Beyond Pico della Mirandola: John Dees formal numbers and real cabala

Jean-Marc Mandosio
cole pratique des hautes tudes, Paris, France
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Available online 5 January 2012
Keywords:
John Dee
Giovanni Pico della Mirandola
Number Philosophy
Kabbalah
a b s t r a c t
It is well known that, in both the Monas hieroglyphica and the Mathematicall praeface, Dee drew a part of
his inspiration from Pico della Mirandolas works. However, the nature and extent of Dees borrowings
has not yet been studied. In fact, the only work of Pico really read and used by Dee was the 900 conclu-
sions, where he found the conception of formal numbers: that is, mystical numbers carrying magical and
divinatory powers. This is very important, since Dee sees these numbers as the very instruments of the
law of Creation. Pico also played a major part in the foundation of Christian cabala: in this eld, his inu-
ence on Dee was mainly indirect, given that Deein the wake of Geofroy Toryextended to Greek and
Latin the magical and mystical properties which Pico considered as an exclusive property of the Hebrew
language. Thus, Dee transforms what he calls vulgar cabalathe part of cabala that deals with lan-
guagefrom a christianised Jewish cabala into a truly catholic cabala. But for Dee, this is only the lower
sort of cabala: above it lies real cabala, that is, the art of transmuting any physical or spiritual body into
another. Vulgar magicians and alchemists fail to achieve their aim because they do not possess the mas-
tery of this discipline. Dee took from Pico the notion that cabala is superior to magic, and that the latter
cannot be successful unless supported by the work of cabala. Finally, Dees conception of the metamor-
phosis of the soul taking place between the horizons of time and eternity is derived not only from Pico,
but also from Thomas Aquinass Summa contra Gentiles.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
When citing this paper, please use the full journal title Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
1. Introduction
Giovanni Pico della Mirandolathe Phnix of his Age, as his
contemporaries called himwas born in 1463 and met an untimely
death (he was probably poisoned) at the age of thirty-one, in 1494.
He published in December 1486 a series of nine hundred conclu-
sions or theses (Conclusiones nongent), meant to be publicly dis-
puted in Rome the following month.
1
In this ambitious pamphlet,
dealing with all knowable things, Pico mixed philosophy with the-
ology, magic and cabala. He took great pride in being the rst Chris-
tian to undertake a serious study of Jewish cabalaa discipline
deeply linked, he thought, not only with the prisca theologia or prisca
sapientia (the Pythagorean and neo-Platonic doctrines heralded by
Marsilio Ficino in Florence just a few years before), but also with
Christian revelation. Indeed, Pico was the rst Christian cabalist, in
that he was the rst to consider that not only the conceptions, but
also the methods of the Jewish cabalists were better suited for Chris-
tian theology than for their own religion.
2
The bombastic introduc-
tory speech (Oratio) he prepared for the public discussion of his
Conclusiones was published only after his death, and became famous
under the deceptive title Oration on the dignity of man (Pico, 2002). It
was never delivered by Pico, because Pope Innocent VIII immediately
cancelled the disputation and put the Conclusiones under examina-
tion. At rst, the ecclesiastical commissioners censored thirteen the-
ses as either heretical or dubious in respect to the Catholic faith. Pico
responded angrily with an Apologia, printed in May 1487, in which
0039-3681/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2011.12.007
E-mail address: jean-marc.mandosio@ephe.sorbonne.fr
1
Ed. and trans. in Farmer (1998). This edition of Picos Conclusiones is by far the best, so that listing the previous ones would be a waste of space. Nevertheless, some of Farmers
views are disputable, and the title of his book (Syncretism in the West) is ill advised.
2
On former mentions of cabala among Christians, see Scholem (2007). Wirszubski (1989) strongly advocated Picos originality as the rst true Christian cabalist (pp. 151 and
169). For a general survey of the developments of Christian cabala, see Secret (1985).
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ shpsa
he defended the said conclusions against the asinine ignorance of the
theologians who dared question his orthodoxy.
3
As a result, the Con-
clusiones were condemned in their entirety in August of the same
year, and their author was excommunicated. Two years later, Pico
published the Heptaplus, a work consisting of a sevenfold commen-
tary on the rst verses of the Book of Genesis, plus an appendix con-
taining a cabalistic explanation of the rst word: Bereshit (In the
beginning).
4
His other works, which are of no concern for the pres-
ent paper, need not be mentioned here. Sufce it to say that Pico
eventually renounced most of his earlier views, and that his ample
Disputations against divinatory astrology were almost completed
when he died (Pico, 19461952).
John Dee had the highest consideration for the Italian philoso-
pher. He liked to identify with great predecessors: rst of all, his
fellow countryman Roger Bacon, closely followed by the noble
Earle of Mirandula. In the Digression apologeticall included in
his Mathematicall praeface, Dee presented himself as a man of sci-
ence and wisdom, harassed by the raging slander of the malicious
ignorant, who accused him of being a conjurer. In this, he shared
the fate of some of the greatest men (Socrates, Apuleius, Pico him-
self, and Trithemius), who had similarly been defamed and forced
to write their own Apologies to clear their reputations.
5
Such an appraisal, coupled with Dees assertion that Picos
works were easily available in England at the time,
6
might lead
us to believe that Dee had an extensive knowledge of everything Pico
had written, but the available bibliographical and textual evidence
tells another story. The catalogues of Dees library show that he
did not possess Picos Opera omnia (of which several editions had
been published since the death of the Italian philosopher), but only
a copy of the Nuremberg edition of the Conclusiones,
7
which he al-
ready had in 1557.
8
In fact, all the phrases and concepts Dee bor-
rowed from Pico come from this single work. He may also have
read, of course, Picos Apologia, even though a mere mention of the
books title in the Mathematicall praeface cannot be considered as a
decisive proof. Dee could have known of its existence without actu-
ally having read it closely; nevertheless, while bearing in mind
Nicholas Clulees cautionary statement about Dees sources,
9
it
seems likely that Dee read not only the Conclusiones, but also the
Apologiaor at least the section in which Pico commented on the
censored conclusions concerning magic and cabala. At all events, this
is incidental to our present purpose. This paper is aimed at showing
precisely what Dee made of Picos Conclusiones. It will deal rst with
Dees considerations on formal numbers, directly drawn from Pico,
then with Dees conception of real cabala, a much more indirect
elaboration of cabalistic notions ultimately derived from the Con-
clusiones, through several mediations.
2. Formal numbers: Picos true legacy
Picos inuence is at the core of Dees conception of the magical
and divine power of numbers. In the Oratio and the Apologia, Pico
advocated as new (owing to the carelessness of moderns, who
let it fall into oblivion) a revival of the ancient manner of philoso-
phizing by numbers, observed by the earliest theologians, by
Pythagoras above all, [and also] by Plato and by the rst Platon-
ists.
10
This divine science of numbering was the key to universal
knowledge, and had nothing to do with mercantile arithmetics, that
is, with the common use of numbers to count things.
11
As Pico
pointed out in the mathematical conclusions,
12
in his customary
enigmatic fashion, the difference between the two disciplines was
not that they made a different use of the same numbers, but that
the higher sort of mathematics involved an altogether different kind
of numbers, that he called formal numbers; and these numbers of-
fered a way to the investigation and understanding of everything
knowable.
13
After Pico, formal numbers were implicitly described
in Johann Reuchlins De arte cabalistica (1517), and explicitly,
although briey, in Cornelius Agrippas De occulta philosophia
(1531).
14
Since the De arte cabalistica does not appear in Dees library
catalogues,
15
we can safely assume that his main source of informa-
tion on formal numbersapart from Pico, of coursewas Agrippas
treatise, which he read avidly.
16
Formal numbers were later men-
tioned in another book he owned: Arcangelo da Borgonovos com-
mentary on the rst series of Picos cabalistic conclusions.
17
However, this was published in 1569, so that it cannot be accounted
a source of the Monas hieroglyphica (1564); while the Mathematicall
praefacecompleted on 9 February 1570bears no trace whatsoever
3
Pico (1969). Pico reused much of the unpublished Oratio in the preface to his Apologia.
4
Pico (1942). See Wirszubski (1989), pp. 172173, 182183, 246247; cf. Wirszubski (2007), pp. 273276, 293294, 398400.
5
Dee (1975), fol. A.ii.r: Well: I thanke God and our Lorde Jesus Christ, for the Comfort which I have by the Examples of other men, before my time: To whom, neither in
godlines of life, nor in perfection of learning, I am worthy to be compared: and yet, they sustained the very like Injuries, that I do: or rather, greater. Pacient Socrates, his Apologie
will testie: Apuleius his Apologies, will declare the Brutishnesse of the Multitude. Joannes Picus, Earle of Mirandula, his Apologie will teach you, of the Raging slaunder of the
Malicious Ignorant against him. Joannes Trithemius, his Apologie will specie, how he had occasion to make publike Protestation: as well by reason of the Rude Simple: as also, in
respect of such, as were counted to be of the wisest sort of men.
6
Dee (1975), fol. .j.v.: Joannes Picus, workes, are commonly had (see the phrase in context below, note 22).
7
Joh. Pici Mirand. Conclusiones nongent 8 Norib. 1532 (Roberts & Watson, 1990, 1583 catalogue, no. 974).
8
Conclusiones 900 Pici Mir. (ibid., 1557 list, no. B121).
9
As Clulee (1988, p. 136) rightly stated regarding Pico and other Renaissance sources, without surviving copies of this material to indicate when Dee had it and what he
attended to in it, it is risky to claim any determinant inuence from it.
10
Pico (2002), p. 72: Est autem . . . alia, quam nos attulimus, nova per numeros philosophandi institutio antiqua, illa quidem et a priscis theologis, a Pythagora prsertim, ab
Aglaophamo, a Philolao, a Platone prioribusque Platonicis observata, sed qu hac tempestate, ut prclara alia, posteriorum incuria sic excolevit, ut vix vestigia ipsius ulla
reperiantur. Cf. Pico (1969), p. 120.
11
Pico (2002), pp. 7274: Scribit Plato in Epinomide, inter omnes liberales artes et scientias contemplatrices prcipuam maximeque divinam esse scientiam numerandi . . .
Scribit Abumasar verbum fuisse Avenzoar Babylonii, eum omnia nosse qui noverat numerare. Qu vera esse nullo modo possunt, si per numerandi artem eam artem intellexerunt
cujus nunc mercatores in primis sunt peritissimi, quod et Plato testatur, exserta nos admonens voce ne divinam hanc arithmeticam mercatoriam esse arithmeticam intelligamus.
Cf. Pico (1969), p. 120.
12
Conclusiones de mathematicis secundum opinionem propriam, in Pico (1998), pp. 466485.
13
Ibid., p. 468 (Concl. math., 11): Per numeros habetur via ad omnis scibilis investigationem et intellectionem. Farmer translates: Through numbers a method exists to the
investigation and understanding of everything knowable (ibid., p. 469). I think it preferable to translate via literally as way. Cf. Dees translation: By numbers, a way is had to
the searching out and understanding of everything able to be known (see infra, note 22).
14
For a general outline, see Brach (2009).
15
Reuchlin (1995); see below, notes 27 and 38. Dee had two other works by Reuchlin: Joh. Reuchlin de verbo mirico 8 Coloni 1532 (Roberts & Watson, 1990, 1583
catalogue, no. 1043; cf. 1557 list, no. B25: Reuchlin de verbo mirico); Joh. Reuchlin lexicon Hebraicum et in hebrorum grammaticen commentarii f Basil. 1537 (ibid., 1583
catalogue, no. 1561).
16
Agrippa (1992); see below, note 48. Cornelius Agrippa de occulta philosophia (Roberts & Watson, 1990, 1557 list, no. B208); Agrippa de occulta philosophia, libri tres 8
Lugduni 1545. Ejusdem de occulta philosophia, liber quartus 8 Marpurgi 1559 (ibid., 1583 catalogue, no. 742743).
17
Arcangelo da Borgonovo (1569). Archangelus Burgonovensis in Cabalistarum dogmata ex Joh. Pico Mirand. collecta, Expositio. 8 Ven. 1559 (Roberts & Watson, 1990, 1583
catalogue, no. 997; on the correct date of publication, ibid., p. 95).
490 J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497
of its contents. In any case, this work adds nothing to what Pico and
Agrippa had already written on the topic.
18
Dee duly quotes Picos Conclusiones in the Mathematicall praeface.
He begins by claiming, after Boethius (1995, II, 1, p. 11), that all
things were formed by the reason of numbers, for numbers are
the ideal pattern which the Creator followed when he brought all
creatures from nothing to the formality of their being and state.
19
In other words: every creature (according to standard Aristotelian
physics) is a combination of matter and form; its form is a number,
or, more exactly, is brought toexistence bya divine force lying innum-
bers. Dee calls it the constant lawof numbers: whichis plantedinthy-
ngs Naturall and Supernaturall: and is prescribed to all Creatures,
inviolably to be kept (Dee, 1975, fol. .j.v). Thus, by the way of num-
bers, we can understand how God created the world, and we can as-
cend through them to contemplate the Form of Forms, the Exemplar
Number of all things numerable (that is, the pattern of Creation in
the Creators mind).
20
Dee adds that the twelfth-century mystic Joa-
chimof Fiore achievedhis famous prophecies thanks to the use of for-
mal numbers, as Pico stated in his mathematical conclusions.
21
He
then praises these conclusions, and exhorts his readers to look by
themselves at the seventy-four questions Pico promised to answer
by the way of numbers, because there, says Dee, they will nd what
wonderful mysteries such numbers can disclose.
22
Indeed, Pico as-
serted that numbers (and more specically, formal numbers) could
demonstrate anything. For instance: Whether there is a God, How
many principal grades of nature exist in the universe, Whether many
gods can exist, What opinion is truer concerning the Trinity: that of
Arius, Sabellius, Wyclif, or the Catholic faith, What natures are t
for the bestowal of happiness, Why men naturally desire victory,
When the world will end, and so on.
23
Formal numbers had been mentioned by Dee for the rst time
seven years before, in his famous letter to William Cecil. There
he declared that it was a pity that no Englishman had yet been able
to deal with formal numbers, for these are, together with mysti-
cal weights and divine measurements, the means by which the
huge frame of this world is assembled and preserved.
24
The preface
to the Monas hieroglyphica, published the following year, promised to
remedy to this situation: the mysterious Monad would make the
arithmetician capable of separating the souls and formal lives of
numbers from their concrete and corporeal nature, so as to enter
our service.
25
Dees readers had to wait until the Mathematicall prae-
face for an explanation of what this was all about.
For Pico, formal numbers were not the base material numbers
used by merchants, accountants, and the like (the numbers num-
bered); nor were they numbers abstracted from matter in the
Aristotelian sense, that is, virtual entities existing only in the arith-
meticians mind. Rather, they were numbers entirely separated
from matter and existing by themselves, just like Platonic ideas
indeed, they were Platonic ideas
26
and these numbers (the num-
bers numbering) were much more real and powerful than the com-
mon ones. According to Pythagoras, Pico recalled, formal number is
the principle of all things.
27
Formal is intended here as opposed to
material. Formality is the adequate object of the intellect,
28
that
knows only forms (that is, ideas): a thing, to be seized by the intel-
lect, must be of a formal nature. The intellect is the denition of all
existence.
29
I understand this rather obscure proposition as follows:
matter by itself does not exist, because existence implies that a spe-
cic form is given to matter; therefore, nothing can exist outside the
forms, which are all virtually included in the intellect, so that the
intellect denesthat is, delimitsanything that exists. Formality
is actuality appropriate, by itself, to perfect the possible intellect,
30
18
See below, notes 4950.
19
Dee (1975), fol. .j.r: And therefore the great and godly Philosopher Anitius Boetius, sayd: Omnia qucunque a primva rerum natura constructa sunt, Numerorum videntur
ratione formata. Hoc enim fuit principale in animo Conditoris Exemplar. That is: All thinges (which from the very rst originall being of thinges, have bene framed and made) do appeare to
be Formed by the reason of Numbers. For this was the principall example or patterne in the minde of the Creator. O comfortable allurement, O ravishing perswasion, to deale with a
Science, whose Subject, is so Auncient, so pure, so excellent, so surmounting all creatures, so used of the Almighty and incomprehensible wisdome of the Creator, in the distinct
creation of all creatures: in all their distinct partes, properties, natures, and vertues, by order, and most absolute number, brought, from Nothing, to the Formalitie of their being
and state.
20
Ibid., fol. .j.r45v: By Numbers propertie therefore, of us, by all possible meanes, (to the perfection of the Science) learned, we may both winde and draw our selves into the
inward and deepe search and vew, of all creatures distinct vertues, natures, properties, and Formes: And also, farder, arise, clime, and mount up (with Speculative winges) in spirit,
to behold in the Glas of Creation, the Forme of Formes, the Exemplar Number of all thinges Numerable : both visible and invisible: mortall and immortall, Corporall and Spirituall.
21
Ibid., fol. .j.v: Part of this profound and divine Science, had Joachim the Prophesier atteyned unto: by Numbers Formall, Naturall, and Rationall, forseyng, concludyng, and
forshewyng great particular events, long before their comming. His bookes yet remainyng, hereof, are good profe: And the noble Earle of Mirandula, (besides that,) a sufcient
witnesse: that Joachim, in his prophesies, proceded by no other way, then by Numbers Formall. Cf. Pico (1998), p. 468 (Concl. math., 10): Joachin in prophetiis suis alia via non
processit quam per numeros formales.
22
Dee (1975), fol. .j.v: And this Earle hym selfe, in Rome, [marg.: Anno 1488] set up 900 Conclusions, in all kinde of Sciences, openly to be disputed of: and among the rest, in
his Conclusions Mathematicall, (in the eleventh Conclusion) hath in Latin, this English sentence. By Numbers, a way is had, to the searchyng out, and understandyng of every thyng,
hable to be knowen. For the verifying of which Conclusion, I promise to aunswere to the 74 Qustions, under written, by the way of Numbers. Which Conclusions, I omit here to rehearse:
aswell avoidyng superuous prolixitie: as, bycause Joannes Picus, workes, are commonly had. But, in any case, I would wish that those Conclusions were red diligently, and
perceived of such, as are earnest Observers and Considerers of the constant law of numbers: which is planted in thyngs Naturall and Supernaturall: and is prescribed to all
Creatures, inviolably to be kept. For, so, besides many other thinges, in those Conclusions to be marked, it would apeare, how sincerely, and within my boundes, I disclose the
wonderfull mysteries, by numbers, to be atteyned unto. (It should be noted that the actual date was not 1488, but 1486.)
23
The examples given here correspond to questions 1, 20, 32, 40, 50, 72, 38 (Pico, 1998, p. 470485).
24
[O]ur cuntry hath no man (that I ever yet could herre of) hable to set furth his fote, or shew his hand: as in the Science De Numeris formalibus, the Science De Ponderibus
mysticis, and the Science De Mensuris divinis: (by which three the huge frame of this world is fashioned, compact, rered, stablished and preserved) and in other Sciences, eyther
with these Collaterall, or from them derived, or to themwards greatly us fordering (letter to W. Cecil, 16 February 1563; quoted after French [1972], p. 25, and Clulee [1988], pp.
103104).
25
See below, note 52.
26
Brach (2009), p. 76, denes the formal number as number considered as wholly independent from any condition or restraint that would result from it being connected to the
continuum, or to any other substratum to which it is supposedly inherent, such as collections of beings or things. See also Valcke (1985), pp. 4548. On Plato and formal numbers,
see Crombie (1979), vol. 2, pp. 447 sqq.
27
Pico (1998), p. 406 (Conclusiones paradox . . . nova in philosophia dogmata inducentes, 26): formalis numerus, quem dixit Pythagoras esse principium omnium rerum.
According to Reuchlins interpretation, Pythagoras, in this sentence, meant number allegorically, for the principle of all things is really the Mind of God, which can best be
represented by the tetractys, that is, the fourfold gure of the denary, identied by Pico and Reuchlin with the tetragrammaton, the four-letter name of God: Mentem vero ipsam
Dei Pythagoras allegorice nuncupavit, cum diceret numerum esse universorum principium . . . Numerum autem pro mente accipit . . . Nec propterea cogitari aliquid potest mentis
similius. Reuchlin (1995), II, fol. 39r, p. 165.
28
Pico (1998), p. 416 (same series of conclusions, 58): Formalitas est adquatum objectum intellectus. Farmers translation (A formality is an adequate object of the intellect,
ibid., p. 417) is inappropriate, since the very concept of a formality is meaningless.
29
Ibid., p. 400 (same series, 7): intellectus est difnitio totius esse . . .
30
Ibid., p. 392 (Conclusiones philosophic secundum propriam opinionem, 66): Formalitas est actualitas apta per se percere possibilem intellectum. Again, Farmers translation
(A formality is an actuality appropriate per se to perfect . . . , ibid., p. 393) is inadequate.
J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497 491
this being the rational part of our soul.
31
In other words, the ra-
tional mind can be brought to perfection through the action of
forms. Now, Pico declared that it is possible for the rational part
of the soul to discourse and operate without conjunction to phan-
tasmata,
32
that is, without leaning on mental images abstracted
from the physical worldbecause intelligible images are not ab-
stracted from phantasmata.
33
Formal numbers are precisely those
intelligible images, able to perfect the rational part of the soul,
and thus to give access to forms of knowledge much superior to
the ordinary ones: for instance, through formal, not material,
arithmetics, the optimal way is had to natural prophecy
34
a
way followed, notably, by Joachim of Fiore.
35
The very language
employed by Pico illustrated the difference between material
numbers (two, three, ten, and so on) and formal numbers, whose
namesbinary, ternary, denary, and so oncould not be used
to count things but only to point out the very essence of
numbers.
36
There is a tendency to consider formal numbers merely as
an equivalent of symbolic numbers. This was certainly not the
case for Pico, to whom formal numbers were not only symbolic
representations through which the mind can ascend to the con-
templation of the divine (even though they could also be used as
a vehicle for mystical speculation): they were actual or active
numbers, that is, numbers carrying an effective, practical power.
Following the secret philosophy of the Pythagoreans, the more
active were the more formal.
37
Each formal number had its own
active properties: for instance, the ternary and the denary carried
much more power than any other number, and were the numbers
of numbers, the only truly formal numbers in magical arithme-
tic.
38
A thorough examination of the laconic bits of information
scattered throughout the Conclusiones shows that, for Pico, formal
numbers were one with the serot: the divine emanations by
which, according to Jewish cabalists, God exerts His power in
the world, and through which the soul can rise to the divine
realm. The Hebrew word serot means numbers, and was trans-
lated in Picos Latin as numerationes. Of course, the serot also cor-
respond to divine names in Jewish cabala; but the Hebrew
characters are both letters and numbers, so that, in the end, there
is virtually no difference.
39
In the Conclusiones, Pico divides cabala in two parts: the sci-
ence of serot (numbers) corresponds to practical cabala, and
the science of shemot (names) to speculative cabala.
40
He then
tells us that the former science practices all formal metaphysics
and inferior theology,
41
that is (as he explains in the Oratio and
the Apologia), the metaphysics of intelligible and angelical forms.
42
Logically, these forms are, in terms of Kabbala, the serot
(Wirszubski, 1989, p. 140). This is why Pico writes that numbers
are proper to the work of cabala.
43
That these numbers used by
cabalists are the serot, and that they correspond to formal num-
bers, is beyond doubt. The link between formal numbers and the
serot is clearly asserted in several conclusions, as in the one where
Pico brings together Pythagorean numbers (the denary and the
rst spherical number) with the cabalistic conception of the Great
Jubilee,
44
which is a mystical representation of the serah called
Intelligence.
45
Another cabalistic conclusion reveals the answer to
the thirty-eighth question listed in the mathematical conclusions
(one of the seventy-four questions which could be answered by
the way of numbers): When will the world end?. The answer is:
If any human conjecture can be made concerning the Last
Things, we can discover through the most secret way of the
cabala that the end of the world will occur ve hundred and
fourteen years and twenty-ve days from now.
46
That is to say, on 1 January 2000. Thus, Pico explicitly conrms that
the way of numbers and the most secret way of the cabala are one
and the same.
47
Agrippas brief expos on formal numbers is more or less a
synthesis of Picos intricate allusions and may be worth quoting,
since Dee undoubtedly read it. Agrippa wrote that the wonder-
ful efciency and virtue hidden in numbers, for good as for evil,
lies not in natural numbers themselves, but in their formal
reason; vocal and mercantile numbers are deprived of such
power, and it is only in rational, formal and natural numbers
that Gods and Natures sacraments are contained. He who
knows how to join, harmonize and proportionate together these
two kinds of numbers will be able to operate wonders and gain
knowledge: that is the way the Pythagoreans followed when
they wanted to prognosticate by the numbers of names, and
31
Ibid., p. 442 (Conclusiones secundum propriam opinionem . . . in doctrina Platonis, 19): pars rationalis anim nostr, quam secundum Peripateticos possibilem intellectum voco
. . .
32
Ibid. (same conclusion): Possibile est ut pars rationalis anim nostr . . . ad hoc perveniat, ut sine conjunctione ad phantasmata discurrat et operetur.
33
Ibid., p. 380 (Concl. phil., 31): Non dari species intelligibiles a phantasmatibus abstractas . . . ut veram . . . sententiam asserimus. See Farmers commentary, ibid., pp. 102105.
34
Ibid., p. 468 (Concl. math., 9): Per arithmeticam non materialem, sed formalem, habetur optima via ad prophetiam naturalem.
35
See the tenth mathematical conclusion, quoted above (note 21).
36
Thus, Pico would not have used the word quatercentenary, as in John Dee Quatercentenary Conference, to speak of a four-hundred year period, but only to signify the divine
power carried by the formal quatercentenary: the power of the number 400 in itself.
37
Pico (1969), V, p. 172: ad secretam philosophiam Pythagoricorum . . . intelligendam, quorum etiam sententia est inter omnia mathematica, numeros ut formaliores, ita etiam
esse actualiores . . .
38
Pico (1998), p. 502 (Conclusiones magic . . . secundum opinionem propriam, 23): Quilibet numerus prter ternarium et denarium sunt materiales in magia; isti formales sunt,
et in magica arithmetica sunt numeri numerorum. See Farmers annotation ad loc. On these and other formal numbers, see Pico (1969), pp. 172174, and Reuchlin (1995), II, fols.
38r40r, pp. 162170.
39
See Wirszubski (1989), Chs. 6 (Language symbolism and number symbolism, pp. 7783) and 12 (Mysticism and magic, pp. 140150); cf. Wirszubski (2007), pp. 113124,
223238.
40
Pico (1998), p. 518 (Conclusiones cabalistic . . . secundum opinionem propriam, 1): ego prima divisione scientiam cabal in scientiam sephiroth et semot, tanquam in
practicam et speculativam, distinguerem. This division was misinterpreted by Wirszubski (1989), p. 139: see Farmers commentary ad loc., and my own remarks in Wirszubski
(2007), p. 215. This misinterpretation does not deeply affect Wirszubskis analysis, given the equivalence of numbers and names in Hebrew.
41
Pico (1998), p. 520 (Concl. cabal. sec. op. propr., 3): Scientia qu est pars practica cabal practicat totam metaphysicam formalem et theologiam inferiorem.
42
Pico (2002), p. 92: Hi sunt libri scienti cabal, in his libris merito Esdras . . . sapienti fontem, idest de intelligibilibus angelicisque formis exactam metaphysicam, . . .
pronuntiavit. Cf. Pico (1969), p. 123.
43
Pico (1998), p. 502 (Concl. mag. 25): [N]umeri sunt proprii operi cabal . . . Again, Farmer (ibid., p. 503) translates inappropriately (numbers are proper to a work of Cabala).
44
Ibid., p. 550 (Concl. cabal. sec. op. propr., 68): Qui sciverit quid sit denarius in arithmetica formali, et cognoverit naturam primi numeri spherici, sciet illud quod ego adhuc
apud aliquem cabalistam non legi, et est quod sit fundamentum secreti magni Jobelei in cabala.
45
Wirszubski (1989), p. 32. See also Farmers commentary ad loc. This conclusion is interpreted by Reuchlin (1995), III, fol. 52v53v (pp. 216219).
46
Pico (1998), p. 478 (Qustiones ad quas pollicetur se per numeros responsurum, 38): Quando futura sit sculi consumatio. Ibid., p. 524 (Concl. cabal. sec. op. propr., 9): Siqua est
de novissimis temporibus humana conjectura, investigare possumus per secretissimam viam cabal futuram esse consumationem sculi hinc ad annos quingentos et
quatuordecim, et dies vigintiquinque. Farmer (ibid., p. 525) translates conjectura as prediction. On the interpretation of this conclusion, see his commentary ad loc.
47
Other examples of Pythagorean or formal arithmetics are given by Pico (1998), pp. 542545 (Concl. cabal. sec. op. propr., 5557).
492 J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497
such a manner of computing is commonly practised among the
Hebrews and the cabalists.
48
Arcangelo da Borgonovo simply re-
peated and simplied Agrippas statements:
We also need numbers to understand Gods and Natures sacra-
mentsnot the merchants ones, of course, but numbers more
occult andformal (as Syrianus calls them), intellectual andideal.
49
So, in the end, it makes no difference at all whether or not Dee al-
ready knew Arcangelos book when he was writing the Mathemati-
call praeface.
50
Dee does not clearly dene formal numbers. In the Mathematicall
praeface, he rather tells us what they are not: neither pure element,
nor Aristotles fthessence, nor evena substance spiritual or angel-
ical, but somethingthat is free fromall matter.
51
Afewyears before,
in the preface to the Monas hieroglyphica, he explained that the differ-
ence betweenvulgar arithmetics andthe superior kindof arithmetics
attainable through the Monad was that the numbers considered by
the vulgar arithmetician as abstracted fromthings corporeal and re-
mote from sensual perception were, in fact, concrete and corporeal,
while in superior arithmetics, the souls and formal lives of numbers
are separatedfromthemso as toenter our service.
52
WhenDee spoke
of the separated souls of numbers, he meant they were reduced to
pure forms, and that is exactly what formal numbers were for Pico.
Dees invention of the word unit, as opposed to unity, was aimed at
showing the difference between the divine monad, which generates
numbers without being itself a number, and the number one, com-
monly used as the rst number, to count things.
53
How could formal numbers be used to obtain universal knowl-
edge and perform all the wonders Pico had promised? If we put
ourselves in Gods place, as Dee does in the Mathematicall praeface,
we can see that, for Him,
Numbryng. . . was his Creatyng of all thinges. And his Continuall
Numbryng, of all thinges, is the Conservation of them in being:
And, where and when he will lacke an Unit: there and then, that
particular thyng shalbe Discreated. (Dee, 1975, fol. .j.v)
That is why Dee could write that there is a constant law of num-
bers, which is planted in things natural and supernatural.
54
The
same idea was already expressed in the twenty-third theorem of
the Monas hieroglyphica:
Our numbers [that is, formal numbers] have such dignity that it
is a sin against the wisdom of Nature to violate their laws; for
by these laws Nature wants to teach us by what certain and
xed limits the numbers are to be engaged, in the explanation
of Natures greatest mysteries.
55
And in the Mathematicall praeface, Dee added that if we manage to
conceive numbers,
absolutely (Not supposing, nor admixtyng any thyng created,
Corporall or Spirituall, to support, conteyne, or represent those
Numbers imagined) . . . at length, we may be hable, to nde the
number of our owne name, gloriously exemplied and registred in
the booke of the Trinitie most blessed and ternall. (Dee, 1975,
fol. .ij.r)
The phrase employed by Deethe number of our own
nameimplies gematria, that is, the cabalistic permutation of
names into numbers and vice versa; it also recalls Agrippas
description of formal numbers as the numbers of names (numeri
nominum).
56
We have seen so far that Dees conception of formal numbers is
pretty similar to Picos. But a deeper examination reveals that there
is an irreconcilable divergence between the two thinkers on the
status and scope of mathematics as a whole. In his mathematical
conclusions, Pico warned the theologians against the use of Euclids
works: Nothing is more harmful to the theologian than frequent
and continuous exercise in Euclidean mathematics, for they do
not treat numbers and magnitudes as images of superior things,
and, therefore, distract men from the investigation of intelligi-
bles.
57
Now, Dee explicitly conceived the Monas hieroglyphica as
(among other things) an exercise in anagogy,
58
that is, precisely,
48
Agrippa (1992), II, 3, pp. 253255: In numeris itaque mirandam latere efcaciam et virtutem tam ad bonum, quam ad malum . . . Nec attenditur hic numerus naturalis, sed
formalis ratio qu est in numero . . . non in vocalibus et mercatoriis numeris has vires esse, sed in rationalibus, formalibus et naturalibus hc Dei et natur sacramenta distincta
atque contenta. Quicunque autem noverit numeros vocales et naturales cum divinis conjungere et in eandem consonantiam temperare, hic per numeros poterit operari mirabilia
et etiam cognoscere. Pythagorici etiam multa sese prognosticare protebantur per numeros nominum . . . ; et hic modus computandi penes Hebros et Cabalistas celeberrimus
est . . .
49
Arcangelo da Borgonovo (1569), fol. 45r: Iccirco numeris etiam indigemus ad percipienda Dei et Natur sacramenta, non quidem mercatoriis, sed occultioribus et formalibus
(ut Syrianus appellat) intellectibus atque idealibus Hebros et Cabalistas celeberrimus est . . . The mention of the Neoplatonic philosopher Syrianus (c. 380c. 438), master of
Proclus, is apparently a hoax, in the typical plagiarists fashion (substituting a remote philosophers name for that of the actual author).
50
A look at the full title of that book can suggest to us why Dee bought it: it promised the reader he would nd there many things wonderfully contributing to that very
beautiful and occult mathematical way of philosophising by numbers (In quibus non pauca adinvenies, qu mire faciunt ad pulcherrimam illam abditamque per numeros, et
mathematicam philosophandi rationem).
51
Dee (1975), fol. .j.r: How Immateriall and free from all matter, Number is, who doth not perceave? yea, who doth not wonderfully wonder at it? For, neither pure Element, nor
Aristoteles, Quinta Essentia, is hable to serve for Number, as his propre matter. Nor yet the puritie and simplenes of Substance Spirituall or Angelicall, will be found propre enough
thereto.
52
Dee (1964), fol. 5v, pp. 128129: Arithmeticus, (non dico, Logista) an non mirabitur, Numeros suos, quos a rebus Corporatis Abstractos, et sensibilibus omnibus liberos, in
Dianas recondebat recessibus; ibique, Mentis variis tractabat Actionibus: Eosdem, hic, in nostro Opere, tanquam Concretos et Corporeos ostendi, erique: et eorundem Animas,
Formalesque vitas, ab eis, in nostros secerni usus?. Josten (ibid.) translated logista as logician, but this word, derived from the Greek logistes, means accountant in this context
(see also Dee [1975], fol. .ij.r: the common Logist). Dee speaks here of the arithmetician, for whom numbersaccording to the Aristotelian conceptionare concepts abstracted
from corporeal things, as opposed to the accountant, who makes no distinction between the numbers and the things themselves. This echoes Picos and Agrippas references to
mercantile arithmetics (see above, notes 11 and 48).
53
Dee (1975), fol. .j.r.ij.r: We account an Unit, a thing Mathematicall, though it be no Number, and also indivisible: because, of it, materially, Number doth consist . . . [marg.:
Note the worde, Unit, to expresse the Greke Monas, et not Unitie: as we have all, commonly, till now, used.] . . . So grosse is our conversation, and dull is our apprehension: while
mortall Sense, in us, ruleth the common wealth of our litle world. Hereby we say, Three Lyons, are three: or a Ternarie. Three Egles, are three, or a Ternarie. Which Ternaries, are
eche, the Union, knot, and Uniformitie, of three discrete and distinct Units. That is, we may in eche Ternarie, thrise, severally pointe, and shew a part, One, One, and One. Where, in
Numbryng, we say One, two, Three. But how farre, these visible Ones, do differre from our Indivisible Units (in pure Arithmetike, principally considered) no man is ignorant.
54
See above, note 22. According to the Yates thesis, this sentence should be interpreted as a forerunner of Galileos famous assumption that the book of Nature is written in
mathematical characters; but when replaced in its proper context, the meaning is completely different, as the following quotations clearly show.
55
Dee (1964), fol. 26v, pp. 212213: Numeri nostri hanc habent Dignitatem: Ut illorum violare Leges, Peccatum sit contra Natur Sapientiam: qu, eisdem nos docere velit, (in
Mysteriis suis maximis examinandis) quibus certis Limitibus Statisque, Illi, devinciantur. See also Dees letter to William Cecil (above, note 24).
56
See above, note 48.
57
Pico (1998), p. 468 (Concl. math., 6): Nihil magis nocivum theologo quam frequens et assidua in mathematicis Euclidis exercitatio. Ibid., p. 468 (Concl. math., 4): Sicut
subjecta mathematicorum, si absolute accipiantur, intellectum nihil perciunt, ita si ut imagines accipiantur superiorum, immediate nos ad intelligibilium speculationem manu
ducunt.
58
Dee (1964), fol. 12r, pp. 154155: Monas hieroglyphica . . . mathematice, magice, cabalistice, anagogice explicata . . . Ibid., fol. 5v: Maxima, perpluraque (absolutissima
Anagogia) illos edocent Mysteria.
J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497 493
the ascension from inferior things to the contemplation or investiga-
tion of a superior plane of being. But the capacity of the Hieroglyphic
Monad to grasp and concentrate the divine power carried by num-
bers, lines and rays led to what Dee called mechanical magic.
59
Moreover, the literary form adopted by Dee was ostensibly Euclid-
ean, even though Euclids geometry was completely distorted (to
say the least) in the twenty-four theorems, so as to conceal the truth
instead of revealing it.
60
Nevertheless, the choice of Euclidean math-
ematics as the starting point for the great physical, metaphysical
and cosmopolitical revolution envisioned in the Monas hieroglyphica
clearly contradicts the incompatibility, endorsed by Pico, between
theology and this sort of mathematics. Similarly, in the Mathemati-
call praeface, Dee introduces formal numbers to an audience of Eng-
lish merchants and practitioners (or mechanicians)the sort of
people whom the noble Earle of Mirandula considered unworthy
of the higher forms of knowledge. The many fruits of the mathemat-
ical tree displayed by Dee in his preface to Euclid are all treated by
him as equally interesting and useful, each at its own level. And,
worst of all (from Picos perspective), this work is truly a manifesto
in favour of the full application of the power of mathematics to the
physical world, which was exactly the trend Pico fought against.
61
3. Away from Pico and back: real cabala
Dees conception of cabala, as expressed in the Monas hieroglyph-
ica, differs greatly fromPicos. Of course, the Italian philosopher was
not his only source on the subject (see De Lon-Jones, 2006). Never-
theless, Dee was sufciently familiar with and fascinated by Picos
Conclusiones for such a comparison to be relevant. Pico considered
cabala to be intrinsically linked with the Hebrew language, which
was the rst tongue, created by God, and therefore the only one
which was not casual, that is, conventional, arbitrary, like all the
other languages invented by men after the Fall.
62
Thus, even the
smallest details in the shape and order of the Hebrew characters are
motivated (to use the language of modern linguistics) and reveal
the secrets of the tennumerations, that is, of the divinesephirot.
63
This
conception came directly from Jewish cabala, and had several impor-
tant consequences. First, the universal knowledge deriving from the
correct use of cabala and formal arithmetic was only attainable
through the practice of the Hebrew language,
64
since cabalistic de-
vicesmainly gematria (conversion of words into numbers), notaricon
(interpretation of words as acronyms) and tsiruf (permutation of let-
ters)only made sense with Hebrew characters and were ineffectual
when applied to other forms of writing. Moreover, given that Hebrew
letters were also numbers, formal arithmetic was ultimately identical
to cabala. The second consequence of the divine institution of the He-
brewlanguage was that the only names which could have power in a
magical work were Hebrew names, or closely derived from He-
brew
65
(that is, Aramaicor Chaldaic, as the Aramaic tongue was
called at the time), because they carry a divine power: for magic can-
not work unless the magicians voice becomes the voice of God.
66
Now, Dee explains that, thanks to the power of the Hieroglyphic
Monad, the Hebrew cabalist shall understand that the principal
keys to his art may be used outside the connes of the language
called holy, and this for a theological reason: God is not only
the God of the Jews, but of all peoples, nations, and languages.
67
In other words, the christianisation of cabala implied that, Christian-
ity being a catholic (universal) religion, the efciency of cabala could
not remain conned to the Hebrew language after the advent of
Christ, because the Hebrews were no longer the elected people. Pi-
cos conception of cabala revealed itself as too narrow and ultimately
wrong, owing to its excessive dependence upon Jewish cabala. In the
preface to the Monas hieroglyphica, Dee stresses that the great mys-
teries contained in the alphabet are to be found in Latin and Greek
as well as in Hebrew,
68
for these three tongues, in writing, use letters
as numbers, so that, being all issued from God alone (although hu-
man arrogance claims to have invented them),
69
Latin or Greek
characters have the same intrinsic properties as the Hebrew ones. In-
deed, cabalistic transformations and permutations are performed by
Dee throughout the book using the three sets of characters.
70
One of the main sources that convinced Dee to refuse to treat the
Hebrew language separately from the others was Geofroy Torys
Champ eury, a French work on the true proportion of ancient let-
ters (Tory, 1529). Like Picos Conclusiones and Agrippas De occulta
philosophia, it was one of the books Dee had with him since at least
the 1550s,
71
and it left its mark in the Monas hieroglyphica.
72
All lan-
59
Ibid., fol. 13r (theorem 7), pp. 158159: Geometras docere, Lineam, ex puncti uxu, produci: Nos hic simili ratione, eri monemus: Dum Elementares nostr Line, ex Still,
(tanquam Puncti, Physici) continuo Casu, (quasi uxu) in Mechanica nostra producantur Magia. On Dees mechanical magic, see Mandosio (2003), pp. 489490.
60
Ibid., p. 489: Dee adopte le mode dexposition des gomtres, non pour dvoiler la vrit, mais pour la dissimuler . . .
61
Cf. Pico (1998), p. 466 (Concl. math., 5): Sicut dictum Aristotelis de antiquis, dicentis quod ideo errarunt in physica contemplatione, quia mathematice res physicas tractarunt,
verum esset si illi materialiter mathematica non formaliter accepissent, ita est verissimum modernos, qui de naturalibus mathematice disputant, naturalis philosophi
fundamenta destruere. In Dees Mathematicall praeface, even the more material branches of mathematics are applied to the physical world. On his position in the early modern
discussions about the so called intermediary sciences between physics and mathematics, see Mandosio (1994).
62
Pico (1998), p. 396 (Concl. phil., 80): Siqua est lingua prima et non casualis, illam esse Hebraicam multis patet conjecturis.
63
Ibid., p. 358 (Conclusiones cabalistic . . . secundum secretam doctrinam sapientum Hebrorum cabalistarum, 33): Null sunt litter in tota lege qu in formis, conjunctionibus,
separationibus, tortuositate, directione, defectu, superabundantia, minoritate, majoritate, coronatione, clausura, apertura, et ordine, decem numerationum secreta non
manifestent.
64
Ibid., p. 414 (Concl. paradox., 55): Qui ordinem Hebraic lingu profunde et radicaliter tenuerit, atque illum proportionaliter in scientiis servare noverit, cujuscunque scibilis
perfecte inveniendi normam et regulam habebit.
65
Ibid., p. 500 (Concl. mag., 22): Nulla nomina ut signicativa . . . in magico opere virtutem habere possunt, nisi sint Hebraica, vel inde proxime derivata.
66
Ibid. (Concl. mag., 1920): [V]oces et verba in magico opere efcaciam habent, quia illud in quo primum magicam exercet natura, vox est Dei. Qulibet vox virtutem habet
in magia, inquantum Dei voce formatur.
67
Dee (1964), fol. 6v7r, pp. 132134: Ad Cabalistam jam venio Hebrum: Qui, ubi suam (sic dictam) Gemetriam, Notariacon, et Tzyruph (Artis su tres quasi prcipuas
Claves) extra Sanct, Nuncupat, Lingu exerceri nes videbit: Immo undiquaque (ex obviis quibusque, visibilibus et Invisibilibus) hujus, (a Deo) Recept Traditionis Mystic
Notas, Characteresque corrogari; Vel, hanc quoque Artem, tum, vocabit Sanctam : (veritate coactus, si Intelligat) Vel, non Judorum, tantum; Sed omnium Gentium, Nationum et
Linguarum, sine pqorxpokgwia, Eundem esse Deum Benevolentissimum fatebitur: Nullumque Mortalem se Excusare posse, de Sanct hujus nostr Lingu Imperitia.
68
Ibid., fol. 4v, pp. 124125: Ipse, qui omnium Mysteriorum Author est Solus, ad Primam et Ultimam, Seipsum Comparavit Literam. (Quod non in Grca solum esse
intelligendum Lingua: sed tum in Hebra, tum in Latina, variis, ex Arte ista, demonstrari potest viis.) O, Quanta, tum, debeant esse, Intermediarum Mysteria?.
69
Ibid., fol. 5r, pp. 126127: Primas, Mysticasque, Hebrorum, Grcorum, et Latinorum literas: a Deo solo profectas, et Mortalibus traditas. (Quicquid humana jactare solet
Arrogantia.) Josten (ibid.) incorrectly linked the parenthesis to the following sentence.
70
The properties of the Latin letters V, L and X, included in the structure of the Monad, are discussed in theorem 16 (Dee (1964), fol. 15v16v, pp. 168172); the Monad also
contains the letters a and x (theorem 22, ibid., fol. 22r23v, pp. 194198).
71
Champ eury de la vraye proportion des lettres antiques par Geofroy Tory. 4 Paris 1527 (Roberts and Watson (1990), 1583 catalogue, no. 330; as often, Dees datation is
wrong); Champ eury (ibid., 1557 list, no. B144).
72
It has been noted that Dees arbor raritatis was adapted from Torys description of the Pythagorean letter Y and from his considerations on Hercules at the crossroads: see
Tory (1529), fol. 62r63v and 72r; Dee (1964), fol. 5r; and Jostens annotations (ibid.), p. 119. On other aspects of Torys inuence on the Monas hieroglyphica, see Clulee (1988), p.
92.
494 J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497
guages are holy in Torys eyes, and Dees insistence that no harm
(not even the slightest) be done to the mystical proportions of the
Monad, lest by such negligence the new discipline of those true
(and most necessary) hieroglyphic measurements may be thrown
into confusion, or perish,
73
echoes Torys exhortation not to modify
in any way the proportions of the letters noble and divine, because
they are like the body of a man, and he who changes their shape
transforms them into a monster.
74
Torys conception of writing was
fully adopted by Dee and made him extend to every alphabet what
Pico considered as the holy properties of the Hebrew letters alone.
Dee, then, declares that there are two different sorts of cabalas.
The one just described is the vulgar one: resting on letters that
can be written by man, it is nothing but a cabalistic grammar,
or the cabala of that which is said. The other cabala, called by
Dee real cabala, or the cabala of that which is (the cabala of being),
goes beyond the connes of language and deals with the things
themselves. This superior cabala was born to us by the law of Cre-
ation, and can be dened as a more divine grammarthat is,
more divine than the vulgar sort of cabala, which was already in it-
self a superior grammar, aimed at the divinebecause it invents
new arts and explains the most abstruse arts very faithfully.
75
I
do not think Dee intended the cabala of that which is as a mere
means to ontological speculation, as the translation cabala of being
could suggest, but, in a more concrete fashion, as the art of applying
cabalistic methodsgematria, notaricon and tsirufto real things in-
stead of letters.
76
Real cabala is the art of transforming, by way of
these three methods (with the addition of temurah, a variant of tsi-
ruf), any physical or spiritual thing into another, in much the same
way as vulgar cabalists transform words and phrases in order to
achieve a deeper understanding of the sacred texts. That is why real
cabala can invent new arts and explain the most abstruse arts,
that is, the magical arts and alchemy: it carries a divine power, the
power to create and sustain all things; and this power passes
through formal numbersthe very instruments of the law of Crea-
tion. Vulgar magicians and alchemists fail to achieve their aim be-
cause they do not possess the mastery of real cabala. This is why
Dee endorsed Johannes Pantheuss criticism of ordinary alchemy
and his promotion of voarchadumia, that is, a superior kind of al-
chemy, empowered by cabala.
77
Interestingly, while Dee pushed cabalistic grammar (the lower
sort of cabala) in a direction which had little to do with Picos ca-
bala, his conception of real cabala was somewhat closer to Pico.
To be sure, Pico had no interest whatsoever in alchemy, but this
is not what is important here. He clearly asserted that cabala
was superior to magicthe higher point of magic was the lower
point of cabalaand that magic had no power at all unless it was
supported by the work of cabala,
78
that is, by the operation of for-
mal numbers.
79
In order to describe the relationship between cabala
and magic, Pico devised three horizons: the horizon of eternal
time, inferior to magic and corresponding to natural philosophy;
the horizon of time and eternity, corresponding to magic; and the
horizon of temporal eternity, superior to magic and corresponding
to cabala.
80
In other words: divine assistance is indispensable for
the achievement of magical feats, but the magician has an interme-
diary status between the natural philosopher and the cabalist.
81
Therefore, if he wants to perform the marriage of the world, which
is the scope of the magical work
82
that is, to unite what is above
(supercelestial entities) to what is below (corporeal things)he
needs cabalistic skills in order to be able to attract the divine emana-
tions (the serot or numerationes) and direct their inuence towards
the physical world; and he obviously also needs to possess full
knowledge of natural philosophy, for he must know the manifest
and occult properties of all things.
An echo of the horizons mentioned by Pico seems to be present
in the twenty-third theorem of the Monas hieroglyphica.
83
This con-
tains a very complex diagram (Dee, 1964, fol. 27r, p. 214), of which I
give here a much simplied version (Fig. 1), to point out that Dee
represented in it the fullled metamorphosis of the Hieroglyphic
Monad through the octonary of our Cross, taking place between
the horizon of time and the horizon of eternity. In this diagram,
the horizon of time is placed at the limit between the celestial (or
ethereal) world and the supercelestial world, while the horizon of
eternity marks the upper limit of the supercelestial world. This is
perfectly logical: the two lower worlds, terrestrial and celestial, form
the physical world, which is entirely subjected to time (eternal
time, in Picos words), while the supercelestial world, being of a
metaphysical nature, is not subject to time. The horizon of eternity
is Divinity itself, and is therefore placed at the upper end of the
supercelestial world; the entities which belong to the supercelestial
world (like angels, serot, formal numbers) are able to travel to and
fro between God and the physical world: they irradiate Gods power
over celestial and terrestrial things; they carry messages to humans
(for instance, foreknowledge of future events); and they elevate the
souls of the wise to the contemplation of God, as in the twenty-
fourth and last theorem of the Monas hieroglyphica (1964, fols.
27v28r).
73
Dee (1964), fol. 25r, pp. 206207: [N]ostris Mysticis Symmetriis, nulla (vel minima) inferatur Injuria: Ne, ea quidem negligentia, . . . verarum istarum (et maxime
necessariarum) Commensurationum Hieroglyphicarum perturbetur, pereatve Disciplina nova.
74
Tory (1529), fol. 79v: Il vous convient noter que Les Lettres sont si Nobles et Divines quelles ne veullent aucunement estre contrefaictes, mutilees, ne changees de leur propre
Figure. . . . Qui osteroit le Bras, la Jambe, ou la Teste dun Homme, Il ne seroit plus Homme . . . Aussi pareillement qui mutile une Lettre de quelque faon quelle soit, elle nest plus
Lettre, mais Grimace, ou chose si meschante quon ne luy scauroit bailler assez competent Nom, qui ne vouldroit dire que ce fust Ung Monstre.
75
Dee (1964), fol. 7r, pp. 134135: Quam . . . Realem nominavi Cabalam, sive Tot omso1: Ut illam vulgarem alteram; Cabalisticam nomino Grammaticam sive Tot kecolemot:
qu, notissimis Literis, ab Homine Scriptibilibus, insistit. Hc autem, qu Creationis nobis est Nata Lege, (ut Paulus innuit) Realis Cabala, Grammatica quoque qudam Divinior
est: cum Artium ista sit Inventrix Novarum, et Abstrusissimarum delissima Explicatrix: Ut hoc nostro alii tentare Exemplo, de cetero, possint.
76
Gemetriam, Notariacon, et Tzyruph (Artis su tres quasi prcipuas Claves) . . . (see above, note 67).
77
Dee (1964), fol. 7v, pp. 136137 (mention of voarchadumia); see Norrgrn (2005).
78
Pico (1998), p. 498 (Concl. mag., 15): Nulla potest esse operatio magica alicujus efcaci nisi annexum habeat opus cabal, explicitum vel implicitum. Farmer (ibid., p. 499)
translates opus cabal as a cabalistic work.
79
See above, notes 4047.
80
Pico (1998), p. 500 (Concl. mag., 1618): Illa natura qu est orizon temporis ternalis est proxima mago, sed infra eum. Illius natur qu est orizon temporis et ternitatis
propria est magia, inde est petenda per modos debitos, notos sapientibus. Illius natura qu est orizon ternitatis temporalis est mago proxima, sed super eum, et ei propria est
cabala. Wirszubski wrongly interpreted these conclusions; see Wirszubski (1989), p. 194, Farmers annotation ad loc., and my own remarks in Wirszubski (2007), p. 314. I also
suggested (ibid., p. 313) the printed text of conclusion 18 be corrected, and illius natura replaced by illa natura, as in conclusion 16.
81
Natural magic is dened by Pico (1998), p. 494, as the practical part of natural philosophy and its noblest part (Concl. mag., 34): Magia est pars practica scienti naturalis.
Ex ista conclusione et conclusione paradoxica dogmatizante .xlvii. [sic] sequitur quod magia sit nobilissima pars scienti naturalis. The general principle behind that assertion is
that, given any practical object, the operation that acts on it is nobler than that which contemplates it, if all other things are equal (Concl. paradox., 46, p. 412): Dato quocunque
objecto practicabili, nobilior est operatio qu eum practicat quam qu eum contemplatur, si ctera sint paria. Therefore, magic (if correctly researched) is the absolute
fulllment of natural philosophy, and even the highest point of all philosophy: [N]ihil est aliud, cum bene exploratur, quam naturalis philosophi absoluta consummatio (Pico
[1969], p. 120); [H]anc practicam scienti naturalis quasi apicem et fastigium totius philosophi . . . (ibid., V, p. 170).
82
Pico (1998), p. 498 (Concl. mag., 13): Magicam operari non est aliud quam maritare mundum.
83
As noticed by Clulee (1988), p. 114. On this diagram, see also Clulee (2001), pp. 195196.
J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497 495
Dees two horizons of time and eternity do not perfectly
match Picos three horizons of eternal time, time and eternity
and temporal eternity, and for a good reason: he did not nd them
in the Conclusiones, but in Thomas Aquinass Summa contra Gentiles.
There, the theologian stated that,
The human soul, being at the border between bodies and incor-
poreal substances, standsso to sayon the horizon of eternity
and time; moving away from the lower grade, it tends towards
the higher. Therefore, when it shall be entirely separated from
the body, it will be perfectly assimilated to the separate sub-
stances as to the mode of understanding, and shall abundantly
receive their inuence.
84
Thomas explains that the intellectual soul can be called a horizon
and a border between corporeal and incorporeal things, because it
is an incorporeal substance which also is the form of the body; as
such, it holds the lower grade in the genus of intellectual sub-
stances, and it is constant that the lower grade of the superior genus
touches the higher grade of the inferior genus.
85
This conception of
horizon as a border between the physical and the metaphysical
worldhad been foundby Thomas in the Liber de causis, the Latintrans-
lation of an Arabic pseudo-Aristotelian work derived from Procluss
Elements of theology.
86
It is not clear whether or not Dee had the Liber
de causis,
87
but he had bought Thomass Summa contra Gentiles in
1556,
88
so that the identication of this work as the direct source of
his two horizons is beyond doubt. Having read both Thomas and
Pico, Dee chose to retain Thomass terminology, but he introduced a
separation between the lower and the higher horizon, while for Tho-
mas they were two sides of the same border: now the supercelestial
world lies between them, and it is there that the soul achieves its
metamorphosis, that is, its ascension to the supreme horizon of
Divinity. In this way, Thomass twofold horizon is merged with Picos
more complex description of a gradual exaltation from the corporeal
world to God through natural philosophy, magic and cabala.
89
That the said diagram was not lightly inserted into the Monas
hieroglyphica is proven by the fact that many years later, in 1599,
Dee was still planning to defend it against the objections that
had been raised against it:
I have just cause, lately given me to write and publish a Treatise,
with Title, De Horizonte ternitatis: to make evident, that one
Andreas Libavius, in a booke of his, printed the last yeere, hath
unduly considered a phrase of my Monas hieroglyphica: to his
misliking: by his own unskilfulnes in such matter: and not
understanding my apt application thereof, in one of the very
principal places, of the whole book. And this booke of mine,
(by Gods help and favour) shall be dedicated unto her most
excellent majesty Roiall: And this Treatise doth containe three
bookes, The rst intitled, De Horizonte liber Mathematicus et Phys-
icus: The Second, De ternitate: liber Theologicus, Metaphysicus et
Mathematicus. The third, De Horizonte ternitatis: liber Theologi-
cus, Mathematicus et Hierotechnicus.
90
The titles of the three books he projected to write on the matter
leave us wondering about what their contents would have been,
apart from the fact that they explicitly restate the exaltation from
the physical world (time) to the supercelestial and the divine (eter-
nity), and from natural philosophy to hierotechnics a holy art
which corresponds to the highest disciplines envisioned by Dee in
both the Monas hieroglyphica and the Mathematicall praeface (adep-
tiva and archemastrie).
The question could be raised whether Dees opposition between
real and vulgar cabala can be paralleled with Picos late distinc-
tion, made in the Apologia, between the rst and true cabala, which
is a divine revelation, and the two human sciences also bearing that
nameone being a certain way of proceeding in the sciences,
while the other is the supreme part of natural magic.
91
This would
probably be going too far, since Dees description is so elliptical that it
gives little evidence for further investigation. What can be said for
sure is that Dees redenition of vulgar cabalaa cabala of letters
and numbers emancipated from the hegemony of the Hebrew lan-
Horizon ternitatis
Octonarius nostr Crucis METAMORPHOSIS
CONSUMMATA
Mundus superclestis
Horizon temporis
Mundus thereus
(clestis)
Mundus terrestris
Fig. 1. Dees horizons of time and eternity.
84
Thomas Aquinas (1918), II, 81, p. 506: Quia, cum anima humana . . . sit in connio corporum et incorporearum substantiarum, quasi in horizonte existens ternitatis et
temporis, recedens ab inmo, appropinquat ad summum. Unde et, quando totaliter erit a corpore separata, perfecte assimilabitur substantiis separatis quantum ad modum
intelligendi, et abunde inuentiam eorum recipiet.
85
Ibid., II, 68, pp. 440441: Semper enim invenitur inmum supremi generis contingere supremum inferioris generis . . . Est igitur accipere aliquid supremum in genere
corporum, scilicet corpus humanum qualiter complexionatum, quod attingit ad inmum superioris generis, scilicet ad animam humanam, qu tenet ultimum gradum in genere
intellectualium substantiarum, ut ex modo intelligi percipi potest. Et inde est quod anima intellectualis dicitur esse quasi quidam horizon et connium corporeorum et
incorporeorum, inquantum est substantia incorporea, corporis tamen forma.
86
Liber de causis (1990), II, 22, p. 42: Omne esse superius aut est superius ternitate et ante ipsam, aut est cum ternitate, aut post ternitatem et supra tempus. Esse vero
quod est post ternitatem et supra tempus est anima, quoniam est in horizonte ternitatis et supra tempus. See Thomass commentary ad loc.: Loquitur enim hic de anima quam
attribuunt philosophi corpori clesti, et propter hoc dicit quod est in horizonte ternitatis inferius et supra tempus. Horizon enim . . . est inmus terminus superioris hemispherii,
principium autem inferioris; et similiter anima est ultimus terminus ternitatis et principium temporis (Thomas Aquinas (2002), p. 16). Cf. Liber de causis (1990), VIII, 84, p. 54:
Et intelligentia quidem comprehendit generata et naturam et horizontem natur scilicet animam, nam ipsa est supra naturam.
87
The two references given in the Index of Roberts and Watson (1990), s.v. Liber de causis, do not seem to match any manuscript which actually contained the work.
88
Thom Aquinatis Summa contra Gentiles F Paris 1519 (Roberts & Watson [1990], 1583 catalogue, no. 92); Summa contra Gentiles Thom Aquinatis (ibid., 1557 list, no.
B279, with the reference: bought February 21 1556).
89
Picos three horizons seem to be derived from the Liber de causis, where the horizons also number threeesse superius ternitate et ante ipsam; esse cum ternitate; esse post
ternitatem et supra tempus. To my knowledge, the link between Picos horizons and the Liber de causis or Thomass commentary and Summa contra Gentiles had not been
recognized until now.
90
A Letter, Containing a most briefe Discourse Apologeticall (London, 1599), quoted in Josten (1964), pp. 9697. On the context of Libaviuss attitude towards Dee, see Forshaw
(2005), pp. 255256.
91
Pico (1969), V, pp. 180181: Hc est prima et vera cabala . . . In universali autem duas scientias hoc etiam nomine [Hebri] honoricarunt. Unam . . . est modus quidam
procedendi in scientiis . . . ; aliam qu est de virtutibus rerum superiorum qu sunt supra Lunam, et est pars magi naturalis suprema. Wirszubski (1989) has convincingly
argued (pp. 122125, 133 and 144145) that this new division, absent from the Conclusiones, was an ad hoc argument aimed at confusing the ecclesiastical commissioners, hardly
compatible with the division between the contemplative and practical parts of cabala, presented in the Conclusiones, which reected Picos true opinion (see above, note 40).
Nevertheless, the readers could take it at face value.
496 J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497
guagehas nothing to do with Pico, while his real cabala, presented
as a general art of transformation and a means to achieve and tran-
scend the alchemical Great Work, both physically and spiritually, is
at least compatible with Picos denition of cabala as the supreme
part of natural magic. Finally, all things considered, Pico envisioned
cabala mainly as a means to the sanctication of the soul;
92
and this
was also Dees ultimate goal in the Monas hieroglyphica.
4. A provisional conclusion
Dee was unquestionably inuenced by Picos workshe praised
them, quoted them and used thembut he transformed the things
he borrowed from Pico and recast them in a different light; for his
aim was not to reect faithfully his predecessors ideas, but to elab-
orate his own. Perhaps the main problem for the modern reader is
that the limited use Dee really made of Pico does not meet our own
expectations. The author of a recent study on Dees occult prac-
tices, for instance, wonders what could he have found crucial in
Picos Conclusiones and in the introductory Oratio (Sz} onyi, 2004,
p. 103).
93
It is interesting to look at the answers he proposes:
To begin with, certainly the bold and daring spirit advocating
philosophical and theological syncretism and at the same time
fervently rejecting the charges that his experiments could be
termed as black magic. (Ibid.)
This is certainly true, and it is conrmed by Dees own words of ap-
praisal for Pico. The other points suggested are the lofty, sometimes
nearly poetical diction of the Oratio in describing the exaltatio (the
ascension of the soul); the fact that the Conclusiones are written in
Dees favorite scientic genre, a series of theorems; the references
to a mix of classical, Arabic, and Christian authors; the possible
inspiration to look into the Hermetic writings as well as the cabala;
and nally, the mention of Jacobs ladder and several references to
Enochs translation from earth to the throne of God and his conver-
sations with angels. This is all very well advised, but it strikes me
that the only thing not taken into account here is precisely the most
obvious, namely the answer that Dee himself explicitly and insis-
tently gave: what interested him primarily in Picos Conclusiones
was the fascinating description of the mystical and all powerful for-
mal numbers. The rest is mere guesswork, oras in the case of
Dees views on cabalaan elaboration of ideas remotely issued from
Pico, but reelaborated or mixed through other sources, as was the
case with Thomas Aquinass horizons. This may seem a little disap-
pointing, but after all, thats life.
Acknowledgements
I wish to express my thanks to the two anonymous readers of
the rst (very imperfect) draft of this paper. Their criticism and
suggestions proved very helpful and induced me to make my con-
clusions more explicit.
References
Agrippa, H. C. (1992). De occulta philosophia libri tres (V. Perrone Compagni, Ed.).
Leiden, New York & Kln: E. J. Brill (First published 1531).
Arcangelo da Borgonovo (1569). Cabalistarum selectiora, obscurioraque dogmata, a
Joanne Pico ex eorum commentationibus pridem excerpta, et ab Angelo
Burgonovensi Minoritano, nunc primum luculentissimis interpretationibus
illustrata. Venetiis: apud F. Franciscum Senensem.
Boethius (1995). Boce, Institution arithmtique (J.-Y. Guillaumin, Ed. & Trans.). Paris:
Les Belles Lettres.
Brach, J.-P. (2009). Mathematical esotericism: some perspectives on Renaissance
arithmology. In W. J. Hanegraaff & J. Pijnenburg (Eds.), Hermes in the academy:
ten years study of Western Esotericism at the University of Amsterdam
(pp. 7590). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Clulee, N. H. (1988). John Dees natural philosophy: between science and religion.
London & New York: Routledge.
Clulee, N. H. (2001). Astronomia inferior: legacies of Johannes Trithemius and John
Dee. In W. R. Newman & A. Grafton (Eds.), Secrets of nature: astrology and
alchemy in early modern Europe (pp. 173233). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Crombie, I. M. (1979). An examination of Platos doctrines, 2: Plato on knowledge and
reality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
De Lon-Jones, K. S. (2006). John Dee and the kabbalah. In S. Clucas (Ed.), John Dee:
interdisciplinary studies in English Renaissance thought (pp. 143158). Dordrecht:
Springer.
Dee, J. (1964). See Josten (1964).
Dee, J. (1975). The mathematicall prface to the Elements of geometrie of Euclid of
Megara (1570). NewYork: Science History Publications (Facsimile of the original
edition).
Farmer, S. A. (1998). Syncretism in the West: Picos 900 Theses (1486). The evolution of
traditional religious and philosophical systems. With text, translation and
commentary. Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies.
Forshaw, P. J. (2005). The early alchemical reception of John Dees Monas
hieroglyphica. Ambix, 52, 247269.
French, P. J. (1972). John Dee: the world of an Elizabethan magus. London: Routledge
& Kegan Paul.
Josten, C. H. (1964). A translation of John Dees Monas Hieroglyphica (Antwerp,
1564), with an Introduction and annotations. Ambix, 12, 84221 (Includes
facsimile of the original edition, 1564).
Liber de causis. (1990). (A. Pattin, Ed.). In P. Magnard et al. (Eds.), La Demeure de
lEtre: autour dun anonyme. Etude et traduction du Liber de causis. Paris: Librairie
philosophique J. Vrin (First published 1966).
Mandosio, J.-M. (1994). Entre mathmatiques et physique: note sur les sciences
intermdiaires la Renaissance. In D. Jacquart (Ed.), Comprendre et matriser la
nature au Moyen ge: mlanges dhistoire des sciences offerts Guy Beaujouan
(pp. 115138). Genve: Droz.
Mandosio, J.-M. (2003). Des mathmatiques vulgaires la monade
hiroglyphique: les lments dEuclide vus par John Dee. Revue dhistoire des
sciences, 56, 475491.
Norrgrn, H. (2005). Interpretation and the Monas hieroglyphica: John Dees
reading of Pantheus Voarchadumia. Ambix, 52, 217245.
Pico della Mirandola, G. (1942). De hominis dignitate, Heptaplus, De ente et uno,
Commento sopra una canzone damore (E. Garin, Ed. and Trans.). Firenze:
Edizione nazionale dei classici del pensiero italiano.
Pico della Mirandola, G. (19461952). Disputationes adversus astrologiam
divinatricem (E. Garin, Ed. and Trans.). Firenze: Edizione nazionale dei classici
del pensiero italiano (First published 1496).
Pico della Mirandola, G. (1969). Apologia. In Opera omnia Joannis Pici (pp. 114240).
Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung (First published 1557;
Facsimile).
Pico della Mirandola, G. (1998). Conclusiones nongent. See Farmer (1998).
Pico della Mirandola, G. (2002). De la dignit de lhomme/De hominis dignitate (E.
Garin, Ed., Y. Hersant, Trans.). Nmes: ditions de lclat (New edition of Pico
della Mirandola, 1942).
Reuchlin, J. (1995). La Kabbale/De arte cabalistica (F. Secret, Trans.). Milano: Arch
(First published 1517; Facsimile).
Roberts, J., & Watson, A. G. (Eds.). (1990). John Dees library catalogue. London: The
Bibliographical Society.
Scholem, G. (1954). Zur Geschichte der Anfnge der Christlichen Kabbala. In L. G.
Monteore (Ed.), Essays presented to Leo Baeck (pp. 158193). London: East &
West.
Scholem, G. (1979). Considrations sur lhistoire des dbuts de la cabale chrtienne
(P. Kessler, Transl.). In A. Faivre (Ed.), Kabbalistes chrtiens (pp. 1746). Paris:
Albin Michel (Updated version of Scholem, 1954).
Scholem, G. (2007). Considrations sur lhistoire des dbuts de la cabale chrtienne
(Rev. by J.-M. Mandosio). In Wirszubski (2007) (pp. 433473) (New edition of
Scholem, 1979).
Secret, F. (1985). Les Kabbalistes chrtiens de la Renaissance (Nouvelle dition mise
jour et augmente). Paris & Milan: Arma Artis & Arch.
Sz} onyi, G. E. (2004). John Dees occultism: magical exaltation through powerful signs.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Thomas Aquinas (1918). Sancti Thom Aquinatis . . . opera omnia, 13: Summa contra
Gentiles. Roma: Riccardo Garoni.
Thomas Aquinas (2002). In H. D. Saffrey (Ed.), Thomas dAquin, Super librum de causis
expositio. Paris: Librairie philosophique J. Vrin.
Tory, G. (1529). Champ Fleury, au quel est contenu Lart et Science de la deue et vraye
Proportion des Lettres. . .. Paris: Geofroy Tory & Giles Gourmont.
Valcke, L. (1985). Des Conclusiones aux Disputationes: numrologie et
mathmatiques chez Jean Pic de la Mirandole. Laval thologique et
philosophique, 41(1), 4356.
Wirszubski, C. (1989). Pico della Mirandolas encounter with Jewish mysticism.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wirszubski, C. (2007). Pic de la Mirandole et la cabale (J.-M. Mandosio, Trans.). Paris
& Tel-Aviv: ditions de lclat.
92
Wirszubski (1989), p. 152160, showed that what Pico considered to be practical Kabbala was in its purest form a contemplative activity, directed towards the indissoluble
union of the soul with God.
93
The question is deceptive, for Dee may not have read the Oratio at all, since it was absent from his 1532 edition of the Conclusiones.
J.-M. Mandosio / Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 43 (2012) 489497 497