The Fragmentation of Renaissance Occultism and the Decline of Magic

The diary of Benjamin Robert Haydon, ed. by Pope W. B. (5 vols, Cambridge, MA, 1960–63), ii, 173.

Blake William , Jerusalem: The emanation of the giant Albion (1804), Plate 15, lines 15–20; see Ault Donald D. , Visionary physics: Blake's response to Newton (Chicago, 1974).

Keats John , Lamia (1820), Part II, lines 229–37. On Keats's location in Enlightenment science, see Goellnicht Donald C. , The poet-physician: Keats and medical science (Pittsburgh, 1984).

Blake William , The [first] book of Urizen (1794).

See, for example, Buchdahl Gerd , The image of Newton and Locke in the Age of Reason (London, 1961); Rattansi P. M. , “Voltaire and the Enlightenment image of Newton”, in Lloyd-Jones H. Pearl V. Worden B. (eds), History and imagination: Essays in honour of H. R. Trevor-Roper (London, 1981), 218–31; and Cohen I. B. , “The eighteenth-century origins of the concept of scientific revolution”, Journal of the history of ideas, xxxvii (1976), 1976–88.

Shapiro Alan E. , in his “Artists' colours and Newton's colours”, Isis, lxxxv (1994), 600–30, suggests that Newton discovered that white light was made of an infinite number of spectral colours (p. 600). This is just loose talk, however, written in the light of our knowledge of the electromagnetic spectrum. Newton himself clearly believed that there were only seven primary colours.

Newton Isaac , Opticks, based on the fourth edition London, 1730 (New York, 1952), Bk I, Pt II, Prop. III, Problem I, 126, my emphasis. The ellipses indicate where I have omitted Newton's labelling of the lines in accordance with his accompanying diagram.

Newton Isaac , “An hypothesis explaining the properties of light, discoursed of in my several papers”, in Cohen I. B. (ed.), Isaac Newton's papers and letters on natural philosophy (Cambridge, MA, 1978), 192–3.

Newton had shown, by further prismatic experiments, that the colours of the spectrum could not themselves be broken into further colours. Repeated refractions merely separated the colours further apart, but did not alter their colours. Opticks, Bk I, Pt I, Prop. V, Theorem IV, ed. cit. (ref. 7), 73–75.

See, for example, Sabra A. I. , Theories of light from Descartes to Newton (Cambridge, 1981).

The optical papers of Isaac Newton, ed. by Shapiro Alan E. , i (Cambridge, 1984), 543. Newton defended this musical analogy in a letter to an Oxford undergraduate, John Harrington, in May 1698, where he wrote: “I am inclined to believe some general laws of the Creator prevailed with respect to the agreeable or unpleasing affections of all our senses.” Newton I. , Correspondence, ed. by Turnbull H. W. (7 vols, Cambridge, 1959–77), iv, 275, quoted by Shapiro , ed. cit., 547.

The classic account is still McGuire J. E. Rattansi P. M. , “Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’”, Notes and records of the Royal Society of London, xxi (1966), 108–43, pp. 115–17. For the Latin text see Casini Paolo , “Newton: The classical scholia”, History of science, xxii (1984), 1984–58. A complete edition, including translations, of these proposed scholia is now available: Volkmar Schuller, “Newton's Scholia from David Gregory's estate on the Propositions IV through IX Book III of his Principia“, in Lefevre W. (ed.), Between Leibniz, Newton and Kant (Dordrecht, 2001), 213–65. For Newton's work on music see Gouk Penelope , “The harmonic roots of Newtonian science”, in Fauvel J. Flood R. Shortland M. Wilson R. (eds), Let Newton be! (Oxford, 1988), 101–25; and idem, Music, science and natural magic in seventeenth-century England (New Haven, 1999), 224–57.

See Westfall R. S. , Never at rest: A biography of Isaac Newton (Cambridge, 1980), 351–9; and idem, “Isaac Newton's Theologiae gentilis origines philosophicae“, in Wagar W. Warren (ed.), The secular mind: Transformations of faith in modern Europe (New York, 1982), 15–34. See also Goldish Matt , “Newton's Of the Church: Its contents and implications”, in Force J. E. Popkin R. H. (eds), Newton and religion: Context, nature and influence (Dordrecht, 1999), 145–64.

Keynes John Maynard , “Newton, the man”, in The Royal Society, Newton tercentenary celebrations (Cambridge, 1947), 27–34. Keynes was one of the first scholars to accept that Newton's undeniable interest in alchemy was sincere and highly positive. For other treatments of Newton's occult interests see, for example, McGuire and Rattansi, “Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’” (ref. 12); Westfall R. S. , “Newton and alchemy”, in Vickers Brian (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities in the Renaissance (Cambridge, 1984), 315–35; Dobbs B. J. T. , The foundations of Newton's alchemy: Or, “The hunting of the Greene Lyon” (Cambridge, 1975); idem, The Janus faces of genius: The role of alchemy in Newton's thought (Cambridge, 1991); Merchant Carolyn , The death of nature: Women, ecology and the Scientific Revolution (San Francisco, 1980); and Henry John , “Newton, matter and magic”, in Fauvel (eds), Let Newton be! (ref. 12), 127–45.

Rossi Paolo , Francis Bacon: From magic to science (London, 1968); Webster Charles , From Paracelsus to Newton: Magic and the making of modern science (Cambridge, 1982); Copenhaver Brian , “Astrology and magic”, in Schmitt C. B. Skinner Q. (eds), The Cambridge history of Renaissance philosophy (Cambridge, 1988), 264–300; idem, “Natural magic, hermetism, and occultism in early modern science”, in Lindberg D. C. Westman R. S. (eds), Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, 1990), 261–302; Millen Ron , “The manifestation of occult qualities in the Scientific Revolution”, in Osler M. J. Farber P. L. (eds), Religion, science and worldview: Essays in honor of Richard S. Westfall (Cambridge, 1985), 185–216; Henry John , “Occult qualities and the experimental philosophy: Active principles in pre-Newtonian matter theory”, History of science, xxiv (1986), 1986–81; and Blum Paul Richard , “Qualitates occultae: Zur philosophischen Vorgeschichte eines Schlüsselbegriffs zwischen Okkultismus und Wissenschaft”, in Buck August (ed.), Die okkulten Wissenschaften in der Renaissance (Wiesbaden, 1992), 45–64.

Moran Bruce , Distilling knowledge: Alchemy, chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, MA, 2005), 1–7 and 185–9; and Newman William R. , Atoms and alchemy: Chymistry and the experimental origins of the Scientific Revolution (Chicago, 2006), 1–20 and 224–5.

Examples of this approach can be seen in a number of papers in Bonelli M. L. Rhigini Shea W. R. (eds), Reason, experiment, and mysticism in the Scientific Revolution (London, 1975), particularly: Paolo Casini, “Newton, a sceptical alchemist?”, 233–8; Hall A. Rupert , “Magic, metaphysics and mysticism in the Scientific Revolution”, 275–82; and perhaps even Paolo Rossi, ”Hermeticism, rationality and the Scientific Revolution”, 247–73. But see also Malinowski Bronislaw , Magic, science and religion and other essays (Boston, 1948); and Hesse Mary B. , “Reason and evaluation in the history of science”, in Teich M. Young R. M. (eds), Changing perspectives in the history of science (London, 1973), 129–47. For further discussion see Katz David , The occult tradition from the Renaissance to the present day (London, 2005), 11–16.

It is important to exonerate Brian Vickers from these charges. Professor Vickers's extensive, careful and thoughtful scholarship has done much to increase our understanding of the history of magic. Even so, I have to say that I find his distinction between two ‘mentalities’, occult and scientific, in the pre-modern period, is a clear case of putting the positivist cart before the historical horse. See his Introduction to Vickers (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities in the Renaissance (ref. 14), 1–55.

Brewster David Sir , Memoirs of the life, writings and discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton (2 vols, Edinburgh, 1855), ii, 374–5.

The denials are based on a misreading of a single comment by Newton in a letter to Richard Bentley written in February 1693. Although this comment, on a superficial glance, might look like a denial of action at a distance, it is not. The misreading was pointed out long ago by Meyerson Emile , “Leibniz, Newton, and action at a distance”, in idem, Identity and reality (London, 1930), 447–56; and reiterated more recently in John Henry, “‘Pray do not ascribe that notion to me’: God and Newton's gravity”, in Force James E. Popkin Richard H. (eds), The books of nature and Scripture: Recent essays on natural philosophy, theology and Biblical criticism in the Netherlands of Spinoza's time and the British Isles of Newton's time (Dordrecht, 1994), 123–47. For the quotation in question, see Cohen (ed.), Isaac Newton's papers and letters on natural philosophy (ref. 8), 302.

Newton , Opticks (ref. 7), Queries, 1, 4, 21, 29, and 31, pp. 339, 352, 371, 375–6. The role of Newton's alchemy in his concept of force was first suggested by Westfall R. S. , “Newton and the Hermetic tradition”, in Debus Allen G. (ed.), Science, medicine and society in the Renaissance (2 vols, New York, 1972), ii, 183–98. See also idem, “Newton and alchemy”, in Vickers (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14), 315–35; Rattansi P. M. , “Newton's alchemical studies”, in Debus Allen G. (ed.), Science, medicine and society in the Renaissance (this ref.), ii, 167–82; and Dobbs , The foundations of Newton's alchemy (ref. 14).

The major study is Schofield Robert E. , Mechanism and materialism: British natural philosophy in an age of reason (Princeton, 1970). But see also Thackray Arnold , Atoms and powers: An essay on Newtonian matter-theory and the development of chemistry (Cambridge, MA, 1970); and Heimann P. M. McGuire J. E. , “Newtonian forces and Lockean powers: Concepts of matter in eighteenth-century thought”, Historical studies in the physical sciences, iii (1971), 1971–306.

I have argued this elsewhere: Henry John , “Magic and science in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries”, in Cantor G. N. Christie J. R. R. Hodge J. Olby R. C. (eds), Companion to the history of modern science (London and New York, 1990), 583–96; and The Scientific Revolution and the origins of modern science, 2nd edn (Basingstoke and New York, 2002), 54–67. See also Rossi , Francis Bacon (ref. 15); and Webster , From Paracelsus to Newton (ref. 15). See also Blair Ann , “Natural philosophy”, in Park Katharine Daston Lorraine (eds), The Cambridge history of science, iii: Early modern science (Cambridge, 2006), 365–406, who writes of the “Transformation of natural philosophy by empirical and mathematical methods” but does not explicitly mention the magical tradition as a source of these methods.

Thomas Keith , Religion and the decline of magic (London, 1971). For a convenient summary of criticisms of Thomas's theses, and an alternative view, see MacFarlane Alan , “Civility and the decline of magic”, in Burke Peter Harrison Brian Slack Paul (eds), Civil histories: Essays in honour of Sir Keith Thomas (Oxford, 2000), 145–60. On the continued fortune of magic in popular culture see, for example, Robert Muchembled, Popular culture and elite culture in France, 1400–1750 (Baton Rouge and London, 1985); and Davies Owen , Cunning folk: Popular magic in English history (New York and London, 2003).

For studies of the importance of drawing intellectual or disciplinary boundaries in order to support knowledge claims, see Gieryn T. F. , “Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists”, American sociological review, xlviii (1983), 781–95; and Barnes B. Bloor D. Henry J. , Scientific knowledge: A sociological analysis (London and Chicago, 1996), 140–68.

I am encouraged in this line of argument by the similar claim made brilliantly with regard to alchemy in Principe Lawrence M. Newman William R. , “Some problems with the historiography of alchemy”, in Newman W. R. Grafton A. (eds), Secrets of nature: Astrology and alchemy in early modern Europe (Cambridge, MA, 2001), 385–431.

For a discussion of the clear separation, and distance, between two major aspects of what we might think of as a unified magical tradition, astrology and alchemy, see Newman Grafton (eds), Secrets of nature (ref. 26), 14–27.

Clark Stuart , “The scientific status of demonology”, in Vickers (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14), 351–74; and idem, Thinking with demons: The idea of witchcraft in early modern Europe (Oxford, 1997), 161–79.

della Porta Giambattista , Natural magick … in twenty books (London, 1658), Bk I, chap. 2, p. 2. This popular manual of natural magic was originally published in four books in Naples, 1554, and in twenty books in 1589. For a brief discussion, see Millen , “Manifestation of occult qualities” (ref. 15).

Agrippa Cornelius , De incertitudine et vanitate omnium scientiarum et artium (n.p., 1531), chap. 42.

Bacon Francis , Novum organum, Pt I, Aphorism IV. On magic in the work of Francis Bacon see Rossi , Francis Bacon (ref. 15); and Henry John , Knowledge is power: Francis Bacon and the method of science (Cambridge, 2002), 42–81.

Hooke Robert , Micrographia (London, 1665), 12, 15, 16, etc.; and Newton Isaac , Letter to Robert Boyle, February 28, 1679, in Cohen (ed.), Newton's papers and letters (ref. 8), 251. See Henry John , “Robert Hooke, the incongruous mechanist”, in Hunter Michael Schaffer Simon (eds), Robert Hooke: New studies (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1989), 149–80.

Women and, to a lesser extent, uneducated men were held to be capable of magical knowledge, of course, but usually only to a limited extent. Prejudiced assumptions by the élite about the limits of the knowledge of such “cunning” men and women were to have appalling consequences during the witch crazes. Supposed success in magical operations was assumed to have been achieved thanks to the Devil's help (rather than by knowledge of natural occult qualities and powers), and so the witch was presumed guilty of commerce with Satan. The educated magus would always have been able to defend himself from similar charges by insisting that he used only natural magic, and by demonstrating a clear understanding of the distinction between natural and demonic magic. Uneducated witches were not always able to make such clear distinctions, and much less so during inquisitorial proceedings. On popular knowledge of medicine see Henry John , “Doctors and healers: Popular culture and the medical profession”, in Pumfrey Stephen Rossi Paolo Slawinski Maurice (eds), Science, culture and popular belief in Renaissance Europe (Manchester, 1991), 191–221. Literature on the witch crazes is vastly extensive, but see, for example, Norman Cohn, Europe's inner demons: The demonization of Christians in medieval Christendom (Chicago, 1993); Trevor-Roper Hugh , The European witch-craze of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Harmondsworth, 1969); and Ankarloo Bengt Clark Stuart Monter William (eds), Witchcraft and magic in Europe: The period of the witch trials (Philadelphia, 2002).

Agrippa , De incertitudine et vanitate omnium scientiarum (ref. 30), chap. 42. See also Kassell Lauren , “‘All was that land full fill'd of faerie’, or magic and the past in early modern England”, Journal of the history of ideas, lxvii (2006), 107–22, p. 112.

Eamon William , Science and the secrets of nature: Books of secrets in medieval and early modern culture (Princeton, 1994); and Hansen Bert , “Science and magic”, in Lindberg D. C. (ed.), Science in the Middle Ages (Chicago, 1975), 483–506, pp. 493–5.

Recorded during one of the weekly conferences conducted at Theophraste Renaudot's Bureau d'Adresse from 1633 to 1642. Quoted from Wellman Kathleen , “Talismans, incubi, divination and the Book of M*: The Bureau d'Adresse confronts the occult”, in Debus A. G. Walton Michael T. (eds), Reading the book of nature: The other side of the Scientific Revolution (St Louis, 1998), 215–38, p. 228.

Copenhaver Brian , “Did science have a Renaissance?”, Isis, lxxxiii (1992), 387–407; Foucault Michel , The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences (London, 1974); and Tillyard E. M. W. , The Elizabethan world picture (London, 1943).

Clark , “Scientific status of demonology” (ref. 28); and idem, Thinking with demons (ref. 28), 161–78.

Cotta John , The triall of witch-craft (London, 1616), 34.

Perkins William , Discourse of the damned art of witch-craft (Cambridge, 1610), 59. The fact that Perkins does not list magicians among those “that are most excellent” in the knowledge of natural magic reflects the Church's reluctance to acknowledge anything worthy in magicians (Perkins was an Anglican clergyman). This is discussed more fully below.

James VI , Daemonologie (Edinburgh, 1597), 44.

The most notorious example of this kind of short cut to wisdom is provided by John Dee, who thanks to his “scrying stone” and a supposedly psychic “medium”, Edward Kelly, who was all too willing to please, held many conversations with angels from 1582 to 1587, with a view to being able to make the philosopher's stone. Note that Dee, for obvious religious reasons, always claimed he was summoning angels, not demons. See Harkness Deborah E. , John Dee's conversations with angels: Cabala, alchemy, and the end of nature (Cambridge, 1999).

Perkins , Discourse of the damned art of witch-craft (ref. 40), 20.

Agrippa , De incertitudine et vanitate omnium scientiarum (ref. 30), chap. 42.

Giuntini F. , Speculum astronomiae (Paris, 1573), quoted from Thorndike Lynn , A history of magic and experimental science (8 vols, New York, 1923–58), vi, 132.

See Walker D. P. , Spiritual and demonic magic from Ficino to Campanella (London, 1958), 36, 83; and Hansen , “Science and magic” (ref. 35), 488–9. As in so many other cases, the Church's attitude forged popular consciousness. Hence, Christopher Marlowe, The tragical history of Doctor Faustus (1604), or the less well known Robert Greene, The honourable historie of Frier Bacon and Frier Bungay (c. 1592). On the legend of Faust, see Butler E. M. , The myth of the magus, Ritual magic, and The fortunes of Faust (Cambridge, 1948, 1949, and 1952). Literature on the witch-crazes is vastly extensive, but see, for example, the works cited in ref. 33 above.

Or some who were more than one of these things — Magical traditions featured prominently in Renaissance eclecticism. John Napier, for example, inventor of logarithms, also devoted much of his time to alchemy, and was known locally, in Edinburgh, as a wizard. See Shennan Francis , Flesh and bones: The life, passions and legacies of John Napier (Edinburgh, 1989).

Molland A. G. , “Roger Bacon as magician”, Traditio, xxx (1974), 445–60, p. 459–60. Consider also the revealingly contradictory title of Roger Bacon's Epistola de secretis operibus artis et naturae, et de nullitate magiae, written between 1248 and 1267.

For a recent discussion of Naudé's book see Kassell , op. cit. (ref. 34); and Molland , “Roger Bacon as magician” (ref. 48), 448.

Hooke Robert , “Of Dr Dee's book of spirits” (1690), in Waller Richard (ed.), The posthumous works of Robert Hooke (London, 1705), 203–10. See Henry , “Robert Hooke” (ref. 32), 176–8; and Deacon Richard Dee John , scientist, geographer, astrologer and secret agent to Elizabeth I (London, 1968). Dee's séances with angels had been published in 1659: A true & faithful relation of what passed for many yeers between dr. John Dee … and some spirits, ed. by Casuabon Meric (London, 1659). See Harkness , John Dee's conversations with angels (ref. 42). On Trithemius, see Arnold Klaus , Johannes Trithemius (1462–1516) (Würtzburg, 1971); and Shumaker Wayne , Renaissance curiosa (Binghampton, 1982).

On Bacon's criticisms of magic see Rossi , Francis Bacon (ref. 15), 31–35.

The retraction appeared in a general attack on all human knowledge, and an affirmation of Christian fideism, Cornelius Agrippa, De incertitudine & vanitate scientiarum declamatio invectiva… (n.p., 1530), but has been shown to share the same magico-religious foundations as the De occulta philosophia — So much so that the two works are said to share a basic unity. See Keefer Michael H. , “Agrippa's dilemma: Hermetic rebirth and the ambivalence of De vanitate and De occulta philosophia”, Renaissance quarterly, xli (1988), 614–53.

Newton , Opticks (ref. 7), Bk III, Pt I, Query 31, p. 401.

For example, Opticks (ref. 7), Queries, 1, 4, 21, 29, and 31, pp. 339, 352, 371, 375–6; and Newton Isaac , The Principia: Mathematical principles of natural philosophy, a new transl. by Cohen I. B. Whitman Anne (Berkeley, 1999), 382–3. On Newton's alchemy see the works cited in ref. 15 above. On action at a distance in Newton see Henry , “‘Pray do not ascribe that notion to me’” (ref. 20).

On the sociology of ‘boundary demarcation’ see the works cited in ref. 25 above. We have mentioned the continuing and constant religious objection to demonology, but there was a new development in the late Renaissance and early modern periods, namely a sceptical denial of the existence of demons and other spiritual beings that went hand-in-hand with the rise of atheism, irreligion and secularism. For a general survey of such trends see Popkin Richard H. , The history of scepticism from Erasmus to Spinoza (Berkeley, 1979). For the relevance of these developments to the decline of magic, especially demonology, see Hunter Michael , “Witchcraft and the decline of belief”, Eighteenth-century life, xxii (1998), 1998–47.

See Vickers , “Introduction”, in idem (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14), 1–55. Professor Vickers is more sophisticated than the label “positivist” might imply. In a recent essay he has distinguished between “occult1”, “a neutral distinction between visible and invisible causes”, and “occult2”, which is not so clearly defined (he refers to it as a synthesis of “magic and astrology”, a “philosophy in its own right”, and an “aggressive formulation” which led to “an increasingly bitter denunciation of occultism by both the Church and secular scholars”). I can agree that in the process of redefining boundaries there was this kind of bifurcation of the occult, but I see it as a process hinging upon many historical contingencies, while Professor Vickers seems to see it merely as a matter of an ahistorical entity called science, triumphing over an ahistorical entity called magic. See Vickers Brian , “The occult in the Renaissance”, Annals of science, lii (1995), 77–84.

Borchardt Frank L. , “The magus as Renaissance man”, Sixteenth century journal, xxi (1990), 57–76, pp. 59, 72.

Literature on the relations between the new philosophies and religion is vast, but for recent provocative insights see Funkenstein Amos , Theology and the scientific imagination from the Middle Ages to the seventeenth century (Princeton, 1986); Harrison Peter , The Bible, Protestantism, and the rise of natural science (Cambridge, 1998); and Gaukroger Stephen , The emergence of a scientific culture: Science and the shaping of modernity, 1250–1685 (Oxford, 2006).

In fact there was a short-lived attempt to do just this, and this will be briefly discussed later (see ref. 110 and text at that point). But this was a minor historical episode that serves to highlight the more general trend.

Clark Stuart , “The rational witchfinder: Conscience, demonological naturalism and popular superstitions”, in Pumfrey Rossi Slawinski (eds), Science, culture and popular belief (ref. 33), 222–48; and idem, Thinking with demons (ref. 28).

Clark , “Rational witchfinder” (ref. 60); and Hansen , “Science and magic” (ref. 35), 488–9. See also Oates Caroline , “Metamorphosis and lycanthropy in Franche-Comté, 1521–1643”, in Feher M. (ed.), Fragments for a history of the human body, Part One (New York, 1989), 305–63, especially p. 320.

Clark , “Rational witchfinder” (ref. 60).

Ibid.

Literature on the witch-crazes is dauntingly vast, but see, for example, Larner Christina , Witchcraft and religion: The politics of popular belief (Oxford, 1984); Klaits Joseph , Servants of Satan: The age of the witch hunts (Bloomington, 1985); Barry Jonathan Hester Marianne Roberts Gareth (eds), Witchcraft in early modern Europe: Studies in culture and belief (Cambridge, 1996); Briggs Robin , Witches and neighbours: The social and cultural context of European witchcraft (London, 1996); and the works cited in ref. 33 above.

Hunter Michael , “Alchemy, magic and moralism in the thought of Robert Boyle”, in idem, Robert Boyle (1627–91): Scrupulosity and science (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2000), 93–118. See also idem (ed.), Robert Boyle by himself and his friends (London, 1994).

See Hunter , Boyle by himself (ref. 65), 29–31.

Quoted from Hunter Michael , “Alchemy, magic and moralism” (ref. 65), 116.

For detailed expositions of what has come to be called the scholar and craftsman thesis, see Zilsel Edgar , The social origins of modern science (Dordrecht, 2000); Smith Pamela H. , The body of the artisan: Art and experience in the Scientific Revolution (Chicago, 2004); and idem, “Laboratories”, in Park Daston (eds), Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 290–319.

Watson Foster , Vives: On education. A translation of the De tradendis disciplinis, together with an introduction (Cambridge, 1913), 209. On Vives, see Noreña Carlos G. , Juan Luis Vives (The Hague, 1970). Bacon Francis , New organon, Pt II, Aphorism 31.

On Gilbert, see Henry John , “Animism and empiricism: Copernican physics and the origins of William Gilbert's experimental method”, Journal of the history of ideas, lxii (2001), 99–119. On Boyle as a thoroughgoing alchemist, rather than one who turned to it later, see Principe Lawrence , The aspiring adept: Robert Boyle and his alchemical quest (Princeton, 1998); and Newman William , Atoms and alchemy (ref. 16).

Clarke Arthur C. , Profiles of the future: An inquiry into the limits of the possible (London, 1962).

du Bartas Salluste , His divine weekes and workes, transl. by Sylvester J. (London, 1606), 221; quoted from Zetterberg J. Peter , “The mistaking of ‘the mathematicks’ for magic in Tudor and Stuart England”, Sixteenth century journal, xi (1980), 1980–97, p. 93. On superstitious beliefs about mathematics and magic and demonology, see Feingold Mordechai , “The occult tradition in the English universities of the Renaissance: A reassessment”, in Vickers (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14), 73–94; and Neal Katherine , “The rhetoric of utility: Avoiding occult associations for mathematics through profitability and pleasure”, History of science, xxxvii (1999), 1999–78.

See Thorndike , History of magic and experimental science (ref. 45); Sherwood M. , “Magic and mechanics in medieval fiction”, Studies in philology, xli (1947), 1947–92; Zetterberg , “The mistaking of ‘the mathematicks’ for magic” (ref. 72); Eamon William , “Technology as magic in the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance”, Janus, 1983, 171–212; Molland A. George , “Cornelius Agrippa's mathematical magic”, in Hay Cynthia (ed.), Mathematics from manuscript to print (Oxford, 1988), 209–19; and Henry , “Magic and science” (ref. 23).

See, for example, Rose Paul Lawrence , The Italian Renaissance of mathematics: Studies on humanists and mathematicians from Petrarch to Galileo (Geneva, 1975); Westman Robert S. , “The astronomer's role in the sixteenth century: A preliminary survey”, History of science, xviii (1980), 1980–47; Jardine Nicholas , “Epistemology of the sciences”, in Schmitt Skinner (eds), The Cambridge history of Renaissance philosophy (ref. 15), 685–711; Biagioli Mario , “The social status of Italian mathematicians, 1450–1600”, History of science, xxvii (1989), 1989–95; Bennett J. A. , “The challenge of practical mathematics”, in Pumfrey Rossi Slawinski (eds), Science, culture and popular belief (ref. 33), 176–90; De Pace Anna , Le matematiche e il mondo: Ricerche su un dibattito in Italia nella seconda metà del cinquecento (Milan, 1993); Lattis James M. , Between Copernicus and Galileo: Christoph Clavius and the collapse of Ptolemaic cosmology (Chicago, 1994); and Dear Peter , Discipline and experience: The mathematical way in the Scientific Revolution (Chicago, 1995).

Zetterberg , “The mistaking of ‘the mathematicks’ for magic” (ref. 72). For more positivist tendencies in the history of Renaissance mathematics see Strong Edward W. , Procedures and metaphysics: A study in the philosophy of mathematical-physical science in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Berkeley, 1936).

On Napier, see Napier Mark , Memoirs of John Napier of Merchiston: His lineage, life, and times, with a history of the invention of logarithms (Edinburgh, 1834); and Shennan , Flesh and bones (ref. 47). Napier's alchemy remains largely unstudied, but see Small J. , “Sketches of later Scottish alchemists: John Napier of Merchiston, Robert Napier, Sir David Lindsay, first earl of Balcarres, Patrick Ruthven, Alexander Seton, and Patrick Scot”, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, xi (1874–76), 410–38. His alchemical papers are in Edinburgh University Library. Literature on Dee is extensive. See Clucas Stephen , “Recent Works on John Dee (1988–2005): A select bibliography”, in idem (ed.), John Dee: Interdisciplinary studies in English Renaissance thought (Dordrecht, 2006), 345–50. The best single study is Nicholas H. Clulee, John Dee's natural philosophy: Between science and religion (London and New York, 1988).

Wilkins John , Mathematical magick, or, the wonders that may be performed by mechanical geometry (London, 1648). The major study is still Shapiro Barbara , John Wilkins: An intellectual biography (Berkeley, 1969), but see also Alfonso-Goldfarb Ana Maria , “An ‘older’ view about matter in John Wilkins' ‘modern’ mathematical magick”, in Debus Walton (eds), Reading the book of nature (ref. 36), 133–46.

Descartes René , Principia philosophiae, IV, §203. On the impact of the pseudo-Aristotelian Quaestiones mechanicae, see Hattab Helen , “From mechanics to mechanism: The Quaestiones mechanicae and Descartes' physics”, in Anstey Peter R. Schuster John A. (eds), The science of nature in the seventeenth century: Patterns of change in early modern natural philosophy (Dordrecht, 2005), 99–129.

This book has been translated into English: Girolamo Cardano, De subtilitate, Book 1, translated, with introduction and notes, by Cass Myrtle Marguerite (Williamsport, PA, 1934). The best edition of the De subtilitate (currently only the first seven books) is De subtilitate libri XXI (Libri I—VII), ed. by Nenci Elio (Milan, 2004). For studies of Cardano see Bellini Angelo , Girolamo Cardano e il suo tempo (Milan, 1947); Siraisi Nancy G. , The clock and the mirror: Girolamo Cardano and Renaissance medicine (Princeton, 1997); and Grafton Anthony , Cardano's cosmos: The worlds and works of a Renaissance astrologer (Cambridge, MA, 1999). See also Cardano Girolamo , De libris propriis: The editions of 1544, 1550, 1557, 1562, ed. by MacLean Ian (Milan, 2004).

Høyrup Jens , “Philosophy: Accident, epiphenomenon, or contributory cause of the changing trends of mathematics — A sketch of the development from the twelfth through the sixteenth century”, in idem, In measure, number, and weight: Studies in mathematics and culture (Albany, 1994), 123–71, p. 165, see also pp. 154–6. See also Newman William R. , Promethean ambitions: Alchemy and the quest to perfect nature (Chicago, 2004).

See McGuire Rattansi , “Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’” (ref. 12). Consider also, in this connection, Leshem Ayval , Newton on mathematics and spiritual purity (Dordrecht, 2003).

For the details of Kepler's geometrical archetype see Koyré Alexandre , The astronomical revolution: Copernicus, Kepler, Borelli, transl. by Maddison R. E. W. (London, 1973); Field J. V. , Kepler's geometrical cosmology (London, 1988); and Martens Rhonda , Kepler's philosophy and the new astronomy (Princeton, 2000).

Kepler and Fludd engaged in a dispute, played out in dauntingly long publications, on the issue of numerology. See Westman Robert S. , “Nature, art, and psyche: Jung, Pauli, and the Kepler—Fludd polemic”; and Field J. V. , “Kepler's rejection of numerology”, both in Vickers (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14), 177–229, and 273–96, respectively.

Principe Newman , “Some problems with the historiography of alchemy” (ref. 26). See also Principe Lawrence M. , “Reflections on Newton's alchemy in light of the new historiography of alchemy”, in Force J. E. Hutton S. (eds), Newton and Newtonianism: New studies (Dordrecht, 2004), 205–19.

Ibid., 386. See also Newman W. R. Principe L. M. , “Alchemy vs. chemistry: The etymological origins of a historiographic mistake”, Early science and medicine, iii (1998), 32–65.

Principe Newman , “Some problems with the historiography of alchemy” (ref. 26), 418.

Ibid., 413–15. The principle contributor to this new scholarship is William Newman himself. See, for a recent example, Newman, Atoms and alchemy (ref. 16).

Ashworth William B. Jr , “Natural history and the emblematic world view”, in Lindberg David C. Westman Robert S. (eds), Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, 1980), 303–32. See also Bono James J. , The word of God and the languages of man: Interpreting nature in early modern science and medicine (Madison, 1995); and Harrison , The Bible, Protestantism, and the rise of natural science (ref. 58). But see also Blair Ann , “Historia in Zwinger's Theatrum humanae vitae“, in Pomata Gianna Siraisi Nancy G. (eds), Historia: Empiricism and erudition in early modern Europe (Cambridge, MA, 2005), 269–96.

On these new occultist developments in medicine see Richardson Linda Deer , “The generation of disease: Occult causes and diseases of the total substance”, in Wear A. French R. K. Lonie I. M. (eds), The medical renaissance of the sixteenth century (Cambridge, 1985), 175–94; and Henry John Forrester John M. , “Jean Fernel and the importance of his De abditis rerum causis“, in idem, Jean Fernel's On the hidden causes of things: Forms, souls and occult diseases in Renaissance medicine (Leiden, 2005), 37–44.

Fernel Jean , De abditis rerum causis (Paris, 1648), Bk II, chap. 16. For a new edition and translation of this important work see Forrester Henry , Jean Fernel's On the hidden causes of things (ref. 89); on amulets, see pp. 646–73.

Wier Johann , De praestigiis daemonum… (Basel, 1583), Bk V, chap. 8, column 535, quoted from Walker, Spiritual and demonic magic (ref. 46), 154; and, of course, Genesis, 1, 3.

See Hansen , “Science and magic” (ref. 35), 488.

Slaughter M. M. , Universal languages and scientific taxonomy in the seventeenth century (Cambridge, 1982); and Rossi Paolo , Logic and the art of memory: The quest for a universal language, transl. by Clucas Stephen (London, 2000).

Bacon Francis , Valerius Terminus, and ‘Proemium’ to Great instauration, in Robertson John M. (ed.), Philosophical works of Francis Bacon (London, 1905), 188, and 241 respectively. Wilkins John , Essay towards a real character and a philosophical language (London, 1668).

On the historical phenomenon of Christian cabbalism, see Blau Joseph Leon , The Christian interpretation of the Cabala in the Renaissance (New York, 1944); and Idel Moshe , “The magical and Neoplatonist interpretation of the Kabbalah in the Renaissance”, in Cooperman B. D. (ed.), Jewish thought in the sixteenth century (Cambridge, MA, 1983), 186–242. On Giovanni Pico see Farmer S. A. , Syncretism in the West. Pico's 900 theses (1486): The evolution of traditional, religious, and philosophical systems, with text, translation, and commentary (Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies; Tempe, AZ, 1998). On Leibniz's efforts to develop a universal language and the role of cabbalism in these schemes, see Coudert Allison P. , “Some theories of a natural language from the Renaissance to the seventeenth century”, Studia Leibnitiana, vii (1978), 1978–41; idem, “Forgotten ways of knowing: The Kabbalah, language, and science in the seventeenth century”, in Kelley Donald R. Popkin R. H. (eds), The shapes of knowledge: From the Renaissance to the Enlightenment (Dordrecht, 1991), 83–99; and Rossi , Logic and the art of memory (ref. 93).

Guy de la Brosse (1628) and John Ray (1660), both quoted from Brian Vickers, “Critical reactions to the occult sciences during the Renaissance”, in Ullmann-Margalit E. (ed.), The scientific enterprise (Dordrecht, 1992), 43–92, pp. 77–79.

For a recent convenient summary of the Renaissance arguments against astrology, see Vickers , “Critical reactions to the occult sciences during the Renaissance” (ref. 96). But see also, Tester Jim , A history of Western astrology (Woodbridge, 1987); Garin Eugenio , Astrology in the Renaissance: The zodiac of life (London, 1983); and Rutkin H. Darrel , “Astrology”, in Park Daston (eds), The Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 542–61.

Kepler Johannes , Mysterium cosmographicum (1597), in Gesammelte Werke, i (Munich, 1938), 21. Galileo, always loath to accept magical influence, did deny the effect of the Moon on the tides. On this issue, however, the magicians were correct and Galileo was embarrassingly wrong. Galilei Galileo , Dialogue on the two chief world systems, transl. by Drake Stillman (New York, 2001), Fourth Day, 487.

See Field J. V. , “Astrology in Kepler's cosmology”, in Curry Patrick (ed.), Astrology, science and society (Woodbridge, 1987), 143–70; and idem, “A Lutheran astrologer: Johannes Kepler”, Archive for history of exact sciences, xxxi (1984), 1984–272 (which includes a complete translation of De fundamentis astrologiae certioribus).

Vickers , “Critical reactions to the occult sciences” (ref. 96); and Tester , A history of Western astrology (ref. 97).

On empirical investigations of astrology and the weather, see Hunter Michael Gregory Annabel , An astrological diary of the seventeenth century: Samuel Jeake of Rye, 1652–1699 (Oxford, 1988); and Hunter Michael , “Science and astrology in seventeenth-century England: An unpublished polemic by John Flamsteed”, in Curry (ed.), Astrology, science and society (ref. 99), 261–300.

de Maupertuis P. , “Lettre sur la comète”, in Oeuvres (Lyons, 1768), iii, 209–56, p. 240. Quoted from Simon Schaffer, “Newton's comets and the transformation of astrology”, in Curry (ed.), Astrology, science and society (ref. 99), 219–43, p. 237.

Halley Edmund , “Some considerations about the cause of the universal deluge”, Philosophical transactions, xxxiii (1724), 118–25; and Whiston William , Vindication of the new theory of the Earth (London, 1698), Preface; both quoted from Schaffer, “Newton's comets” (ref. 103), 233.

Newton's belief recorded by his friend John Craig, Cambridge University Library, Keynes MS 130.7, f. 1r. See also Newton Isaac , “De gravitatione et aequipondio fluidorum”, in Hall A. R. Hall M. B. (eds), Unpublished scientific papers of Isaac Newton (Cambridge, 1962), 139.

The rivalry on this issue between Newton and Leibniz is brought out most starkly in the so-called Leibniz—Clarke correspondence. See Alexander H. G. (ed.), The Leibniz—Clarke correspondence (Manchester, 1956); and Vailati Ezio , Leibniz and Clarke: A study of their correspondence (Oxford, 1997). For an account of the role of comets in Newton's system, see Kubrin David , “Newton and the cyclical cosmos”, Journal of the history of ideas, xxviii (1967), 1967–46; Genuth Sara Schechner , “Comets, teleology and the relationship of chemistry to cosmology in Newton's thought”, Annali dell'Istituto e Museo di Storia della Scienza di Firenze, x (1985), 1985–65; and Schaffer , “Newton's comets” (ref. 103).

Two developments summed up by Pierre Simon Laplace, author of Traité du mécanique céleste (5 vols, 1799–1825), who used Newtonian mechanics to show that the planetary system was self-regulating, without the need for comets, and who also told Napoleon that God was not mentioned in his book because he “had no need of that hypothesis”. See Gillispie C. C. , Pierre-Simon Laplace, 1749–1827: A life in exact science (Princeton, 1997).

Maricurtensis Petrus Peregrinus , De magnete, seu rota perpetui motus, libellus … nunc primum promulgatus (Augsburg, 1558). See Thompson S. P. , The epistle of Peter Peregrinus de Maricourt to Sygerus de Foucaucourt, soldier, concerning the magnet (London, 1902); and Harradon H. D. , “Some early contributions to the history of geomagnetism — I: The letter of Peter Peregrinus de Maricourt to Sygerus de Foucaucourt, soldier, concerning the magnet”, Terrestrial magnetism and atmospheric electricity, xlviii (1943), 1943–17. William Gilbert, De magnete [1600], transl. by Mottelay P. Fleury (New York, 1958). For details see Henry , “Animism and empiricism” (ref. 70). For a general study of the concept of self-movement in Aristotelianism see Gill Mary Louise Lennox James G. (eds), Self-movement: From Aristotle to Newton (Princeton, 1994).

Bennett J. A. , “Magnetical philosophy and astronomy from Wilkins to Hooke,” in Taton R. Wilson C. (eds), Planetary astronomy from the Renaissance to the rise of astrophysics, Part A: Tycho Brahe to Newton (Cambridge, 1989), 222–30. On Kepler's use of Gilbert see, for example, Koyré, The astronomical revolution (ref. 82), 185–214.

Petty William Sir , The discourse made before the Royal Society … together with a new hypothesis of springing or elastique motions (London, 1674). See Henry , “Occult qualities and the experimental philosophy (ref. 15), 350–1.

Prior Moody E. , “Joseph Glanvill, witchcraft and seventeenth-century science”, Modern philology, xxx (1932), 167–93; Edelin George , “Joseph Glanvill, Henry More, and the phantom drummer of Tedworth”, Harvard Library bulletin, x (1956), 1956–92; Jobe Thomas Harmon , “The devil in Restoration science: The Glanvill—Webster debate”, Isis, lxxii (1981), 1981–56; and Bostridge Ian , Witchcraft and its transformations c. 1650-c. 1750 (Oxford, 1997). On similar efforts in the Netherlands see Fix Andrew , Fallen angels: Balthasar Bekker, spirit belief and confessionalism in the seventeenth-century Dutch Republic (Dordrecht, 1999).

It is like comparing Wilkins , Mathematical magick (ref. 77), with, say, Severinus Petrus , Idea medicinae philosophicae: Fundamenta continens totius doctrinae Paracelsicae, Hippocraticae, & Galenicae (Basel, 1571).

But remember what was said earlier about the possibility that the work of other numerologists on the Keplerian or Newtonian model might simply be being overlooked.

The main support for the claim that experimentalism and the utilitarianism of the new philosophies derives from the occult tradition is to be found in Francis Bacon. See Rossi , Francis Bacon: From magic to science (ref. 15); and Henry , Knowledge is power (ref. 31). But see also, for example, Henry , “Magic and science” (ref. 23); idem, “Occult qualities and the experimental philosophy” (ref. 15); and idem, “Animism and empiricism” (ref. 70).

On the decline of belief in symbolic magic, see Vickers Brian , “Analogy versus identity: The rejection of occult symbolism, 1580–1680”, in idem (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14); and idem, “Critical reactions to the occult sciences” (ref. 96). See also, Copenhaver Brian , “The occultist tradition and its critics”, in Garber D. Ayers M. (eds), The Cambridge history of seventeenth-century philosophy (Cambridge, 1998), 454–512.

Walker , Spiritual and demonic magic (ref. 46), 84; Thomas , Religion and the decline of magic (ref. 24); and Clark , “The rational witchfinder” (ref. 60).

The literature here is vast but an obvious starting point is Thomas , Religion and the decline of magic (ref. 24). Consider also Clark , Thinking with demons (ref. 28). On the socio-political dimensions of alchemy, which has been well served in the literature, see for example Rattansi P. M. , “Paracelsus and the Puritan revolution”, Ambix, xi (1963), 24–32; Trevor-Roper Hugh , “The Paracelsian movement”, in idem, Renaissance essays (London, 1985), 149–99; Mendelsohn J. Andrew , “Alchemy and politics in England”, Past and present, cxxxv (1992), 1992–78; and Newman William , “From alchemy to ‘chymistry’”, in Park Daston (eds), The Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 497–517. On the political dimension to astrology, see for example, Curry Patrick , Prophecy and power: Astrology in early modern England (Oxford, 1989). See also, for another example, Zambelli Paola , “Magic and radical reformation in Agrippa of Nettesheim”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, xxxix (1976), 69–103.

Consider, for example, Digges Thomas , A perfit description of the caelestiall orbes, according to the most auncient doctrine of the Pythagoreans (London, 1576). On this tradition, usually called the prisca theologia tradition, consult Schmitt Charles B. , “Prisca theologia e philosophia perennis: Due temi del Rinascimento italiano e la loro fortuna”, in Atti del V Convegno Internazionale del Centro di Studi Umanistici: Il pensiero italiano del Rinascimento e il tempo nostro (Florence, 1970), 211–36; and Walker D. P. , The ancient theology: Studies in Christian Platonism from the fifteenth to the eighteenth century (London, 1972).

De vita coelitus comparanda was the third part of Ficino's De vita triplici (Florence, 1489). The meaning of the title is obscure, possibly something like: “On arranging one's life in accordance with the heavens”. See Walker , Spiritual and demonic magic (ref. 46), 58, where Walker makes it clear that ‘spiritual magic’ is his own phrase to describe Ficino's ideas. For an indication of Ficino's immense influence see, for example, Hirai Hiro , Le concept de semence dans les theories de la matière à la Renaissance: De Marsile Ficin à Pierre Gasendi (Turnhout, 2005).

See Garin Eugenio , “The philosopher and the magus”, in idem (ed.), Renaissance characters, transl. by Cochrane Lydia G. (Chicago, 1997), 123–53. See also Borchardt , “The magus as Renaissance man” (ref. 57). We should also remember, however, that even a highly learned magician such as Agrippa might call himself a magus and at the same time be anxious about the religious implications of being a magus. See Keefer , “Agrippa's dilemma” (ref. 52).

The most convenient source on the religious Corpus Hermeticum, which includes an invaluable introduction, is Copenhaver Brian P. , Hermetica: The Greek Corpus Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius in English translation (Cambridge, 1991). On the so-called “technical” writings see Festugière A.-J. , La révélation d'Hermès Trismégiste, i: L'Astrologie et les sciences occultes (Paris, 1950). For brief assessments of the historical significance of the Hermetic writings see Cophenhaver , “Astrology and magic” (ref. 15); idem, “Natural magic, Hermetism, and occultism in early modern science” (ref. 15); and idem, “Magic”, in Park Daston (eds), Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 518–40.

Copenhaver , “Astrology and magic” (ref. 15); idem, “Did science have a Renaissance?” (ref. 37); and Walker , Spiritual and demonic magic (ref. 46).

Copenhaver , “Astrology and magic” (ref. 15), 273.

For an important study of the role of discussions of natural powers and the abilities of demons, see Newman , Promethean ambitions (ref. 80).

On Paracelsus see, for example, Pagel Walter , Paracelsus: An introduction to philosophical medicine in the era of the Renaissance (Basel, 1958); and Weeks A. , Paracelsus: Speculative theory and the crisis of the early Reformation (Albany, 1997). On Fracastoro, see Nutton Vivian , “The seeds of disease: An explanation of contagion and infection from the Greeks to the Renaissance”, Medical history, xxvii (1983), 1983–34; and idem, “The reception of Fracastoro's theory of contagion: The seed that fell among thorns?”, Osiris, n.s, vi (1990), 196–234. On Fernel, see Richardson , “Generation of disease” (ref. 89); Brockliss Laurence Jones Colin , The medical world of early modern France (Oxford, 1997); Hirai Hiroshi , “Humanisme, néoplatonisme et prisca theologia dans le concept de semence de Jean Fernel”, Corpus, xli (2002), 2002–69; Walker D. P. , “The astral body in Renaissance medicine”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, xxi (1958), 1958–33; idem, “Medical spirits in philosophy from Ficino to Newton”, in Arts du spectacle et histoire des idées (Tours, 1984), 287–300; and Henry Forrester , “Jean Fernel and the importance of his De abditis rerum causis” (ref. 89).

For brief accounts of the nature of alchemy see Moran Bruce T. , Distilling knowledge: Alchemy, chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, 2005); Newman , Atoms and alchemy (ref. 16); and idem, “From alchemy to ‘chymistry’” (ref. 116). On occult qualities see Hutchison Keith , “What happened to occult qualities in the Renaissance?”, Isis, lxxiii (1982), 1982–53; and Millen , “Manifestation of occult qualities” (ref. 15).

Copenhaver , “Astrology and magic” (ref. 15).

On this aspect of Aristotelianism see, for example, Dear Peter , Discipline and experience (ref. 74), 11–31; and idem, “The meanings of experience”, in Park Daston (eds), Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 106–31.

On Pomponazzi see Walker , Spiritual and demonic magic (ref. 46), 107–11. On Fernel: Henry Forrester , “Jean Fernel and the importance of his De abditis rerum causis” (ref. 89). On Sennert: Newman , Atoms and alchemy (ref. 16). For general studies of this theme see Millen , “Manifestation of occult qualities” (ref. 15); and Henry , “Magic and science” (ref. 23).

For more details see Newman , Atoms and alchemy (ref. 16). See also Joy Lynn S. , “Scientific explanation from formal causes to laws of nature”, in Park Daston (eds), Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 70–105; and van Melsen Andrew G. , From atomos to atom: The history of the concept atom (New York, 1960).

Vickers Brian , “Introduction”, in idem (ed.), Occult and scientific mentalities (ref. 14), 1–55.

Kassell Lauren , Medicine and magic in Elizabethan London: Simon Forman, astrologer, alchemist, and physician (Oxford, 2005). On Fludd, consider, for example, Huffman William H. , Robert Fludd and the end of the Renaissance (London and New York, 1988); and Debus Allen G. , Man and nature in the Renaissance (Cambridge, 1978), 121–6. Fludd's work has even been considered alongside that of Agrippa and Cardano: Silvia Parigi, La magia naturale nel Rinascimento: Testi di Agrippa, Cardano, Fludd (Turin, 1989).

Both Daniel Garber and Lynn S. Joy acknowledge the role of chemical ideas in early modern changes in natural philosophy. See Garber Daniel , “Physics and foundations”, and Lynn S. Joy, “Scientific explanation from formal causes to laws of nature”, in Park Daston (eds), Cambridge history of science, iii (ref. 23), 29–33, and 70–105, respectively.

See Henry Forrester , “Jean Fernel and the importance of his De abditis rerum causis” (ref. 89); Matton Sylvain , “Fernel et les alchimistes”, Corpus, xli (2002), 2002–97; Nutton , “The seeds of disease” (ref. 124); and idem, “The reception of Fracastoro's theory of contagion” (ref. 124). As representative of the Paracelsians, consider Severinus: Shackelford Jole , A philosophical path for Paracelsian medicine: The ideas, intellectual context, and influence of Petrus Severinus (1540/2–1602) (Copenhagen, 2004).

Fracastoro Girolamo , De sympathia et antipathia rerum (Lyons, 1554). Cardano Girolamo , De subtilitate libri XXI (Basle, 1554). The book mentioned is Book XVIII, but is by no means the only book where Cardano draws upon occult ideas and attitudes.

Telesio Bernardino , De rerum natura iuxta propria pricipia libri IX (Naples, 1587). For Telesio's, Campanella's and even Bacon's credentials as magicians, see Walker , Spiritual and demonic magic (ref. 46), 189–93, 199–203, and 203–36. On Bacon's semi-Paracelsian cosmology, see Rees Graham , “Francis Bacon's semi-Paracelsian cosmology”, Ambix, xxii (1975), 1975–101; and idem, “Francis Bacon's semi-Paracelsian cosmology and the Great Instauration”, Ambix, xxii (1975), 1975–73.

On Bruno, see (of course) Yates Frances , Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic tradition (London, 1964). See also Patrizi Francesco , Nova de universis philosophia libris quinquaginta comprehensa (Venice, 1593)f Magia philosophia … Zoroaster et eius cccxx Oracula Chaldaica … Hermetis Trismegisti Poemander… (Hamburg, 1593).

Henry , “Occult qualities” (ref. 15).