We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2019
Among the philosophers of the sixteenth century who deserve wider attention than they have hitherto received is Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola (1469- 1533).x As nephew and near contemporary of the more famous member of the Pico family, Giovanni (1463-1494), he has often been obscured by his uncle's brilliance and originality in the eyes of later scholars. His own work as a philosopher, however, is not without interest, both for its content and for its historical importance.
Gianfrancesco Pico was a man of many interests and his personal life was filled with enough exciting episodes to make it sometimes seem more like fiction than fact. Widely praised by his contemporaries as a poet, humanist, and scholar, he was friend and correspondent to some of the foremost figures of his time.2 It will be my purpose here to determine what, if any, philosophical influence his works had on thinkers of the sixteenth and early seventeenth century.
1 Although there are no adequate or even very substantial treatments of either Gianfrancesco's life or thought, material concerning him is to be found in a large number of very widely scattered sources, only the most important of which can be mentioned here. The only general monograph devoted to him is the out-of-date but still useful Richardi Bartoli Minoritae Injoannem Franciscum Picum … Allocutio (Bononiae, 1793). Important are the many studies of Felice Ceretti in several Italian journals of local history. Particuarly valuable for the best survey of bibliography up to that date is ‘Gianfrancesco II’ in his Biografie Pichensi (Mirandola, 1909), II, 43-51; an older but still useful general survey “is Tiraboschi, Girolamo, Biblioteca Modenese ... (Modena, 1781-1786), iv, 108–122 Google Scholar. For Pico's religious position see Corsano, Antonio, IlPensiero religiose* italiano(Bari, 1937), pp. 54–64.Google Scholar On his philosophy, the most useful treatments are to be found in Strowski, Fortunat, Montaigne (Paris, 1906), pp. 124–134 Google Scholar; Cassirer, Ernst, Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie mid Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit(2d ed., Berlin, 1911), 1, 145–149 Google Scholar; Garin, Eugenio, La Pilosofia(Milano, 1947), II, 72–77.Google Scholar See also Charles B. Schmitt, ‘Henry of Ghent, Duns Scotus, and Gianfrancesco Pico on Illumination', in Mediaeval Studies xxv (1963), 231-258.
2 Among his correspondents in Italy were Savonarola, Ficino, Poliziano, Aldo Manuzio, Ludovico Ariosto, Pietro Bembo, and Sadoleto; beyond the Alps were Faber Stapulensis, Conrad Celtes, Emperor Maximilian, Pirckheimer, and Reuchlin.
3 Certain influences of Pico have already been noted by Garin, Walker, Thorndike, and Gregory in their writings cited in the present study. Some of the other influences are perhaps considered for the first time.
4 Op. cit., pp. 124-134.
5 Villey, Pierre, Les Sources et revolution des essais de Montaigne (Paris, 1908), II, 166, 324–325.Google Scholar
6 Popkin, Richard H., The History of Scepticism from Erasmus to Descartes(Assen, 1960).Google Scholar This book, rich in bibliography and doctrinal analysis, treats Gianfrancesco on pp. 19-22.
7 The full title of the work is Examen vanitatis doctrinae gentium et veritatis Christianae disciplinae: distinctum in libros sex, quorum tres omnem philosophorum sectam universim: reliqui Aristoteleam et Aristoteleis armis particulatim impugnant: ubicunque autem Christiana et asseritur et celebratur disciplina. The work was first printed in 1520 by the press at Mirandola and appeared afterward in the Opera of 1573 and 1601. It is one of only two books printed at Mirandola, not the only one, as Popkin says (op. cit., p. 19). On the press at Mirandola see F.J. Norton, Italian Printers 1501-1520, an Annotated List,withanlntroduction (London, W^i P- 53. Despite its being printed at the small local press of Mirandola, this edition is by no means excessively rare, even today. Besides the copy listed in the printed catalogue of the British Museum many copies are to be found, particularly in the libraries of Italy.
8 For a recent survey of the life and works of Nizolio and an ample bibliography see Quirinus Breen's introduction (pp. i-lxxiv) to his edition of Mario Nizolio, De veris principiis et vera ratione philosophandi contra pseudophilosophos (Rome, 1956).
9 Breen, op. cit., I, xxiii-xxvi.
10 Marii Nizolii De veris principiis et vera ratione philosophandi contra pseudophilosophos, libri IV. Insiripti illustrissimo Baroni a Boineburg ab editore G.G.L.L. qui dissertationempraeliminarem de instituto operis atque optima philosophi dictione, epistolam de Aristotle recentioribus recondiliabili, notasque atque animadversiones marginales leniendo textui, adjecit [Francofurti, 1670]. It was reprinted four years later with only the title page altered. For recent study of this work, besides Breen, see Paolo Rossi, ‘La celebrazione della rettorica e la polemica antimetafisica nel “De Principiis” di Mario Nizolio’ in La Crisi dell'uso dogmatico della ragione a cura di Antonio Banfi (Roma-Milano, 1953), pp. 99-121.
11 Breen, op. cit., 1, 21-30.
12 Ibid., II, 165-175. Chapter 6 of book IV.
13 Ibid., II, 175. Here are quoted the precise titles of chapters 4 and 5 of book rv of the Examen vanitatis. See Ioannis Francisci Pici Mirandulae Domini... Opera quae extant omnia … (Basileae, 1601), pp. 668-674. All subsequent references to the works of Gianfrancesco Pico are to this edition unless otherwise stated.
14 On Pico's use of sceptical arguments see Strowski, Cassirer, Garin, Popkin, and Schmitt, op. cit.
15 This occupies the entire fifth book of the Examen vanitatis (pp. 692-760).
16 Little attention has been given this man by modern scholars. Some information is available in Opuscoli volgari di Messer Giulio Castellani editi e inediti pubblicati per cura di F[rancesco] Z[ambrini] F[aentino] (Faenza, 1847), pp. vii-xxi, Montanari, Antonio, Gli uomini illustri di Faenza(Faenza, 1882-1883)Google Scholar, 1, par. 1, 63-66, and Garin, op. cit., II, 39-43.
17 The full title of this work, which was printed at Bologna for the first, and apparently only, time, is Iulii Castellanii Faventini adversus M. Tullii Ciceronis Academicas questiones disputatio, qua omnium pene philosophorum opinio de percipienda veritate comprehenditur, et Aristotelis prae omnibus celebratur philosophia.
18 Ibid., pp. 19-24.
19 ‘Qui omnes [i.e., dogmatici] rectius quidem, meo iudicio, quam Sceptici, fuerunt philosophati… hie enim argumentorum omnium, quae a Scepticis afferuntur, acervum facere non devrevimus, sed Ciceronis rationes tantum refellere, eisque Aristoteleo quodam more respondere’ (ibid., pp. 34-35).
20 Ibid., chapter x, pp. 93-103. The title is ‘Confirmantur Luculli dicta de sensuum perspicuitate et Ioannis Francisci Pici argumentis respondetur, quae Aristotelis philosophiam videntur destruere'.
21 I have not been able to identify the source of this. Less information is available on Pier Nicola than on Giulio Castellani. See, however, Antonio Montanari, op. tit., I, par. II, pp. 61-62.
22 De anima 427b11-13.
23 Castellani, op. tit., pp. 95-96.
24 Ibid., p. 97. Such arguments are to be found throughout Pico's work. Perhaps one of the most characteristic statements is in chapter 12 of book iv of the Exatnen vanitatis (p. 687). See also chapter 22 of book II (pp. 560-564).
25 Pico treats this in chapters 2 and 3 of book v of the Examen vanitatis (pp. 695-707).
26 Gabriele Falloppia or Falloppio (1523-1562) was of course the famous Italian student of Vesalius and one of the foremost anatomists of his time. He was professor of anatomy at Padua from 1551 until his death. On his particular contributions to the study of the anatomy of the eye see Giuseppe Ovio, Storia deVoculistica (Cuneo, 1950), 1, 241, 243, 259, 260, etc. For the details of his career see G. Favaro, Gabriele Falloppia, Modenese (Modena, 1928).
27 Castellani, op. cit., p. 99.
28 ‘Cum ergo sensoria naturalem suam in cunctis hominibus et semper temperationem conservent, profecto sensus vera et certa, quod ad eos attinet, pronunciare poterunt: quoniam tametsi aliquantulum eorum organa mutentur: non tamen proprium et naturale ipsorum temperamentum variabitur, ac de illis perinde evenire crediderim, ut de cerebro accidit.… Ita profecto sensuum instrumenta in diversis hominibus ac in iisdem diversis temporibus aliquantulum in suo naturali temperamento intendi ac remitti possunt. Verum eiusmodi mutatio tantas non habebit vires, ut diversas fallacesque sensuum operationes reddere possit.’ (Ibid., pp. 100-101.)
29 Ibid., p. 102.
30 Ibid., pp. 102-103.
31 Ibid., p. 170.
32 See Popkin, op. cit., pp. 21 ff. Although there are translations of Sextus which date from an earlier period, they do not seem to have been much used. See for example Clemens Baeumker, ‘Eine bisher unbekannte mittelalterliche lateinische Uebersetzung der 
des Sextus Empiricus', Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie iv (1890-1891), 574.
33 The first Latin translations of Sextus’ works appeared in 1562 and 1569. The Greek text was not printed until 1621. See the discussion of the translations below. For further information see Popkin, op. cit., pp. 17-18.
34 On this point see Hermann Mutschmann, ‘Die Uberlieferung der Schriften des Sextus Empiricus', Rheinisches Museumfur Philologie Lxrv (1909), 244-283, 478, who lists and describes most of the extant manuscripts of Sextus. For a few additions not known to Mutschmann see Popkin, op. cit., pp. 17-18, esp. II. 3, p. 17.
35 For a recent survey of these arguments and ample bibliographical notations see Neal Ward Gilbert, Renaissance Concepts of Method (New York, 1960).
36 See n. 7.
37 For the extent of this influence see Popkin, op. cit.
38 The Latin translation of the Outlines of Pyrrhonism which first appeared in 1562 at Paris.
39
Sexti Empirici … Adversus mathematicos … Gentiano Herveto Aurelio interprete … Eiusdem Sexti Pyrrhoniarum
libri tres … interprete Henrico Stephano … (Parisiis, 1569), fol. a2v.
40 A number of interesting examples on the various attitudes toward this question are given in Popkin, op. cit.
41 He does this neatly in Examen vanitatis II, I (p. 537). The word iudicatorium, although rather rare, had been used to render 
at least once before (Aristotle, Metaphysics, 1063a3). See Sancti Thomae Aquinatis … Opera omnia (Parmae, 1852-1869), xx, 496a, 1.4 This is the translatio antiqua of Aristotle.
42 Sextus Empiricus, op. cit., p. 498. Also see p. 574a for Estienne's considerations on the various possibilities for translating 
43 For example, see the marginal notes on pp. 120-121.
44 See however the work of Bernardi discussed below, which retains Pico's term.
45 The work occupies nine books and is the second longest of Gianfrancesco's writings, being surpassed in length only by the Examen vanitatis.
46 On the De rerum praenotione see Thorndike, Lynn, A History of Magic and Experimental Science(New York, 1923-1958), vi, 467 Google Scholar; Walker, D. P., Spiritual and Demonic Magic from Ficino to Campanella(London, 1958), pp. 146–151 Google Scholar; Corsano, op. cit., pp. 54-64.
47 See Farner, Oskar, Huldrych Zwingli, seine Entwicklung zum Reformator 1506-1520 (Zurich, 1946), 11 Google Scholar, 122, 136.
48 For Champier still indispensable is Allut, P., E\ude biographique et bibliographique sur Symphorien Champier(Lyon, 1859)Google Scholar. For his anti-occult activity see Thorndike, op. cit., v, 111-126.
49 He was responsible for the publication of an anthology which contained Gianfrancesco's translation of a work attributed to Justin Martyr. See Allut, op. cit., pp. 153-156, where this publication is described. The ‘Justini philosophi et martyris christiani admonitorius gentium’ is Gianfrancesco's translation. The work is also sometimes called Cohortatio ad Graecos, for example in Johannes Quasten, Patrology (Utrecht, 1950-1953), 1, 198. The translation appears to have been first printed at Strasbourg in Pico's Opera of 1507. It was reprinted several times thereafter, remaining a standard translation of the pseudo-Justin work for most of the sixteenth century.
50 On Pico's and Champier's criticisms of Pietro d'Abano see Thorndike, op. cit., v, 121-122 and Bruno Nardi, ‘Le dottrine fdosofiche di Pietro d'Abano’ in Saggi sull'aristotelismo padovano dal secolo XIV al XVI (Firenze, 1958), esp. pp. 23-25, 27-39.
51 Sec for example De rerum praenotione, III, 4 (299-302); IV, 9 (329-330); VII, 7 (433- 436); Examen vanitatis 1, 12 (505); iv, 6 (676).
52 It was printed during the century at least six times, at Venice in 1521, 1522, 1526, 1548, 1565, and at Pavia in 1523.
53 On Wier and his work see Walker, op. cit., pp. 152-156; Thorndike, op. cit., vi, 515-517. For a brief summary of his life and further bibliography see Nieuw Nederhndsch Biografisch Woordenboek (Leiden, 1911-1937), x, coll. 1190-1191.
54 Ioannis Wierii De praestigiis daemonum et incantationibus ac veneficiis libri sex, postrema editione sexta audi et recogniti. Accessit liber apologeticus et pseudomonarchia daemonum (Basileae, 1583), coll. 147, 534; cf. De reum praenotione, VII, 5 & 6 (425-433).
55 Ibid., col. 155; cf. De reum praenotione, iv, 9 (329-330).
56 M Ibid., col. 149; cf. De reum praenotione, VII, 5 (425-428).
57 Ibid., coll. 159, 213, 538, etc.
58 Ibid., p. 5. Besides what is said in the De rerumpraenotione and other works, Pico also composed a dialogue on the subject, Dialogus in tres libros divisus: titulus est Strix sive de ludificatione daemonum . . ., first printed at Bologna in 1523. It was reprinted in 1612 and was twice translated into Italian; one translation appeared in 1524 and was reprinted in 1556, the other appeared in 1555 and was reprinted in 1864. The work is accorded brief discussion in Eugenio Camerini, Nuovi profili letterari (Milano, 1876), pp. 86-92.
59 Wierius, op. cit., col. 359. At the beginning of chapter 31 of book in, entitled Delusionis venereae diaboli historiae, et causa longioris tractationis huius argumenti', Wier says: ‘Delusionis huius et fallaciae diabolicae duo adhuc exempla adijciam ex illustri philosopho Francisco Mirandula. Agnovi (inquit) virum nomine Benedictum Bernam, aetatis annorum septuagintaquinque: eundemque sacerdotem ex his quos presbyteros vocant, qui annis plus quam quadraginta cum daemone familiari sub forma foeminae illi associato concumbebat, in forum deducebat alloquebatur, adeo ut astantes qui nihil videbant, eum pro fatuo haberent. Vocabat autem illam Hermelinam, quasi mulier esset. Alium quoque Pinnetum (ait) nomine novi, qui ad octoginta et amplius annos pervenerat, cum daemone alio, qui muliebri forma ei videbatur, vocabatque eum Florinae nomine, plus quadraginta annis venereas voluptates exercuisse. Sed is, dum haec scriberem, vivebat: alter poenas iam dederat, confessus arcana se in sacrificio non protulisse, consecratum vero munus mulierculis ad veneficia praebuisse, pueris sanguinem exuxisse, atque alia eiusmodi gravia scelera: tormentorum tamen vi, ne iocum fuisse credas.’ The story is summarized from a discussion in Pico's dialogue, cf. Dialogus in tres libros … . (Bononiae, 1523), sig. E2v-Fr.
60 On Bodin's interest in occult philosophy see Friedrich von Bezold, ‘Jean Bodin als Okkultist und seine Demonomanie’ in Aus Mittelalter und Renaissance (Miinchen-Berlin, 1918), pp. 294-328; Walker, op. cit., pp. 171-178; Thorndike, op. cit., vi, 525-527.
61 De la Demonomanie des sorciers … (Paris, 1580).
62 Demonomanie, fol. e3r . Gianfrancesco wrote a work entitled De animae immortalitate digressio (Bononiae, 1523). It was reprinted in 1541 and 1553.
63 Ibid., fols. eIv, 107p.
64 Ibid., fol. 209v.
65 Piccioli is rather an obscure figure who is identified by Thorndike (op. cit., v, 261) with a professor at Bologna active in 1530-1531. His work was not printed, however, until 1587 with the following title: Antonii Piccioli … seu Rapiti Renovati, Cenetensis iurisconsulti… De manus inspectione libri tres (Bergamo, 1587).
66 De manus inspectione (3r).
67 Whose work De vanitate scientiarutn (1530) is specifically referred to, although Gianfrancesco Pico's similar Examen vanitatis is not mentioned. Agrippa is characterized as ’ … non tantum occultas, quibus antea ipsemet tribus libris ex professo subscripserat, sed universas Philosophias sub vanitatis titulo, Salomonem forte in Ecclesiaste imitatus, con-culcare non dubitavit’ (3r).
68 Ibid., 3V.
69 Both Cardano and Giovanni Pico accept some occult sciences and reject others. On Cardano's view see Thorndike, op. cit., v, 563-579. For Giovanni Pico it is sufficient to mention the difference in his attitude toward magic in the Oratio and that toward astrology in the Adversus astrologiam. Agrippa's attitude is even more ambiguous, for although he wrote a scathing attack on ‘the vanity of sciences', his own viewpoint shows strong influences from the occultist tradition.
70 My attention was called to this passage by Wind, Edgar, Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance (New Haven, 1958), p. 53.Google Scholar
71 For Harvey's interest in humanism and his proximity to the thought of the continental humanists see P. Albert Duhamel, ‘The Ciceronianism of Gabriel Harvey', Stud, in Philology XLIX (1952), 155-170.
72 For the details of the translation see S. E. Lehmberg, ‘Sir Thomas More's Life of Pico della Mirandola', Studies in the Renaissance III (1956), 61-74.
73 The Works of Gabriel Harvey D. C. L., ed. A. B. Grosart (London, 1884), I, 64-65. This is a reprint of Harvey's Three Proper and wittie, familiar Letters (London, 1580). The description that Harvey gives of Pico refers of course to the uncle. He apparently confused the two, as many after him have done.
74 On Mazzoni see Garin, op. cit., n, 88-89 and Giuseppe Rossi, ‘Jacopo Mazzoni e l'ecletticismo filosofico nel Rinascimento', Rendiconti della R. Accademia del Lincei, Classedi scienze morali, storiche efilologiche, ser. v, II (1893), 163-183.
75 Gianfrancesco specifically says several times that he does not intend to show the basic agreement of all philosophy as his uncle attempted to do. Rather, he tried to do the opposite, to show the constant struggles and disagreements between the various schools. For example, he says, ‘Mihi autem venit in mentem consentaneum magis esse et utile magis, incerta reddere philosophorum dogmata, quam conciliare, ut patruus volebat' (Examen vanitatis I, 2 [486]).
76 Iacobi Mazonii … De triplici hominutn vita, activa, netnpe, contemplativa et religiosa methodi tres … (Cesenae, 1577) and Iacobi Mazonii… in universam Phtonis et Aristotelis philosophiam praeludia sive de comparatione Platonis et Aristotelis (Venetiis, 1597).
77 Sextus Empiricus was by that time published and other arguments about the legitimacy of the Aristotelian corpus could easily have come from Diogenes Laertius and other sources.
78 Pico's argument is to be found in the work De providentia Dei contra philosophastros (Novi, 1508). This work, which is not in the Opera of 1573 or 1601, was reprinted in 1509 and c. 1615. His conclusion is ‘Igitur si quas voluerint causas assignare philosophastri ut providentiam tollant, aut eas quas per se, aut per accidens esse censentur assignaverint necesse est (neque enim alias est reperiri) … .’ (fol. F4v).
79 De triplici hominum vita . . ., fol. 362'.
80 Of the scanty information available on Bernardi, perhaps best, but by no means satisfactory, is Gianmaria Mazzuchelli, Gli scrittori d'ltalia … (Brescia, 1753-1763), 11, 966-967.
81 The full title of the work is Seminarium totius philosophiae: opus sane admirabile, et omni eruditorum generi perquam utile: quod Platonis ac Aristotelis eorundemque interpretum tarn Graecorum, quam Latinorum ac etiam Arabum questiones, conclusions, sententiasque omnes integras et absolutas miro ordine digestas complectitur; ut quivis uno intuitu et sine ullo labore, quicquid unquam a summis sapientiae magistris dictum fuit perspicere et corum opera omnia in unum velut locum collecta habere possit. Nunc etiam nova appendice infinitisque theorematibus ex antiquorum philosophorum et universa Avicennae logica ac philosophia collectis, auctum et locupletatum. The first edition appeared in Venice in 1582-1585.
82 According to Mazzuchelli (op. cit., II, 966), it was printed three times at Venice and once at Lyon. Although no copy is listed in the British Museum catalogue, that of the Bibliotheque Nationale lists three copies and there is one at the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale in Florence.
83 Ioannis Baptistae Bernardi… Seminarium … (Venetiis, 1599), I, fol. 3v-4r . The pagination refers to the copy in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Florence. The list is included in volume 1, but refers to volume m. I do not know whether all of the copies of the Venice, 1599 edition are bound in this way or whether it is a peculiarity of this copy. All further references are to this copy.
84 Ibid., III, fol. 54v b-55ra ; 21 entries.
85 Ibid., III, fol. 184vb - 185ra ; 11 entries.
86 Ibid., III, fol. 133va-133vb ; 4 entries.
87 Ibid., III, fol. 289ra, 290va-290vb, 291va, 292rb; 15 entries.
88 Ibid., III, fol. 285ra ; 2 of 3 entries cited.
89 Ibid., III, fol. 318ra - 319rb ; 8 entries.
90 Ibid., III, fol. 59ra-59rb ; 11 entries.
91 Ibid., III, fol. 116vb-117ra ; 4 entries.
92 Ibid., III, fol. 196va; 4 entries.
93 Ibid., III, fol. 257vb-258rb ; 28 of 28 entries.
94 Ibid., III, fol. 165ra-165rb; 14 of 34 entries. The majority of these refer of course to Gianfrancesco's short treatise De imaginatione, which was probably first published in 1501. It was later reprinted in 1507, 1536, 1573, 1588, and 1601. It appeared in a French translation in 1557 and this was reprinted in 1577. For further information see Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola On the Imagination, the Latin text with an introduction, an English translation, and notes by Harry Caplan (New Haven, 1930). The introduction, found on pp. 1-10, is a useful aid to the study of the work.
95 For a general discussion of Beni's life and works see Mazzuchelli, op.cit.,a, 842-849.
96 Pauli Beni Eugubini … In Platonis Timaeum sive in naturalem omnem atque divinam Platonis et Aristotelisphilosophiam decades tres (Romae, 1594). This work was reprinted in 1605 and 1624.
97 Ibid., pp. 3-6.
98 Ibid., p. 3.
99 Ibid., p. 4; see II. 75 above.
100 ‘Nisi tamen quae de Aristotelicorum librorum iactura, confusione ac varietate ab Andronico et Strabone (ne antiquorum suspiciones attingam) sunt dubitationes exitatae: a Plutarcho, Athenaeo, Adrasto et Magentio repetitae: ab Olympiodoro, Ammonio, Philopono et Simplicio auctae; ab alijs denique multis, praesertim vero a Iohanne [marginal note: Pic. 1. 4 de vanit. gent.] Francisco Pico et Francisco Patritio [marginal note: Patr. in die. Perip.] altius exaggeratae … .’ (p. 28).
101 The various commentaries appeared first in print between 1592 and 1606 at Coimbra. Later printings were for the most part at Cologne and Lyon. For the printing history of the Commentarii see Carlos Sommervogel, S. J., Bibliotheque de la Compagnie de Jesus (nouvelle edition, Bruxelles-Paris, 1890-1932), 11, 1273-1278; ix, 62-63.
102 Commentarii Collegii Conimbricensis e societatejesu: in universam dialecticam Aristotelis Stagiritae (Coloniae, 1630), 1, 297. Cf. Examen vanitatis, IV, 7 (677).
103 Ibid., II, 236; cf. Examen vanitatis. iv, 4 (670-671).
104 Commentarii… in octo libros physicorum (Coloniae, 1630), 11, 30.
105 Ibid., II, 78. Other examples may be found at 1, 17, 315; 11, 127, 129, 312, 376. Also see Commentarii … in tres libros de anima (Coloniae, 1629), pp. 120, 209.
106 Examen vanitatis, 1, 12 (504-510).
107 Commentarii… in quatuor libros de coelo, meteorologica et parva naturalia (Coloniae, 1631), I, 268; n, 33,43, 49, 83,115,121. Pico is also cited concerning other points at 1,195, 244.
108 Commentarii… in octo libros physicorum, 1, 175.
109 On Fabri seejoannis Hyacinthi Sbaraleae Supplementum et castigatio adscriptores trium ordinum S. Francisci a Waddingo, aliisve descriptos … (editio nova, Romae, 1921), n, 378- 379; Dictionnaire de theologie catholique, v, 2060-2061; Montanari, op. cit., I, rx, 68-72.
110 Philippi Fabri Faventini… Expositiones et disputationes in XII libros Aristotelis Metaphysicorum; quibus doctrina Ioannis Duns Scoti magna cum facilitate illustratur et contra adversaries omncs tarn peteres, quam recentiores defenditur … (Venetiis, 1637).
111 Ibid., pp. 10-12; ‘Obiectio adversariorum Aristotelis contra scientiam metaphysicae'.
112 Ibid., p. 10a.
113 Ibid., p. 11b.
114 Gassendi has not been studied as much in the past, perhaps, as he deserves, and, to a large extent, earlier studies have concerned themselves primarily with his ‘Epicureanism'. However, in the last several decades, greater attention has been paid to the man in general and to his anti-Aristotelian polemic in particular. Of the earlier scholarship in this connection, still valuable is the pioneering study by Henri Berr, An jure inter scepticos Gassendus numerates fuerit (Parisiis, 1898). This work was recently reprinted in a French translation (1960). Among more recent studies should be mentioned the work of Bernard Rochot, especially his edition of the Exercitationes paradoxicae, published as Pierre Gassendi, Dissertations en forme de paradoxes contre les Aristoteliciens (Paris, 1959) with a French translation and an important introduction; the various contributions in the Centre international de synthese publication Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655), sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris, 1955) by Berr, Rochot, A. Koyre et al. are important. Most recent and most detailed with respect to Gassendi's ‘scepticism’ is Tullio Gregory, Scetticismo ed empirismo: studio su Gassendi (Bari, 1961) with ample bibliography and a survey of earlier scholarship.
115 The first book appeared as Exercitationes paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos … (Grenoble, 1624) and was reprinted separately in 1649 and 1656. The second book appeared separately in 1659, although both had been printed together already in the Operaof 1658. They were again printed together in the Opera of 1727. For further details of the printing history see Pierre Gassendi, Dissertations ..., p. vii. For a list of the titles of the proposed seven books of the work see the introduction to book 1 in Petri Gassendi … opera omnia (Lugduni, 1658), m, 102. Subsequent references are to this edition.
116 Tullio Gregory, op. cit., pp. 24-25, 33, 30-31.
117 Gassendi, Opera, in, 99, 142a.
118 Ibid., p. 99.
119 Besides his uncle Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463-1494), there was also a professor of philosophy at Bologna in the middle of the sixteenth century who was called Antonio Bcrnardi della Mirandola (1503-15 65). This man is often referred to as Mirandulanus.
120 Unfortunately these titles to the various articles are not retained in the Opera of 1658. They do, however, appear in the earlier editions and are printed in Rochot's edition.
121 Examen vanitatis, IV, 1 (660).
122 Gassendi, Opera, III, 206a
123 The similarities and differences in the attitudes of the two men are discussed by Gregory, op. cit., pp. 121-125.
124 The work seems to have been written in 1609-1610, but was not printed until 1636 at Paris. It was reprinted in 1693. For futher details see Luigi Firpo, Bibliografia degli scritti di Tommaso Campanella (Torino, 1940), pp. 110-111. There is a large literature on Campanella, but, as many of his writings are only now appearing in print, the last word has not yet been said. I should like to mention the recent Italian translation of the De gentilismo with introduction and useful notes in Tommaso Campanella, Delia necessita di unafilosofia cristiana, a cura di Romano Amerio (Torino, 1953). It is interesting to note that, although the name of Aristotle does not appear in the title of this work, Campanella cites it in a letter as De gentilismo praesertim aristotelico non retinendo. See Tommaso Campanella, Lettere, a cura di Vincenzo Spampanato (Bari, 1927), p. 336.
125 Tertullian, who said, ‘Nobis curiositate opus non est post Christum Iesum nee inquisitione post evangelium. Cum credimus nihil desideramus ultra credere. Hoc enim prius credimus non esse quod ultra credere debeamus.’ (De praescriptione haereticorum in Corpus Christianorum, series Latina, Tertulliani Opera, pars I, Turnholti, 1954,1, 193.)
126 Instructive regarding the sources for this work is the index of names given in Amerio's edition, pp. 93-95.
127 Ad Doctorem Gentium Thomae Campanellae Stylensis ordinis praedicatorum Degentilismo non retinendo … (Parisiis, 1636), p. 24. This reference is signaled by Thorndike ﹛op. cit., VI, 467), who, however, misinterprets the passage, translating it to mean that Campanella had called Pico, rather than Aristotle, the sepia. As obscure as Pico's style may be, Campanella did not here discuss it, although the passage out of context is ambiguous. It is correctly translated by Amerio (op. cit, p. 38). The text referred to in Gianfrancesco's writings is to be found in Examen vanitatis, iv, 7 (677). The comparison of Aristotle to a cuttlefish has a long and interesting history with which I hope to deal elsewhere.
128 The research necessary for this paper was carried out under the provisions of a United States Government grant for study in Italy during the years 1961-1963.
