In the late 14^th century, the philosopher Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola wrote an epic polemic against the practice of astrology. This work, entitled the Disputationes adversum astrologiam, was to become a great resource to those who sought to refute astrology in the generations following Pico’s. A number of factors contributed to Pico’s inspiration for creating his Disputationes, and it will be easier to understand those factors if we examine the philosophical and religious context of Pico’s life at the point of its writing; particularly in reference to his close friend and teacher, Marsilio Ficino.

In 15^th century Florence, a group of philosophers met regularly, in a more casual re-enactment of Plato’s Academy of ancient Greece. They called themselves the Academy as well, and found sponsorship from a patron known as the Cosimo de Medici. This group was led by the Neo-Platonist Marsilio Ficino, and Pico was the groups eminent (and subsequently most influential) member.

Both Ficino and Pico were interested in occult subjects, though they would not have defined them as such at the time. Pico was a student of the Cabala, though he combined Cabalistic ideas with those of Christianity and Neo-Platonism. Ficino’s use of astrology was heavily influenced by Neo-Platonism as well.

Ficino created his own form of astrology which he wrote much about in his lifetime. He practiced a very unique form of natural astrological magic, involving talisman creation based on planetary qualities assigned to earthly objects, such as plants and minerals. Pico, however, did not practice any kind of astrology, and towards the end of his life, he wrote one of the most influential ant-astrological works in history. Why did Pico come out against astrology so vehemently when his teacher, Ficino, was a proponent of some forms of it?

The two men had very similar philosophical outlooks, but as we examine the differences in their approach to astrology, subtle differences in their philosophical doctrines become very relevant. Understanding these differences in thought is integral to understanding why the two approached astrology from different angles. However, as we will discover, philosophical reasons alone were not the inspiration for Pico’s attack against astrology.

Ficino and his worldview

Ficino was a physician, priest, and philosopher. He was influenced greatly by Neo Platonism and an obsession with ancient Greece.

Ficino believed in a hierarchical structure of the world. The Neo-Platonic idea that all of creation had emanated from God was central to his worldview, and his cosmology consisted of the concept of planetary spheres wherein outer heavenly spheres were more perfect than the lower spheres which contained the moon and the earth. In this cosmology, all of that which was on the earth moved in sympathy to those objects (planets and comets) which traversed the heavenly spheres, and each of God’s creations (plants, people, animals) contained some part of God himself.

In addition, Ficino believed that individual souls could receive a connection to the perfect celestial sphere via vibrations carried on stellar rays. This is an astrological theory originating in Arabic thought, and Ficino’s acceptance of it displays his level of study.

Because of this worldview, his use of natural magic and astrological correspondences was acceptable to Ficino. Believing that the perfect stars had some power over activity below, and that the stellar rays carrying vibrations from the world soul could contact the souls of individuals, he prescribed uses for astrological (natural) magic. Items on earth, such as minerals and plants, contain qualities of the planets. Through careful combining of these objects into amulets and talismans, humans could increase the wellbeing of their individual souls.

For Ficino, these concepts had little, if anything, to do with Free Will. Believing that the celestial bodies had an influence over physical matter was unrelated to the soul’s ability to make choices on its path. In addition, Ficino didn’t practice or support any sort of astrology which predicted the future and thus affected Free Will.

Pico

Pico is known as one of the most influential Renaissance philosophers. Though his life was short and Ficino’s role was also very important, one striking philosophical development, attributed to Pico, did much to affect the art and literature of the Renaissance, as well as the progression of philosophy thereafter.

We can understand Pico’s philosophy of man’s place in the world by comparing it to Ficino’s classically Neo-Platonic hierarchical structure. Where Ficino believed that man was below the heavens, Pico believed that the heavens, and all of God’s creations, were intertwined on the same level. This idea was integral to another closely related idea – that every man had the possibility and expression of divinity within him.

Some excerpts from Pico’s works can help clarify this concept.

In this passage from Pico’s work Heptaplus, we find him describing the relationship of “three worlds.” The “three worlds,” in Pico’s cosmology, are God (the outermost world, unifying all within it), the celestial world (the heavenly spheres), and the elemental world (the natural world). Regardless of these definitions of separate worlds, he goes on to say:

“It should above all be observed, a fact on which our purpose almost wholly depends, that these three worlds are one world, not only because they are all related by one beginning and to the same end, or because regulated by appropriate numbers they are bound together both by a certain harmonious kinship of nature and by a regular series of ranks, but because whatever it is in any of the worlds is at the same time contained in each and there is no one of them in which is not to be found whatever is in each of the others.”[i]

This outlook, that the world of God was the same as any other part of existence, led to an understanding that all of existence served to symbolize God. And so it follows that man himself is a symbol of the divinity of God. This concept had a huge influence in the philosophical and artistic world of the Renaissance – if this was the case, then man could express the divine through his actions and intellect.

A excerpt from Pico’s most famous work, the Oration on the Dignity of Man, clarifies the possibilities which were open to this new divine form of man. This oft-quoted passage is Pico’s interpretation of what God said to Adam upon his creation:

``We have given you, O Adam, no visage proper to yourself, nor endowment properly your own, in order that whatever place, whatever form, whatever gifts you may, with premeditation, select, these same you may have and possess through your own judgment and decision. The nature of all other creatures is defined and restricted within laws which We have laid down; you, by contrast, impeded by no such restrictions, may, by your own free will, to whose custody We have assigned you, trace for yourself the lineaments of your own nature. I have placed you at the very center of the world, so that from that vantage point you may with greater ease glance round about you on all that the world contains. We have made you a creature neither of heaven nor of earth, neither mortal nor immortal, in order that you may, as the free and proud shaper of your own being, fashion yourself in the form you may prefer. It will be in your power to descend to the lower, brutish forms of life; you will be able, through your own decision, to rise again to the superior orders whose life is divine.[ii]

This subtle but infinitely important difference between the philosophy of Pico and Ficino is one of the reasons we can find that their views on astrology differed. However, it wasn’t philosophy which sparked Pico’s eventual outcry against the astrologers who were practicing at the time.

Astrology’s role

Because of Pico’s belief that man contained all of God, and thus, all of existence, the role of the planets takes on a completely different meaning, one unlike Ficino’s view that the planets are more perfect than the earth. In the words of [author]:

If man contains the whole universe and is also the possessor of a completely separate mind, it is quite impossible that anything in the cosmos can have an influence on him. Because of this philosophy, it is impossible for Pico to subscribe, as Ficino did, to even the milder doctrines of the astrologers.

When we talk about astrology’s role in the worldview of these two philosophers, it’s important to discern what type of astrology we are referring to. The brand of astrology favored by Ficino was a rather unique form of astrological magic, based on correspondences between planets and earthly minerals and actions. This is not too far off from the Cabalistic interest in correspondences that Pico favored, though there is no evidence of Pico ascribing to Ficino’s ideas of astrological correspondences.

Neither Pico nor Ficino were supporters of judicial astrology. Judicial astrology of the time included all forms of predictive astrology, and was quite popular among the general population, and especially among royalty. Any type of astrology which involved the predicting of any event or outcome was not only incompatible with their philosophical convictions, but came in direct conflict with their religious convictions as well.

So, when Pico wrote his Disputationes, he was not attacking Ficino’s astrological magic – though he didn’t ascribe to such use of magic himself. Rather, he was attacking divinatory astrology, that which claims to predict the future. All types of predictive astrology (known as ‘judicial astrology’) came under fire from Pico.

Pico’s attack

The Disputationes is Pico’s lengthiest work. It consists of 12 books, each of which is dedicated to debunking a different aspect of astrological practice. The text draws from past known opponents of astrology – most notably St. Augustine. The sheer thoroughness of the disputation is impressive, and its resonating effect on later generations was great.

Among his arguments against astrology were the following:

- He points out that the ancient philosophers (who were highly revered in philosophical circles), such as Seneca, Cicero, and Democritus did not ascribe to astrology.

- He draws on Ptolemy’s reasoning for the errors of the calculations of astrologers, and generally dissects the disparate techniques used by astrologers, in order to show the lack of consistency (and thus, accuracy) in the field.

- He disputes the belief of the stars as causes, using his doctrine of the sky as a universal cause rather than a particular cause.

- After disputing astrology’s function as a science, he rejects that it can be an art, either.

The intricacies of these arguments, as they were laid out in the Disputationes, served many future generations, as an extensive encyclopedia of arguments against astrology.

There is a surprising twist to the history of Pico’s rejection of judicial astrology. Despite the philosophical incompatibility of astrological concepts with Pico’s worldview as it has been described above, Pico’s famous attack on judicial astrology, was inspired by religious conviction more than anything else.

At the beginning of his career as a philosopher, Pico issued 900 hundred theses and invited anyone to come challenge them in a public forum. Due to the content of a number of these theses, he found himself under an investigation by a committee appointed by the Pope himself. The committee found 13 of the theses to be theologically objectionable, and rejected Pico’s defense of them.[iii] He was imprisoned for some time over the matter, and the formal charge of heresy was not lifted until only one year before his early death at the age of 33. Towards the end of his life, Pico was deeply troubled by his inability to be accepted within the church, for he was, after all, a devoted Christian. [iv]

During the last years of his life, Pico came under the influence of a vociferous and dedicated preacher named Girolamo Savonarola. Under Savonarola’s guidance, Pico began to prepare himself to participate in the order of Dominican monks.[v] It appears that the Disputationes was intended to be only one part of an enormous work planned by Pico – a work that would serve as evidence of his Christian devotion, in the face of a lifetime of living under the charge of heresy [vi]. This projected work was going to be an exhaustive polemic against various enemies of the Church, not simply an attack on astrology, but also an attack on non-believers, pagans, heretics, and more.

So, Pico Della Mirandola’s Disputationes turns out to have been borne of many complex inputs. His study of philosophy, his relationship with the Florentine Academy, his own struggle with guilt of heresy, as well as the influence of the devoted monk Savonarola. Pico’s creation of this work, as well as the events leading up to it, make a wonderful lens through which to interpret the worldview of the members of the Platonic Academy. In addition, Pico (and Ficino’s) worldviews and life’s work were incredibly influential to future generations of philosophers.

---

[i] Pico’s Heptaplus, excerpted here:

http://ls.poly.edu/~jbain/mms/handouts/mmspico.htm

[ii] Picos’ Oration on the Dignity of Man, internet source:

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/Mirandola/

[iii] Kristeller, Paul Oskar. Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance. Stanford University Press, 1964, pp 56

[iv] Allen, Don Cameron. The Star Crossed Renaissance, Duke University, 1943. pp 21.

[v] ibid

[vi] It should be noted that there is an apparent schism among scholars surrounding Pico’s reasons for writing the Disputationes. Paul Oskar Kristeller, who did much research and publishing surrounding the Italian Renaissance philosophers, had this to say about Pico’s occult influence and his interest in magic and the Cabala: “we must face the fact that he accepted natural magic.” He went on to describe the Disputationes as a work which “has often been hailed by modern historians as a landmark in the struggle of science against superstition.” Comments like these, among others in his work, display Kristeller’s obvious bias against astrology, though he does seem to show quite a bit of respect for Ficino and Pico regardless of their superstitious interests. However, we can assume that his own opinions surrounding astrology are what caused him to completely disregard the idea that Pico’s work may have been very much influenced by his friendship with Savonarola, formed just before Pico began writing the Disputationes. Savonarola was a dedicated religious reformer, and not only may have been the influence which caused the extreme vehemence of the Disputationes, but may have edited the work after Pico’s early death.

Bibliography:

Books:

Whitfield, Peter. Astrology: A History. Harry N Abrams; 2001

Tester, Jim. A History of Western Astrology. New York, Ballantine Books, c. 1987

Allen, Don Cameron. The Star Crossed Renaissance, Duke University, 1943.

Kristeller, Paul Oskar. Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance. Stanford University Press, 1964

Internet:

Kreis, Stephen, 2004

http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/pico.html

Hooker, Richard. Pico Della Mirandola, 1996:

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/REN/PICO.HTM

Magic, Medicine, and Science Homepage

http://ls.poly.edu/~jbain/mms/index.html