The Cosmographia of Bernardus Silvestris

by Bernardus Silvestris, Winthrop Wetherbee (Translator)

Cosmographia ("Cosmography"), also known as De mundi universitate ("On the totality of the world"), is a Latin philosophical allegory, dealing with the creation of the universe, by the twelfth-century author Bernardus Silvestris. In form, it is a prosimetrum, in which passages of prose alternate with verse passages in various classical meters. The philosophical basis of the work is the Platonism of contemporary philosophers associated with the cathedral school of Chartres—one of whom, Thierry of Chartres, is the dedicatee of the work. According to a marginal note in one early manuscript, the Cosmographia was recited before Pope Eugene III when he was traveling in France (1147–48). - Wikipedia

Genres: Philosophy, Medieval, Poetry, Literature

180 pages, Paperback

First published October 15, 1990

About the author

Bernardus Silvestris, also known as Bernard Silvestris and Bernard Silvester, was a medieval Platonist philosopher and poet of the 12th century.

Bernardus' greatest work is the Cosmographia, a prosimetrum on the creation of the world, told from a 12th-century Platonist perspective. The poem influenced Chaucer and others with its pioneering use of allegory to discuss metaphysical and scientific questions. Bernardus also wrote the poem Mathematicus and probably the poem Experimentarius as well as some minor poems.

Reviews

[WJ · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book and Introduction, one of the best from Columbia University Press in ‘Records of Western Civilization Series’. But, bizarrely, the headnote given above in Goodreads is about another book, not this one. Nothing on Noys, Silva, Endelechia, which is The Cosmographia. As one reviewer on the back of the actual book has said 'A significant example of 12th century Platonism, combining the Timaeus with Christian Neo-Platonism, the Cosmographia is an allegory of creation..." (Looks like they've changed the Goodreads headnote to the correct book now. Excellent)

[William Bies · Rating 4 out of 5]

During the twelfth-century Renaissance, the natural was conceptually separated from the supernatural and made an object of study in its own right. Bernardus Silvestris’ popular allegorical poem Cosmographia constitutes a major literary testament to the change in attitude. He weaves the cosmological concerns of the cathedral school of Chartres, which aimed above all to reconcile Plato’s account of the formation of the world through the demiurge in the Timaeus with the scriptural account of creation ex nihilo in Genesis, together with the metaphysics and mystical sacramental hierarchy of the Neoplatonic tradition going back to Pseudo-Dionysius and Johannes Scotus Eriugena. The poem falls into two parts, Megacosmos, detailing the story of the original formation of the world out of the primordial chaos, and Microcosmos, having specifically to do with the creation of man in God’s image. The allegorical personalities that figure in the first part are Nature, Noys, Silva (formless chaos), Endelechia and Physis, while in the second part, these undertake a pilgrimage to seek out the muse Urania, who represents the celestial intelligence in man, whose mind is compounded of higher and lower. The epic is interrupted in places by lengthy descriptive passages that dwell on flora and fauna, reminiscent of Basil the Great’s Hexaemeron from the fourth century. The format fosters Bernardus’ penchant for keen psychological observation and one is struck by how optimistic the tone is (as when, near the beginning, Nature prevails on Noys to embellish the created world with an even more beautiful form). For something akin and more recent, compare with the psychological drama in Goethe’s allegorical play Pandora. One could regret that Bernardus fails to compose a third part dealing with the fall and the restoration of man by Christ, a topic Alain de Lille would take up later in the twelfth century in his Anticlaudianus. If he had, perhaps he could have rivaled John Milton! As it stands, though, the poem is engaging as far as it goes. From the standpoint of intellectual history, for the most part derivative and ripe; late in the twelfth century, the alliance between Platonic proto-scientific speculation and classical Latin literature was due to pass out of style and the schoolmen of the thirteenth century would head off in another direction, almost exclusively scientific rather than literary, under the star of the newly recovered writings of Aristotle and his Arabic commentators.

[Erick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bernardus Silvestris was a writer during the Scholastic era. He’s associated with the school of Chartres, which included another Bernard, William of Conches, John of Salisbury and Thierry of Chartres. St. Victor and Chartres were probably the most notable cathedral schools of France during this period. While Aristotelianism was seemingly ubiquitous, Chartres seems to have been more partial to Plato.

This work is thoroughly Platonist/Neo-Platonist. This is somewhat astounding given that there were so few sources for Platonism in Latin at the time. Calcidius’ commentary on the Timaeus was available and so was Macrobius’ commentary on Cicero’s Dream of Scipio. There wasn’t much else, other than Christian writers that owed something to Platonism, such as the Pseudo-Dionysius and John Scotus Eriugena. As the title suggests, this is dedicated to cosmogony, and it’s a Platonist cosmogony that is presented. The work is presented as a story featuring characters such as Noys (Greek Nous, i.e. reason), Nature, Silva (hyle/matter), etc. The editor/translator does a great job of foot noting distinct passages and citing the probable works that Bernardus Silvestris was dependent on. The ones I listed above being some of the more notable. He also apparently was heavily influenced by the Hermetic work Asclepius. The Hermetic works are really anonymous/pseudonymous works of Middle Platonism. Most of the ideas presented here cannot really be said to be based in a Biblical cosmogony at all and can be reasonably argued are not compatible with it. It’s surprising that this work and its author escaped the suspicion of heresy when William of Conches and his Philosophia Mundi did not.

An interesting work. It’s a bit refreshing to read a book in the Scholastic tradition that isn’t Aristotelian. The fact that the author was able to present a fairly thorough and comprehensive Platonist cosmogony with so few primary sources available to him is impressive as well. I give it around 4 stars.

[Massimiliano · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is difficult to judge a book this ancient with contemporary criteria. It is meant to be an allegory (or an account?) of the creation of the world with both Christian and (Neo)Platonic eyes. Overall, the 'microcosmos' section is much more enjoyable than the 'macrocosmos' one. The third chapter of the former was a real chore with its interminable lists of plants, animals, and so on. From chapter seven things got smoother, I liked a lot the descriptions of all the inhabitants of the heavenly and airy spheres and the descriptions of the making of Man. Not the easiest read overall, though much easier than the Timaeus, one of the main sources here.

[Ooniemme · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Cosmographia is such a fun work and it is a very insightful look into the medieval mind. I would recommend it alongside the Divine Comedy and the Consolation of Philosophy as an excellent primer for getting into the early middle ages' headspace

[Katie · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's essentially the bastard lovechild of Hesiod, the Bible, and Plato.