1 Naudé, Gabriel, Apologie pour tous les grands personnages quit ont este'faussement soupwnnez de magie (Paris, 1625) 404 Google Scholar: “ … c'est plustost suivre l'ignorance ou la passion de PauleJove & des Demonographes, que la verite de l'histoire, de faire unjugement si peu favorable & sinistre de cet homme, qui n'a pas este seulement un nouveau Trismegiste es trois facultez superieures de la Theologie, Jurisprudence & Medecine, mais qui a voulu promener son corps par toutes les parties de l'Europe, & faire rouler son esprit sur toutes les Sciences & disciplines … “; 419: “Cette preuve qui est la plus forte & la moins desguisee que puissent avoir nos adversaires, estant ainsi rendue vaine & de nulle consequence, il n'y a rien si facile que de venir a bout des autres, lesquelles se liroient beaucoup plus a propos dans les Romans magiques de Merlin, Maugis, & du Docteur Fauste, que dans les Escrits serieux & bien examinez, ou qui le devroient estre, de plusieurs Historiens & Demonographes… . “ (Here and throughout these notes, u/v and i/j have been normalized in accordance with modern practice.)

2 On Agrippa's use of the Hermetica and of the writings of his predecessors in the Hermetic-Cabalistic tradition, see Nauert, Charles G. Jr., Agrippa and the Crisis of Renaissance Thought (Urbana, Illinois, 1965) 117-39Google Scholar, 153—56; Walker, D. P., Spiritual and Demonic Magic from Ficino to Campanella (1958: rpt. Notre Dame 1975) 90–96 Google Scholar; and Yates, Frances A., Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (London, 1964), 130-47Google Scholar, 281-83. Agrippa's influence on Bruno is discussed in many passages of this latter book; for his influence on Dee, see Yates, The Art of Memory (1966; rpt. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1969) 257, and Theatre of the World (Chicago, 1969) 23-24, 30-31; also French, Peter J., John Dee (London, 1972) 29–30 Google Scholar. His importance to Thomas Vaughan is evident in The Works of Thomas Vaughan, ed. Rudrum, Alan (Oxford, 1984) 84–87 Google Scholar, 99-103.

3 Zambelli, Paola, “Magic and Radical Reformation in Agrippa of Nettesheim“, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 39 (1976): 88–103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 102; see also her article “Cornelio Agrippa, Erasmo e la teologia umanistica,” Rinascimento, 21 (1969): 29-88; Wirth, Jean, “‘Libertins’ et ‘Epicuriens': Aspects de l'irreligion au XVIe siecle,” Bibliotheque d'humanisme et renaissance, 39 (1977): 609–613.Google Scholar

4 See Christopher Baxter, “Johann Weyer's De praestigiis Daemonum: Unsystematic Psychopathology,” and Sydney Anglo, “Reginald Scot's Discoverie of Witchcraft: Scepticism and Sadduceeism,” in The Damned Art: Essays in the Literature of Witchcraft, ed. Sydney Anglo (London, 1977) 59, 65, 71-72; 121, 125.

5 See Pierre Villey, Les Sources et I'évolution des Essais de Montaigne (2 vols.; 2nd ed.; Paris, 1933) 2: 166-70; Jeande la Taille, Dramatic Works, ed. K. M.Hall and C. N.Smith (London, 1972) 23; Thevet, André, Les vrais pourtraits et vies des hommes illustres (2 vols.; Paris, 1584)Google Scholar 2: fols. 542-544V; Gabriel Naude\ Apologie 400-429. Marin Mersenne, in his Quaestiones celeberrimae in Genesim (Paris, 1623) col. 590, denounced Agrippa as “Archimagus“; in the same year that this book appeared a man was burned at Moulins for possessing a copy of De occulta philosophia (cf. Correspondance du P. Marin Mersenne, ed. Cornells deWaard and Rene Pintard [Paris, 1932] 5in.). For indications of Agrippa's influence in Germany, see Klibansky, R., Panofsky, E. and Saxl, F., Saturn and Melancholy (London, 1964) 350-65Google Scholar; and Peuckert, Will-Erich, Pansophie: Ein Versuch zur Geschichte derweissen undschwarzen Magie (2nd ed.; Berlin, 1956), 135-45.Google Scholar

6 There is a recent edition of this translation: Of the Vanitie and Uncertaintie ofArtes and Sciences, ed. Catherine M. Dunn (Northridge, California, 1974). Sidney refers to De vanitate in A Defence of Poetry, ed. J. A. Van Dorsten (London, 1966) 49-50; and for indications of the extent of Sidney's interest in Agrippa, see A. C. Hamilton, “Sidney and Agrippa,” Review of English Studies, n.s. 7, no. 26 (1956): 151-57. Greville echoes the main argument of De vanitate in Caelica, 66, and in A Treatise of Religion, st. 107; Selected Poems of Fulke Greville, ed. Joan Rees (London, 1973 32-33, 53. For indications of Nashe's use of Agrippa, see The Works of Thomas of Nashe, ed. R. B. McKerrow (5 vols.; London, 1904-1910) 3: 151-52; 5: 125; and for a brief discussion of the possibility that Nashe felt a more radical affinity with Agrippa, see Jonathan V. Crewe, Unredeemed Rhetoric, Thomas Nashe and the Scandal of Authorship (Baltimore, 1982) 77-80, 113n. One might, with less confidence, add Spenser to the list of Elizabethan writers who drew upon Agrippa. See Spenser: Poetical Works, ed. J. C. Smith and E. De Selincourt (1912; rpt. London, 1966) 624, 541; Brooks-Davies, Douglas, Spenser's “Faerie Queene“: A Critical Commentary on Books I and II (Manchester, 1977) 6 Google Scholar, 65, 86, 105; and my article “Agrippa,” in A. C. Hamilton et al., ed., The Spenser Encyclopedia (University of Toronto Press, forthcoming).

7 As an exponent of Reuchlin's Cabalistic-Hermetic philosophy, Agrippa was subjected to anti-Semitic attacks from 1509 onwards—a year before the Reuchlin affair began (cf. Paola Zambelli, “Agrippa von Nettesheim in den neueren kritischen Studien und in den Handschriften,” Archiv für Kulturgeschichten, 51, Heft 2 [1969]: 276ft); the first slander printed against him was in Ortwin Gratius’ Lamentationes obscurorum virorum (1518); cf. Zambelli, “Agrippa von Nettesheim” 280, and “Magic and Radical Reformation” 70. There is an intriguing possibility that the “Georgius Subbunculator” with whom Gratius has “Agrippa Stygianus” exchange letters could be none other than Georgius Sabellicus Faustus —who, from the accounts given of him by Trithemius in 1507 and Mutianus Rufus in 1513, was indeed something of a botcher-up of old clothes. For these accounts, and for subsequent attacks which link Agrippa and Faustus, see Alexander Tille, Die Faustsplitter in der Literatur des sechzehnten bis achtzehnten Jahrhunderts nach den altesten Quellen (Berlin, 1900) 1-5, 16, 56, 87-88, 102; and P. M. Palmer and R. P. More, ed., The Sources of the Faust Tradition from Simon Magus to Lessing (1936; rpt. New York, 1965) 83-88, 101-103. The earliest printed legends about Faustus are contained in Johannes Cast's Sermones conviviaks (1548), and include the statement that Faustus’ dog and horse were devils (Tille 12, Palmer and More 98); this echoes the claim of Paolo Giovio, in his Elogia doctorum virorum (1546; rpt. Basle, c. 1560) 236-37, that Agrippa's dog was a devil. Gabriel Naudd's Apologie (400-402, 419-29) shows an awareness of the manner in which orthodox polemicists had used demonological legends to sully Agrippa's reputation, but he seems not to have realized that the stories told about Agrippa in some cases antedated those told about Faustus.

8 Faustus’ direct reference to Agrippa is quoted from Marlowe's “Doctor Faustus” 1604-1616: Parallel Texts, ed. W. W. Greg (1950; rpt. Oxford, 1968), scene i, line 150 (1604 text; line 139 in the 1616 text) pp. 170-71. On Marlowe's use of Agrippa, see Michael Hattaway, “The Theology of Marlowe's Doctor Faustus” Renaissance Drama, n.s. 3 1970 54-55, 61-65; and my articles “Verbal Magic and the Problem of the A and B Texts of Doctor Faustus,” Journal ofEnglish and Germanic Philology, 82 (1983): 324-46, esp. 336-40; and “Misreading Faustus Misreading: The Question of Context,” The Dalhousie Review, 65.4 (Winter 1985-86): 511-33, esp. 527-29.

9 On Pico, see Eugenio Garin, “Le interpretazioni del pensiero di Giovanni Pico,” in L'Opera e ilpensiero di Giovanni Pico della Mirandola nella storiadell'Umanesimo (Florence, l965) 3–32; and D. P. Walker, “Savonarola and the Ancient Theology, “ in his The Ancient Theology (London, 1972) 42-62. On Lefevre, see Eugene F. Rice Jr., “The Demagia naturali of Jacques Lefevre d'Etaples,” in Philosophy and Humanism: Renaissance Essays in Honor of Paul Oskar Kristeller, ed. Edward P. Mahoney (New York, 1976) 19-29; and Copenhaver, Brian P., “Lefevred'Etaples, Symphorien Champier and the Secret Names of God,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 40 (1977): 189–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 For a refutation of the charges of charlatanism raised by earlier interpreters, see Nauert, Agrippa 196-99. The view that De vanitate was intended as “a safety-device” is advanced by Yates, Giordano Bruno 131; on the condemnations of De vanitate and the resulting controversies, see Nauert, Agrippa 106-111.

11 “Nauert, Agrippa 214, 220.

12 For a suggestive analysis of the structures and rhetorical intentions of De vanitate, see Eugene Korkowski, “Agrippa as Ironist,” Neophilologus, 60 (1976): 594-607.

13 Henricus Cornelius Agrippa, In praelectione Hermetis Trismegisti, ed. Paola Zambelli, in Eugenio Garin et al., ed., Testi umanisticisu l'ermetismo (Rome, 1955) 124: “Instruit nos praeterea de cognitione sui ipsius, de ascensu intellectus, de arcanis precibus, de divino connubio, deque regenerationis sacramento… . Firmam auteni robustamque mentem, per quam sine fallacia mirabilia et cognoscimus et operamur, quomodo possimus adipisci, ipse nos Mercurii Pimander edocet.“The letter to which Nauert refers (Agrippa 214) is printed in Agrippa's Opera, ed. Richard H. Popkin (2 vols.; Lyon, c. 1600; facsimile rpt. Hildesheim, 1970) 2: Epist. V, xix.

14 Bowen, Barbara C., “Cornelius Agrippa's De vanitate: Polemic or Paradox?” Bibliotheque d'humanisme et renaissance, 34 (1972): 249-56.Google Scholar

15 Maurice de Gandillac, “Les secrets d'Agrippa,” in Aspects du libertinisme an XVIe siide, ed. Andr£ Stegmann (Paris, 1974) 133 dates the Dehortatio to 1518. Thedateof 1526 suggested by Nauert (Agrippa 98, 208) is much more probable: this short work was dedicated by Agrippa in June of 1526, and bears marked similarities to De vanitate, which was completed in September of that year.

16 Sidney, , A Defence of Poetry, 49–50 Google Scholar.

17 Of the Vanitie, “Cornelius Agrippa, to the reader,” 10. The work of Eugenio Garin on the place of magic in Renaissance thought (see his Medioevo e Rinascimento [3rd ed.; Bari, 1966] 90-99, 151-91) encouraged scholars like Zambelli and Nauert to insist that Agrippa's major works have a common substructure. See Nauert, Agrippa 200 and Zambelli, “A proposite del De vanitate scientiarum et artium di Cornelio Agrippa,” Rivista critica distoria deltafilosofia, 15: 2 (1960): 167-81; “Humanae literae, verbum divinum, docta ignorantia negli ultimi scritti di Enrico Cornelio Agrippa,” Giornale critico delta filosofia ilaliana (1965): 101-131; and “Agrippa von Nettesheim” 264-95. The present article attempts a more clearly-focussed analysis of that substructure, and offers more detailed suggestions as to how it might explain the contrasting orientations of De vanitate and De occulta philosophia.

18 Agrippa, De occulta philosophia III. iii in Opera 1:314. Seen. 56 below.

19 These features include the initially polemical nature of the Faustus legend, its emphasis on flight, the insistently blasphemous nature of Faustus’ aspirations and deeds, his final death (rather than conversion) and, of course, the Helen of Troy episode. See Michael H. Reefer's dissertation “ This Fatal Mirror“: Marlowe's Doctor Faustus, the Legend and the Context (University of Sussex, 1980)22-23,90-91, 118-34. On patristic accounts of Simon Magus, the most important of which for Renaissance readers were Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, 1.23, 1-4, and the pseudo-Clementine Recognitiones, 11.5-15 (the Refutatio omnium haeresium of Hippolytus was not rediscovered until the nineteenth century), see Wilson, R. McL., The Gnostic Problem (1958; rpt. London, 1964) 36–44 Google Scholar; Grant, R. M., Gnosticism and Early Christianity (1959; 2nd ed., New York, 1966) 7–96 Google Scholar; and Jonas, Hans, The Gnostic Religion (2nd ed.: Boston, 1963) 103-11Google Scholar. For references to more recent studies, which have been increasingly concerned with the relations between the Simoniangnosis and certain texts in the Gnostic library discovered at Nag Hammadi, see Sasagu Arai, “Simonianische Gnosis und die Exegese uber die Seele,” in Martin Krause, ed., Gnosis and Gnosticism (Leiden, 1977) 185-203; and Arai, “Zum ‘Simonianischen’ in AuthLog und Bronte,” in Krause, ed., Gnosis and Gnosticism (Leiden, 1981) 3-15. The methods of patristic heresiologists are analyzed by Gerard Vallee in A Study in Anti-Gnostic Polemics: Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Epiphanius (Waterloo, 1981).

20 See, for example, the texts of Ludovico Lazzarelli reprinted in Garin et al., ed., Testi umanistici; or Augustinus Steuchus, Deperenniphilosophia libriX(Lyon, 1540), I.viii, I.x, I.xxiii-xxvi, H.xvii, X.x; and among modern studies, R. Marcel, “La fortune d'Hermes Trismegiste a la Renaissance,” in L'Humanisme francais au dibut de la Renaissance, ed. Andr£ Stegmann (Paris, 1973) 137-54; D. P. Walker, The Ancient Theology; and Elaine Limbrick, “Hermetisme religieux au XVIe siècle: le Pimandre de Francois de Foix de Candale,” Renaissance and Reformation I Renaissance et Rijorme, n.s. 5 (1981): 1-14.

21 Agrippa, In praelectione Hermetis Trismegisti, ed. Zambelli, in Garin et al., ed., Testi umanistici 122-23.

22 See Grafton, Anthony, “Protestant Versus Prophet: Isaac Casaubon on Hermes Trismegistus,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 46 (1983): 78–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Symptomatic of this tendency is Frances A. Yates’ last book, The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age (London, 1979). The influence of Reuchlin's Christian Cabala, as iSet out in his De verbo mirifico (1494), is very much evident in Agrippa's De occulta philosophia, especially in the manuscript version of 1510. Charles Zika claims (correctly, I think) in “Reuchlin's De Verbo Mirifico and the Magic Debate of the Late Fifteenth Century, “Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 39(1976): 138, that “it was primarily Reuchlin's statement of the possible fusion of magic with religion which constituted the driving force behind Agrippa's formulation in the De Occulta Philosophia of a sacralized magic which would enable other forms of magic to be viewed in a correct perspective and ultimately to be purified and restored to their former place of honour.” See also Zika's “Reuchlin and Erasmus: Humanism and Occult Philosophy,” The Journal of Religious History, 9 (1976-77): 242-43. My point in this paragraph is that Reuchlin's Cabala was itself deeply indebted to Hermetic sources.

24 Asclepius, 6, in A. D. Nock and A. J. Festugiere, ed. and tr., Corpus Hermeticum (4 vols.; 2nd ed.; Paris, i960) 2: 301-302: “Propter haec, o Asclepi, magnum miraculum est homo, animal adorandum atque honorandum. hoc enim in naturam dei transit, quasi ipse sit deus; hoc daemonum genus novit, utpote qui cum isdem se ortum esse cognoscat; hoc humanae naturae partem in se ipse despicit, alterius partis divinitate confisus.“

25 Pico's Oration (De hominis dignitate) opens with these words: “Legi, Patres colendissimi, in Arabum monumentis, interrogatum Abdalum Sarracenum, quid in hac quasi mundana scaena admirandum maxime spectaretur, nihil spectari homine admirabilius respondisse. CuisententiaeilludMercuriiadstipulatur: Magnum, o Asclepi, miraculum est homo.” G. Pico della Mirandola, De hominis dignitate, Heptaplus, De ente et uno, ed. E. Garin (Florence, 1942) 102. On Pico's Oration, see Ernst Cassirer, “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola,” Part II, in Renaissance Essays from the “Journal of the History of Ideas”, ed. P. O. Kristeller and P. P. Wiener (New York, 1968) 33-52; Eugenio Garin, “Leinterpretazioni del pensiero di Giovanni Pico,” in L'Opera e ilpensiero di Giovanni Pico 3 - 32; and in the same volume, P. O. Kristeller, “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and his sources” 35-133, esp. 53-67; Heller, Agnes, Renaissance Man, tr. Allen, R. E. (London, 1978) 60 Google Scholar, 532-33, 450-52.

26 Agrippa, De triplici ratione, cap. v in Opera 2: 469-70. Agrippa actually makes a double reference to this passage of the Asclepius: “O magnum miraculum homo, praecipue autem Christianus, qui in mundo constitutus, ea quae supra mundum sunt, ipsiusque mundi autorem cognoscit, turn in eo ipso inferiora quaeque cernit & intelligit: non solum ea quae sunt, & quae fuerunt, sed et ilia quae non sunt, & quae ventura sunt. Magnum certe miraculum est homo Christianus, qui in mundo constitutus supra mundum dominatur, operationesque similes efficit ipsi Creatori mundi, quae opera vulgo miracula appellantur, quorum omnium radix & fundamentum fides est in Iesum Christum.“

27 De verbo mirifico (1494), sig. b4: “Simulque in natura constituti, supra naturam dominamur, et monstra, portenta, miracula divinitatis insignia, nos mortales uno verbo, quod iam pridem vobis explicare ausus sum prodigimus” (cited from Zika, “Reuchlin's De Verbo Mirifico” 107).

28 See Zika, “Reuchlin's De Verbo Mirifico” 129-30. Reuchlin consistently devalued Hermes and the “Egyptian” magical tradition by comparison with the Cabala (Zika 112, 123-24), but for further instances of Hermetic influence in De verbo mirifico, see Zika 114, 118, 120, 123.

29 Cf. Pico, De hominis dignitate, in Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Gian Francesco Pico, Opera omnia (2 vols.; 1557—1573; facsimile rpt. ed. Cesare Vasoli (Hildesheim, 1969) 1:316-17. Pico is referring here to Dionysius the Areopagite, De divinibus nominibus IV. 2. A similar pseudo-Dionysian pattern is apparent in the Oratiojoannis Tritemii abbatis spanhemensis de vera conversione mentis ad Deum (Moguntina, 1500) sig. a iijv, c, c ij.

30 Gikatila's Ginat Egoz was a major source for Reuchlin; on Gikatila and his teacher Abulafia, see Gershom Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (3rd ed.; New York, 1961) and Scholem, Kabbalah (New York, 1974).

31 Yates, Frances A., “The Hermetic Tradition in Renaissance Science,” in Singleton, Charles S., ed., Art, Science, and History in the Renaissance (Baltimore, 1970) 255.Google Scholar

32 An initial attempt to define this genre has been made by Pheme Perkins, The Gnostic Dialogue (New York, 1980).

33 On the sources and coherence of the Hermetica, see A.J. Festugiere, “L'Herm.6- tisme,” Arsberattelse, Bulletin de la Society Royale des Lettres de Lund (1947-48): 1-58; and his La Révélation d'Hermes Trismégiste (4 vols.; Paris, 1950-54).

34 Ludovico Lazzarelli, Desumma hominis foelicitate dialogus, qui inscribitur calix Christi et crater Hermetis, ed. M. Brini, in Garin et ah, ed., Testi umanistici 56.

35 For indications of the influence of (among others) the first, fourth, and seventh tractates onFicino, see P.O. Kristeller, Studies in Renaissance Thought and Letters (1956; rpt. Rome, 1969) 233-35. Kristeller does not mention the thirteenth tractate, butseeFicino's Dialogus inter Deumetanimamtheologicus (trans, in The Letters of Marsilio Ficino 1 [London, 1975]: PP- 35-39; compare Corpus Hermeticum XIII.3-11) for clear evidence of his interest in it. For a later echo of the Corpus Hermeticum XIII, see Ficino's Commentaria in PhilebumPlatonis, cap. xx (The Philebus Commentary, ed. andtr. Michael J. B. Allen [Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1975] 202). Lazzarelli's Crater Hermetis conflates elements of the first, fourth, and thirteenth tractates with the god-making mystery of the Asclepius into a Hermetic-Christian mystery of regeneration (see Kristeller, Studies 23 7-40). For modern evaluations of the coherence and central importance of C H. I, IV, VII, and XIII, see Festugiere, “L'Hermetisme” 11; A. D. Nock, Conversion (Oxford, 1952) 117—18; Nock, “Early Gentile Christianity and its Hellenistic Background,” in his Essays on Religion and the Ancient World, ed. Zeph Stewart (2 vols.; Oxford, 1972) 1: 16, I28n., 61; Nock and Festugiere, Corpus Hermeticum 1: 85;andC. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge, England, 1953) 190. These four tractates are translated by R. M. Grant in his Gnosticism: An Anthology (London, 1961) 311-33.

36 See John 1:12-23, 3:3-8; I Peter 1:23. A number of Pauline passages lend themselves to interpretation in terms of rebirth: Romans 12:2,1 Cor. 4:15, II Cor. 3:18, Gal. 4:19, 29, Eph. 4:22-24, Col. 3:9-10.

37 Mercurii Trismegisti Pymander, de potestate et sapientia Dei… [Marsilio Ficino Florentine interp.] (Basle, 1532), sig. A6. In this same passage the narrator (who is unnamed in the Greek text, but identified as Mercurius by Ficino) makes it clear that he wishes knowledge of nature as well as of God: “Cupio inquam rerum naturam discere, deumque cognoscere” (sig. A6). My quotations from the Hermetic tractates I am discussing are drawn from Ficino's translation: Agrippa, who was not fluent in Greek, relied upon this translation rather than the Greek text. These tractates were unknown in Europe before Ficino obtained a Greek manuscript and translated it in the early 1460s; the Hermetic Asclepius (of which the Greek text is lost) was already available in a Latin translation that was ascribed to Apuleius of Madaura and was cited with some frequency from the twelfth century onwards.

38 Mercurii Trismegisti Pymander, sig. A6V-A7: “Lumen illud ego sum, mens, deus tuus, antiquior quam natura humida, quae ex umbra effluxit. Mentis vero germen, verbum lucens, dei filius… . Sic inquit cogita, quod in te videt, & audit, est verbum domini, mens autem pater deus.” k

39 Ibid., sig. A8r-v: “Qui cum naturam contueretur mira pulchritudine preditam esse, actionesque omnes septem gubernatorum, atque insuper dei ipsius effigiem possidere, illi amore ingenti subrisit, utpote quae humanae pulchritudinis speciem in aqua specularetur, eiusdemque adumbrationem quandam in terra conspiceret: ille praeterea conspicatus similem sibi formam in seipso existentem, velut in aqua, amavit earn, secumque congredi concupivit. Effectus evesdgio secutus est voluntatem, formamque carentem ratione progenuit.“

40 A°lbid., sig B3V: “O populi viri terrigenae, qui vosmetipsos ebrietati, somno, & ignorantiae dedidistis, sobrii vivite, abstinete a ventris luxu vos, qui irrationali somno demulcti estis… . Cur 6 viri terrigenae praecipites in mortem ruitis, cum vobis haudquaquam desit immortalitatis consequendae facultas?“

41 Ibid., sig. D2V-D3: “Quo ruitis mortales ebrii, qui merum ignorantiae combibistis? Cum id ferre nequeatis evomite, vivite sobrii, oculis mentis inspicite… . In primis autem oportet vestem quam circumfers exuere, indumentem inscitiae, pravitatis fundamentum, corruptionis vinculum, velamen opacum, vivam mortem, sinsitivum cadaver… . “

42 Ibid., sig. C3: “ … ii 6 Tati secumdum operum comparationem pro mortalibus immortales habentur, intelligentia sua cuncta complexi quae in terra sunt & quae in mari, & si quid est praeterea super coelum.“

43 Ibid., sig. D2v: “ … ad fontem vitae recurrite, illumque qui vos introducet, in adytum veritatis capescite. Ibi fulgidum lumen nullis immixtum tenebris.“

44 The words are those of Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples in his introductory note to the thirteenth tractate. “Argumentum decimitertii,“Mercurri Trismegisti Pytnander, sig. G3: “Tertiusdecimus est de arcano regenerationis mysterio… . “

45 Ibid., sig. G5: “Absit hoc 6 fili: recurre in teipsum, & consequeris: velis, ac fiet: purga sensus corporis, solve te ab irrationabilibus materiae ipsius ultoribus.” The ten powers of God (sig. G5V-G6) call out for conflation with the ten Sephiroth of the Kabbalists.

46 Ibid., sig. G7: “An ignoras quod & deus & unus [sic: read “unius“] filius natus es?“

47 Ibid., sig. G4.V: “ … quis erit regenerationis autor? TRIS. Dei filius, homo unius voluntate dei.“

48 Ibid., sig. G6: “O pater concipio, non oculorum intuitu, sed actu mentis, qui per vires intimas exercentur. In coelo sum, in terra, in aqua, in aere, in animalibus sum, in arboribus, in corpore, ante corpus, atque post corpus, & ubique.“

49 Ibid., sig. B4: “Corporis enim somnus animi sobrietas extiterat. Oculorum compressio verus intuitus. Silentium meum bonitatis foecunda praegnatio. Sermonis prolatio bonorum omnium genitura.“

50 Ibid., sig. G7.

51 See, for example, Corpus Hermetkum X.25, XI. 19-20, XII. 1, Asdepius 6.

52 Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition 130.

53 “An Encomium on the three Books of Cornelius Agrippa Knight, by Eugenius Philalethes,” lines 5-10; in Three Books of Occult Philosophy, written by Henry Cornelius Agrippa, ofNettesheim, tr. J.F. (London, 1651), sig. a2. Cf. The Works of Thomas Vaughan 86.

54 Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, “Epistola nuncupatoria,” in Opera 1: 307: “Divinorum autem intelligentia purgat mentem erroribus, redditque divinam, virtutem operibus nostris infallibilem praestat, & malorum omnium daemonum fraudes & obstacula longe propellit, illosque simul imperio nostro subiicit, etiam bonos angelos & universas mundi virtutes in nostrum ministerium cogit, attracta videlicet ab ipso archetypo operum nostrorum virtute: ad quern quum ascendimus, necesse est omnem creaturam nobis obedire, totusque nos sequitur coelestium chorus.” In the opening sentence of this dedication, Agrippa warns that “nulla in re nobis in hac vita magis elaborandum esse, quam ut ab animi nobilitate, quo Deo proxime accedimus divinamque induimus naturam, minime degeneremus: ne quando inani ocio torpescens animus, ad terreni corporis fragilitatem, carnisque vitia resolvatur, illumque tanquam proiectum per perversarum cupiditatum tenebrosa praecipitia perdamus” (306). The purgation of which he speaks thus implies a form of dualist ascesis.

55 De occulta philosophia, III.i, p. 310: “Firmam autem & robustam mentem (utinquit Hermes) consequi non aliunde possumus, quam a vitae integritate, a pietate, a divina denique religione. Religio enim sacra mentem purgat, redditque divinam… . “

56 Ibid., Ill.iii, p. 314: “nunc vero narrabimus rem arcanam, necessariam & secretam, Quicuique qui in hac arte operari affectat, quae est principium & complementum & clavis omnium magicarum operationum: & ipsa est dignificatio hominis ad hanc tarn sublimen virtutem ac potestatem. “ P . 315: “Inest enim nobis ipsis rerum omnium apprehensio & potestas. Prohibemur autem quo minus his fruamur, per passiones ex generatione nobis obstantes, per imaginationes falsas, & appetitus immoderatos: quibus expulsis, subito adest divina cognitio atque potestas.“

57 Ibid., Ill.vi, p. 322: “ … sic etiam per solum opus religionis, fit aliquod sine applicatione naturalium coelestiumque virtutem: sed nemo potest operari per puram & solam religionem, nisi qui totus factus est intellectualis. Quicunque autem sine admixtione aliorum virtutum, per solam religionem operatur, si diu perseveraverit in opere, absorbetur a numine, nee diu poterit vivere.“

58 Ibid., III.vi, p. 321: “Mens itaque nostra pura atque divina, religioso amore flagrans, spe decora, fide directa, posita in culmine & fastigio humani animi, veritatem attrahit, omnesque rerum tam naturalium quam immortalium status, rationes, causas & scientias, in ipsa veritate divina, tanquam in quodam aeternitatis speculo intuetur, subito comprehendens… . Hinc provenit nos in natura constitutes, aliquando supra naturam dominari: operationesque tam mirificas, tam subitas, tam arduas efficere, quibus obediant manes, turbentur sidera, cogantur numina, serviant elementa: sic homines Deo devoti, ac theologicis istis virtutibus elevati, imperant dementis, pellunt nebulas, citant ventos, cogunt nubes in pluvias, curant morbos, suscitant mortuos… . “

59 Ibid., III.xxxvi, p. 411: ;“Sic & verba nostra plurima producere possum miracula, modo formentur verbo Dei, in quibus etiam unica nostra generatio perficitur, sicut inquit Esaias, A facie tua Domine concepimus, sicut mulieres recte concipiunt a facie maritorum, & peperimus spiritum… . “

60 On Lazzarelli's previous conflation of the Hermetic-Christian doctrine of rebirth with the demonic magic of the Asclepius, see Kristeller, , Studies in Renaissance Thought and Letters 221-57Google Scholar, and Walter, , Spiritual and Demonic Magic 64–72.Google Scholar

61 See Martin Luther: Selections from his Writings, ed. John Dillenberger (New York, 1961) 174-75, 341; and Gerhard Ebeling, Luther, tr. R. A. Wilson (London, 1972) 108- “*» 109. This view of illumination was given systematic formulation by Jean Calvin in his Institution de la religion chrestienne, I.vii and I.ix.

62 Ioannis Calvini Opera quae supersunt omnia, ed. Baum, Cunitz and Reuss (59 vols.; Brunswick, 1863-1900) 27: col. 515: “Quand nous avons ces appettis, il faut bien que le diable nous y pousse.“

63 Agrippa, De vanitate, cap. C, in Opera 2: 299: “Harum autem scripturarum (dico canonicarum) Veritas & intelligentia a sola Dei revelantis authoritate dependet, quae non ullo sensuum iudicio, nulla ratione discurrente, nullo syllogismo demonstrante, nulla scientia, nulla speculatione, nulla contemplatione, nullis denique humanis viribus comprehendi potest, nisi sola fide in lesum Christum, a Deo patre per Spiritum sanctum in animam nostram transfusa.“

64 Ibid., Cap. XCVIII, pp. 286-87, 289-90: “ … ita etiam divina oracula admodum obscura & abscondita, data nostris interpretationibus explicanda, non quidem ex nostris viribus aut adinventionibus quasi Dei oracula sicuti naturae opera opus habeant nostro adiumento, sed ex ipsomet scripturarum illarum sancto Spiritu, qui distribuit dona sua omnibus secundum quod vult & ubi vult, faciens alios quidem prophetas, alios prophetaruminterpretes… . Hie tamenaltiore opus est spiritu, qui diiudicet atque discernat, qui videlicet non ex hominibus, nee ex carne & sanguine, sed desuper datus sit a patre luminum: de Deo enim sine eius lumine nemo rite quicquam effari potest, lumen autem illud est verbum Dei, per quod omnia facta sunt, illuminans omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum, dans illis potestatem filios Dei fieri, quotquot receperunt, & crediderunt ei… . “

65 Ibid., Cap C, pp. 299-300: “Quae tanto quidem superior est atque stabilior omni humanarum scientiarum credulitate, quanto Deus ipse hominibus est sublimior & veracior, sed quid veracior? Imo solus Deus verax, omnis homo mendax: omne igitur, quod ex hac veritate non est, error est, sicut quod ex fide non est, peccatum est. DEUS enim solus fontem veritatis continet, a quo haurire necesse est qui vera dogmata cupit, cum nulla sit nee haberi possit de secretis naturae, de substantiis separatis, deque ipsorum authore Deo scientia, nisi divinitus revelata: divina enim humanis viribus non tanguntur, & naturalia quovis momento sensum effugiunt… . “ ‘Separate substances’ means angels and/or Intelligences.

66 Ibid., Cap. XCVIII, p. 287: “ … sed alia constat cognoscendi via, quae inter hanc & propheticam visionem media est, quae est adaequatio veritatis cum intellectu nostro purgato, veluti clavis cum sera, qui ut est veritatum omnium cupidissimus, ita intelligibilium omnium susceptivus est. Atque idcirco intellectus passibilis vocatur, quo etsi non pleno lumine percipimus ea, quae depromunt prophetae & hi qui ipsa divina conspexerunt, aperitur tamen nobis porta, ut ex conformitate veritatis perceptae, ad intellectum nostrum, & ex lumine, quod ex ipsis penetralibus apertis nos illustrat, multo certiores reddamur, quam ex philosophorum apparentibus demonstrationibus, defmitionibus, divisionibus & compositionibus, daturque nobis ut legamus & intelligamus, non oculis & auribus exterioribus, sed percipiamus melioribus sensibus, & ablato velamine & revelata facie hauriamus veritatem, a medulla sacrarum literarum emanentem, quam sub velaminibus tradiderunt hi. qui vero intuitu conspexerunt, quae a sapientibus huius mundi & philosophis cognitionibus abscondita est, eamque nos tanto certitudinis iudicio apprehendimus, ut omnis amoveatur perplexitas.” Agrippa's passible or passive intellect is not to be confused with the “possible intellect” of Aquinas and the other scholastics; a close parallel to it is Ficino's De Amore, Orat. 6, cap. 3, according to which the gods are immortal and impassible, men passible and mortal, and daemons immortal but passible; the passible intellect is thus common to men and daemons

67 I have quoted the Revised Standard Version; the Vulgate text of II Cor. 3:15-18 reads as follows: “Sed usque in hodiernum diem, cum legitur Moyses, velamen positum est super cor eorum. Cum autem conversus fuerit ad Dominum, auferetur velamen. Dominus autem Spiritus est: Ubi autem Spiritus Domini: ibi libertas. Nos vero omnes, revelata facie gloriam Domini speculantes, in eamdem imaginem transformamur a claritate in claritatem, tamquam a Domini Spiritu.“

68 Agrippa's model for this sort of interpretation is the Cabala: “Altera in ipsis sacris literis ipsius universi, & sensibilis mundi, totiusque naturae, ac mundanae fabricae vires, virtutesqueexquirit, quamexpositionemindephysicam, sivenaturalem appellant, inhac excelluit Rabbi Simeon, Ben Ioachim, qui super Leviticam amplissimum volumen scripsit, in quo pene omnium rerum naturas discutiens, ostendit quomodo Moyses secundum triplicis mundi convenientiam & rerum naturam arcam, tabernaculum, vasa, vestes, ritus, sacrificia, & reliqua mysteria ad Deum & virtutes caelestes placandas, & ad explicandam horum imaginem, hominem ordinavit, & hanc expositionem multi cabalistae sequuntur, illi videlicet, qui de Bereith, hoc est, de creatis tractant… (Agrippa, De vanitate, 288).

69 Ibid., 311-312:”…si divinam hanc & veram, non ligni scientiae boni & mali, sed ligni vitae sapientiam assequi cupitis, proiectis humanis scientiis, omnique carnis & sanguinis indagine atque discursu, qualescunque illae sint, sive in sermonum rationibus, sive in causarum perscrutationibus, sive in operum & effectuum meditationibus vagentur, iam non in scholis philosophorum & gymnasiis sophistarum, sed ingressi in vos- metipsos cognoscetis omnia: concreata est enim vobis omnium rerum notio quod (ut fatentur Academici) ita sacrae literae attestantur, quia creavit Deus omnia valde bona, in optimo videlicet gradu, in quo consistere possent: is igitur sicut creavit arbores plenas fructibus, sic & animas ceu rationales arbores creavit plenas formis & cognitionibus, sed per peccatum primi parentis velata sunt omnia, intravitque oblivio mater ignorantiae. Amovete ergo nunc, qui potestis, velamen intellectus vestri, qui ignorantiae tenebris involuti estis, evomite lethaeum poculum, qui vosmetipsos oblivione inebriastis, evigilate ad verum lumen, qui irrationabili somno demulcti estis, & mox revelata facie transcendetis de claritate in claritatem: uncti enim estis a sancto (ut ait Ioannes) & nostis omnia. & iterum: non necesse habetis, ut aliquis vos doceat, quia unctio eius docet vos de omnibus… . “

70 Ibid., Cap. CI, p. 305: “Atquehaec est ilia, nee ulla alia scientiarum deificatio, quam antiquus ille serpens huiusmodi deorum artifex primis parentibus pollicebatur, inquiens: Eritis sicut dii, scientes bonum et malum. In hoc serpente glorietur, qui gloriatur in scientia.” Thanks presumably to a printer's error, the 1575 edition ofjames Sanford's translation renders “deificatio” as “edification” in this passage; the error is perpetuated in Dunn, ed., Of the Vaniti'e 379.

71 Agrippa, De vanitate Cap. I, p. 3: “ … nee aliam nobis supra humanitatis metam afferre deitatis beatitudinem, nisi illam forte, quam antiquus ille serpens pollicebatur primis parentibus… . “

72 Ibid., p. 313: “O stulti & impii, quit posthabentes dona Spiritus sancti, laboratis, ut a perfidis Philosophis, & errorem magistris discatis ea, quae a Christo & Spiritu sancto suscipere deberetis. An putabitis vos posse ex Socratis ignorantia haurire scientiam?“

73 Ibid., pp. 313-314: “Sed revocate vosmetipsos qui veritatis cupidi estis, discedite ab humanarum traditionum nebulis, adsciscite verum lumen: vox ecce de caelo, vox de sursum docens, & sole clarius ostendens, quod vobis iniqui estis, & sapientiam suscipere cunctamini. Audite oraculum Baruch: Deus, inquit est, & non existimabitur alius ad ilium, hie adinvenit omnem viam disciplinae, & tradidit earn Iacob puero suo, & Israeli dilecto suo, dans legem & praecepta, atque ordinans sacrificia: post haec in terris visus est, & cum hominibus conversatus est, videlicet factus caro, & aperto ore docens, quae in lege, & Prophetis aenigmatice tradiderat. Et ne putetis ad divina duntaxat, & non etiam ad naturalia haec referri, audite quid de seipso testatur Sapiens: Ipse inquit, mihi dedit eorum, quae sunt, scientiam veram, ut sciam dispositiones orbis terrarum, & virtutes elementorum, initium, consummationem, mediatatem, & vicissitudines temporum, anni cursus, stellarum dispositiones, naturas animalium, iram bestiarum, vim ventorum, cogitationes hominum, differentias virgultorum, virtutes radicum, & quaecunque sunt abscondita & improvisa, didici: omnium enim artifex docuit me sapientiam.” The 1530 edition also reads “sapientiam.” Agrippa's quotation in this passage of the apocryphal book of Baruch 3:36-38 provides an example ofhis habitual freedom in dealing with scriptural texts. In the Vulgate this passage reads as follows: “Hie est Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius adversus eum. Hie adinvenit omnem viam disciplinae, et tradidit illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel dilecto suo. Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est.“

74 Agrippa, De vanitate, p. 314: “Hie est IESUS CHRISTUS, verbum, & filius Dei patris, & sapientia Deificans, verus magister, factus homo sicut sumus nos, uti nos perficeret filios Dei, sicut est ipse… . “

75 See De occulta philosophia, III.v, Opera, 1: 319-20. The fideism evident in this passage is also present in the 1510 version of De occulta philosophia; see Nauert, Agrippa 220.

76 Opera 2: Epistolarum Liber V.xiv, p. 873: “Sed, heus tu, qui sunt duces tui, quos sequeris? tu qui audes irremeabilem domum intrare Daedali, atque tremendi Minois ire per excubias, & te committere Parcis? Qui sunt magistri tui? … Cave, ne decipiare ab his qui fuerunt decepti.“

77 Henrici Cornelii AgrippaeabNettesheym… De occulta philosophialibritres, 1533, “Ad lectorem,” sig. aa ii: “Non dubito, quin titulus libri nostri de Occulta philosophia, sive de Magia, raritate sua quamplurimos alliciat ad legendum, inter quos nonnulli obliquae opinionis mente languidi, multi etiam maligni & in ingenium nostrum ingrati accedent, qui temeraria sua ignorantia magiae nomen in deteriorem partem accipientes, vix conspecto titulo clamabunt nos vetitas artes docere, haeresum semina iacere, pius auribus offendiculo, praeclaris ingeniis scandalo esse, maleficum ese, superstitiosum esse, daemoniacum esse, magus qui sim. Quibus si respondeam magum apud literatos viros non maleficum, non superstitiosum, non daemoniacum sonare, sed sapientem, sed sacerdotum, sed prophetam: Sibyllas magas fuisse, proinde de Christo tarn apertissime prophetasse: iam vero & magos ex mirabilibus mundi arcanis, ipsius mundi auctorem Christum cognovisse natum, omniumque primos venisse ad ilium adorandum, ipsumque magiae nomen acceptum philosophis, laudatum a theologis, etiam ipsi evangelio non ingratum. Credo ego istis tarn pertinacis supercilii censores Sibyllis & Sanctis magis, & vel ipso evangelio prius sibi interdicturos, quam ipsum magiae nomen recepturi sint in gratiam, adeo conscientiae suae consulentes, ut nee Apollo, nee Musae omnes, neque angelus de coelo me ab illorum execratione vendicare queant. Quibus & ego nunc consulo ne nostra scripta legant, nee intelligant, nee meminerint: nam noxia sunt, venenosa sunt, Acherontis ostium est in hoc libro, lapides loquitur, caveant ne cerebrum illis excutiat.” Agrippa continues, in words which I have paraphrased: “Quod shjua repereritis, quae vobis non placeant, mittite ilia, nee utimini: nam & ego vobis ilia non probo, sed narro. Caetera tamen propterea non respuite, nam & medicorum volumina inspicientibus contingit cum antidotis & pharmacis simul etiam venena legere. Fateor praeterea magiam ipsam multa supervacua, & ad ostentationem curiosa docere prodigia, simul haec ut vana relinquite, causas tamen illorum ne ignorate. Quae verb ad hominum utilitatem, ad avertendos malos eventus, ad destruendum maleficia, ad curandos morbos, ad exterminanda phantasmata, ad conservandam vitae, honoris, fortunae dexteritatem, sine dei offensa, sine religionis iniuria fieri possunt: quis ilia non tarn utilia censeat, quam etiam necessaria? Sed quia admonui vos, multa me narrando potius quam affirmando scripsisse: sic enim opus esse visum fuerat quo pauciora praeteriremus, multa insuper Platonicorum caeterorumque gentilium Philosphorum placita secuti sumus, ubi institute nostro scribendi suggerebant argumentum: ideo si alicubi erratum sit, sine quid liberius dictum, ignoscite adolescentiae nostrae, qui minor quam adolescens hoc opus composui, ut possim me excusare ac dicere, dum eram parvulus, loquebar ut parvulus: sapiebam ut parvulus, factus autem vir, evacuavi quae erant parvuli, ac in libro nostro de Vanitate ac incertitudine Scientiarum, hunc librum magna ex parte retractavi. Sed hie me iterum forte redarguetis inquientes: Ecce iuvenis scripsisti, & senex retractasti, ut quid ergo edidisti? Fateor iuvenis admodum hos libros scribere aggressus sum, spe tamen illos aliquando correctiores locupletioresque emissurus, atque ea causa Ioanni Tritemio abbati Peapolitano quondam Spanhemensi, viro arcanarum rerum admodum industrio, primum illos obtuli corrigendos. Contigit autem postea, ut interceptum opus, priusquam illi summam manum imposuissem, corruptis exemplaribus truncum & impolitum circumferretur, atque in Italia, in Gallia, in Germania, per multorum manus volitaret, iamque nonnulli impatientius nescio an impudentius, ipsum informe opus sub praelum exponere volebant, quo uno perculsus malo, ipse edere constitui, cogitans minus periculi fore, si libri isti paulo castigatiores mea manu prodirent, quam si laceri per incondita fragmenta invulgarentur per manus aliorum” (sig. aa iir-v).

78 Ibid. CCCLXI-CCCLXII: “lam itaque ex his quae dicta sunt, patet non aliud esse magiam, quam complexum idololatriae, astrologiae, superstitiosaeque medicinae. Iamque etiam a magis magna haereticorum caterva in ecclesia orta est, quit sicut lannes & Mambres restiterunt Moysi, sic illi restiterunt apostolicae veritati: horum princeps fuit Simon Samaritanus, qui Romae sub Claudio Caesare propter hanc artem statua donatus est, cum hac inscriptione; Simoni sancto deo. Eius blasphemias copiose narrant, ClerrTens, Eusebius, & Irenaeus. Ex hoc Simone tanquam ex haeresum omnium seminario, per multas successiones monstrosi Ophitae, turpes Gnostici, impii Valentiniani, Cerdoniani, Marcionistae, Montaniani, & multi alii haeretici prodierunt, propter quaestum & inanem gloriam, mentientes adversus deum, utilitatem nullam, neque beneficia hominibus praestantes, sed decipientes, & in perniciem & in errorem mittentes, & qui credunt illis confundentur in iudicio dei. Verum de magicis scripsi ego iuvenis adhuc, libros tres amplo satis volumine, quos de Occulta philosophia nuncupavi, in quibus quicquid tunc per curiosam adolescentiam erratum est, nunc cautior hac palinodia recantatum volo: permultum enim temporis & rerum, in his vanitatibus olim contrivi. Tandem hoc profeci, quod sciam quibus rationibus oporteat alios ab hac pernicie dehortari. Quicunque enim non in veritate, nee in virtute dei, sed in elusione daemonum, secundum opera tionem malorum spirituum, divinare & prophetare praesumunt, & per vanitates magicas exorcismos, incantationes, amatoria, agogima, & caetera opera daemoniaca, & idololatriae fraudes exercentes, praestigia & phantasmata ostentantes mox cessantia, miracula sese operari iactant: omnes hi cum Ianne & Mambre & Simone Mago aeternis ignibus cruciandi destinabuntur.” It should be remarked that nowhere in this passage does Agrippa deny the possibility of legitimate and non-demonic divination, prophesying, and miracle-working.

79 See Coggins, R.J., Samaritans and Jews: The Origins of Samaritanism Reconsidered (Oxford, 1975) 154-56Google Scholar, for a brief discussion of Samaritan messianic expectations. Two years after the confrontation between Simon and Saints Peter and Philip recorded in Acts 8, Pilate intervened to prevent the followers of a Samaritan prophet from gathering on Mount Gerizim, their holy place (Josephus, Antiquities, XVIII,iv. i). On the basis of this passage, R. M. Grant speculated that Simon may have been a messianic figure, “and that Gnostic reinterpretation arose out of the failure of his mission” (Gnosticism and Early Christianity [New York, 1966] 73).

80 Only the latter of these two works could have been known to Agrippa, but the main narrative contents of both are reported in a number of patristic texts, which were in turn used by medieval writers like Jacobus de Voragine. On Jacobus and his Legenda Aurea see Reames, Sherry L., The “Legenda Aurea“: A Reexamination of its Paradoxical History (Madison, 1985).Google Scholar

81 Giovanni Pico's opinion that the Recognitiones contained apostolic doctrine was quoted by Jacques Lefevre d'Etaples in the preface to his 1504 edition of the work; see Eugene F. Rice, ed., The Prefatory Epistles of Jacques Lefevre d'Etaples (New York, 1972) 117-18. Agrippa shared this opinion: see De occulta philosophia, III. xli (Opera 1:432-33). Others, especially Calvin, were more skeptical (cf. Calvin, Commentarius in Acta apostolorum, in Opera 48: VIII, also cols. 187-88).

82 Cf. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, 1.23; Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica, II. 1, 13-14 (the latter two chapters being largely derived from Irenaeus).

83 Recognitions, II. 7, in The Writings ofTatian and Theophilus; and the Clementine Recognitions, tr. B. P. Pratten, M. Dods, andT. Smith (Edinburgh, 1867) 196. S. dementis Romani Recognitions, Rufino Aquileiensi presb. interprete, II. 7, in J. P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Graeca 1 (Paris, 1857): col. 1251: “Simon hie, … gente Samareus ex vico Gethonum, arte magus, Graecis tamen litteris liberalibus apprime eruditus, gloriae ac jactantiae supra omne genus hominum cupidus, ita ut excelsam virtutem quae supra creatorem Deum sit, credit si velit, et Christum putari, atque Stantem nominari. Hac “sautem appellatione utitur quasi qui neget posse se aliquando dissolvi, asserens carnem suam ita divinitatis suae virtute compactam, ut possit in aeternum durare.“

84 Recognitions II. 12, trans. Pratten, et al., 199. Recognitiones II. 12, Migne, PG 1 col. 1254: “ … Simon accepit Lunam, cum qua usque ad praesens circuit, ut videtis decipiens turbas et asserens, semetipsum quidem virtutem esse quamdam, quae sit supra conditorem Deum, Lunam vero quae secum est, esse de superioribus coelis deductam, eamdemque cunctorum genitricem asserit sapientiam, pro qua, inquit, Graeci et barbari confligentes, imaginem quidem ejus aliqua ex parte videre potuerunt, ipsam vero ut est, penitus ignorarunt, quippe quae apud ilium primum omnium et solum habitaret Deum.“

85 Adversus haereses 1.23.

86 Recognitiones II.6, trans. Pratten et al., 196. Recognitiones II.6, Migne, PG I:col. 1251: “Quis enim est, qui non obstupescat super his, quae facit, mirabilibus, ut putet eum de coelis Deum ad salutem hominum descendisse?“

87 Acts of Peter, 32, in E. Hennecke, New Testament Apocrypha, ed. W. Schneemelcher, tr. R. McL. Wilson et al. (2 vols.; London, 1973-74) 2 : 316. Actus Petri cum Simone, XXXII, inR. A. Lipsius and M. Bonnet, eds., Acta apostolorumapocrypha (3 vols.; 1891- 1903; rpt. Hildesheim, 1959) 1:83: “en subito in alto visus est omnibus videntibus in tota urbe supra omnia templa et montes.“

88 On patristic representations of Simon Magus, see the sources listed in n. 19 above, and for further detail, K. Beyschlag, Simon Magus und die christliche Gnosis (Tubingen, 1974), and G. Ludemann, Untersuchungen zur simonianischen Gnosis (Göttingen, 1975). For examples of the use of Simon Magus by Renaissance demonologists, see Kramer and Sprenger, Malleus maleficarum, I, Qn. 10; II, Qn. 1, ch. 9;JohannGodelmann, Tractatus demagis, veneficisetlamiis… (Frankfurt, 1591), I.iii, p. 27;BenedictusPererius, Adversus fallaces et superstitiosas artes (Lyon, 1592), I.vi, pp. 40-41 (sig. C4V-C5).

89 See Richardson, E. C., “Faust and the Clementine Recognitions,” American Society of Church History, 6 (1894): 141-42Google Scholar. Frank Baron, who seems unaware of this article, believes that the historical Faustus, “bold as he was, seems to have stopped short of making such a dangerous identification” (Doctor Faustus from History to Legend [Munich, 1978] 86).

90 For an earlier example of Simon Magus being treated as an authority on magic, see Thorndike, Lynn, Michael Scot (London, 1965) 119-20.Google Scholar

91 Opera 1: 445-46: “ … nullum opus sit in tota mundi serie tarn admirabile, tarn excellens, tarn miraculosum, quod anima humana suam divinitatis imaginem complexa, quam vocant Magi animam stantem & non cadentem, sua propria virtute absque omni externo adminiculo non queat efficere. Forma igitur, totius magicae virtutis est ab anima hominis stante, & non cadente.“

92 Ibid., 443-44: “Quae igitur menti unita est anima, haec dicitur anima stans & non ““cadens: verum non omnes homines mentem adepti sunt, quoniam (ut inquit Hermes) voluit illam Deus pater tanquam certamen praemiumque animarum proponere: quod qui neglexerint mentis expertes, corporeis sensibus mancipati, irrationalibus animalibus similes facti, eundem cum eisdemsortiunturinteritum… . “ It seems to me certain that Agrippa knew what he was doing in making these allusions to Simon Magus: in De occulta philosophia, IH.xli, only three chapters earlier, he quotes at length both from the Recognitiones and from Irenaeus. The fact that the last sentence quoted in n. 91 above is an exact echo of the twelfth of Giovanni Pico's Conclusiones magicae (Opera omnia 1:105, sig. I 5) does not, I think, alter the Simonian tonality of the passage. However unexceptionable “stans et non cadens” might be in a theological context, in a magicial context it can only be a Simonian allusion.

93 Recognitiones II.58, trans. Pratten, et a1, 231. Migne, PC, 1: col. 1276: “Et Simon: Magnus sane labor est agnoscere eum homini in carne posito. Omnibus enim tenebris tetrius, et omni luto gravius est corpus hoc, quo circumdatur anima.“

94 Sébastien Castellion, De haereticis an sint persequendi, ed. Sapevander Woude(l554; facsimilerpt. Geneva, 1954), sig. F8-F8v (pp. 95-96), quoting ‘Augustinus Eleutherius’ (Sebastian Franck): “At de iis qui postea secuti sunt haereticis, nihil nisi mera nequitia et abominandae blasphemiae traduntur, sine ulla specie aut scriptura: sicut de Simone, de Mane, de Menandro, &c. quorum nonnulli se Deum aut Christum esse iactaverunt, & tam inepta tradiderunt, ut ego non possim credere, potuisse primos illos Christianos ab eis decepi, si tam crassae fuissent eorum haereses. Videtur Eusebius saepe, si quid probabile habuerunt, praetermisisse, ut solemus: si quern odisse coepimus, nihil nisi malum de eo dicere possumus: ut est in proverbio, Inimicum os nemini bene dicit. Scriptores ea aliquando de haereticis post eorum tempus scripserunt, quae vulgo ferrentur: sed credibile est, illos longe aliam speciem habuisse. Itaque credo multa eorum dicta esse inversa, multa etiam eis falso adscripta: aut bonis omissis, si quid mali erat, id esse decerptum atque auctum.“

95 Cf De vanitate, cap. 1, Opera 2:7.

96 Of the Vanitie, cap. 1, pp. 12-13. Opera 2: 3: “Astipulatur istis Platonica historia, Theutum quendam humano generi insensum daemonum scientias primum excogitasse, non minus offensivas, quam utiles… . “Agrippa is referring to Plato's Phaedrus, 274C- 275B. The Egyptian god Theut or Thoth was equated by Cicero with that Mercury who killed Argus, fled to Egypt, and gave laws and the art of writing to the Egyptians (De natura deorum, III.55); Lactantius, repeatiing this statement, identified Thoth-Mercury with Hermes Trismegistus (Institutiones divinarum, 1.6), an identification that is repeated by Ficino in his preface to Mercurii Trismegisti Pymander (Basle, 1532), sig. A2. Agrippa's attack on Theut-Hermes may be compared with that of Erasmus in Moriae encomium, cap. 32. For Agrippa's suggestion that the Ophites (along with other sects) were derived from the Cabalists, see De vanitate, cap. 47.

97 Henrie Cornelius Agrippa, of the Vanitieand Uncertaintie ofArtes and Sciences, tr. James Sanford (London, 1575), ‘to the Reader,” sig. f iiij.

98 W. W. Greg, ed. Marlowe's “Doctor Faustus” 1604-1616: Parallel Texts (1950; rpt. Oxford, 1968) 293 (1616 text, lines 2118-21).

99 Charles Adam and Paul Tannery, ed., Oeuvres de Descartes (12 vols.; 1897-1910; rpt. Paris, 1974) 10; 185: “il fut assez hardi pour se persuader que c'6toitl'Espritde Vgrite’ qui avoit voulu lui ouvrir les tr & ors de toutes les sciences par ce songe.” This quotation is from a paraphrase of Descartes’ early text Olympka (1619-1620) in A. Baillet's Vie de Monsieur Des-Cartes (1691). The Olympka manuscript, since lost, contained Descartes’ account of the dream-revelation of November 10, 1619 which was the inaugural moment of his original philosophical thinking. See Henri Gouhier, Les premiires pensies de Descartes: contribution a I'histoire de I'anti-Renaissance (Paris, 1958). The reader who compares (as Gouhier did not) the Descartes-Baillet account of this dream-revelation with the Hermetic texts discussed above cannot fail to be struck by the parallels between them, which suggest that Descartes’ experience followed a Hermetic paradigm.