Hieroglyphica. These works represent a period in Dee’s life between the
1550s and 1570s in which his occult pursuits centred on astrology
and astral/natural magic. In the 1580s, John Dee shifted his attention
to angelic and spiritual practices. These later interests are exception-
ally interesting and certainly fundamental to understanding the scope
and development of Dee’s occult thought. However, the scope and
theme of this present study cannot accommodate an analysis of Dee’s
conversations with spirits.
27
The career of Dee and his works have attracted many interpretations
since the earliest part of the twentieth century. Generally speaking,
three strands of interpretation have developed: the first developed in
the 1950s which highlighted the significance of Dee’s works by sani-
tizing them from the occult and focusing on the more ‘exact’ aspects
of his mathematics, presenting them as proto-scientific endeavours.
This strand is represented by the works of E. G. R. Taylor.
28
Another
strand emerged in the 1960s and 1970s that saw the occult elements
to have inspired the ‘scientific’ outlook of Dee. This is represented
by Frances Yates’s The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, Peter
French’s The World of an Elizabthean Magus, and I. R. F. Calder’s the-
sis ‘John Dee Studied as an English Neoplatonist’. Yates placed Dee in
the Hermetic tradition in which she had included Ficino and Pico in
her Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition. In her later work she
emphasized the Kabbalistic elements that were amalgamated into early
modern Hermeticism.
29
Considering Dee’s mathematization of astrology
in the Propaedeumata and the Kabbalistic Monas Hieroglyphica inspired by
the Art of Lull founded on a ‘universal religious and scientific basis’,
Yates claimed that ‘we may begin to see Dee in his true historical
context’. He appeared to her as truly a man of the late Renaissance
148
The Arabic Influences on Early Modern Occult Philosophy
developing occult philosophy in scientific directions thus stimulating
the Scientific Revolution.
30
French, Yates’s student, adopted her inter-
pretation and considered Dee a personification of the Hermetic mage,
dignified and powerful. Dee’s ‘erudite’ gnostic Hermeticism accommo-
dated Kabbalah and thus he joined Pico and Ficino as ‘rehabilitators’
of Hermetic philosophy.
31
Calder, on the other hand, argued that the
Neoplatonic/Pythagorean mathematics Dee advocated formed a scien-
tific precursor of modern physical science; ‘it was the devising of means
for investigating experience in mathematical terms that was undertaken
by various Renaissance theoreticians, that marks the beginning of specif-
ically modern experimental methods’.
32
Calder accepted that this form
of Neoplatonism also created the mystical expression of astrology and
its rhetorical contemplation which he attributed to the Arabs (Avicenna
and Averroes mainly):
The characteristic emphasis on the natural power of the Intel-
lect to arrive at truth [
. . . ] ran through much of the scientific
thought of the Arabs; which current, by insisting that the cos-
mos was a logical and necessary unfolding of intelligible principles,
emanating from and manifesting the nature of God, gave strong
support and encouragement to the study of natural science and
mathematics.
33
In his study on magical exaltation in the works of Dee, György E. Szony
accepted Yates’s and French’s interpretive models, arguing that Dee’s
eschatological project exercised through Kabbalah and contemplation
of the Monad was inspired by Hermeticism and Neoplatonism placing
him in the same milieu of Ficino and Pico.
34
Yates, French and Calder thus legitimized Dee’s occult and mystical
pursuits – categorized as Hermetic and Neoplatonic – only in their con-
tribution to developing a recognizable ‘modern’ scientific discourse.
35
The first strand, which undermines occult tendencies, was continued
in the 1970s by J.L. Heilbron who explicitly trivializes the magical ele-
ments and rejects the second strand which legitimizes occult thought
as a proto-scientific mentality. In his introduction to Wayne Shumaker’s
translation of the Propaedeumata Aphoristica, he adopted a limited typol-
ogy of early modern magic: the works of Francis Bacon marked the
break from the earlier ‘hermetic magic’ which was essentially spiritual
and demonic to which Dee’s angelic magic belonged.
36
It was irrational
and thus could not be the ‘ancestor’ of experimental physics. Natu-
ral magic, on the other hand, was understood by Heilbron exclusively
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |