the Inquisition fifteen years later he practically denied this, yet
acknowledged attending the lectures of Balbani, of Lucca, as well as
of others who taught and preached in Geneva. Under the regulations of
the Academy (University), where he had already registered, certain
regulations must be complied with, and Bruno appears to have obeyed
them in at least a certain degree. But the immediate cause for his
departure from Geneva appears to have been one of his outbreaks of
cynicism and accurate scholarship, since in 1579 he was called before
the Council for having caused to be printed a document enumerating
twenty errors made by the Professor of Philosophy (de la Faye) in one
of his lectures. The latter was incensed and outraged at this criticism
and disparagement of his views and learning, and the quarrel assumed
unexpected magnitude, since Bruno, on his second appearance before the
Consistory or supreme tribunal of the Church, denied the charges and
called the ministers "pedagogues." These gentlemen decided to refuse
him communion unless he should confess and repent of his faults and
make due apology. His acceptance of these conditions not being hearty
enough to suit his judges, he was admonished and excluded from the
communion. These steps lead to greater contrition on his part, and the
ban of excommunication was withdrawn. This sentence of exclusion was
the only one within the power of the Consistory to pass, but does not
prove that Bruno had accepted the protestant faith, nor partaken of its
communion. In fact at his trial he steadfastly denied this. It seemed
however, to disgust him with Calvinism, against which thereafter he
never ceased to inveigh. Later he contrasted it with Lutheranism which
was far more tolerant, and still later gave him a heartier welcome.
Calvin, it must be remembered, had written a polemic against Servetus,
"in which it is shown to be lawful to coerce heretics by the sword."
As between the council of Trent and Calvin it certainly must have been
hard, in those days, to select either a faith, or an abiding place
where that faith might be peaceably practised. Doubtless Bruno's views
concerning the philosophy of Aristotle conflicted with those of the
church authorities, for Beza (Calvin's follower), had stated that they
did not propose to swerve one particle from the opinions of that Greek
philosopher, to whom, though of pagan origin, the Church, both Roman
and Protestant, was for centuries so firmly bound.
And so shaking the dust of Geneva from his feet he journeyed to Lyons,
where he failed utterly to find occupation, and then on to Toulouse,
where he remained about two years. Here he took a Doctorate in Theology
in order to compete for a vacant chair. To this he was elected by
the students, as the custom then was in most of the _scholia_ or
universities. For two sessions he lectured on Aristotle. Had this
University required of him that he should attend mass, as did some
others, he could not have done so, owing to his excommunication;
though just why exclusion from a Calvinistic academy should debar him
from Catholic mass does not appear. Toulouse was a _warm_ place for
heretics; the burning of 14,000 of them at its capture will prove
this. A few years (35) after he left it Vanini was burned for heretic
notions. It is hardly to be believed that Bruno could pass two years
or more here without controversies arising from his teaching. But his
nominal reason for leaving, in 1581, and going to Paris, was the war
then raging in Southern France, under Henry of Navarre.
Before leaving Toulouse he completed his "_Clavis Magna_" or "Great
Key," the last word--as he seemed to think--on the art of memory. Only
one volume of this great work, which, in his peculiarly egotistical
way, he said is "superlatively pregnant," was ever published, and that
in England, the "_Sigillus Sigillorum_." It must not be forgotten that
it was on both teaching and practising this art of memory that Bruno,
throughout his career, prided himself. He was even not averse, at least
at certain periods of his career, to the belief that he had some secret
system for this purpose, or even received occult aid. But when summoned
before Henry III, to whose ears had come his fame, and asked whether
the memory he had and the art he professed were natural or due to
magic, he proved that a good memory was a cultivated natural product.
He then dedicated to the King a book on "_The Art of Memory_."
But this was shortly after his arrival in Paris, in 1581, where he
quickly became famous. A course of thirty lectures on "_The Thirty
Divine Attributes_" of St. Thomas Aquinas would have given him a chair,
could he have attended mass.
His residence in Paris was marked by an extraordinary literary
activity. He published in succession _De Umbris Idearum_ (Shadow of
Ideas), dedicated to Henry III, (this included the Art of Memory
just mentioned) _Cantus Circaeus_ (Incantation of Circe) dedicated
to Prince Henry; _De Compendiosa Architectura et Complemento Artis
Lulli_ (Compendious Architecture); _Il Candelaio_ (The Torchbearer);
these all appeared in 1582. These varied greatly in character. The
first was devoted to the metaphysics of the art of remembering, with
an analysis of that faculty, and these second was given up to the
same general topic. It was all obscure, hence perhaps its popularity.
Brunnhofer says that it was "a convenient means of introducing Bruno
to strange universities, gaining him favor with the great, or helping
him out of pressing need of money. It was his exoteric philosophy with
which he could carefully drape the philosophy of a religion hostile
to the Church, and ride as a hobby horse in his unfruitful humors."
Nevertheless we must believe in his sincerity. The "Compendious
Architecture" is the first of his works in which Bruno deals with the
views of Raymond Lully, a "logical calculus and mnemonic scheme in one"
(McIntyre) that had many imitators. For Lully Bruno seems to have the
greatest regard, this appearing in many ways. Lully, by the way, was a
Spanish scholastic and alchemist, who was born on one of the Balearic
Islands in 1235. He went as a missionary to the Mahommedans, and spent
much time in Asia and Africa. He figures largely in the history of the
alchemists and as a practitioner of the occult.
The "Torchbearer" was a work of very different character. It was
described as a "Comedy" by one who described himself as "Academico di
nulla academia, ditto il fastidito: In tristitia hilaris, hilaritate
tristis." It is essentially a satire on the predominant vices of
pedantry, superstition and selfishness or sordid love. Though lacking
in dramatic power it is regarded as second to nothing of its kind and
time. Its _dramatis personae_ are personified types, not individuals.
It was realistic even in its vulgarity, for obscenity was prevalent in
the literature of those days. But in it Bruno struck at what seemed to
him his greatest enemy, i. e. pedantry.
There were at this time in Paris two great Universities, one the
College de France, with liberal tendencies, and opposed to the Jesuits
and all pedantry; the other the Sorbonne, for centuries the guardian
of the Catholic faith, endowed with the right of censorship, which
must have been exercised over Bruno's works. In which of these, though
surely in one of them, Bruno was made an Extraordinary Lecturer
history has failed to record. He must have offended both, since he was
anxious to be taken back into the Church, yet was revolutionary in his
teaching. More than thirty years later Nostitz, one of his pupils,
paid tribute to his versatility and skill, saying "he was able to
discourse impromptu on any suggested subject, to speak extensively and
elaborately without preparation, so that he attracted many pupils and
admirers in Paris." (McIntyre). But Bruno belonged to the literally
peripatetic school, and in 1583 he forsook Paris for London, because as
he says of "tumults," leaving it to the imagination whether these were
civil or scholastic.
Elizabeth reigned at this time; her influence made England a harbor
of safety for religious and other mental suspects. She had a penchant
for Italians and their language; two of her physicians were Italians,
and Florio was ever welcome at her court. To this court Bruno also
was welcomed, and, basking for sometime in the sunshine of her regard
and patronage, passed there the happiest portion of his unhappy life.
Oxford was at that time the stronghold of Aristotelianism. One of
its statutes ordained that "Bachelors and Masters who did not follow
Aristotle faithfully were liable to a fine of five shillings for every
point of divergence, and for every fault committed against the Logic
of the Organon." (McIntyre). In Oxford at this time, unfortunately,
theology was the only live issue; of science as of real scholarship
there was little or none. (Its predominant trait of those days is
still, perhaps, its dominant feature to-day). To this university Bruno
addressed a letter, couched in vainglorious and egotistical terms,
craving permission to lecture there. This was not received with favor,
while his doctrines met with small encouragement at this ancient seat
of learning, which Bruno later stigmatized as the "widow of true
science." But opportunity was afforded him to dispute publicly before
a noble visitor in June, 1583, a Polish prince; one Alasco, for whom
great public entertainment had been provided. His opponent, defeated by
fifteen unanswerable syllogisms, resorted to scurrility and abuse. This
public exhibition put an end to the lectures on the Immortality of the
Soul which Bruno had been allowed to give, and he returned to London.
Shortly after this he published his _Cena_ (Ash Wednesday Supper)
in which he ridiculed the Oxford doctors, saying among other things
that they were much better acquainted with beer than with Greek. But
he criticised too cynically and lost thereby in popularity. This
led to the appearance of the _Causa_, a dialogue, in which he was
less vindictive. He admitted in this that there was much in the old
institution which was admirable; that it was even the first in Europe,
that speculative philosophy first flourished there, and that thence,
"the splendor of one of the noblest and rarest spheres of philosophy,
in our times almost extinct, was diffused to all other academies in
civilized lands." What he most condemned was the too great attention
given to language and words while the realistics for which words
stand were neglected. Doctors were easily made and doctorates too
cheaply bought. His charge in brief was that they mistook the shadow
for the substance; a charge even yet too commonly justified among the
strongholds of theology and other speculative dogmas.
Returning to London after this experience Bruno went to live with
Mauvissiere, the French Ambassador. While the English records make no
mention of his presence it is yet quite certain that he was frequently
at Court, and that men like Sydney, Greville, Temple and others were
his frequent associates. But as the Ambassador's influence was on the
wane, he was not equal to his great trust. At this time our philosopher
spoke of himself as one "whom the foolish hate, the ignoble despise,
whom the wise love, the learned admire," etc. (McIntyre). Of Queen
Elizabeth he wrote in most fulsome phrases, such as she too dearly
loved. Before his judges, a few years later, Bruno apologized for his
exaggerated expressions concerning a Protestant ruler, claiming that
when he spoke of her as "divine" he meant it not as a term of worship,
but as an epithet like those which the ancients bestowed upon their
rulers; claiming further that he knew he erred in thus praising a
heretic.
Bruno published seven works in England. The first was "_Explicatio
triginta Sigillorum_," the Thirty Seals thus explained being hints for
acquiring, arranging and remembering all arts and sciences. To it was
added his _Sigillus Sigillorum_ for comparing and explaining all mental
operations. Then came an Italian dialogue "_La Cena de le Ceneri_" or
Ash Wednesday Supper. This was written in praise and extension of the
Copernican theory, indeed quite exceeding it in teaching the identity
of matter, the infinity of the universe, the possibility of life on
other spheres, with a painstaking attempt to show that these notions
do not conflict with those of Mother Church. Next came "_De Causa,
Principio et Uno_." (Cause, Principle and Unity). This treated of the
immanence of spirit, the eternity of matter, the potential divinity
of life, the origin of sin and death, and many other similar abstruse
topics. It was followed by _De l'Infinito Universo ed Mondi_, with
numerous reasons for believing the universe to be infinite and full of
innumerable worlds, with the divine essence everywhere pervading.
All these works appeared in 1583. In 1584 appeared his "_Spacio de la
Bestia Triofante_" or Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast. In this prose
poem Jupiter, repenting his errors, resolves to expel the many beasts
that occupy his heavenly sphere--the constellations--and to substitute
for them the virtues. In the council of the gods convened by him many
subjects are discussed, among them the history of religions, the
contrasts between natural and revealed religions and the fundamental
forms of morality. In this allegory Jupiter represents of course
the human spirit; the Bear, the Scorpion, etc., are the vices to be
expelled. Unfortunately the book was quite generally regarded as
attack upon the Church or the Pope, though what he really struck at
was the credulity of mankind. It was dedicated to Sir Philip Sydney.
Then came his "_Cabala del Cavallo Pegasio_" or Cabal, dedicated to a
suppositious Bishop who was made to impersonate the spirit of ignorance
and sloth. It is a mordant satire on Asinity, including credulity and
unquestioning faith. After this he dedicated another work to Sidney.
"_Degl' Heroici Furori_" (Enthusiasms of the Noble), a collection of
sonnets with prose commentaries, like Dante's _Vita Nuova_, touching
on the love for spiritual beauty arising from that for physical beauty
attaining a climax in a sort of ecstasy by union with the divine. These
sonnets possess a very high literary value aside from their other
interest.
When his ambassadorial patron was recalled Bruno probably returned
to Paris with him, during the latter part of 1585. Here he spent a
year amidst constant turmoil and excitement, and at his own expense.
Though he attempted reconciliation with the Church he was regarded as
an apostate. He held one more public disputation in which he advanced
one hundred and twenty theses against the teaching of the Sorbonne,
his side being taken by its rival, the College de France. The outcome
cannot have been brilliantly favorable, since he soon after left Paris,
in June, 1586. The collection of charges above alluded to was published
in Paris after Bruno's departure, and again in Wittenberg, under the
title "_Excubitor_" (The Ambassador). It was an arraignment of the
Aristotelians, based on the words of that great master himself. Bruno
claimed the same right to criticise Aristotle that the latter claimed
to criticise his predecessors. In it Bruno says, "It is a poor mind
that will think with the multitude because it is a multitude; truth is
not altered by the opinions of the vulgar or the confirmation of the
many;"--and again--"it is more blessed to be wise in truth in face of
opinion than to be wise in opinion in face of truth." (McIntyre, p. 50).
In addition to this Bruno had also published, before leaving Paris, a
commentary on the Physics of Aristotle.
Tarrying somewhat by the wayside Bruno reached Wittenberg, where,
in 1586, he matriculated at its University, Marburg having curtly
rejected him. Describing him here McIntyre styles him the "Knight
Errant of Philosophy." Here Lutheranism dominated the theological
faculty, while the philosophical faculty was dominated by Calvinism;
views concerning the person of Christ, the "Real Presence," and the
doctrine of Predestination keeping them apart in spite of Melancthon's
attempt to reunite the two factions. From the Lutheran party Bruno
obtained permission to lecture, and so for two years he taught from
the Organon of Aristotle, as well as the writings of Raymond Lulli.
To the University senate he dedicated a work on Lulli, "_De Lampade
Combinatoria Lulliana_," whose chief purpose was to teach one how
to find "an indefinite number of propositions and middle terms for
speaking and arguing." He regarded it as the only key to the Lullian
writings, as well as a clue to a great many of the mysteries of the
Pythagoreans and Cabalists. It was soon followed by "_De Progressu
et Lampade Venatoria Logicorum_," intended to enable one to "dispute
promptly and copiously on any subject."
But again fate compelled a change of residence, for the Calvanistic
and Ducal party gained in political ascendancy, to which party Bruno,
as a Copernican, would have appeared as a heretic. After delivering
an eloquent address of farewell he moved on, his next abiding place
being Prague, where Rudolph II, of Bohemia, was posing as the friend
of all learned men. Here he already had friends at court, and here
he introduced himself with another Lullian work. To the Emperor he
next dedicated a work of iconoclastic type, "One hundred and sixty
articles against the mathematicians and philosophers of the day." For
this the Emperor granted him the sum of three hundred dollars, and in
January, 1589, he shifted again to Helmstadt, in Brunswick, where he
matriculated again in the then youngest of the German Universities.
This had been founded only twelve years before by Duke Julius, who
was extremely liberal in his views, and intended to found a model
institution, in which theology should not play too dominant a part. But
while he received here a certain recognition fate again sported with
him, for the Duke died four months after his arrival. Bruno obtained
permission to pronounce a funeral oration, desiring to express his
gratitude to the memory of one who had opened such an institution, so
free to all lovers of the Muses and to exiles like himself, who were
here protected from the greedy maw of the Roman wolf, whereas in Italy
he had been chained to a superstitious cult. It was full of allusions
to the papal tyranny which was infecting the world with the rankest
poison of ignorance and vice.
The fatuous simplicity and the worldly blindness which Bruno displayed,
in ever setting foot inside of Italian or papal territory after the
delivery of this _Oratio Consolatoria_, may in one way be appreciated
but never understood or explained. Moreover he had made himself
_persona non grata_ as well to the Protestants, who were scarcely
more liberal than the Catholics. It appears that the great Boethius,
superintendent of the Church at Helmstadt, had acted both as judge
and executioner, and publicly excommunicated Bruno without a hearing,
since there is extant a letter appealing from his arbitrary judgment
and malice. The grounds for this judgment were never made clear,
since no attention was ever paid to the appeal; but inasmuch as Bruno
never really joined the Protestant profession it must have been meant
to inflict some species of social ostracism. Boethius had himself to
be suppressed later. But Bruno, finding too many enemies, left for
Frankfort in 1590, "in order to get two books printed."
These were his two great Latin Works, "De Minimo" and "De Immenso," the
introduction to the latter being the "De Monade." He worked at these
with his own hands. In the introduction to the former his publisher
stated that before its final revision Bruno had been hurriedly called
away by an unforseen chance. This sudden departure may have been due
to a refusal of the town Council to permit his residence there, or it
may have been a call to Zürich, where he spent a few months with one
Hainzel, who had a leaning toward the Black Arts. Bruno wrote for him
"_De Imaginum Compositione_," a manual of his Art of Memory. In this
Swiss city he also dictated a work "_Summa Terminorum Metaphysicorum_,"
which was not published until 1609, and then in Marburg. But Bruno
returned to Frankfort in 1591, where he obtained permission to
publish his _De Minimo_. This work was on the "three fold minimum
and measurement, being the elements of three speculative and several
practical sciences." This like the two next mentioned was a Latin poem,
after the fashion of Lucretius. The _De Monade, Numero et Figura_ dealt
with the Monad, and with the elements of a more esoteric science,
while in the _De Immenso et Innumerabilibus_, the Immeasurable and
Innumerable, he dealt with the Universe and the worlds. These three
poems contain Bruno's complete philosophy of God and Nature.
While thus staying in Frankfort for the second time Bruno was invited
by a young Venetian patrician to pay him a visit, and become his
tutor in those arts in which the philosopher excelled. It was the
most unfortunate event in Bruno's unhappy life when he accepted this
apparently tempting invitation. Mocenigo, his host, was of good family,
but shallow, vain, weak-minded and dishonest, with the fashionable
taste of his day for the black arts. It is quite possible that he
was moreover the tool of the Inquisition, which had long desired to
entrap Bruno. It is probable moreover that the latter quite failed to
appreciate how unenviably he was regarded by that Church to which he
still felt that he belonged. Furthermore Venice was then a Republic and
free, and he longed for his beloved Italy again.
En route to Venice he spent three months in Padua, teaching there and
gathering around himself pupils, even in that short time. He had barely
left it when Galileo was invited there to teach; as Riehl has said,
"the creator of modern science following in the steps of its prophet."
Early in 1592 Bruno went to live in Mocenigo's house. Trouble soon
began. Entirely apart in temperament and characteristics, they soon
disagreed. The pupil was deeply disappointed at not acquiring that
mastery over the secrets of nature for which he had hoped, and found
that there was no quick way to acquire a retentive and replete memory.
And so Mocenigo announced to his friend Ciotto, the bookseller, his
intent to gain from Bruno all he could and then denounce him to the
Holy Office. While others were thus conspiring against him Bruno
was writing a work on "The Seven Liberal Arts" and on "Seven Other
Inventive Arts," intending to present it to the Pope, hoping thus to
obtain absolution and be released from the ban of excommunication.
When Bruno at last appreciated the dangers by which he was surrounded
he announced his intent to go again to Frankfort to have some of his
books printed, and so took his leave of Mocenigo. On the following day,
in May, 1592, Bruno was seized by six men, using force, who locked him
in an upper story of Mocenigo's house. The next day he was transferred
to an underground cellar, and the following night to the prison of the
Inquisition. May 23rd his former host denounced him, with a cunning and
lying statement concerning some of his views and teachings. Thus he was
reported as stating that Christ's miracles were only apparent, that He
and the apostles were magicians, that the Catholic faith was full of
blasphemies against God, that the Friars befouled the world and should
not be allowed to preach, that they were asses, and the doctrines of
the Church were asses' beliefs, etc. (McIntyre). This was followed
two days later by a second denunciation in which Mocenigo went to a
diabolical extreme of deceit and hypocrisy; stating that all the time
he was entertaining Bruno he was promising himself to bring him before
the Holy Office. Within forty-eight hours the Holy Tribunal met to
consider the matter; before them appeared the book-sellers who had
known Bruno in Zürich and Frankfort, and before them came Bruno in his
own behalf, professing his entire willingness to tell the whole truth.
Within a few days Mocenigo made yet another deposition, denouncing
Bruno's statements about the infallible Church. On the following day
Bruno was again heard in his own defense, and appealed to the famous
and fallacious doctrine of two-fold truth, acknowledging that he had
taught too much as a philosopher rather than as an honest man and
Christian, and that he had based his teachings too much on sense and
reason and not enough on faith;--so specious had become his argument
with the terrors of the Inquisition before him. He further claimed that
his intent had been not to impugn the faith but to exalt philosophy. He
then beautifully epitomized his own views, claiming that he believed
in an infinite universe, in an infinite divine potency, holding it
unworthy of an infinite power to create a finite world, when he could
produce so vast an infinity; with Pythagoras he regarded this world as
one of many stars,--innumerable worlds. This universe he held to be
governed by a universal providence, existent in two forms;--one nature,
the shadow or footprint of deity, the other the ineffable essence of
God, always inexplicable. Concerning the triune Godhead he confessed
certain philosophic doubts as well as concerning the use of the term
"_persons_" in these distinctions, while he quoted St. Augustine to
the same effect. The miracles he had always believed to be divine and
genuine; concerning the Holy Mass and the Transubstantiation he agreed
with the Church. As the days went by he became the more insistent upon
his orthodoxy. He condemned the heretic writings of Melancthon, Luther
and Calvin, expressed respect for the writings of Lulli because of
their philosophical bearings, while for St. Thomas Aquinas he had the
most profound regard.