Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance

by Brian Vickers (Editor)

The essays in this volume present a collective study of one of the major problems in the recent history of To what extent did the occult 'sciences' (alchemy, astrology, numerology, and natural magic) contribute to the scientific revolution of the late Renaissance? These studies of major scientists (Kepler, Bacon, Mersenne, and Newton) and of occultists (Dee, Fludd, and Cardano), complemented by analyses of contemporary official and unofficial studies at Cambridge and Oxford and discussions of the language of science, combine to suggest that hitherto the relationship has been too crudely stated as a movement 'from magic to science'. In fact, two separate mentalities can be traced, the occult and the scientific, each having different assumptions, goals, and methodologies. The contributors call into question many of the received ideas on this topic, showing that the issue has been wrongly defined and based on inadequate historical evidence. They outline new ways of approaching and understanding a situation in which two radically different and, to modern eyes, incompatible ways of describing reality persisted side-by-side until the demise of the occult in the late seventeenth century. Their work, accordingly, sets the whole issue in a new light.

Genres: Renaissance, History

452 pages, Hardcover

First published June 29, 1984

Reviews

[Kevin Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

This should be of interest to anyone who is a fan of Frances Yates' work. An academic volume that points out some of the complexities of renaissance magic - and the transition from natural magic to natural science - that Yates ignores. A bit dense (hence my 3 star review); certainly slower reading than any of Yates' work. However, this is clearly not meant to be a beach book; interested parties will find it worth the slog.

[Ankh156 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some excellent papers, cheek by jowl with others altogether too dry and academic for passing or passionate interest. I was digging in to fill-out my historical background for Dr John Dee and the late renaissance pre-scientists/post-conjurors. The editor's rather fulsome conribution hangs uneasily between the two. Not a tome I'd recommend for the fainthearted faddist. That said, I enjoyed what I read of it, and will probably return for another hefty dose as research requires.