Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo Scott E. Hendrix Abstract In the modern world ‘scientific’ is typically equated with ‘rational,’ a viewpoint that has led modern intellectuals to portray the emergence of modern science as a process involving the rejection of superstition. For this reason many historians, philosophers of science, and scientists have depicted Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and Galileo Galilei as heralds of scientific rationalism for their ‘rejection’ of superstition in the form of astrology. In the traditional narrative, Pico’s Disputations Against Astrological Divination is often described as a landmark on the movement toward modernity. However, when read carefully it is clear that this work does not present the wholesale rejection of astrology that many have assumed, and in fact the evidence indicates that Pico never broadly opposed astrological theory or practice. Looking forward to Galileo, the progenitor of the scientific method, there is considerable evidence that he was a practitioner of judicial astrology throughout his life, demonstrating that he never rejected either the concept of celestial influence on earthly events or the practice of predicting the future through the use of the discipline. Furthermore, the astrologer’s model of a mechanistic cosmos functioning with absolute mathematical regularity may have positively influenced Galileo’s own developing mechanical philosophy. Therefore, the history of astrology should be revaluated: well into the early modern period it was not a ‘superstitious’ belief system that retarded the development of a ‘modern’ worldview, but in fact may have positively contributed to our current model of scientific rationalism. Key Words: Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Galileo Galilei, Marsilio Ficino, Albumasar, Jean Gerson, astrology, scientific rationalism, science, modernity, Disputations Against Astrological Divination. ***** When we discuss modernity and the modern world, definitions immediately become very fuzzy. Is modernity a set of ideas? A form of behavior? Does it have an individual ontological status or does it only exist in 2 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ contrast to that which is not modern? An overall discussion of the topic would be far beyond the bounds of this paper, but there is a key element that I wish to address: the role of scientific rationalism, and its relationship to what we now think of as ‘superstition.’ As the philosophers of science, Boris Castel and Sergio Sismundo have said, ‘The modern world, and perhaps what it means to be modern, is thoroughly entwined with science,’1 which has led to a redefinition of the terms ‘rational’ and ‘scientific’ as virtual synonyms in our modern world. Therefore, I will focus on two intellectuals, both Italians, who have been held up as icons rationality, the fifteenth-century humanist Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and the seventeenth-century progenitor of the scientific method, Galileo Galilei. Both are viewed as making strides toward a modern sensibility in no small part due to a rejection of irrational superstition, symbolized in the popular imagination and all-too-often in the scholarly one as well by their opposition to astrology. What I will argue is that not only did neither of these iconographic figures reject astrological divination based on the shared belief that the heavens affect terrestrial creatures and events, but also that adherence to a belief in celestial influence was both wholly rational and in fact may have played a positive role in the development of Galileo’s scientific ideas. Before exploring these ideas, however, I should pause to explain what I mean by astrology, and to describe very briefly its place in the Scott E. Hendrix 3 ______________________________________________________________ intellectual landscape of Renaissance and Early Modern Europe. The discipline owes its conceptual beginnings to the ancient Babylonians, who by 410 BC at the latest were casting horoscopes intended to describe an individual’s future.2 But more importantly for Western science, the Greeks appropriated and adapted these ideas for their own ends. The idea that the heavens influenced events on Earth seems to have been universal among Greek natural philosophers, with Plato’s Timaeus describing the flow of celestial influences downward to terrestrial objects and Aristotle asserting that such forces were responsible for birth and death here on the Earth.3 By the time that the great second-century Hellenistic cosmologist Ptolemy wrote the work that would come to be known as the Almagest at Alexandria, interest in celestial influence provided a major impetus to study of the heavens. Ptolemy maintained that the celestial bodies are ‘letters inscribed (and yet moving) in the heavens,’ pouring forth heat on the sub-lunar world and thereby affecting all terrestrial creatures.4 These ‘letters,’ as he called them, spelled out different messages as their combinations changed, and by reading them one knowledgeable in astrology could learn much of use for directing one’s life. The importance placed on understanding this influence can be seen by Ptolemy’s devotion of more than half of the Almagest to direct discussions of it, a point that we should keep in mind. From our twenty-first-century perspective it might seem odd that the hyper-rational Greeks and their Hellenistic descendants would have so 4 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ thoroughly embraced astrology. But it was precisely because of their rationality that intellectuals from Plato to Ptolemy found astrology to be so attractive. As scholars such as Cecil J. Schneer have noted, the major trend in Greek and Hellenistic thought was to explain the world and events within it through the interaction of physical rather than supernatural forces. ‘Greek rationalism’ is itself synonymous with an approach that emphasizes explanations that are both logical and replicable by others trained in Greek philosophy.5 Astrology as it reached its fullest development in late antiquity in the work of Ptolemy presented a model of the universe in which physical bodies interacted with one another with perfect, mathematically describable consistency. Such a cosmological model required no belief in invisible entities or divine intervention to explain everything from the movements of the planets to the coming to be and passing away of living things on the earth. Indeed, the Ptolemaic model was one in which the entire universe functioned with machine-like regularity, a point to which I shall return. Eventually the Muslim world appropriated Greek knowledge and Ptolemaic astronomy, developing and adding to these ideas in creative ways. The most important scholar to do so was the ninth-century Persian, Abū Ma'shar al-Balkhī,6 or Albumasar as he came to be known in the West, and he was the first to grapple with integrating concepts of celestial influence and judicial astrology—that is using the art to answer questions about the world, Scott E. Hendrix 5 ______________________________________________________________ including the course of future events—within a monotheistic religious context that at this period still highly valued human free will, as I have analyzed elsewhere.7 Accused by one opponent of ‘studying astrology until he became an atheist,’ Albumasar’s reaction was to develop the position that the heavens incline, but do not compel, human action. Therefore, ‘the wise man,’ meaning one who understood these influences and could counteract them, ‘dominates the stars,’ an idea that both preserved the predictive power of astrology to a large degree as well as the freedom of the human will.8 After the transmission of Albumasar’s works to the West in the twelfth century, 9 this compromise would eventually make astrology acceptable to most Christian intellectuals by the fourteenth century.10 Albumasar’s contributions to the history of astrology are directly relevant to understanding Pico della Mirandola’s approach to the discipline. Renaissance humanism promoted a ‘back to the source’ approach to scholarship that demanded a bypassing not only of commentaries on foundational works, but of translations as well. It was for this reason that the Italian scholar studied Arabic and sought out the works of the most important contributors to the Arabic intellectual heritage in their original language in order to gain a direct understanding of their content.11 Albumasar’s negotiated compromise between astrological determinism and human free will encapsulated in that dictum, ‘the wise man dominates the stars,’ would have been quite familiar to Pico whether he learned about it directly or 6 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ through the works of the thirteenth-century German theologian, Albert the Great, who made great use of it in his own works.12 Both the works of Arabic intellectuals as well as those of Albert the Great held a prominent place in Pico’s personal library.13 Pico would have found this formulation making astrological belief congruent with the concept of free will very useful. His own veneration for human freedom has been enshrined in his justly-famed Oration on the Dignity of Man, which proclaims that ‘to man it is allowed to be whatever he chooses to be,’ either akin to an angel through the cultivation of the intellect, or a beast otherwise.14 However, what is often forgotten is that Pico wrote this Oration to serve as the preface to his 900 Theses. This work came under papal ban in 1486, in part because of the reverence for astrological influence that Pico exhibits throughout the work, driving Pico to flee to France. Influenced by Proclus’ late fourth or early fifth-century commentary on Plato’s Timaeus, eight of the theses argue that specific types of intellect derive their appropriate human skills through the power of the heavens.15 Regardless of Pico’s lofty prefatory comments about human freedom - which may well have been intended to counteract expected criticism to the theses -the papacy viewed this as an argument in favor of astrological determinism. Nevertheless, Pico’s position was not surprising. He may have believed that celestial influence had greater force in human life than many of Scott E. Hendrix 7 ______________________________________________________________ his contemporaries, but it had been centuries since anyone had voiced an outright rejection of the power of the stars. Even such critics of astrology as the fifteenth-century French theologian and chancellor of Paris, Jean Gerson, voiced concerns about potential abuses of the discipline while arguing that celestial divination was simply too complicated for it to be effective rather than rejecting the idea that the heavens influence terrestrial events.16 Furthermore, Pico’s sometime friend and contemporary, Marsilio Ficino, was such a strong proponent of the importance of understanding celestial influence upon humans that he was forced to defend his views before the Pope in 1489.17 This was not because Ficino’s belief in the force heavenly bodies imparted to terrestrial objects was in any way unusual, but rather because he argued rather too forcefully that application of astrological knowledge allowed people to elevate themselves to a closer relationship with God.18 While such a statement might sound odd, all he really meant was that celestial forces influence people to act in ways that are not always consistent with what God would want, by imparting impulses such as lust or gluttony. But if we understand the source of these impulses then we can more easily resist them and act in accord with our intellectual, rather than our physical desires.19 Ficino was on very solid ground, for by the time of his writing more than two centuries of tradition supported the notion that the heavens affect humankind’s corporeal essence, influencing the soul secondarily through the 8 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ body’s ‘pulling and tugging’ upon the soul.20 By the fifteenth century the idea that everything on earth experienced a constant bombardment of celestial force was so well established that no natural philosopher would have argued against the point, and intellectuals and professionals working within a variety of fields felt it necessary to be skilled in astrology. Neither alchemists nor physicians would have attempted to ply their trade without a thorough command of the discipline and almost every court across Europe had at least one astrologer in residence.21 Clearly, while in his 900 Theses Pico might have gone too far in his stress upon the role of celestial influence in human life, his belief in the power of the stars to affect humankind was entirely within the mainstream of learned opinion of his day. Given the intellectual climate within which he worked, and the strong support for astrology evidenced in Pico’s 900 Theses, one would think that there would be little need to argue in favor of the importance of the discipline for the Italian humanist. Unfortunately, in the last years of his life Pico complicated matters greatly with the writing and posthumous publication of his Disputations Against Astrological Divination.22 The title certainly sounds straightforward enough and the assessment of a great many scholars - including the modern editor of the volume, Eugenio Garin stresses Pico’s absolute rejection of divinatory astrology. This rejection has been highlighted by those such as Louis Dupré as a significant step on the Scott E. Hendrix 9 ______________________________________________________________ path toward modernity.23 Unfortunately such a position does not stand up to a close reading of the text itself, a fact that recent scholarship is beginning to acknowledge.24 Turning to the text, it is first important to note that when Pico died the work was unfinished and unpublished. Therefore, the version that is available to us today was edited by the scholar’s nephew working together with Pico’s personal physician, and it is altogether likely that the finished product has been heavily influenced by their work.25 While this makes interpretation problematic, it is clear that Pico’s intent was to critique astrology as, in his words, ‘prohibited by law, damned by the prophets, ridiculed by saints, forbidden by popes and sacrosanct synods.’26 However, as strongly worded as that statement is, we must be careful about Pico’s meaning. Does he intend to lump all astrology together in his condemnation? In a word, no. Rather, Pico accepted that the heavens transmit influence to terrestrial creatures, including people, stating ‘we defend this [belief in celestial influence] as far as this, that nothing comes to us from heaven except with light having carried it.’27 While he does go on to lash out at ‘casters of nativities-‘ meaning those who compose birth charts - as promoting ‘the most infectious of all frauds,’28 ultimately Pico seems most concerned that astrologers might lead people into a focus upon worldly forces and away from an attentive regard for God.29 This is much the same concern that had led some medieval theologians, such as Jean Gerson, to reject 10 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ astrology out of fear that it might lead those who practiced and put faith in it into idolatry. The context of what Pico was and was not arguing against in his Disputationes is important, for the work’s modern editor, Eugenio Garin, has attempted to establish a direct link between the text’s arguments and the work of a later Italian intellectual - Galileo Galilei. As a leading figure in the development of the scientific method, it has long been an article of faith among not only scientists but also historians that Galileo was a ‘constant adversary of divinatory astrology,’ to quote Garin.30 This attitude toward Galileo has also been common among philosophers of science such as Karl Popper as well as scientists such as Carl Sagan.31 For these intellectuals, the story arc runs from Pico’s rationalist ‘rejection’ of astrology to Galileo’s ‘opposition’ to astrology in seventeenth-century Italy. However, just as Pico had no desire to reject celestial divination, Galileo was even less inclined to oppose the discipline. The nineteenth-century editor of Galileo’s collected works, Antonio Favaro, published an article entitled ‘Galileo Astrologo’ in 1881, which has recently been translated and included in a special volume on Galileo’s Astrology released by Culture and Cosmos in 2003.32 Although Favaro’s conclusions were tentative and he suggested that perhaps Galileo had lost interest in astrology as he aged, the evidence he presents leaves the reader Scott E. Hendrix 11 ______________________________________________________________ with no doubt that Galileo frequently cast horoscopes. We see this not only through such things as the natal chart Galileo cast for the Grand Duke Cosimo II of Florence, but also in the epistolary discussions of horoscopes in which Pico engaged with important but distant figures such as the Cardinal Allesandro d’Este as well close friends such as Giovanfracesco Sagredo.33 Yet even today historians attempt to explain away Galileo’s astrological pursuits as an activity intended to garner patronage from powerful people such as the Dukes of Florence,34 quickly pass over it as an activity in which he ‘dabbled,’35 or ignore it altogether.36 This approach to Galileo is inexcusable, for as Darrel Rutkin has argued, if we wish to understand the great scientific innovator on his own terms, we must be willing to examine his body of work as it is, not as we would wish it to be.37 If we take the time to examine the horoscopes that Galileo cast there can be no doubt that he was completely earnest in his belief in the importance of the discipline. In MS. Gal. 81 we find not only horoscopes that could have been intended to garner the support of a patron -such as the aforementioned one for Cosimo II- but also those that Galileo did for himself, his daughters, and twenty as yet to be identified people.38 Rutkin has devoted some time to analyzing the natal charts for Galileo’s daughters and for his friend Sagredo and he notes the care with which these charts are constructed. These charts are now available on the website of Skyscript and, using Galileo’s own birth chart as a point of reference, I would 12 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ note a point that goes unmentioned in Rutkin’s work that reinforces his argument - the corrective notes that one finds throughout the chart. In the upper left-hand corner of Galileo’s horoscope one finds a horizontal table listing information on each of the planets plus the sun and the moon as well as the ‘head of the Dragon,’ meaning the north node of the moon. There are then four rows below the symbol for each astronomical point detailing its motion on the day in question using noon as a referent point. The important point is that there are mathematical corrections visible under the headings for both Saturn and Mars, as well as on the body of the horoscope itself.39 If Galileo had cast these horoscopes merely for the purpose of patronage or to earn money, why would he have been so concerned with accuracy? The importance of the existence of this sizeable number of horoscopes is that they make clear that Galileo was not at all unfamiliar with the workings of judicial astrology. These horoscopes all seem to date to the late 1580s and 1590s while he was at Padua, but there is nothing to suggest that he changed his mind about the discipline after his appointment to the position of ‘Chief Mathematician of the University of Pisa and Philosopher and Mathematician to the Grand Duke’ of Tuscany in 1610. Instead, it is just as likely that other concerns simply kept him too busy for such pursuits, especially since he became increasingly anxious to solidify his status as a philosopher rather than simply a professor of mathematics.40 In the absence Scott E. Hendrix 13 ______________________________________________________________ of evidence to the contrary we must assume that Galileo maintained his early interest in astrology throughout his life. This point is not merely one of antiquarianism. To repeat an earlier point, the astrologer’s worldview was one in which the cosmos existed as an interlinked whole, as distant celestial bodies interacted with one another and the earth in entirely consistent and mathematically describable ways. The Christian version of this system as articulated by medieval natural philosophers placed the beginning of the system of influences with God, but Western theologians agreed that he did not ordinarily intervene in his creation thereafter, allowing it to function with mechanical precision, as if it were clockwork in the phrase of Nicole Oresme.41 This is the astrological system that Galileo inherited, and it is interesting to speculate upon the influence of the mechanical aspects of this model upon Galileo’s own system of thought. One thing that is certain, though: whether astrological theory provided an impetus for the burgeoning mechanical philosophy of the Scientific Revolution or not, there can be no doubt that it is anachronistic to look for a rejection of astrology during this period as a sign of scientific rationalism. After all, for Pico just as for Galileo, belief in astrology, based as it was on the best natural philosophy of their day, was rational. 14 Rational Astrology and Empiricism, From Pico to Galileo ______________________________________________________________ Notes 1 Boris Castel and Sergio Sismundo, The Art of Science, Toronto, UTP Higher Education, 2003, p. 9. Abraham Sachs, ‘Babylonian Horoscopes,’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies, vol. VI, 1952, pp. 54-56. 3 S. J. Tester, A History of Western Astrology, Woodbridge, Boydell Press, 1987, p. 177. 4 Quoted in John D. North, ‘Celestial Influence-- the Major Premiss of Astrology,’ in ‘Astrologi Hallucinati:’ Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time, Paola Zambelli, ed., New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1986, p. 52. 5 Cecil J. Schneer, The Search for Order: The Development of the Major Ideas in the Physical Sciences from the Earliest Times to the Present, New York, HarperCollins, 1960, pp. 17-51. 6 The most thorough analysis of Abu Ma’Shar is Richard Lemay’s Abu Ma'shar and Latin Aristotelianism in the Twelfth Century, Beirut, American University of Beirut, 1962. 7 Scott E. Hendrix, ‘Reading the Future and Freeing the Will: Astrology of the Arabic World and Albertus Magnus,’ Hortulus vol. 2.1, 2006, online. 8 Ibid. 9 Lemay, xxx-xxxi. 10 For this story, see Scott E. Hendrix, Albert the Great’s Speculum Astronomiae and Four Centuries of Readers, Lewiston, The Edwin Mellen Press, forthcoming. 11 Paul Oskar Kristeller, Renaissance Thought and its Sources, New York, Columbia University Press, 1981, p. 206. 12 Paola Zambelli, ‘Albert le Grand et l’astrologie,’ Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale, vol. 49, 1982, pp. 146-147. 13 Pearl Kibre, The Library of Pico della Mirandola, New York: Columbia University Press, 1936, pp. 62, 70, 86. 14 Pico della Mirandola, Oration on the Dignity of Man, as included in Philosophic Classics: Medieval Philosophy, Walter Arnold Kaufmann and Forrest E. Baird, eds., Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 2007, p. 515. 15 Steven Vanden Broecke, The Limits of Influence: Pico, Louvain, and the Crisis of Renaissance Astrology, Leiden, Brill, 2006, pp. 55-56. 16 Jean Gerson, Tricelogium astrologiae theologizatae, in Oeuvres Complètes, edited by Mgr. P. Glorieux, Paris: Desclée, 1962,caput X, pp. 111-112. Note Gerson’s opening statement on celestial influence: ‘Admisso quod caelum in talibus initiis fortius agit aut influit.’ 17 Paul Oskar Kristeller, Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964, pp. 3753. For a consideration of Pico and Ficino’s sometimes strained relationship, see H. Darrell Rutkin, ‘Astrology, Natural Philosophy and the History of Science, c. 1250-1700: Studies Toward an Interpretation of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola’s Disputationes adversus astroligiam divinatricem,’ Indiana University, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 2002, pp. 261-263. 18 Frances Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1991, p. 56. 19 Marsilio Ficino, Three Books of Life, Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark, eds., Binghamton, The Renaissance Society of America, 1989, caput, 3.12.122. 20 Perhaps the strongest proponent of this notion was Albert the Great, who expressed this viewpoint in almost everything he wrote. See chapter 2 of Hendrix, Albert the Great’s Speculum Astronomiae. 21 On alchemy, see Bruce T. Moran, Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Astrology, and the Scientific Revolution, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2006, chapter 1. For medicine, see Hilary Carey, Astrology at the English Court and University in the Later Middle Ages, London, Macmillan Academic and Professional, 1992, pp. 49-51. 22 Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. Disputationes Adversus Astrologiam Divinatricem, Eugenio Garin. ed., Florence, Vallecchi Editore, 1946. 23 Louis Dupré, Passage to Modernity: An Essay in the Hermeneutics of Nature and Culture, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1995, pp. 56-57. 24 Both H. Darrel Rutkin and Steven Vanden Broecke develop this idea in their work. 25 Rutkin, pp. 339-342. 26 Pico, vol. I, p. 94. ‘Quis iam igitur audeat homo christianus (cunctis enim nunc mihi sermo) astrologiam tueri, sequi, extolerre, a lege prohibitam, a prophetis damnatum, a sanctis irrisam, a pontificibus et sacrosanctis synodis interdictam?’ 27 Pico, vol. I, p. 253. ‘quod hactenus defendamus, nihil ad nos a caelo nisi luce vehente pervenire, quod Avicenna quoquo dixit in libris meteorlogicis, lumen vocans vehiculum virtutum omnium caelestium et Albertus in libro de somno vigiliaque confirmavit.’ ‘Hactenus’ can refer to a point that is no longer maintained, meaning ‘no longer’ or ‘up until now,’ or it can mean ‘as far as this,’ or ‘this and no more.’ In the context we are considering here, it must carry the latter meaning in the sentence, for Pico does not juxtapose a rejection of this important astrological doctrine with the statement. 28 Wayne Shumaker, The Occult Sciences in the Renaissance: A Study in Intellectual Patterns, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1978, p. 19. 29 For a much more comprehensive consideration of Pico’s attitude toward astrology see Rutkin, pp. 230-305. Steven Vanden Broecke develops a compelling argument that what Pico was calling for was a reform of astrological practices, rather than a rejection of the discipline. See Vanden Broecke, chapter 3. 30 Eugenio Garin, Astrology in the Renaissance: The Zodiac of Life, Carolyn Jackson and June Allen, trans., Routledge, 1983, p. 10. 2 31 Karl Popper, Objective Knowledge: an Evolutionary Approach, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1975, p. 176; ‘The Harmony of the Worlds,’ Cosmos, Carl Sagan, PBS, 1980. 32 Antonio Favaro, ‘Galileo Astrologo,’ Julianne Evans, trans., Galileo’s Astrology, special issue of Culture and Cosmos, vol. 7.1, 2003, pp. 9-19. 33 Ibid., pp. 11-13. 34 Richard Tarnass, The Passion of the Western Mind, New York, Random House, 1993, p.295. 35 Wade Rowland, Galileo's Mistake: A New Look at the Epic Confrontation Between Galileo and the Church, New York, Arcade Publishing, 2003, p. 295. 36 Peter K. Machamer, The Cambridge Companion to Galileo, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995, passim. 37 H. Darrel Rutkin, ‘Galileo Astrologer:’ Astrology and Mathematical Practice in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries,’ Galilaena, vol. II, 2005, p. 143. 38 Ibid., p. 117. 39 http://www.skyscript.co.uk/galchart.html, accessed 4 Jan. 2010. 40 Mario Biagioli, Galileo, Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1994, chapter 1. 41 John North, The Norton History of Astronomy and Cosmology, New York, W.W. Norton, 1995, p. 265. Bibliography Primary Sources Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. Disputationes Adversus Astrologiam Divinatricem. Eugenio Garin (ed.) Florence, Vallecchi Editore, 1946. –––, Oration on the Dignity of Man, in Philosophic Classics: Medieval Philosophy, Walter Arnold Kaufmann and Forrest E. Baird (eds) Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 2007, p. 515. Jean Gerson. Tricelogium astrologiae theologizatae, in Oeuvres Complètes, Mgr. P. Glorieux (ed.) Paris: Desclée, 1962. Marsilio Ficino. Three Books of Life, Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark (eds.), Binghamton, The Renaissance Society of America, 1989. Secondary Sources Biagioli, M. Galileo, Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1994. Broecke, S.V. The Limits of Influence: Pico, Louvain, and the Crisis of Renaissance Astrology. Leiden, Brill, 2006. Carey, H. Astrology at the English Court and University in the Later Middle Ages, London, Macmillan Academic and Professional, 1992. Castel, B and Sismundo, S. The Art of Science. UTP Higher Education, Toronto, 2003. Dupré, L. Passage to Modernity: An Essay in the Hermeneutics of Nature and Culture. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1995. Favaro, A. ‘Galileo Astrologo,’ Julianne Evans (trans.), Galileo’s Astrology, Culture and Cosmos, vol. 7.1, 2003, pp. 9-19. Garin, E. Astrology in the Renaissance: The Zodiac of Life, Carolyn Jackson and June Allen, (trans.), Routledge, 1983. Hendrix, S.E. Albert the Great’s Speculum Astronomiae and Four Centuries of Readers. Lewiston, The Edwin Mellen Press, forthcoming. –––, ‘Reading the Future and Freeing the Will: Astrology of the Arabic World and Albertus Magnus.’ Hortulus, vol. 2.1, 2006, online. Kibre, P. The Library of Pico della Mirandola. New York: Columbia University Press, 1936. Kristeller, P.O. Renaissance Thought and its Sources. New York, Columbia University Press, 1981. –––, Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1964, pp. 37-53. Lemay, R. Abu Ma'shar and Latin Aristotelianism in the Twelfth Century. Beirut, American University of Beirut, 1962. Machamer, P.K. The Cambridge Companion to Galileo. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995. Moran, B.T. Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Astrology, and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2006. North, John D. ‘Celestial Influence-- the Major Premiss of Astrology,’ in ‘Astrologi Hallucinati:’ Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time, Paola Zambelli (ed.). New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1986. –––,The Norton History of Astronomy and Cosmology, New York, W.W. Norton, 1995. Popper, K. Objective Knowledge: an Evolutionary Approach. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1975. Rowland, W. Galileo's Mistake: A New Look at the Epic Confrontation Between Galileo and the Church, New York, Arcade Publishing, 2003. Rutkin, H.D. ‘Astrology, Natural Philosophy and the History of Science, c. 1250-1700: Studies Toward an Interpretation of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola’s Disputationes adversus astroligiam divinatricem.’ Indiana University, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 2002. –––, ‘Galileo Astrologer:’ Astrology and Mathematical Practice in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries.’ Galilaena, vol. II, 2005, pp. 107-143. Sachs, A. ‘Babylonian Horoscopes,’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies. vol. VI, 1952, pp. 49-74. Sagan, C. ‘The Harmony of the Worlds.’ Cosmos. PBS, 1980. Schneer, C.J. The Search for Order: The Development of the Major Ideas in the Physical Sciences from the Earliest Times to the Present. New York, HarperCollins, 1960. Shumaker, W. The Occult Sciences in the Renaissance: A Study in Intellectual Patterns. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1978. Tarnass, R. The Passion of the Western Mind. New York, Random House, 1993. Tester, S. J. A History of Western Astrology. Woodbridge, Boydell Press, 1987. Yates, F. Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1991. Zambelli, P. ‘Albert le Grand et l’astrologie.’ Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale, vol. 49, 1982, pp. 141-158. Scott E. Hendrix is an assistant professor of history at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI (USA). His teaching spans the medieval and early modern periods and he writes on the history of astrology as well as mysticism.