Renaissance Interpretations of Life in Heaven and Earth
Annual Meeting of the Renaissance Society of America • San Diego • April 4, 2013
Session 4
Chair: Patrick J. Boner (Johns Hopkins University)
When Ghosts Become Visible: Natural and Supernatural Beings in Paracelsus’ Cosmology
Dane T. Daniel (Wright State University)
In his cosmological system, Paracelsus addressed the phenomenon of ghosts along with a plethora of invisible entities such as nymphs, demons and angels as subjects of natural philosophy. He also assigned habitants to a “celestial realm” as subjects of “adept philosophy.” What were his sources for these unusual beings? I will explore his invocations or exegeses of Biblical passages, Neo-Platonic authors, medieval alchemists, and folklore literature to begin addressing the question. As Paracelsus explains in his major work, Astronomia Magna (1537/38), ghosts are simply the sidereal bodies of humans that have not yet returned to their source, i.e. the stars. In nature there are indeed a number of these “natural” sidereal entities, which differ from what he sees as “celestial” beings, e.g., resurrected people. What is the difference in composition of “natural” bodies and “supernatural” beings, and how are the “sidereal” and “celestial” sensed and/or accessed differently?
In his cosmological system, Paracelsus addressed the phenomenon of ghosts along with a plethora of invisible entities such as nymphs, demons and angels as subjects of natural philosophy. He also assigned habitants to a “celestial realm” as subjects of “adept philosophy.” What were his sources for these unusual beings? I will explore his invocations or exegeses of Biblical passages, Neo-Platonic authors, medieval alchemists, and folklore literature to begin addressing the question. As Paracelsus explains in his major work, Astronomia Magna (1537/38), ghosts are simply the sidereal bodies of humans that have not yet returned to their source, i.e. the stars. In nature there are indeed a number of these “natural” sidereal entities, which differ from what he sees as “celestial” beings, e.g., resurrected people. What is the difference in composition of “natural” bodies and “supernatural” beings, and how are the “sidereal” and “celestial” sensed and/or accessed differently?
Life in the Blood: Johann Ernst Burggrav’s Lamp of Life and Death
Vera Keller (University of Oregon)
For decades, Johann Ernst Burggrav’s Biolychnium or Lamp of Life and Death (1610, 1611, 1629 and 1630) provoked debate about the relationship between life and blood. Burggrav was a physician, alchemical editor, and an associate of Johann Hartmann at Marburg. Based on his views concerning the vital flame that burned within blood, Burggrav claimed that an individual’s health could be judged through a flame kept burning with their blood. The Lamp provoked a variety of responses, rebuttals, and further experimentation. The discoveries of William Harvey renewed these debates, when even some of those who denied Burggrav’s ability to build such a lamp (such as Walter Charleton), adopted his terminology of the Biolychnium for new theories concerning blood and vitality. This paper explores Burggrav’s vital philosophy and its role in continuing debates.
For decades, Johann Ernst Burggrav’s Biolychnium or Lamp of Life and Death (1610, 1611, 1629 and 1630) provoked debate about the relationship between life and blood. Burggrav was a physician, alchemical editor, and an associate of Johann Hartmann at Marburg. Based on his views concerning the vital flame that burned within blood, Burggrav claimed that an individual’s health could be judged through a flame kept burning with their blood. The Lamp provoked a variety of responses, rebuttals, and further experimentation. The discoveries of William Harvey renewed these debates, when even some of those who denied Burggrav’s ability to build such a lamp (such as Walter Charleton), adopted his terminology of the Biolychnium for new theories concerning blood and vitality. This paper explores Burggrav’s vital philosophy and its role in continuing debates.
Conception of Life in Francis Bacon’s De viis mortis
Kaz Shibata (University of Tokyo)
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was keenly interested in the prolongation of the human lifespan and tried to establish its theoretical foundation. The conception of life and death was thus important in his natural philosophy. A small work entitled On the Ways of Death (De viis mortis), composed intermittently in 1610s, was one of the early writings in which Bacon addressed these biological phenomena and developed his first speculations on the prolongation of life. Although this treatise is a key to understanding his biological ideas in general, it has often escaped the attention of historians. The present paper will examine Bacon’s discussion on the preservation of non-living natural beings (wood, water, fruits, etc.). Why did he focus on these matters? How did he perceive their relationship with the human lifespan and its prolongation? These questions are crucial to grasp his early conception of life.
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was keenly interested in the prolongation of the human lifespan and tried to establish its theoretical foundation. The conception of life and death was thus important in his natural philosophy. A small work entitled On the Ways of Death (De viis mortis), composed intermittently in 1610s, was one of the early writings in which Bacon addressed these biological phenomena and developed his first speculations on the prolongation of life. Although this treatise is a key to understanding his biological ideas in general, it has often escaped the attention of historians. The present paper will examine Bacon’s discussion on the preservation of non-living natural beings (wood, water, fruits, etc.). Why did he focus on these matters? How did he perceive their relationship with the human lifespan and its prolongation? These questions are crucial to grasp his early conception of life.