Download - Walker-Orpheus the Theologian and Renaissance Platonists

8/9/2019 Walker-Orpheus the Theologian and Renaissance Platonists

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/walker-orpheus-the-theologian-and-renaissance-platonists 1/22

Orpheus the Theologian and Renaissance Platonists

Author(s): D. P. WalkerSource: Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 16, No. 1/2 (1953), pp. 100-120Published by: The Warburg InstituteStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/750229 .

Accessed: 30/11/2014 16:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Warburg Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the

Warburg and Courtauld Institutes.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=warburg

http://www.jstor.org/stable/750229?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


http://www.jstor.org/stable/750229?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=warburg



ORPHEUS

THE

THEOLOGIAN AND RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

By

D.

P.

Walker

TL

ap

&

tL

HD&cV

?

Rwij ?q

airtX[CCV;

I

(Numenius,apud ClementAlex.,

Stromata,,

xxii)

Ficino's

Orphicsinging

There

are

several

quite

distinct

ways

in

which

Orpheus

was

important

to

men

of

the Renaissance.

It is indeed this

richness

of

meaning

that makes

him

stand out

against

all the other Greek

mythical

heroes,

religious

teachers,

philosophers,

and

poets,

who

play

such an essential

part

in

the

thought

and

art

of

the fifteenth

and sixteenth

centuries.

For

Orpheus

could

be

any,

and

often

was

all of these. I am

dealing

here with

only

one

of these

aspects:

Orpheus

as

a

theological

writer.

But

some

of the

others

are relevant

to

this,

especially

in so

far as

they

increase his

authority

and

prestige

as

a

theologian,

and must be briefly mentioned.

First,

he

was believed

to be the founder of

an

esoteric

mystery religion;'

so

that,

as a

theologian,

he was not

merely

commenting

on an

already

existing

Greek

religious

tradition,

but was

providing

the fundamental

sacred

writings

of

his

own.

It is also

important,

as we shall

see,

that

according

to

Diodorus

Siculus2

he learnt his

religious

rites in

Egypt.

Though

Diodorus

and

others

specifically

connect

these with

Dionysius,

he was

also

regarded

as

the

source

of

all

esoteric

Greek

religion;

as Proclus

says,

"All

the

Greeks'

theology

is the

offspring

of

the

Orphic

mystical

doctrine."3

Among

the

sects

thus connected

with

Orpheus

the

Pythagoreans

are

particularly important.

For

Iamblichus4

(and

after

him

Proclus)

stated that

it was

from

disciples

of

Orpheus

that

Pythagoras, and through him Plato,5 had learnt that the structure of all things

is based

on

numerical

proportions.

Orpheus

could

thus become the ultimate

source

of the Timaeus.

Secondly,

we

must bear

in mind

Orpheus

as

the

type

of the

ethically

influential,

effect-producing singer. Orpheus

with his

lyre

charming

the

rocks,

trees

and wild

animals was

normally

interpreted6

as

meaning

that he

was a

divinely

inspired

poetic

teacher,

possessed

by

Platonic

furor,

who

reformed

and

civilized his barbarous

contemporaries,

"the

stony

and

beastly

people,"

as

Sidney

calls

them.7

Ficino,

who

developed

the doctrine

of the

furores

so

that

the

greatest

poets

were

thought

to

be

possessed

not

only

by

the

poetic

furor,

but

also

by

the

religious (Bacchic), prophetic,

and amorous

ones, gives

Orpheus

as

an

example

of this: "Omnibus his furoribus

occupatum

fuisse

Orpheum

libri

eius

testimonio

esse

possunt."s

It was

a

characteristic

of

such

inspiration

that

the

poet

received

supernaturally

revealed

knowledge

of

human

I

v.

Otto

Kern,

Otphicorum

Fragmenta,

Ber-

lin,

1922,

pp.

26-30.

2

Kern,

test.

95-7.

Cf.

ibid.,

test.

216

(Herodotus).

3

Proclus,

Theologia

Platonica,

1,

6

(Kern,

test.

250).

4 lamblichus,

Vita

Pythag.

(Kern,

test.

249).

5

Proclus

(Kern,

test.

250)

explicitly

gives

the filiation: Orpheus -Aglaophemrs

-

Py-

thagoras-Plato.

6

Main

classical

sources:

Quintilian,

Inst.

Orat., I,

Io9;

Horace,

Ars

Poetica,

391.

There

were

of course other

interpretations.

7

Sir

Philip

Sidney,

An

Apologie

for

Poesie,

London,

1595,

ed.

G.

Gregory

Smith

(Eliza-

bethan

Critical

Essays,

Oxford,

1904),

p.

151/2.

s

Ficino,

In

Convivium

Platonis

...

Comm.,

in

his

Opera Omnia, Basle, 1576, p.

1362.

100

This content downloaded from 155.97.178.73 on Sun, 30 Nov 2014 16:15:58 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions






ORPHEUS

THE

THEOLOGIAN

AND

RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

ioi

and divine

things.'

Thus

Orpheus

the

legendary

singer

reinforces the

claim

of

Orpheus

the

theologian

to be

in

receipt

of

divine

revelation. The

same

consequence,

an increase

of his

authority,

was

produced

by

the

frequently-

made

comparison

between

Orpheus

and

David,

whose

music was

powerful

enough to cure Saul's madness and who also wrote divinely inspired songs of

religious

content.

Guy

Lef~vre

de la

Boderie,

whose

motto,

printed

at

the

beginning

and end

of

his

publications,

was

"May

Holy

David

sprout

forth

as

One

orphically,"2

wrote a

long

poem

in

which

translations

of

Orphic frag-

ments

and

of the Psalms

are

embedded,

in

order to show

that the

same

God

inspired

both.3

Orpheus'

musical "effects" are also

important

with

regard

to

fifteenth-

century

enthusiasm

for the

Orphic

Hymns.

Music,

in

that it

harmonized

the

dissonances

in

the

soul

produced

by

its

conjunction

with the

body,

could

be

used

as

a

preparation

for

philosophic

or

religious

contemplation,

as

it

was

by

Ficino4

and later

by

Tyard,5

or,

combined with

magic

rites,

as

a

means to

religious ecstasy. It was known from Marinus'

Life

that Proclus had

zealously

sung

and studied

Orphic

hymns,6

and

had

used

"methods

of

purification,

both

Orphic

and

Chaldaean,

such

as

immersing

himself

in the

sea

resolutely

every

month,

or

even two or three times a

month,"'

in

order to

attain to

a

1Iv.

e.g.

Ficino,

Opera,

p.

287

(Theologia

Platonica,

XIII,

ii),

where

Orpheus

is

named,

together

with

Homer,

Hesiod

and

Pindar,

as

one

of

the

"legitimi

ver6 poitae"

who

show

knowledge

of

all

the

arts, which,

without

supernatural

inspiration,

they

could

not

have

learnt. The

ultimate source of

this

is,

of

course,

Plato's

Ion.

2

'AyLoS

AOCt8

v

ppoot

6p9pt.x0S,

an

ana-

gram

of

his name.

Cf.,

amongst

many juxta-

positions

of

Orpheus

and

David: Clement

of

Alexandria,

Protrepticus,

c.

i

(Migne,

Pat.

Gr.,

8,

col.

49

f.;

the famous musical

opening,

where the

Greeks are exhorted to

leave

Orpheus's

music

for

David's);

Ficino,

Opera,

p.

673

(Letter

to Alessandro

Braccio,

who,

gifted

with

furor

as

described

in

the

ion,

is

urged

to

"canere

Deum,"

as did

Moses,

David,

Zoroaster,

Linus,

Orpheus, etc.);

Giovanni

Pico

della

Mirandola, Opera Omnia,

Basle,

1572,

I,

Io6

(Orphic

Conclusiones,

No.

4:

"Sicut

hymni

David

operi

Cabalae

mirabiliter

deserviunt,

ita

hymni

Orphei

operi

verb

licitae

&

naturalis

Magiae");

Marot,

Oeuvres,

ed.

Guiffrey,

Paris,

1875-

1931,

V,

198/9 (Dedication

of his

Pseaumes,

1541):

N'a

il

souvent

au

doulx

son

de

sa

lyre

Bien

appais6

de

Dieu

courrouc6

l'ire?

N'en

a ii

pas

souvent

de ces

bas

lieux

Les

escoutans

ravy

jusques

aux

cieulx,

Et

faict

cesser

de Saail la

manie

Pendant

le

temps

que

duroit

l'armonie?

Si

Orpheus jadis

l'eust

entendue,

La sienne il eust A quelque arbre pendue;"

3

La

Boderie,

L'Encyclie

des Secrets de

l'Eter-

nite',

Antwerp,

n.d.

(privilege

dated

Oct.

1570),

p.

189,

entitled: "Guidon Le

Fevre

de

la

Boderie

aus

Poetes

de

ce

Temps,

se

jouant

a

bon escient

sur

l'Anagrammatisme

de

son

nom,

L'VN GVIDE

ORFEE.

Cantique."

4

Music had this effect

both

by

its

direct

harmonizing

influence on

the

spiritus

(and

thence on soul and

mind),

and

because it

imitated the

harmony

of the

heavens,

itself

an

imitation of

the divine

music

"in

aeternai

Dei mente"

(Ficino,

Opera,

p. 614);

cf.

ibid.,

p.

651,

on

his own

use

of

it

"ut

caetera

sensuum oblectamenta

penitus negligam,

molestias

animae

corporisque expellam,

men-

tem ad

sublimia

Deumque

pro

viribus

eri-

gam";

p. 562,

used "adversus atrae

bilis

amaritudinem";

p.

56i

f.,

long

chapter (De

Vita

coelitits

comparanda,xxi)

on use of

music

to

capture

beneficent

planetary influences).

5

Pontus de

Tyard,

Solitaire Premier

(I552),

ed. S. F.

Baridon, Geneva,

1950, p.

18/9

(ascension

of

the soul

through

the four

Platonic

furores;

the

first,

poetic,

by

music

harmonizes the

"horrible

discord"

of

the

soul

caused

by

its

union

with the

body.

6

Probably

not those

now known

as

Orphic

Hymns,

which

are

quoted

by

no

ancient

writer.

Marinus,

Life

of

Proclus,

tr. L.

J.

Rosan

(in

his

The

Philosophy of

Proclus,

New

York,

1949),

PP.

24,

27,

28.

7

Ibid.,

p. 23-







10o2

D.

P. WALKER

theurgic

union

with God.

It was a

magical,

and

perhaps

theurgic,1

use of the

Hymns

that Pico

rediscovered

:"Nihil

efficacius

hymnis

Orphei

in naturali

Magia,

si debita

musica,

animi

intentio,

&

caeterae

circumstantiae,

quas

norunt

sapientes,

fuerint adhibitae."2

The

Orphic

Hymns,

sung

with

their

"debita musica," are, I think, what Ficino means by the "antiquus ad

Orphicam

Lyram

carminum

cantus."3

He

says

several times that he

practised

this

himself,

and

lists the

revival of it

among

the

great

achievements

of

fifteenth-

century

Florence,

together

with the resuscitation

of Plato

by

the

academy

at

Careggi.4

Indeed

an

example

of

the

magical

efficacy

of this

Orphic

singing

occurs

right

at

the

beginning

of

the

history

of

the

academy.

In a

letter of

September

1462

to

Cosimo

de'

Medici,5

Ficino

tells that

some

time

earlier he

had

been

singing

"relaxandae mentis

gratia"

the

Hymnum

d

Cosmum

in

fact

entitled

'rp.vo

'oVOpvoU),)6

which,

in

his

translation,

ends:

"Exaudi

nostras,

Cosme,

preces

vitamque quietam pio

juveni

tribue."7

Just

after he

had

sung

it

again

"ritu

Orphico"

a

few

days

before

writing,

he received a letter

telling

how generously Cosimo was to patronize his studies; Cosimo must have been

inspired

by

"celesti

quodam

afflatu"

at the

very

time that Ficino was

singing

the

hymn

for the

first

time,

and

have

thus

granted

the

prayer

it

ends

with.

Considering

the

typical pun

(Cosimo-Kosmos),

this

should

perhaps

not

be

taken

too

seriously;8

but

on

the

whole

Ficino

certainly

did take his

Orphic

1

No

one,

I

think,

would dare to affirm

dogmatically

what the aim of Pico's

Orphic

magic

was,

but

cf. his

Apologia (Opera,

p. 124),

where,

after

quoting

Iamblichus'

statement

(v.

supra,

note

4,

p.

ioi)

that

Pythagoras'

doctrines

are

derived from

Orpheus,

he

goes

on to

say

that

from the latter

"quicquid magnum

sub-

limeque

habuit Graeca

philosophia

ut

a

primo

fonte

manavit. Sed

qui

erat

veterum

mos

theologorum,

ita

Orpheus

suorum

dogmatum

mysteria

fabularum

intexit involucris

.. ."

which

Pico has

stripped

off. This seems to

me

to

imply

something

more than

the

magic

which

is "naturalis

philosophiae

absoluta

consummatio"

(ibid.,

p. 120).

2

Pico,

Opera,

p.

Io6

(Orphic

Conclusions

No.

2).

3

Ficino,

Opera, p.

944,

cf.

ibid.,

pp.

822,

871,

6o8;

Naldi's

two

poems

to

Ficino

(in

Kristeller, SupplementumFicinianum, Florence,

1937,

II,

37,

De

Orpheo

n

ejus cythara

picto,

and

II,

262,

in

which

Ficino,

by

metempsychosis,

has

Orpheus'

soul via

Pythagoras

and

En-

nius);

Della

Torre,

Storia dell'Accademia

Platonica

di

Firenze, Florence,

I902,

p. 490

(conjectures

on

Ficino's musical

education;

suggests

that,

in

a

scholars'

play,

he

played

the

part

of

a

boy

who

sings

to a

lyre

given

him

by

a

Muse,

with the

words:

Mulcentem

tigres

adamantaque

saxa

trahentem

Tu cape sacratam numine, sume lyram.),

p. 789 (from

Corsi's

biography

of

Ficino:

"Orphei

hymnos

exposuit,

miraque,

ut

ferunt,

dulcidine

ad

lyram

antiquo

more

cecinit").

Pico, also,

was

in

the habit

of

singing

"ad

lyram"

Latin

prayers

of

which he

had com-

posed

the

words

and

the

music

(G.-F.

Pico's

Life

of

him,

in

front of

G.

Pico,

Opera,

no

pag.).

4

Ficino, Opera,p. 944-

5

Kristeller,

Suppl.,

II,

87 (and

Della

Torre,

op.

cit.,

p.

537).

6

Orphica,

ed.

E.

Abel,

Leipzig, 1885,

p.

6o.

M

Ci6'

Wd-ryOv

0cLv

6aWoV

L

veo0pivT.

There is

an

invocation to

K6a[Le7 xazcp

earlier

in

the

hymn.

8

Such

a

pun

may,

of

course,

be

entirely

serious,

considering

the

widespread

belief

in

the

magical

power

of

names,

one

of

the

basic

assumptions

of Cabalism

and

Natural

Magic,

supported

by

the

theory

of

language,

deriving

ultimately

from Plato's

Cratylus, according

to

which

words have a

real,

and not

conven-

tional,

relation

to

their referents. But

some

of

Ficino's

puns

are

undoubtedly

jocular,

e.g.,

Opera, p.

788 (Letter

to

Foresio)

:

"Si

quis

nobis

objiciat,

illos

nimium

delirare,

quibus

nimium

agitur

res de

lyra.

Respondebis ...

nos ...

lyrare

ne

delyremus."

La

Boderie,

an

enthusiastically

Orphic

follower of

Ficino,

justified

his

passion

for

anagrams

of

proper

names

thus:

Vrayment

Platon n'a

point

pour

n6ant recherche

La

secr6te

vertu aus

propres

noms

comprise,

Ayant

de

noz

H6bries

ceste

science

aprise

Comme

autre meint

secret

qu'aus

Grecs

il a

cache.







ORPHEUS

THE

THEOLOGIAN

AND RENAISSANCE PLATONISTS

103

singing

seriously,

and the

ritualistic,

magical

(either

in Pico's or

Collingwood'sx

sense)

use

of the

Hymns may,

as we shall

see,

provide

a clue to the

origins

of the interest

in all the

Orphic

writings.2

II

The

Orphica.

The tradition

of

the

"Prisci

Theologi."

The

veiling

of

truth

"Let

us

now,"

in the words of

Thomas

Taylor,3

"proceed

to

his

theology;

exchanging

the

obscurity

of

conjecture

for

the

light

of clear

evidence;

and

the intricate

labyrinths

of fable for

the

delightful

though

solitary

paths

of

truth."

The

Orphica

can,

for

our

purposes,

be

roughly

divided into

three

groups:

(I)

Fragments

of

verse

embedded

in

various ancient

writers,

mainly

in

the Greek

Fathers,

particularly

Pseudo-Justin

(author

of

the

Cohortatio d

Gentiles),

Clement

of

Alexandria,

Eusebius,

and

in

Proclus.4

These are of

varying dates, some possibly going back to pre-Platonic times.5

(2)

The

Hymns.6

These are now

usually thought

to be

of

the second or

third

century

A.D. and are not

quoted

by any

ancient writer.

They

are not

particularly

Orphic

in

content,

but are

considered

by

modern

scholars to

be

genuine

examples

of

hymns

used

by

some

religious

sect. Like other

Hellenistic

hymns,

they

consist

largely

of

strings

of

epithets.

(3)

The

Argonautica.

This is

a

poem

of the

late fourth

century

A.D.,

based

largely

on the

Argonautica

f

Apollonius

of

Rhodes.7

(L'Encyclie

esSecrets e

'Eternite,

.d.

(1570/1),

p.

254,

cf.

p.

213).

1

v.

Collingwood,

The

Principles f Art,

Ox-

ford,

1938, p. 57

f. Pletho's

theory

of

prayer

(v.

infra,

n.

6,

p.

IO8)

is an

example

of Col-

lingwood's meaning

of

magic.

2

v.

infra,

p.

Io8.

3

The

Hymns

of

Orpheus,

Translated

rom

the

original

Greek

With

a

Preliminary

Dzssertation

on

The

Life

and

Theology

f

Orpheus,

London,

1792, p.

I2,

introducing

a

detailed

exposition

of

Proclus'

metaphysics.

4

A

fairly complete

edition

of

these was

published

by

Henri Estienne:

Ilov•omS

9LL,6aoc9og.

oesis

Philosophica,

vel

saltem,

Reliquiaepoesis philosophicae,Empedoclis,

Par-

menidis,

Xenophanis,

Cleanthis, Timonis,

Epi-

charmi.

Adiuncta unt

Orphei

llius

carmina

qui

a suis

appellatus

uit

6

OeoX?6yoq.

tem,

Heracliti

et

Democriti

oci

quidam,

&

eorum

pistolae,

Paris,

1573.

There was

a

different edition

of

them

in

I588:

Oppe

cq

en-

OeooyL•x

. .

., Paris,

Steph.

Prevosteau,

1588.

The

invaluable

modern edition of

them

by

Kern has

already

been

cited

(v.

supra,

note

I,

p.

Ioo).

5

I

am

not,

of

course,

here concerned

with

the

extremely

controversial historical

prob-

lems of ancient

Orphism,

on

which

see:

W. K. C. Guthrie, Orpheus ndGreekReligion,

London,

I935;

K.

Ziegler,

articles

Orpheus

and

Orphische Dichtung

in

Pauly-Wissowa,

Real-Encyclopddie

der Classischen

Altertumswissen-

schaft,

Stuttgart,

1942;

E. R.

Dodds,

The

Greeks

and the

Irrational,

Univ.

of

California,

1951,

Ch.

V.

6

There

is a

critical

edition of these

by

Quandt

(Berlin,

I940),

which I

have

not

been

able

to see.

The

only

other modern edi-

tion

is

that

by

Abel

(v.

supra,

note

6,

p.

102).

The editio

princeps

is:

'OppecS

'Apyovottuvxx,

Florentie,

Philippi

Junte, I5oo,

containing,

besides

the

Argonautica,

Orpheus'

and

Proclus'

Hymns;

the edition is

probably

by

Constan-

tine

Lascaris

(v.

E.

Legrand,

Bibliographie

hellinique, Paris, 1885, I, lxxxvi).

At least

a

dozen

other editions

appeared

during

the

I6th

century.

There

are

at least

24

MSS.,

mostly

of the

I5th

century;

none

are earlier.

It

seems

likely

that the first MS.

was

brought

over

from

Constantinople

by

Giovanni

Aurispa

in

1424

(v.

R.

Sabbadini,

Biografia

Documentata

di

Giovanni

Aurispa,

Noto,

I890,

p.

20,

and Ambrosius

Traversarius,

Latinae

Epistolae,

ed. L.

Mehus,

Florence,

1759,

col.

1026/7).

7

There is a

critical

edition and translation

by

G.

Dottin

(Les

Argonautiques

'Orph&e,

aris,

1930). For ed.princ. v. supra,note 6, p. 103).







10o4

D.

P.

WALKER

Of

these,

group

(i)

is

for

us

by

far

the most

important.

The

Hymns,

apart

from the use of

them

just

described,

are

not

very

suitable to

Christian-Platonic

purposes;

but

their

lack

of

any

specific

content made them well fitted for

ingenious,

Proclus-like

interpretations,

of

which Ficino's

commentary

on the

Hymnto Nature' is a good example. The Argonautica ere chiefly of interest

because

of

passages

where

Orpheus sings

short

cosmogonies,2

and

the

mention

that

he

had been to

Egypt.3

With

regard

to the

antiquity

of all

these

works

and their

attribution

to

Orpheus,

Renaissance

scholars were

aware

that

many

of the

Orphic

poems

must be

of

widely

different

dates;

they

knew,

from

the Suidas

Lexicon,

that

several

different authors had

written

under the name

of

Orpheus.4

Agostino

Steuco,

in

1540,

and

Henri

Estienne,

1566,

both assert

on internal

evidence

that

the

Hymns

must be later

than

most of

the

Fragments.5

Leonardo

Bruni,

in

about

1420,

and

Gian-Francesco

Pico,

in

1496,

even

reproduce

Aristotle's

denial that

Orpheus

was

the

author

of

the

Orphica

or indeed that he ever

existed.6

But, on the whole, at least as far as group (I) is concerned, these

questions

were not

discussed;

those

syncretists

who

make

great

use

of

Orpheus

assumed that the

Orphica,

even if

not

all

literally by

Orpheus,

were

the

genuine

sacred

writings

of a

very

ancient

religious

tradition.

The

context

in

which

group

(I)

was

found

by

Renaissance

scholars was

extremely

important,

since it indicated how

these

fragments

might

be

used.

The

Greek Fathers

were

quoting Orpheus

in

order

to

show

that

anything

valuable

in

Greek

philosophy

had been stolen from

Moses,

and

Proclus

pointed

the

way

to the

interpretation

of

polytheism

in

terms of an

intricate scheme of

metaphysical

entities.8

Proclus would

also

suggest

the

conception

of an

ancient,

pre-Platonic,

religious

tradition,

including

Orpheus,

the Chaldaean

Oracles and Pythagoras. It was on a combination of these lines that the

Renaissance

syncretists

worked.9

They

all made certain

basic

assumptions,

which

are,

roughly:

1

Letter to

Germain de

Ganay,

in

Ficino's

translation of

Athenagoras'

De

Resurrectione,

Paris,

1498,

reprinted

by

Kristeller,

"The

Scholastic

Background

of Marsilio

Ficino,"

Traditio,

II,

257, 1944.

2

Orph.

Arg.,

1.

419 (cf.

Apollonius

Rhod.,

Arg.,

I,

492).

3

Ibid.,

1.

43-

4

v.

Kern, op. cit.,

test.

223, cf. ibid.,

test.

225

(ConstantineLascaris,

7rpo)ey6Leva

ou

aopou3

'Opcpis).

5

Steuco,

De

Perenni

Philosophia,Lyons,

I540,

I,

xxviii

(Steuco, Opera

Omnia,Venice,

i591,

III,

f.

24

vo).

H.

Estienne,

Praefatio

o

his

O1

t

'HpoaxSq

rnovtae•r

~

CpwAe60xovreqS

notL7Ta,

I566,

p.

487;

this contains the

Orphic

Argonautica,

Hymns

and Lithica.

6

Cicero,

De

Natura

Deorum,

I,

xxxviii:

"Orpheum

poetam

docet

Aristoteles

nun-

quam

fuisse,

et

hoc

Orphicum

carmen

Py-

thagorei

ferunt

cujusdam

fuisse

Cercopis."

Leonardo

Bruni

Aretino, Humanistisch-philoso-

phische

Schriften,

herausg.

Hans

Baron,

Leip-

zig, 1928, p. 133 (Proemium

n

quasdam

orationes

Homeri,

proving

these to be

the

oldest;

else-

where

(ibid., p. 59,

Le

Vite

di Dante

e

di

Petrarca)

he

cites

Orpheus

and Hesiod

as

examples

of

poets inspired

by furor).

Gian-Francesco

Pico,

Opera

Omnia, Basle,

1573 (Tom.

II

of

both

Picos'

Op.

Omn.),

p.

36.

7

This is

explicit

in

Cudworth,

who

dis-

cusses the

antiquity

and

authenticity

of the

Orphica

at

great length

and

finally

concludes

that,

though

some

are

perhaps

not

by

Or-

pheus

but

by Pythagoras

and other

disciples,

most of them are

in

the tradition

of the

"alle-

gorical

theology"

initiated

by

Orpheus

(Ralph

Cudworth,

The

true

intellectual

System

of

the

Universe,

2nd

ed., London,

1743,

I, IV,

xvii,

pp.

I,

294

f.;

first ed.

1678).

8

On

Proclus see

Rosan,

op.

cit.

(supra,

note

6,

p. IoI).

9

Other

modern works

dealing

with

this

kind

of

syncretism

are:

Ludwig Mohler,







ORPHEUS

THE THEOLOGIAN

AND RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

105

Either:

there

were

partial

pre-Christian

revelations,

other

than

that

given

to

the

Jews,

and/or

a

continuous

tradition

of divine

knowledge

deriving

ultimately

from

pre-lapsarian

Adam;

Or:

the

only

pre-Christian

revelation

was the

Jewish

one;

but this

filtered

through to the Gentiles. The usual channel of communication was Egypt;

Moses

had

taught

the

Egyptian

priests,

or had

left books

there.

The

second of

these

is the more

usual

assumption;

or

the two

can

be

combined

together,

if

one

substitutes

"chief"

for

"only"

in the second.

From

either

or

both

these

assumptions

derive

lists of ancient

thinkers,

the

prisci

theologi,

ll

teaching

the

same

religious

truth;

a

typical

one would

run

some-

thing

like

this:

(Adam,

Abraham),

Zoroaster, Moses,

Hermes

Trismegistus,

(the

Druids), Orpheus,

Pythagoras,

Plato

.

.

.1

The

series culminates

in

the

New

Testament;

but,

since

the

main intention

is

to

provide

a

Christian

Platonism,

it

can

be continued

to

include

the

Neoplatonists,

as valuable

inter-

preters

of

Plato,

and

Denis

the

Areopagite,

the

disciple

of

St.

Paul,

whose

remarkable conformity with Proclus greatly increased the authority of the

latter.2

These

prisci

theologi

may

either derive

successively

one from

another,

or

each

may

be said

to have visited

Egypt

and there learnt

the

Mosaic

doctrine,

or,

more

usually,

both.

Orpheus

is

nearly

always

the oldest

of

the

Greeks,

and,

having

visited

Egypt,

is

thus

the

main source

of

religious

truth

for

Pythagoras,

Plato, etc.;

but

these

had

also studied

in

Egypt

and were also

influenced

by

Zoroaster

and

Hermes

Trismegistus3-that

is to

say,

the

tradi-

tion

had

several

channels,

which

might

all

operate

at once.

The

occurrence

in the

Orphica

of odd bits

of

Homer and

Hesiod

is,

of

course,

explained

the

wrong

way

round

;4

Hesiod's

theogony

is

thus

thought

to be based on

Orpheus'.

Occasionally,

however,

it is

suggested

that Musaeus

was the

teacher

of Or-

pheus,

instead of

being

his

disciple

or son as usual ;5 this was because, in

Kardinal

Bessarion als

Theologe,

Humanist und

Staatsmann,

Paderborn,

1923

(Quellen

und

Forschungen..

.

herausg.

v. d.

G6rres-Gesell-

schaft,

Bd.

XX);

Th.

Freudenberger,

Augus-

tinus

Steuchus

aus

Gubbio,

Augustinerchorherr

nd

Papstlicher

Bibliothekar

(1497-1548),

Mtinster

i.

W.,

1935;

Bohdan

Kieszkowski,

Studi sul

Platonismo

del Rinascimento

in

Italia,

Florence,

1936;

Giuseppe

Anichini,

L'Umanesimo

e

il

problema

della

salvezza

in

Marsilio

Ficino,

Milan,

1937;

Milton

V.

Anastos,

"Pletho's Calendar

and Liturgy," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, No. 4,

pp.

183-305,

Harvard U.

P.,

1948;

P.

O.

Kristeller,

"The

Scholastic

Background

of

Marsilio

Ficino,"

Traditio,

I,

257,

1944,

and

"La Posizione

storica di

Ficino,"

Civilta

Moderna,

933

(which

I have not been

able to

see);

E.

H.

Gombrich,

"Icones

symbolicae,"

Journal

f

the

Warburg

ndCourtauld

nstitutes,

XI,

163, 1948.

1

v.,

e.g.,

Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

.

25

(De

Chris-

tiana

Religione,

c.

xxii:

"Prisca

gentilium

Theologia,

in

qua

Zoroaster,

Mercurius,

Or-

pheus,

Aglaophemus,

Pythagoras

consense-

runt, tota in Platonis nostri voluminibus

continentur";

cf.

ibid.,

p. I,

where the Druids

are

mentioned),

p.

871/2

(where

the

list is

extended to

Plotinus

and Ficino

himself),

cf.

Kristeller,

The

Philosophy

of

Marsilio

Ficino,

Columbia

U.

P.,

I943,

p.

25;

Steuco,

Op.

Omn., III,

97v, I4',

26r;

Amaury

Bouchard,

De Lexcellence

et immortalite

de

Lame,

Bib. Nat.

MS.

Fr.

1991,

f.

10,

32v;

Gemistus

Pletho,

Nooyv

E7uyypO~y%

%

c

acOo[ev.e,

ed. C.

Alex-

andre,

trad.

A.

Pellissier,

Paris,

1858,

pp.

30-

32 (Zoroaster... (Magi,

Brahmins,

Curetes),

Eumolpus .

.

. seven sages . . . Pythagoras,

Plato...

Plotinus,

Porphyry, Iamblichus;

cf.

Anastos,

op.

cit.,

p.

280), 253;

Cornelius

Agrippa,

De Incertitudine

et

Vanitate

Scientiarum

declamatio

invectiva,

ed.

of

1539

(no

place),

c.

lii,

Ivi.

2v.

Introduction

to

Oeuvres

Completes

du

Pseudo-Denys L'Ariopagite,

ed. &

trad.

M. de

Gandillac, Paris,

1943.

3

Cf.

supra, p.

ioo,

and

infra,

n.

6,

p.

Io7;

n.

9, p.

i08.

4

E.g.

G.-F.

Pico,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

130.

s E.g.

Steuco,

Op.

Omn.,

f.

24V,

who adds:

"quod ipse non affirmo."







Io6 D. P.

WALKER

Eusebius,1

Artapanus

states

that the Greeks

called Moses

Musaeus2-Orpheus

can

thus

learn

directly

from

Moses.

This

is,

unfortunately,

contradicted

by

Orpheus'

own

writings,3

and

for

most Renaissance

writers

Orpheus

is the

oldest

of

the

Greek

poets,

philosophers,

theologians.

We now come to the question: why, if Orpheus and Plato had read the

Pentateuch

in

Egypt

and

recognized

it as

divinely

inspired,

did

they

not

merely

translate

it4

and

comment

on

it?

The answer to this is

in the

theory

of the

poetic veiling

of

truth

with

fables,

and its

correlative,

the

allegorical

interpretation

of

religious

texts.

It

has,

of

course,

been

generally

considered,

from the time

of Philo and

the Greek Fathers

up

to

the

Renaissance,

that

most or

all

of the Old

Testament could and should

be

interpreted

allegori-

cally;5

thus

the

very

source

of

this

tradition,

Moses'

writings,

was itself

wrapped

in

fables.6 As Pico

explains,

in

his

Heptaplus,

Moses

seems "rudis"

only

because

he

is

talking

in

fables;

which

he does both in

order

not to

blind

the

simple

and

ignorant

with too

much

light,

and in

order

to

convey

several

quite distinct meanings at once.' Thus Plato and Orpheus are only following

their

master's

example

when

they

too

conceal the

truth

in

enigmas,

fables and

myths,

lest it should

be

profaned

and

despised

by

the

vulgar.8

Plato also had

an

additional

reason:"

Socrates' death was

due to

imprudently

unveiled talk

about

religious

truth.

By

means

of

these

theories

the

whole of

ancient

poly-

theism can be

explained away,

or

rather

accepted allegorically.'0

It

must

also be

remembered

that

Renaissance

poets

and

philosophers

were often

1

Eusebius,

Praep. Evang.,

IX,

xxvii,

432

a,

(Kern,

test.,

44).

2

Moses was

also

occasionally

identified

with Hermes

(Eusebius, ibid., 432 b; cf. Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

p. 29).

Dorat

(elegiacs

in

La

Boderie,

Encyclie,

p. 156)

adds to

Musaeus-

Moses,

rather

wildly:

Hebrus-Hebrew,

Daph-

nis-David,

Hesiod-Isaiah.

3

v.

Kern,

fr.

247,

lines

4,

I8,

test. I68.

4

Augustine

(Civ.

Dei, VIII,

xi)

deals

with

the

difficulty

that

the

Scriptures

were not

yet

translated

into

Greek

by

suggesting

that

Plato,

while in

Egypt,

had

them

read to him

by

an

interpreter.

5

I

am

using

the

term

"allegorical"

a

little

loosely,

to

refer to

any

non-literal

interpreta-

tion.

6

v.

e.g.

Clemens

Alex.,

Stromata,

V, iv-xii;

V,

xi,

contains a

good

example

of his

Biblical

interpretation:

the

Pythagoreans'

and

Soc-

rates'

teaching

that,

for

religious contempla-

tion,

the

soul

must be

separated

from the

body

derives from

Moses' command

(Leviticus,

vii)

that burnt

offerings

be skinned and divided

into

parts.

According

to

Ps.

Justin

(op.

cit.,

c.

29,

Migne,

Pat.

Gr., 6,

col.

296),

Plato's

theory

of

Ideas derived from

his

failure

to

understand the

mystical

sense of Moses'

writings;

he

took too

literally

Exodus,

xxv.

9,

40 (the tabernacle to be made after the

pattern

shown to Moses on the

mountain)

and the double

account of

the

creation

in

Genesis. Clement

(Strom.,

V,

xiv),

on

the

other

hand,

thinks

that

Platonists

rightly

de-

duced the

intelligible

and sensible worlds

from the

double

creation of heaven

and

earth

and

of

man

(Genesis

i.

I, 8, 1o;

i.

27;

ii.

7;

cf.

Eusebius,

Praep.

Evang.,

XI, xxiii,

xxiv).

Pico finds his three worlds

(angelic,

celestial,

sublunar)

clearly

represented

in

Moses'

divi-

sion of the

tabernacle

into three

parts

(Exodus

xxvi-xxviii; Pico,

Heptaplus,

in

Pico,

De

Hominis

Dignitate,

De

Ente

et

Uno

.

.

.

,

ed. E.

Garin, Florence,

1942,

p.

186).

7

Pico,

Heptaplus,

ed.

cit.,

p.

170o.

8

A

very

frequently

cited

text

is

Plato,

Epist., II,

312

d e, (cppoao-ov aot881

o•myt.&v

. .

etc.).

Cf.

Bessarion,

In Calumniatorem

Platonis,

ed. L.

Mohler,

Paderborn,

1927,

p.

11

(Ch.

I, ii,

"Quam

ob

causam

Plato

de

summis rebus aut

nihil aut

per

aenigmata

scripserit"),

15;

Steuco,

op.

cit.,

III,

8v,

where

the Plato letter

is

compared

with

the

opening

of

Orpheus'

Palinode

(v.

infra,

note

8,

p.

I

lo);

Pico,

passage quoted

above,

note

I,

p.

I02.

9

v.

infra,

note

7,

p. 109.

10

E.g.

Pletho

(op.

cit.,

p.

130)

states

that

he

uses

the

names

of

gods only

as

a

conveniently

short

way

of

referring

to

metaphysical

enti-

ties; cf. infra, note 6, p. io8.







ORPHEUS

THE THEOLOGIAN

AND RENAISSANCE PLATONISTS

1o7

themselves

deliberately

veiled

and

obscure,

and

echo

again

and

again

"Odi

profanum volgus

et

arceo."'

Pico,

for

example,

was

intentionally

enigmatic

in his

Orphic

Conclusions because "secretam

Magiam

a

nobis

primum

ex

Orphei

hymnis

elicitam

fas non

est

in

publicum

explicare"

2

and ean

Dorat

taught the Plkiade:

... comment

On

doit

feindre et

cacher

les

fables

proprement,

Et a bien

desguiser

la verit6 des choses

D'un

fabuleux manteau dont elles

sont

encloses

:

which

they certainly

did their

best to

carry

out.4

III

The

beginnings

f

Renaissance

eligious

yncretism:

icino,

Plethoand

Bessarion

In the Renaissance

the

Orphica

appear

in

company

with the

Hermetica,

the

Chaldaean Oracles

(i.e.

Zoroaster),5

the

Sybils,

etc.,

all

of

which

are

used

for the

same end:

to link Moses with

Plato,

Genesis

with

the

Timaeus,

nd

both

with

Christian doctrine.

I

am, therefore,

dealing

with

only

one

strand in

a

tradition made

up

of

several.

These

writers

who use this

prisca theologia

o

reconcile

Platonism with

Christianity

can,

I

think,

be

said to

start

with

Ficino,6

who

greatly

influenced

many

of his

successors,

and the

list,

by

no

means

complete,

would

continue:

the

two

Picos,

Symphorien

Champier,

Amaury

Bouchard,

Agrippa

of

Nettesheim,

Agostino

Steuco,

La

Boderie,

Duplessis-Mornay,

Walter

Raleigh

...

Cudworth

...

Thomas

Taylor.

One

might, however, perhaps push the origins of this kind of syncretism a little

further back than

Ficino.

Gemistus

Pletho,

who,

according

to

Ficino,7

gave

Cosimo

de'

Medici the

initial

idea

of

starting

a

Platonic

academy,

is

an

obvious candidate. Kristeller

writes:8

"Ficino

obviously

derived

at

least one

characteristic idea from

Pletho-the

idea of

an

ancient tradition

of

pagan

theology

that

led

directly

from

Zoroaster,

Hermes

Trismegistus,

Orpheus,

1

Horace,

Carmina,

II,

i.

2

Pico,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

io6

(Orphic

Concl.,

No.

I).

3

Ronsard,

Hymne

e

l'Automne

Oeuvres

om-

pletes,

ed.

Vaganay,

Paris,

1923-4,

VI,

159);

cf. his Abbrege e l'Art PoetiqueFrangoys,1565

(ed.

cit., IV,

471):

"Car

la

Poesie

n'estoit

au

premier Age qu'une

Theologie allegorique,

pour

faire entrer

au

cerveau des hommes

grossiers

par

fables

plaisantes

et colorees

les

secrets

qu'ils

ne

pouvoient

comprendre, quand

trop

ouvertement on

descouvroit

la

verit&.

Eumolpe

Cecropien,

Line maistre

d'Hercule,

Orphee,

Homere,

Hesiode inventerent un

si

excellent

mestier."

*

Ronsard

in

his

Hymnes

onsidered

himself

to be

an

Orphic

poet;

the first of them

begins

(Hymne

de

l'-terniti,

i1556,

ed.

cit.,

VI,

i)

:

Remply

d'un feu

divin,

qui

m'a

l'ame

eschauff6e,

Je

veux

mieux

que

devant,

suivant

es

pas

d'Orf&e,

Descouvrir

es secretsde

Nature

et des

Cieux

.

.

.

5

Plethoseems

o

have

been

mainly

respon

sible

for the

attribution

of these Oracles to

Zoroaster v. Anastos,op.cit.,p. 287).

6

To

be

complete

the

history

should

be

takenback

nto

the Middle

Ages:

St. Thomas

Aquinas,

e.g.,

mentions

Orpheus

as a

poetic

theologian

(v.

Curtius,

Europdische

iteratur nd

Lateinisches

Mittelalter, Bern,

1948,

pp.

221-3),

and several

times

states

that

Plato was able

to

get

so

near the

truth

because

he had visited

Egypt

(quoted

by

Bessarion,

op.

cit.,

p. 297).

Aquinas'

source

is St.

Augustine,

Civ.

Dei,

VIII, xiv,

xxxvii.

7

Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

1537;

cf.

Della

Torre,

op.

cit.,

pp.

426,

443,

456, 530.

8

Philosophyof Ficino, p.

I

5.







io8

D. P.

WALKER

and

Pythagoras

to Plato and

his followers

..

."

This is

perhaps

true,

with

one,

for

us,

important exception:

Pletho

does not

in

any

of his

surviving

works

mention

Orpheus,

nor

quote,

nor refer

to,

any

Orphica.1

But this

does not

necessarily

mean that he had not

read them. For neither

does he

mention

Proclus, who, as his adversary Gennadius pointed out,2 is certainly the main

source

of

his

theology,

and

he could

not

have read

Proclus without

becoming

aware of

the

importance

of the

Orphica.

Moreover

he

wrote out a

copy

of

fourteen

of

the

Orphic

Hymns,3

and

it

seems

likely

that these have

some

connexion

with the

hymns

that

figure

so

largely

in

the

surviving

bits of

his

Nomoi,

with

the elaborate

directions

for

singing

them,

for musical

modes,

postures,

days

and times of

day.4

Here we have

something

very

like

Pico's

and Ficino's

theurgic,

magic

singing

of the

Orphic

Hymns

;5

and

Pletho,

like

Pico,

interprets

Orpheus' gods

as

well-defined

metaphysical

or

natural

prin-

ciples.6

Since Ficino's interest in

Orpheus

as

a

theologian

probably began

with

the

Hymns,

which

are

among

his

very

earliest

translations from Greek

(I462),7

together perhaps with his first reading Eusebius' PraeparatioEvangelica

in

the same

year,

it does seem

quite possible

that

the

ultimate

source

of

this

interest

may

have been an

enthusiasm for

a

peculiar type

of ancient

hymn-

singing

which

Pletho left

behind

him after the Council of

Florence

(I438/9).

With

regard

to the derivation from Pletho of the

general

theory

of a

"prisca

theologia,"

that too is

possible;

but it should

be

remembered:

first,

that

once

Ficino

had

begun

reading

such authors

as

Eusebius,

Proclus,

or even

Augus-

tine,9

such

a

theory

would occur

to

him

in

any

case.

Secondly,

Pletho was

an

anti-Christian

writer,'x

and was therefore

using

the

prisca heologia

or

purposes

1

Kieszkowski

writes

(op.

cit.,

p. 33):

"Ple-

tone parla frequentemente delle tradizioni

religiose

antiche,

specialmente

delle

dottrine

orfiche,

mettendole

in

rilievo

..

.",

giving

as

examples

Pletho's scheme

of

Olympic

gods,

and his

references

to

Eumolpus

and

the

Curetes.

The

only

one of

these which

might

possibly

seem to be

specifically Orphic

is

the

last;

but

Pletho

interprets

the

Curetes

euhemeristically,

as

early

Greek

theologians,

parallel

to

the Brahmins and

Magi

(Pletho,

op.

cit.,

pp.

30-32).

2

v.

Anastos,

op.

cit.,

p.

29I.

3v.

J.

Morellius,

Bibliothecae

regiae

Divi

Marci Venetiarum . . Bibliotheca manuscripta

Graeca

et

Latina, I,

Bassani,

18o2,

p.

269.

4

Pletho,

Hcpt

NoVuav,

ed.

cit.,

p.

202

f.,

230

f.;

cf.

Anastos,

op.

cit.,

pp.

255,

267 ("In

both

matter

and

style,

Pletho's

hymns

.

.

closely

resemble

the

pedantic

hymns

of

Proclus

and

the

pseudo-Orpheus"),

268

(sug-

gestion

that

Pletho's

system

of four

modes

is

based

on

the

eight

xo%

f

Byzantine

liturgy).

5

v.

supra,

p.

102.

6

Pletho,

op.

cit.,

p.

202

(e.g.

Apollo--

identity,

Artemis-diversity);

Pico,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

Io6

(Orphic Conclusions,

No.

3):

"Nomina deorum, quos Orpheus canit, non

decipientium

daemonum,

A

quibus

malum

&

non bonum provenit, sed naturalium vir-

tutum,

divinarumque

sunt

nomina,

A

vero

Deo

in

utilitatem maxime

hominis,

si

eis uti

scierit,

mundo distributarum."

Pletho's con-

ception

of

prayers

and

hymn-singing

was

very

much more rational

than

Pico's;

he

states

that

they

have

no effective connexion

with

an

objective divinity,

either

as

praise

or

suppli-

cation,

but

are of

purely

subjective

value,

moulding

our

p•vmoarwxov

to

that which

is

divine

in

us

(v.

Pletho, ibid.,

pp.

150,

186).

7v.

Kristeller,

Suppl.

Ficin., I,

cxliv/v;

Della

Torre,

op.

cit.,

p.

537.

8

v. infra, p. III.

9

Cf.

supra,

note

6,

p.

107.

The

theory

of

Plato's

being

a

follower

of

Moses

appears

already

in

Bruni,

though

he

rejects

it

on

chronological grounds

(Prologue

to

his trans-

lation of

the

Phaedo,

ited

by

Della

Torre,

op.

cit.,

p.

444).

His source

is St.

Augustine

(Civ.

Dei, VIII,

xi),

who

rejects

the tradition that

it was

through

meeting Jeremiah

that

Plato

had

learnt

Moses'

doctrine,

but

thinks it

very

probable

that he

had

read

the Pentateuch.

10

v.

Pletho,

op.

cit.,

p.

258;

cf.

Kieszkowski,

op.

cit.,

p.

15.







ORPHEUS THE THEOLOGIAN AND RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

Io09

very

different

from

Ficino's.

Thirdly, George

of Trebizond's

attack on

Pletho

and

Platonism

appeared

circa

1455,1

whereas

Bessarion's

reply

was

not

pub-

lished

until

1469, though

written

about ten

years

earlier;2

Pletho

and his

Platonism

would therefore

be in

particularly

bad odour

in the

1450's

and

146o's. This was perhaps the real reason why Ficino did not publish his

translation

of the

Hymns3-he

did not want to follow in Pletho's

footsteps.

Bessarion

would

be

another obvious

source

for

Ficino,

were

it not

that

Ficino

had

apparently

not read the

In

Calumniatoremlatonis

until

Bessarion

sent

him

a

copy

in

1469.4

Nevertheless,

Bessarion is another

important

starting-point,

though

probably

less influential than

Ficino,

for the

Christian

interpretation

of

Plato

and

the

prisci

theologi.

He

only

cites

Orpheus

once,5

though

he remarks

"quem

Plato

in

plerisque sequitur,"

and

is not

in

general

much concerned

with

pre-Platonic theologians.

But

he

does

state that

Plato,

when in

Egypt,

learnt

much

from Mosaic

writings.6

He

reproduces

Pseudo-

Justin's suggestion

that Plato

was

prevented

from

clearly

publishing

his true

religious views by the example of Socrates' death.' He examines with great

detail

and

competence

the

resemblances and differences

between

Platonic and

Neoplatonic

triads and the

Christian

trinity.8

All

these are

typical

and

persistent

themes of

the

Renaissance

Platonists with

whom we are

concerned.

IV

Orpheus'

monotheism.His Palinode

n

the

Renaissance

The main

religious

truths which Ficino and

his followers

found

in

the

Orphica

and

in

other

prisci

theologi

were:

monotheism,

the

trinity,

and

the

creation as recounted in Genesis. Orpheus is chiefly cited in connexion with

the

first

two,

and I shall

confine

myself

to

these.

For

monotheism,

by

far the

most

important

and

most

frequently

cited

1

In

MS.

(v.

Mohler,

Bessarion,

I,

350

f.).

It was

printed

much later:

Comparationes

Phylosophorum

Aristotelis et Platonis

a

Georgio

Trapezuntio

viro

clarissimo, Venice,

1523.

2

Bessarion,

In Calumniatorem

latonis, Rome,

1469;

v.

Mohler,

op.

cit., I,

358

f.

3

Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

933 (Letter

to Mar-

tinus

Uranius,

June

I492):

"Argonautica

&

hymnos Orphei,

&

Homeri

&

Proculi,

Theo-

logiamque Hesiodi, quae

adolescens

(nescio

quomodo)

ad verbum mihi soli

transtuli,

quemadmodum

tu

nuper

hospes

apud

me

vidisti,

edere

nunquam placuit,

ne

forte

lectores

ad

priscum

deorum

daemonumque

cultum

iamdiu

merit6

reprobatum,

revocare

viderer,

quantum

enim

Pythagoricis

quon-

dam curae fuit

ne divina

in

vulgus

ederent,

tanta

mihi

semper

cura

fuit,

non

divulgare

prophana

.

. ."

Considering

the

enormously

important

part

played by

the

ancient

gods

in

Ficino's

published

works,

this

seems,

by

itself,

an

insufficient

reason.

4v. Ficino, Op. Omn., p. 616/7 (letter

to

Bessarion).

5

Bessarion,

In Cal.

Plat.,

ed.

Mohler,

p.

121;

Orpheus'

aether

and

chaos,

produced

from Time

(Kern,

Fr.

54 (Damascius) and/or

66

(Proclus) ),

are the

same

as

r6

nl-pma

nd

,6

&neypo

in

Plato's

Philebus

(I6c,

23c,

24a-e).

Bessarion

possessed

a

MS.

copy

of

the

Orphic

Hymns

and

Argonautica (Venice,

Marciana,

cod.

gr. 480;

v.

C.

Nigra,

"Inni

di

Callimacho,"

Rivista

difilologia

e

d'istruzione

classica,

Turin,

I892,

p. 200).

6

Ibid.,

p.

245,

based on:

Augustine,

Civ.

Dei,

.VIII,

xi;

Cyril,

Contra

Julianum,

I

(Migne,

Pat.

Gr.,

76,

col.

524

f.);

Eusebius,

Praep. Evang.,

passim.

Mohler's

comment on

this

is

(op.

cit., I,

389):

"Wer

m6chte

aber

ihm das

verargen,

da seine

Zeit

tiberhaupt

noch keinen

Einblick

in

die

philosophie-

geschichtliche

Entwicklung gehabt

hat "

7

Bessarion,

op.

cit.,

p.

229;

cf.

Ps.-Justin,

Cohort.

ad

Gent.,

c.

20

(Migne,

Pat.

Gr.,

6,

col.

276).

8

Ibid., pp. 93 f., 297 f.







IIO

D. P.

WALKER

Orphic

fragment

is that

known as

the Testament

(Atmo"imx)

r

the

Palinode,

now

usually

considered to be a

Jewish

forgery,

of which there

are

several

versions

in

Ps.-Justin,

Clement,

Eusebius and

Cyril.

I

In

the

Justinian

version,2

Orpheus,

after

shutting

the

doors

against

the

profane,

announces to

his

dis-

ciple, Musaeus, that he is now going to speak the truth-let not Musaeus

deprive

himself of

blessed

eternity

through

those

things

he

previously

believed,

but

look to

the

Divine

Word,

to the

one Ruler

of

the

universe,

and be

guided

by

Him.

He is

one,

self-created,

creator of all

things;

no mortal

has ever

seen

Him.

Out of

goodness

He

sends

mortals evil

things,

bloody

war

and

weeping

pains

(or

in

Eusebius'

version:3

He

does

not send

them,

but

men

are

subject

to

them).

He

is seated in

the

heavens on a

golden

throne;

the

earth

is

under

His

feet;

He

stretches

forth His

right

hand

over the

oceans,

and makes the

mountains and

seas to

shake.

The

Greek

Fathers,

except

Eusebius,

cite

this as a

recantation,

as

showing

that

Orpheus,

having

visited

Egypt

and

there read

Moses'

writings,

realized

the error of his former polytheism4-that is, as a means of discrediting the

Greek

gods.

Ficino,

however,

and his earlier

followers,

did not

wish

Orpheus

to

abjure

all

his

polytheistic

writings;

the

many

gods

were

still

indispensable

and

could

be made

harmless in

a

variety

of

ways,5

in

Ficino's case

by

inter-

preting

them as

aspects

of

the

one

Jove:

"...

Orpheus

non solum

deos omnes

in uno collocat

Jove

tim

opifice

mundi,

quim

animo

mundi,

verum etiam

in

quolibet

Deo

saepe

numina

cuncta

commemorat,

quem

nos

in

libro de

sole

imitati

sumus."6

In a letter

of

I492,7

Ficino,

after

saying

that he did

not

publish

his

translation of

the

Hymns

for

fear of

encouraging

polytheism,

sends,

as

promised,

"tutiora

quaedam Orphei

carmina."

The first

of

these

"safer

Orphic songs"

is

an

extremely

free Latin

version of

the

Palinode,

which

omits

the

warning

to Musaeus not to be misled

by

formerbeliefs, so that

any

appear-

ance of

its

being

a

recantation

has

gone.s

This

version is taken from

George

1

Kern,

Fr.

245-247.

Eusebius

says

his

version comes

from

Aristobulus;

if

so,

the

frag-

ment would date

from

the 2nd

century

B.c.;

but

these

passages

from

Aristobulus

in

Euse-

bius

are

often

thought

to

be

forgeries

of the

3rd

century

A.D.

2

Kern,

Fr.

245.

3

Kern,

Fr.

247,

lines

13-16.

4

E.g.

Ps.-Justin,

Coh.

ad

Gent.,

c.

14/15

(Migne, Patr., ser. graec., 6, col. 268): "Some

of

you,

I

think,

must be

aware,

if

you

have

read

Diodorus

Siculus and other

historians

of

those

times,

that

Orpheus

and

Homer,

and

Solon,

who

gave

the Athenians their

laws,

and

Pythagoras

and Plato and

several

others,

having

visited

Egypt

and

profited

by

Moses'

writings,

afterwards

published

things

that

were

the

opposite

of what

they

previously

had

wrongly

thought

about

the

gods.

For

even

Orpheus,

who

was

indeed

your

first

teacher

of

polytheism,

later

announced

to

Musaeus

and

other

noble

listeners

the

following

about

the one and only God."

5

Cf.

supra,

notes

Io,

p.

Io6,

and

6,

p.

Io8.

6

Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

1371.

Cf.

Bessarion,

op.

cit.,

p.

233 (III,

v:

"Quod

Plato

sub

nomine

Jovis

unum

et

primum

deum

colit")

;

Augustine,

Civ.

Dei, IV,

xi

(refutation

of

the

attempt

to include

all

the

gods

in

Jupiter).

7

v.

supra,

note

3,

p.

10o9.

8

First nine lines

given

by

Ficino

(Op.

Omn.,

P-.

934):

1

Vos qui virtutem colitis, vos ad mea tantum

Dicta aures

adhibete,

aninrosque

intendite vestros.

Contra

qui

sanctas

leges

contemnitis,

hinc

vos

Effugite,

&

procul

hinc

miseri,

Procul ite

profani.

6

Tu

ver6

qui

divinas

specularis,

&

alta

Mente

capis

museae

voces,

complectere

&

illas,

Aspiciens

sacris

oculis,

sub

pectore

serva.

Hocque

iter

ingressus,

solum

ilium

suspice

mundi

Ingentem

authorem

solum,

interituque

carentem.

The

corresponding

lines

in

Eusebius

(Kern,

Fr.

247)

are:

S

~O(i

OCLOT

?

L4

&ka6o

-C

•Upoc

o8'1(

xycac

•ipplot,

(PEUYov'greg

xaw)v

EOcatoS,

eloCLo

eOv'roC

rraL6tou

-

aa'&xouc, oycay6pouxyove M'9S,







ORPHEUS

THE

THEOLOGIAN

AND

RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS 1i

x

of Trebizond's

translation of

Eusebius'

Praeparatio

vangelica,1

f which

there

is

a

manuscript

in

the

Bibl.

Mediceo-Laurenziana,

bearing

the

Medici

arms

and dated

1462,2

the

year

in which Ficino was

translating

the

Orphic Hymns.

I

cannot

conceive

of

any

motive

George

could

have

had

for

deliberately

mistranslating these lines, and he was a notoriously inaccurate translator.3

Ficino

may

merely

have

been

misled

by

this

incompetent

version;

but it

seems

unlikely

that

he should neither

have looked

at the

original

Greek

text of

Eusebius,4

nor have

known

any

of the

versions

in

the other

Fathers.5

It

is

per-

haps

also

significant

that

he

has chosen

the version which does

not make

God

into

the

avenging

Jehovah.6

Agrippa,

who

also,

in

the De Occulta

Philosophia,

could

not do without

the ancient

gods, quotes

part

of the same

translation

of

the Palinode

n

the

chapter

entitled: "Necessariam

esse

Mago

veri

Dei

cogni-

tionem,

&

quid

de

Deo veteres senserunt

Magi atque

philosophi."7

Steuco

is

willing

to take

it

as

a

recantation,

but

only

if the

Hymns

(the

chief

evidence

of

Orpheus' polytheism)

really

are

by Orpheus,

and

not,

as

Steuco thinks

probable, by some much later poet.8 And elsewhere he quotes the Palinode,9

Mouac i'

&

ephE

y&p

&?eta,

IV76

ae

8

xrt&

b&v

'rTOecam

Poivro'

9

4

crOvocg

&t6pan,

egS

8•)

6yov

Oetov

p•aocS•

rou'r

7pooaipeuse,

1OUve)v

pocslEg voephv

xu

ros

-

e5

8'idpove

&~rpo~nvrol),

uvov

8'&a6po

6alioLo

rUTc•iYV

&O&vac'rov

...

"museae"

in line

6,

which

makes little

sense

and

no

grammar,

may

be

a

misprint.

I

am

not

sure

whether

Musaeus

(line

4

in

Eusebius)

has

turned

into

the Muses

or

not.

George

of

Trebizond

(v.

note

i,

p.

xix

)

has:

S...

&

alta

Mente

capis

musae

voces

amplectere:

et

illas

Aspiciens

..

The

original

edition

of

Ficino

(Ficino,

Epistole,

Venice,

1495,

f.

clxxxv)

has:

I

Tu

verb

qui

divina

specularis,

&

alta

Mente

capis

musee voces:

complectere:

&

illas.

Aspiciens

..

Agrippa,

De

Occulta

Philosophia,

in his

Opera,

Lyons,

Per

Beringos

Fratres, n.d.,

p.

254,

III,

ii,

has:

6

Tu

verb

qui

divina

specularis,

& alta.

Mente

capis

Musaee,

voces

complectere,

&

illas

Aspiciens

..

1

(begins)

Ad

santissimum

papam

Nicolaum.

q.

Georgii Trapezuntii

in traductionemEusebii

Prae-

fatio,

I470,

no

pag.,

XIII,

xii.

2

Bandini,

Catalogus

Codicum

Latinorum

Bi-

bliothecae

Mediceae

Laurentianae,Florence,

1774,

I,

347.

3

v.

Praefatio

to E.

H.

Gifford's edition

of

Eusebius,

Praep.

Evang.,

Oxford,

I903,

I,

p.

xliv,

where

he

quotes

Petavius:

"Trape-

zuntius Latina sua versione non tam Eusebio

lucem

attulit,

quam

eo

foede

laniando,

ad-

dendo,

ac

depravandojustam

de se

querelam

posteris

reliquit

..

."

4

There

are two

MSS. of

it

(i4th

and

I5th

century)

in

the

Bibl.

Med.-Laur.,

the

later

having

a

family-tree

of

the

Medici in

the

margin

(v.

ibid.,

p.

xix).

5

It

must be admitted that

no

MSS.

of

the

relevant works of

Ps.-Justin,

Clement

Alex.,

and

Cyril

are

in the

Bibl.

Med.-Laur.

6

Clemens

Alex.

(Stromata,

V,

xiv)

points

out the

parallels

between

the

Palinode

and

the

Old

Testament God:

Isaiah

lxvi,

I

("Thus

saith the

Lord,

The heaven

is

my

throne

and the earth

is

my

footstool"),

Iviv,

I

("O

that thou wouldst rend

the

heavens .

.

.

that the mountains

might

flow

down

at

thy

presence");

Deuteronomy

xxxii,

39

("See

now

that

I,

even

I,

am

he,

and

there

is

no

God

with

me:

I

kill,

and

I

make

alive;

I

wound

and

I

heal:

neither is

there

any

that

can

deliver

out

of

my

hand").

He

also

takes

two

lines

of the Aristobulus

version

of the

Palinode

(Kern,

Fr.

247,

lines

22-24):

"No

mortal

could

ever

see

the

lord, except

a

single

off-

shoot

of

the

ancient race of

the

Chaldaeans"

-as

referring

to Abraham

or Isaac.

Ficino

(Op.

Omn.,

p.

29)

also cites

these

lines

and

suggests

they

refer

to

Enoch,

Abraham

or

Moses;

cf.

Ph.

de

Mornay,

De la

Veriti

de

la

Religion

Chrestienne,

Antwerp,

I581,

p.

509.

7

Agrippa,

De

Occ.

Phil., III,

vii,

cf.

III,

ii.

8

Steuco,

op.

cit.,

III,

24v

(De

Perenni Philos-

phia,

I,

xxviii,

"Ex

Theologia

Orphei,

de

Verbo

divino,

&

qubd

sit vox divina: &

qubd

formator mundi";

throughout

this

chapter

bits

of

the

Palinode

are

quoted),

III,

2v.

9 Ibid., III, 46r-v.

8







1I2

D. P.

WALKER

omitting

the

recantatory

lines,

and

introducing

it

by:

"Orpheus

igitur

etiam

vetustissimus,'

ante omnes celebratos

in

Graecia

philosophos

&

poetas,

multis

carminibus

de

singulari

Deo,

non secus

atque

Prophetarum quis,

mira

exprompsit."

Sir Walter

Raleigh

also omits

the

recantatory

beginning

when

quoting

this

fragment;2

he introduces

it

thus:

"And as

in

Pythagoras,

in

Socrates,

and

in

Plato: so

we find the same

excellent

understanding

in

Orpheus,

who

everywhere

expressed

the

infinite

and

sole

power

of one

God,

tho'

he

uses

the

name of

Jupiter,

thereby

to

avoid

the

envy

&

danger

of

the time

.. ."

and

then

quotes

the Pico Conclusion:3

"The name of those Gods of

whom

Orpheus

doth

sing

are not of

deceiving

devils . . . but

they

are the names

of

natural

and divine virtues."

La

Boderie,

on the other

hand,

translates the

Palinode

aithfully,

even

expanding

the

recantatory

lines

;4

but

he

follows it

immediately with two other Orphic fragments which confirm the Ficinian

interpretation

of

Orpheus'

many

gods

as

aspects

of

one-in

which

case no

recantation

is

necessary.

The

first,

which in

Ps.-Justin

also comes

after the

Palinode,

ays

tersely:

Zeus

is

one,

Hades

is

one,

Helios

is

one,

Dionysos

is

one,

One God

in

all.

Why

should

I

speak

to

you

of

them

separately?5

The second

will be

discussed below."

Philippe

de

Mornay

accepts

the

Palinode

as

a

recantation,

citing

Ps.-Justin

as evidence

that

Orpheus

invented

Greek

polytheism;'

but he

too

does not

quote

the

opening

lines of the

fragment,

and

implies

that these

gods

were

only

poetic

fictions,

though dangerous

ones.8

These last three writersbelong to a period, after the Council of Trent and

the establishment of

Protestantism as an

irremediable

fact,

in

which

the

acceptance

of the

ancient

gods,

in

any

form,

was more

uneasy.

They

still

have

something

of the

liberal,

sympathetic

attitude

to

the Greeks of Ficino

and

the earlier

sixteenth

century;

but

living

in

a

more intolerant

atmosphere,

with

all

boundaries

more

sharply

marked,

they

deal

with

polytheism

in

a

1

He

has

just

given

a

list

of ancients

who

wrote

well

of

the

one

God-"Trismegistus,

Orpheus,

Sibylla,

Empedocles,

Pythagoras,

Melissus,

Anaxagoras,

Philolaus,

Pherecides

"

.

.

-and

remarked that the

older the

more

clearly

monotheist.

2

Raleigh,

History

of

the World

(first

ed.

1614),

London,

1733,

I, vi,

sec.

vii.

3

v.

supra,

note

6,

p.

Io8.

4

La

Boderie,

Encyclie,

p. g9o:

De

moy

tu

as

apris

choses

par-ci

devant

Contre

les

bonnes

moeurs,

& la

vie ensuivant:

Mais

maintenant

je

veu

la

Verit6

t'apprendre.

5

Kern,

Fr.

239.

La Boderie

(ibid., p. 191)

translates

:

Et

Jupiter

est

Un,

Un

Pluton,

Bacchus

Un,

Un

Soleil,

Un Dieu

Seul

A

ous

ces

noms

commun.

Qu'est-il

donc

besoing

qu'ici

je

te recite

Un

'

un,

&

A

part

tout ce

qu'un

seul excite?

6

v.

infra,

p.

115.

7

Philippe

de

Mornay,

De la

Veritg

de

la

Religion Chrestienne,Antwerp, 1581, p.

54-

Cf.

supra,

note

4, p.

Ii0o.

8

Ibid.: "Mais

il

est

temps

de venir aux

Poetes

anciens,

qui estoyent

aussi

Philosophes,

&

qui

ont

faict

par

leurs

fictions ouverture

a

la

pluralit6

des Dieux.

Entre iceux

se ren-

contre tout le

premier Orphee

que

Justin

en

appelle

le

premier

Autheur,

qui premier

leur

a donne des

noms

&

des

genealogies:

Mais

voici sa

repentance

en

son

hymne

'

Museus,

qui

est

appellk

son

Testament;

c'est a

dire

sa

derniere

doctrine,

&

'

laquelle

il

veut

qu'on

se

tienne."







ORPHEUS

THE

THEOLOGIAN AND

RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

i"3

more

cautious,

more

overtly

censorious

manner.

Raleigh

and La

Boderie

both

write

passages

which

are

paeans

of

triumph

on

the final

destruction

of

the

pagan

gods by

Christianity;

but in

both

cases a

note

of

elegiac

nostalgia

is,

to

my

ear,

unmistakable.'

Mornay,

though

nearly

half

his De

la

Veriti

Chrestiennes taken up with showing how near the ancients approached to

Christian

truth,

has towards the end

of the book

two

harshly

euhemeristic

and

Augustinian

chapters

against

the

gods,2

of whom

he

writes

in

this

manner:

". ..

&

Orph6e

mesmes,

qui

les a deifiez

n'en

parle pas

autrement

[sc.

que

les

evhemeristes].

De

Juppiter que

lisons nous?

Juppiter,

dit

l'histoire,

chasse

son

pere,

il

tient ses

assises

en

la

montagne

d'Olympe,

il

ravit

Europa

en un

vaisseau

nommd

le

Taureau:

Ganymedes

en un

autre,

qui s'appelloit

l'Aigle....

Enfin

apres

avoir donn6

quelques

Loix,

&

departy

les

charges

de son

estat

entre

ses

amis,

il

meurt,

& est enterr6

en

la

ville

de Gnose:

Qu'est

cela

que

la

vie,

& d'un

homme,

&

d'un

tresmeschant homme?"3

This

is

paralleled

by

his attitude to earlier

literary,

as

opposed

to

syncretist,

humanists:

"Un

Politian,

dit

Vives,4

mesprisoit

totalement la lecture des

Escri-

tures.

Voyons

donq

ce

qu'il prisoit.

Toute

sa

vie il

a

dispute

s'il

falloit

1

E.g. Raleigh, op.

cit., I,

vii,

sec.

viii:

"Ju-

piter

is

no more vexed

with

Juno's jealousies;

death hath

persuaded

him

to

chastity

& her

to

patience;

and

that time- which

hath

de-

voured itself,

hath also eaten

up

both

the

bodies

and

images

of

him

and his:

yea,

their

stately temples

of stone

&

dureful

marble.

The

houses &

sumptuous buildings

erected

to

Baal,

can nowhere be

found

upon

the

earth;

nor

any

monument

of

that

glorious

temple

erected to

Diana.

There are none

now

in

Phoenicia

that

lament

the death

of

Adonis: nor

any

in

Libya,

Creta, Thessalia,

or

elsewhere,

that ask

counsel

or

help

from

Jupiter.

The

great

God

Pan

hath broken

his

pipes:

Apollo's priests

are become

speechless:

and the trade

of

riddles

in

oracles,

with the

devil's telling men's fortunes therein,

is

taken

up

by

counterfeit

Egyptians,

and

cozening

astrologers."

La

Boderie,

Les

Hymnes

Ecclesi-

astiques,

Paris,

1582,

p. 190:

(at

Christ's

birth)

Dans

les cueurs tenebreux des

hommes

par

le

monde

Tout soudain

on

ouyt

les Dieux

payens

remir,

Et

par

l'air

obscurcy

les

noirs Demons

gemir.

Comme

lors

que

Thamus

le

nocher osa dire

Que

le

grand

Pan

est

mort,

soudain

on

ouyt

bruire

Les

cris,

les

plaints,

les

pleurs,

et les

hurlantes

voix

Des

faux

Dieux

abatus

en

l'ombre

de

la

Croix.

This

legend

of the death of

Pan

would

be

a

good

symbol

in

which to

study

Christian

atti-

tudes to pagan gods. Its source is Plutarch,

De

Defectu

orac.,

418e.

In Eusebius

(Praep.

Evang.,

V,

xvii),

as

in

La

Boderie,

Pan

repre-

sents

the

pagan

gods.

In

Rabelais

(IV,

xxviii,

ed.

Plattard, Paris,

1929,

IV,

I

I6)

he

is

Christ

crucified

(cf. Milton, Hymn

on the

Morning of

Christ's

Nativity,

(1629) (Poetical

Works,

ed.

Beeching,

Oxford,

1921, p.

2),

which

contains

a

Gotterddimmerung,

ostly

of non-Greek

gods,

but:

The

shepherds

n

the Lawn

Or ere the

point

of

dawn,

Sate

simply

chatting

in

a

rustick

row;

Full

little

thought hey than,

That

the

mighty

Pan

Was

kindly

com

to

live

with

them

below.)

Cf.

A.-J.

Krailsheimer,

"Rabelais et

Postel,"

in

Bibliotheque

d'Humanisme

et

Renaissance,

XIII,

1951,

p. 187.

2

Mornay,

op. cit.,

pp.

509, 526:

c.

xxii

"Que

les Dieux adorez

par

les Gentils

estoyent

hommes

consacrez a la

posterit6";

c. xxiii

"Que

les

Esprits qui

se

faisoyent

adorer

soubs

les

noms

de

ces hommes

l1,

estoyent

Daemons,

c'est

a

dire,

diables,

ou

malings

Esprits."

Cf.

Augustine,

Civ.

Dei,

VI,

vii; VII, xviii,

xxxv;

VIII,

xxiii-xxvi.

3

Ibid.,

p.

519.

4

Vives,

De

Veritate

Fidei

Christianae,

II,

vii

(Op.

Omn.,

Valentiae

Edetanorum,

I782-90,

VIII,

p.

165)-







114

D. P.

WALKER

dire

Vergilius

ou

Virgilius,

Carthaginensis

u

Carthaginiensis,

rimus

ou

preimus;

&

s'il

a

eu

quelque

reste

de

loisir,

ce a este

pour

faire

quelque

Epigramme

Grec,

en

louange

de

paillardise,

& de Sodomie.

.

. Au

contraire,

un

Marsile

Ficin,

un

ConteJehan

de la

Mirande,

l'honneur

en

toutes

sciences,

& de l'Italie, & de leur siecle, apres avoir leu tous les bons autheurs du

monde,

se sont venuz

reposer

en

nos

Escritures,

& ont este

en fin

des-

goustez

de toutes

autres;

de celles

cy

ne

s'en sont

peu

rassasier."I

This

change

of attitude

towards Greek

theology,

due to historical

develop-

ments

between

the

generation

of Ficino

and that

of La

Boderie,

must be

dis-

tinguished

from

the more fundamental

difference

of outlook that

one

finds,

for

example,

between

the two Picos. Gian-Francesco

Pico

is at the

beginning

of

a line

of

anti-philosophic

fideism,

which

leads

through

Agrippa's

De

Vanitate

Scientiarum

nd

Henri Estienne's

and Gentien

Hervet's translation

of

Sextus

Empiricus

to

Montaigne's

Apologie

de

Raymond

Sebond.2

In his Examen

Vanitatis

doctrinaeentiumhe cites or quotes the Palinode our times, in each case with

the same intention

as the Greek Fathers:

to

discredit

Greek

theology

and

to

show

that

any

truth it contained

had

been stolen from

Moses.3

Orpheus'

visit

to

Egypt

is

always

mentioned;

he even

prefers

Orpheus

to

Pythagoras

and

Plato,

because,

by

the time the

latter had visited

Egypt,

the Mosaic

tradition

had become

corrupted

with

polytheism.

He

cites no other

Orphica

and

is

extremely

harsh

on

Orpheus

as a

polytheist;

Orpheus

was

the

inventor

of

the amor

puerorum,4

and

this,

says

Pico,

is an unnatural

vice which

usually

accompanies

the unnatural

belief

in

many

gods.5

This was also one

of

George

of

Trebizond's

accusations

against

Plato,

namely

that he

practised

and

en-

couraged

paederasty

and

heresy,6

and one which Bessarion

thought

serious

enough

to use most of one Book out of four in

refuting

it.I

Agrippa

has the

two

attitudes

successively;

the De Occulta

hilosophia

s

sprinkled

with

Orphica

and

unacknowledged

bits

of Ficino and

the elder

Pico,8

whereas,

in

the

strongly

evangelical

De

Vanitate,

e

contemptuously

dismisses

the

"gentilium

theologiam

"

Museo,

Orpheo,

Hesiodo

quondam

descriptam,

quam

omnino

poeticam

&

fabulosam esse

in

confesso

est;

quam

Eusebius

& Lactantius &

aliorum

Christianorum

doctores

jamdudum

validissimis

rationibus

profligarunt

..

."

He also refers to Orpheus' paederasty, making the ingenious suggestion that

1 Mornay,

op.

cit.,

p.

617.

2See

Hugo

Friedrich,

Montaigne,

Bern,

1949, p.

161

f.

3

G.-F.

Pico,

Op.

Omn.,

pp.

724-5,

756, 814,

oo009.

4

Ovid,

Metamorphoses,

X,

83

(Kern,

test.

77);

cf.

Poliziano,

Orfeo

(?

1472),

ed. Car-

ducci,

Bologna,

1912,

pp.

389-90.

5

G.-F.

Pico,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

471.

6

Comparationes,

no

pag.,

sig.

Miii",

Nv

f.

7

Bessarion, op. czt., pp. 429-492.

Cf.

G.

Pico,

Commento

.

.

sopra

una

canzona

..

de Giro-

lamo

Benivieni,

ed.

Garin

(De

Homn.

Dign.,

etc.),

pp.

537-8;

in

clearing

Platonic

homo-

sexual

love from

imputations

of

vice

he

gives

as

examples

of

pure

love:

Orpheus

and

Musaeus,

Socrates

and

Alcibiades

(and

"quasi

tutti e'

piii ingegnosi

e

leggiadri

della

gioventh

di

Atene"),

and others.

8

E.g.

De

Occ.

Phil., I,

xiv; II,

xxv,

xxvi;

III,

vi,

vii.

9 Agrippa,

De

Vanitate,

c.

xcvii.







ORPHEUS

THE

THEOLOGIAN

AND RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

I15

it was

with

the

powerful,

though

effeminating,

effects

of his music

that

he

seduced

the Thracian

youths.'

V

Trinitarian

Orphica.

The

drift

towards

eresy

Two other

important

monotheistic

fragments,2

which will lead

us on

to

the

trinity,

usually

occur

together,

as

they

do in

Proclus.

They

are

both

part

of

the

specifically

Orphic

theogony,

in which Zeus swallows the

first-born

god,

Phanes,

and thus unites

the

multiplicity

of the whole

universe,

as

Proclus

explains.3

Renaissance

writers do

not,

of

course,

try

to

work out

Orpheus'

theogony

as distinct

from

Hesiod's,

since the

former is

for

them

the

source

of

the latter

;4

but

these

are

fragments

which

do

tend,

however

interpreted,

to

carry

a certain

metaphysical

content. The

first is

translated

thus

by

Thomas

Taylor :5

Hence with the universe

great Jove

contains

Extended

aether,

heav'n's exalted

plains;

The barren restless

deep,

and

earth

renowned,

Ocean

immense,

&

Tartarus

profound;

Fountains

&

rivers,

and the

boundless

main,

With

all

that nature's

ample

realms

contains;

And

Gods &

Goddesses

of each

degree;

All that is

past,

and all

that e'er

shall

be,

Occultly,

and in fair

connection, lies,

In

Jove's

wide

belly,

ruler of the

skies.

The

other,

sometimes called the

Hymn

ofJove,

is

possibly

referred

to

in

Plato's

Laws,6and is quoted in the Ps.-AristotleDe Mundo7 nd, in a longer version,

by

Porphyry

(apud Eusebium)

and

Proclus.8

It

begins:

"Zeus is

the

first,

Zeus

the

last,

high-thunderer:

Zeus the

head,

Zeus the

middle;

from

Zeus

all

things spring;

Zeus is male

and

immortal

bride." Then

are

enumerated:

"fire and

water

and

earth and

aether,

night

and

day,

and

Wisdom,

first

creator

and

sweet

Love";

all

these lie

in

Zeus'

great body

(or

palace).

These two

fragments

can

be taken

simply

as

assertions

of

monotheistic

belief

in

one

creator,

while Wisdom and

Love

are

respectively

the Son

and

1

Ibid.,

c.

xvii. But he

does

include

Orpheus

in a

list of

those who

thought rightly

about

the

soul

(ibid.,

c.

lii).

2

The final fate of the

Palinode,

before we

leave

it,

may

be

seen

in

Cudworth.

He

examines

in

great

detail the

questions

of

Orpheus'

existence,

antiquity

and

mono-

theism

(op.

cit.,

p.

294

f.),

and concludes

that

he

"acknowledged

one

supreme

unmade

Deity"

and that

"the

Pythagoreans

and

Platonists

not

only

had

Orpheus

in

great

esteem,

he

being commonly

called

by

them

6

OEooy),oc,

the

theologian,

but

were also

thought

in

great

measure to have

owed

their

theology

and

philosophy

to

him,

as

deriving

the

same

from

his

principles

and traditions"

(ibid.,

p. 299);

but,

as to the

Palinode,

the

Fathers

were

misled

by

"certain

counterfeit

Orphick

verses

in

Aristobulus

[i.e. apud

Euse-

bium;

Kern,

Fr.

247],

made

probably by

some

ignorant Jew;

wherein

Orpheus

is

made

to

sing

a

palinodia"

(ibid.,

p. 302).

3

Kern,

Fr.

167,

I68.

4

v.

supra, p.

105.

On the

differences be-

tween

the

two

theogonies

see

W. C. K.

Guthrie,

Orpheus,

p. 83.

5

Proclus,

Comm. on

Timaeus,

transl.

Th.

Taylor,

London,

1820,

p.

263 ;

Kern,

Fr.

I67b.

6

Plato,

Laws,

IV,

715e (Kern,

Fr.

21).

7

Kern,

Fr.

21a.

8

Kern,

Fr.

168.







116

D. P.

WALKER

the

Holy

Ghost,

as in La

Boderie'

and

Mornay,2

or

they

can

be

interpreted

in

more

perilous

ways.

Ficino,

in a

letter on

the Platonic

furores,3

quotes

the

Hymnof

Jove

and

equates

Jove

with

the anima

mundi,

having

just

before

quoted

the famous

passage

from the

Aeneid:

Principio

coelum, ac terras,

camposque liquentes,

Lucentemque globum

Lunae,

Titaniaque

astra,

Spiritus

intus

alit,

totamque

infusa

per

artus

Mens

agitat

molem,

et

magno

se

corpore

miscet.4

In

the letter

containing

the

Palinode,5

he

quotes

it

again

in

full,

together

with

Porphyry's

commentary

on

it,6

which

takes

Jove

as the

mens

mundi,

"who

created

all

things

therein,

containing

the world in

himself."'

This

interpreta-

tion,

repeated

by

Agrippa,8

comes near

to

making Jove

into

the

creative

Logos,

God

the

Son.9

This

step

is taken

by

Steuco;

all these

things

in

the

Palace

ofJove

are,

he

says, what the Platonists call Ideas, what the Christians and Hermes Tris-

megistus

call Wisdom or

Logos.'0

He then

quotes

a crucial

passage

from St.

Paul,11

as a

parallel:

Who

[sc. Christ]

is

the

image

of the invisible

God,

the

first-born of

every

creature:

For

by

him

were all

things

created,

that are

in

heaven,

and that are in

the

earth,

visible

and

invisible,

whether

they

be

thrones,

or

dominions,

or

principalities,

or

powers:

all

things

were

created

by

him

[at'

C

Oov]

and

for

him

[Ete

~6TO].2

Since

Steuco believed

that

the

Jews

knew

only

the

second

person

of the

Trinity,13he is able to equateJove withJehovah, as well as with the Son. Like

the

rest of

the

Platonists,

Steuco

compares

or

identifies the

persons

of the

1

La

Boderie,

Encyclie,

p. 192:

M6me

ce

grand

Harpeur

a

voulu

designer

Le

Fils,

& Saint

Esprit

pour

les siens

enseigner.

"La

Sagesse,

dit-il,

fut

la

mere

premiere

Avec

le dous Amour." 6

Bouche

de lumiere

2

Mornay,

op.

cit.,

p.

Io02.

3

Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

6

2.

4

Virgil,

Aeneid,

VI,

724-727-

5

v.

supra,

note

7,

p.

I

I0o.

6Apud

Eusebium,

Praep.

Evang.,

III,

ix.

7

"AM '6v

voOv

oo

x6a[Lou

U6oX[ljPVOV7-E,

86

rO&

a

68)

L

L7Tgllo6py

aeV

V

o r6v

x6a(Gov.

Ficino: ". ..

Jovem

mundi

mentem

arbi-

trantes,

quae

in

se

ipsa

mundum

continens

produxit."

8

Agrippa,

De

Occ.

Phil.,

III,

vii.

9

The

likeness

of

these

Fragments

to

Stoic

pantheism,

especially

when

coupled

with the

Virgilian

passage,

did

not

trouble

the earlier

syncretists.

But in the

I7th

century

Cudworth

(op.

cit.,

I,

305

f.)

discusses

at

length

"that

strong

and rank

haut-goust"

in

Orphism

"of

making

God to be

all,"

and

finally

decides

that

Orpheus

does not

go

beyond

an

orthodox

degree

of

immanence;

which

he

backs

up

by

quoting

Coloss.

i.

15-17 (quoted

lower on this

page).

10

Steuco,

Op.

Omn., III,

I22v.

11Ibid.,

III,

I23r.

St.

Paul,

Coloss.

i.

15-I7.

12

Orpheus' "gods

and

goddesses"

in

Jove's

body

(v. fragment quoted

supra,

p.

I

15)

are

Paul's

Thrones, Dominions, etc.; Orpheus

can

be

excused

for

giving

angels

both

sexes,

since

they

are,

of

course,

neuter-though

Christian

theologians

rightly give

them

the

worthier sex

(the male)

(Steuco,

ibid.).

13

Steuco,

Op.

Omn.,

III,

3v, 25r.

Though

Steuco

was Librarian

of

the

Vatican,

this

is

by

no means the most

startling

of his un-

orthodoxies;

he also believed

that the

empy-

rean heaven was eternal

and

uncreated,

and

that

God,

when

creating

man,

took on

human

form

(Freudenberger,

Aug.

Steuchus,

pp.

219

f.,

210

f.).







ORPHEUS THE THEOLOGIAN

AND RENAISSANCE

PLATONISTS

117

Trinity

with Platonic

or

Neoplatonic

metaphysical principles:'

the Father

is

the One

and

the

Good,

the

Son is Mind and

Being.

As

Mind,

he is

the

creating Jehovah,

both

containing

the Ideas and identical

with

them,

who

created

the universe on their

model,

like the Platonic

demiurge.2

He is

Being,

since he is Jehovah, who announced to Moses "I am that I am,"

Ets

6

(V,s,

hich was

regularly interpreted

by

the Fathers as

equivalent

to "I am

Being"

(1

0b

6v,

i.e. Plato's

0

v-,

v)).

The third

person

of the

Trinity

was some-

times

provided

with

anima,

or animamundi.

But,

on the

whole,

attention

was

concentrated on the first two

persons; probably

because

the

equation

Holy

Ghost=anima

mundi was too

obviously

heretical,

though

it was

sometimes

suggested,4

and

also

because,

as Steuco

says

:5

"tertius

[sc.

opifex] semper

fuit

obscurior,

etiam

apud

nostrates."

Steuco, however,

was

exceptional

in

firmly

identifying

the

Orphic Jove

with

God

the

Son;

there

were

plenty

of other

possibilities

in the

Orphica.

I

have

already

mentioned

Wisdom

and

Love

in

the

Hymnof

Jove

6

there

is

also

the Divine Word in the Palinode.7Ficino, Pico, and Mornay also all suggest

Pallas

Athene,8

who

appears

in

Orphica

quoted

by

Proclus,9

where she is

said

to have

sprung

from

the

head

of

Zeus

that she

might

be

the

creator

of

many

works.

There is another

frequently

used trinitarian

fragment,

which

Mornay

quotes

in an

ingenious

way,

so as

to

make an

historical

link

between

Hermes

Trismegistus

(Egypt)

and

Orpheus;

it

is an

oath,

found in

Ps.-Justin

:10

I

swear

by

thee, heaven,

the wise

work of

great

God,

I

swear

by

thee,

Voice of the

father,

which he first

pronounced

When

he

constructed

the

whole universe with

his

counsels.

This,

in

the

Suidas

Lexicon,

s

attributed

to Hermes

Trismegistus. Mornay

first

quotes

it when

exposing

Hermes' trinitarian

doctrine,

and

then,

a

page

later,

quotes

it

again

as

Orpheus',

with

the

comment:

"C'estoit,

comme

il

appert

cy-dessus,

une

prikre qu'il

avoit

apprise

de

Mercure."11

These

speculations

on the

Trinity-Platonic,

Neoplatonic,

reinforced

with

bits of

Orphica,

Hermetica,

Chaldaean

Oracles-have

an

evident drift

to-

wards

heresy.12

It

is,

I

think,

generally

admitted that the

Greek

Fathers,

as

1 V. e.g.,

Steuco,

Op.

Omn.,

III, 3'-5, I

.

Cf.

infra.,

pp.

I18-9.

2

Ibid.,

III,

Iov,

13v

f.

3

Exodus

ii.

14.

Eusebius,

Praep. Evang.,

XI,

ix

(compared

to

Plato, Timaeus, 27d-28, 37e);

Clement

Alex.,

Stromata,

I, xxv;

Augustine,

Civ.

Dei,

VIII,

xi;

Steuco,

Op.

Omn., III,

I Ir,

25v.

Cf.

Bessarion,

op.

cit.,

p.

I I6.

4

E.g.

Steuco,

Op.

Omn.,

III, I2r,

30`-31;

Mornay, op.

cit.,

p.

I I6

f.

(somewhat

tenta-

tive

identification

of

Plotinus' anima

mundi

with

the

Holy

Ghost);

Bessarion,

op.

cit.,

p.

299

(excusing

Plato for

having

the

anima

mundi as

the

third

hypostasis,

and

quoting

Virgil,

Aeneid,

VI,

724).

5

Steuco,

Op.

Omn.,

III,

34v.

6v.

supra,

pp.

I

15-6.

7

v.

supra, p. I I0.

8

Ficino,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

I8;

Pico,

Op.

Omn.,

p.

Io8

(Cabalistic

Concl.,

No.

Io;

Orpheus'

Pallas is

the

same as

Zoroaster's

paterna

mens,

Hermes' Son of

God,

Pythagoras'

wisdom,

Parmenides'

sphaera ntelligibilis) ; Mornay, op.

cit.,

p.

102.

9

Kern,

Fr.

174-7.

Cf.

Augustine,

Civ.

Dei,

VII,

xxviii

(Varro

equating

Minerva

with

Plato's

ideas); Plato,

Cratylus, 407b

(Athena

derived

from

O

0~o0

v67Eq).

10

Kern,

Fr.

299.

11

Mornay,

op.

cit.,

pp.

o10-2.

12

Cf.

D.

Cantimori,

"Anabattismo e

Neo-

platonismo

nel

XVI

Secolo in

Italia,"

Recon-

diti

della

R. Acc.

Naz.

dei

Lincei

Classe

di

scienze

mor.,

stor. e

filol.,

S.

6,

XII,

Rome,

1937,

PP.

543,

552-3.







x

18

D. P.

WALKER

opposed

to

the

Western,

tend

to

emphasize

the

distinctness

of

the

persons

of

the

Trinity

at

the

expense

of their

unity;

even when

remaining

within

the

bounds

of

orthodoxy, they

assign special

functions to the

second

and

third,

which come near

to

destroying

their

consubstantiality

with the

first and each

other.' It is noticeable, even in the few examples given here from Renaissance

scholars,

that there

is

a

strong

insistence on the

Son as creative

Logos

2

this

may

have

been

due,

in

some

measure,

to the

interest

in

Orphica

which sent

them

back to these

Fathers. It

is

an

easy

transition to

pass

from

regarding

Platonic or

Neoplatonic

triads

(e.g.

One,

Mind,

Soul)

as

foreshadowings

of,

gropings

towards,

the

Christian

Trinity

to

regarding

them

as

helpful

ways

of

partially

understanding

a

mystery,

and

thence to

taking

them

as

real

explana-

tions of

it,

or

as identical

with it. In

the

case of the

equation

Mind-Intelligible

World

=

Son-Logos,

this

seems

already

to

be

happening

in

Clement

of

Alexandria,3

and it

happens

in

Eusebius

in

an

unmistakably

Arian

way:4

he

quotes

Plato on the Good

beyond

Being,

identifies

it

with God the

Father,

and then emphasizes that it absolutely transcends all Being, so that the Ideas

cannot be coessential

with

it, i.e.,

the Son

is not of one substance

with the

Father. And

Eusebius,

it will

be

remembered,5

is

one

likely starting-point

of

Ficino's,

and hence of his

followers',

syncretism.

The Renaissance

Platonists

were

themselves aware of this

danger.

Bes-

sarion,

in

rebutting George

of

Trebizond's

charge

that Plato was

a

source of

heretics

(particularly

of

Arius

and

Origen),

claims

that

it is the

heretics'

fault

if

they

do not

interpret

Plato

according

to

the

Bible,

but the

Bible

according

to

Plato;

6

but he

was

acutely

conscious

of the

danger

of

making

Christianity

fit

Platonism,

instead of the

other

way

round. He

constantly

indicated

points

where Plato is not

reconcilable

with

orthodoxy,7

and was

especially

careful,

when dealing with the Trinity, to emphasize that Platonic hypostases are not

coessential with each

other,

that the

doctrine of the

Trinity

cannot be

reached

by

natural

reason,

and to

establish

the orthodox doctrine

by

long

quotations

from St.

Augustine

and

St.

Thomas.8

Pico,

in

his

commentary

on

Benivieni's

Canzona,

hough

he

adopts

a

Platonic

scheme

involving

a created

Mind

called

the

Son of

God,

takes

care to

point

out

that this is

not the Christian

truth.9

Mornay,

however,

commenting

on the

famous

three

kings

in Plato's

Epistle

II,10

which

he

interprets

as

the

Good,

the

Demiurge

and the

anima

mundi,

writes:

Or

encequ'il

les

renge

au

dessous

l'un

de

l'autre,

il

semble

bien

Ar-

rianiser. Et encor est ce

beaucoup

en un

Payen.

Mais

quand

il

recognoist

1

v.

e.g.,

The Catholic

Encyclopedia,

ed. C. H.

Herbermann,

etc.,

New

York,

XV,

1912,

pp.

52-3

(art.

Trinity);

Dictionnaire

de

Thdologie

Catholique,

ed.

A.

Vacant,

etc.,

XII,

Paris,

1935,

col.

2307,

2322

f.,

2332

f.

(art.

Pla-

tonisme).

2

In

Steuco

he

is

plainly

the

creator

in

Genesis.

3

E.g.

Stromata,

V,

xiv,

IV,

xxv.

Cf.

Dict.

de

Theol.

Cath.,

III1,

cols.

i55,

158-161

(art.

Clement

d'Alexandrie).

4

Eusebius,

Praep.

Evang.,

XI,

xxi.

5

Cf.

supra,

p.

0o8.

6

Bessarion,

op.

cit.,

p.

Io03

E.g.,

ibid.,

p.

87

(pre-existence

of

souls,

souls of celestial

bodies).

8

Ibid.,

pp.

297

f.

9

Pico,

Heptaplus

etc.,

ed.

Garin,

pp.

464/5.

10

Plato,

Epist.

II,

3I2e:

nept

-

v

ivroO)v

x&al

• rTCO•V'

art XOCx

xevoU

EvexOC

ivrOC,

x"ct

xelvo

O&-tov

&'vtovtv

o

v

xcaXv

O

eutepOv

U

7ept

6r&

sKepcX,

ct

tpcorov ept-ri plcxm.







ORPHEUS

THE THEOLOGIANAND RENAISSANCEPLATONISTS

iI9

une

mesme

essence,

il monstre

que

la

diversite est es functions

seulement,

&

en

l'ordre

des

causes,

qui

est bien

passe plus

outre

que

les

Ariens.1

Steuco

had

gone

further in this

dangerous

direction;

he

sharply

criticizes Pico

and Ficino for supposing that Plato and the prisci theologi hought Mind was

a

creature

and

not co-eternal

with

the

Father-this Arian

error was confined

to

the

later

Platonists.2I

Steuco

wishes

the

ancient

theologians

to be not

only

Christians,

but

strictly

orthodox

ones,

who would

have been

on

the

right

side

at the Council

of

Nicaea. This attitude is the

exact

opposite

of

Bessarion's,

who

insists that

Plato

and

the rest

could not

possibly

have

been Christians

and

must

not be

considered

as

such,

and it is an attitude

which,

I

think,

inevitably

leads

to

heresy.

VI

Summaryf waysin which heologicalOrphica reimportantn theRenaissance

Since this

essay

is a

preliminary

sketch which deals

with

only

a

fraction

of

the

relevant

material,

I

should

like

to

conclude it

by

indicating

briefly

the

ways

in which

the

Orphica

seem

to

me

important

for

the

history

of Renais-

sance

thought; only

some of

these

have

been

shown

in

the

preceding pages,

and

that

incompletely

and

perhaps

not

clearly.

The content of

the

Orphica,

as

interpreted

by

Renaissance

Platonists,

is

on

the

whole so

indistinguishable

from other available

hellenistic

sources

that

it

is

impossible,

or

unwise,

to

attribute to them

any specific

influence.

There

are two

possible exceptions

to this.

First,

some of the

Orphica

have a

positive

pantheistic content,3 which might at least strengthen other similar, probably

Stoic,

influences

on

Renaissance

philosophy.

Secondly,

there

is

the

context

in

which

the

Orphic fragments

were

found:

Clement

and

Eusebius,

with their

dangerous

Platonic

expositions

of

the

Trinity,4

and

Proclus,

with his

multiple

interpretation

of

pagan gods

as

metaphysical

and natural

principles.5

The

Orphica

remain,

however,

chiefly

important,

not because

of their

content or

context,

but because

they

reinforce

the

belief

in,

and form

part

of,

a

prisca theologia

which

confirms the

compatibility

of Platonism

with Christi-

anity.

As

suggested

in

Section

I,

Orpheus

was a

particularly

eminent

member

of

the

sequence

of

prisci

theologi

because his other

aspects,

legendary

and

historical,

increased

his

authority

as

a

theologian

or

connected

him with

activities highly valued by Renaissance Platonists. The significance of this

tradition

of

ancient

theology

is,

again,

not so

much

in

its

content,

which a

priori

had to

conform

with

Christianity,

as

in

the

results

of

supposing

the

existence

of such

a

tradition and in

the

assumptions

it

involved.6

These results

may

be

summarized under

the

following

interconnected

categories.

The

belief

in

the

prisca

theologia:

(i)

led to an

extremely

liberal,

open

kind

of

Christianity,

to an

emphasis

on the

similarities

rather

than the differences

between various

religions.

This

1

Mornay,

op.

cit.,

p. 123.

2

Steuco,

Op.

Omn.,

III,

42v.

3

v. supra,p.

116

and note 9.

4

v.

supra,

pp.

I

I6-8.

5

v.

supra,

pp.

104,

i

o6,

I

o8.

6

v. supra, p. 105-







120o

D.

P.

WALKER

tendency

seems

even to survive

the Reformation

and the Council of

Trent;

Mornay

and

La

Boderie,

for

example,

hardly

ever

mention

points

of dif-

ference between

Catholicism

and Protestantism.

(ii)

enabled

pagan

philosophy

to

be

accepted

as

historically

part

of the

Christian tradition, and thus saved Ficino and his followers from the strain

or

dishonesty

of the "double

truth,"

still alive with

the Paduan

Aristotelians.

(iii) helped

the

survival,

in

innocuous

forms,

of

the

pagan

gods

and

heroes;

Ficino

and Pico were

able,

with a clear

conscience,

to

sing Orphic

hymns

to

Uranus or Phoebus.

(iv) strongly

influenced

the Renaissance

interpretation

of

Plato and the

Neoplatonists.

Historically

Plato

was

considered

as

deriving

from

Moses;

teleologically,

as

leading up

to

the Christianrevelation.

This

viewpoint,

how-

ever

erroneous

it

may

seem

to-day,

did at least

provide

an

intelligible

frame-

work

into which one

of the most

enigmatic,

if most

profound,

of all

philoso-

phers

could be

fitted.