Throughout the latter half of
the sixteenth century John Dee enjoyed a thoroughly European reputation
for profound scholarship: his opinions were widely consulted,
his authority invoked in many diverse fields of speculation and
research. Yet, without minimising the value of his personal influence
and attainments, the justification for a detailed study of these
must depend less on the limited value of the accompanying attempt
to assess Dee's own claims as an original thinker or direct contributor
to scientific discovery, than on the fact that he may be significantly
considered as the representative - and in some respects the spokesman
- of an age. Dee in his life and writings championed a certain
vigorous "new philosophy" which flourished in the late
Renaissance(1), and though this philosophy, or rather the particular
form which it then assumed, fell later into barren obsolescence
(2) yet some of its offshoots of that time were to bear rich,
and unexpected fruit in succeeding centuries. Dee's surviving
works are perhaps only fragmentary illustrations of certain aspects
of the general body of doctrine he maintained, yet an examination
of them is illuminating since, however limited or idiosyncratic
their subject matter, they exemplify a typical approach to various
problems, and they also occasionally give clear expression to
broad statements of principle, which should, Dee believed, provide
a foundation for a multitude of particular applications. In these
respects, they throw some light, if only indirectly, on much contemporary
endeavour and achievement, even in fields discussed not at all,
or only incidentally, by Dee, since these may often properly be
regarded as related and comparable effects arising from a common
intellectual tradition.
The movement to which Dee contributed
may be described rather broadly as striving after a new philosophic
synthesis which should fully express and relate, as far as they
could be known from the data of reason, revelation, and experience,
both the capacities of men and the processes of nature, and which
should relegate neither to a subordinate or derivative position
in regard to the other. It has a natural place, frequently acknowledged
by its exponents, in the general stream of neoplatonism, but it
is more particularly associated with that current, which embracing
much of later Greek endeavour in astronomy and mathematics, stemmed
from Alexandria, notably preserving thereafter, from this source,
the characteristic emphasis on the natural powers of the Intellect
to arrive at truth, and on the value of dialectic, with the corresponding
lack of stress on the immediate importance of "ecstasy"
(reflected in the Greek patristic writers' comparative neglect
of the doctrines of Original Sin and Grace), and ran through much
of the scientific thought of the Arabs; which current, by insisting
that the Cosmos was a logical and necessary unfolding of intelligible
principles, emanating from and manifesting the nature of God,
gave strong support and encouragement to the study of the natural
sciences and mathematics. That other aspect of neoplatonism -
the only one of much influence in the Latin speaking world during
the middle ages, represented by the writings of the Pseudo-Dionysius,
and to some extent those of St. Augustine, which stressed, or
was inclined to value above all else, the personal mystic experience
- to which all knowledge and philosophy was considered at best,
merely a propaedeutic, since true knowledge was essentially revealed
and not attained to - this aspect was of course incorporated into
the scientific neoplatonism of the Renaissance - to have excluded
it would have introduced incoherency and inconsistency into a
doctrine relying so much on the assertion of the mind's ability,
owing to its relationship with the creative thought of God, to
determine a priori, at least criteria of, truth. Nevertheless
it was overshadowed in the sixteenth century by the rediscovery
of, or by the increased attention then given to, the works of
later Greek Platonists - the mathematical and metaphysical commentaries
of Proclus for example, whose writings make up one of the chief
single influences on Dee's thought in general - as well as ancient
scientific writings either associated with these, or at least
having little relation with and frequently running counter to
Aristotelian doctrines - and the theological writings of the Greek
Fathers, who presented a much more explicit synthesis of Christianity
and pagan philosophy, the essential harmony between which was
affirmed by Justus, Clement, Gregory and others, than any of the
Latin Fathers had been prepared to do. The form this Neoplatonism
assumed and the applications of its doctrines, in the late Renaissance,
of which Dee's work is here considered to be representative, and
which were to give a new character to the scientific, or philosophical,
approach to Nature in his time, bore fruits in fields far removed
from Dee's own immediate interests; for while his own practical
achievements, in kind and in extent, remained somewhat narrowly
limited, the principles from which they sprung, and the method
by which they were developed, were widely proclaimed and accepted
as possessing universal validity throughout the "natural,"
"intellectual," and "spiritual" worlds, and
as providing guiding canons for practice of the various arts as
well as invention or discovery in mechanics and natural sciences.
Previous page | Table of Contents | Next page |