FWIW my opinion is that yes, we should be thinking more about a possible connection between GB, JK, TB...
More to follow, hopefully.
Here is some information for list members who want to
know more about Bruno and read his actual works:
--The work in which he defended the ideas of
Copernicus is _Cena de la Ceneri_ (translated "The Ash
Wednesday Supper), published in 1584
--De l'Infinito, Universi e Mondi (translated "on the
Infinite Universe and Worlds), published in 1584
Those are the only two references that I am aware of
which Bruno makes to these beliefs. There are many
reasons to suppose that Bruno could be deemed a
heretic in the eyes of the Church. His ideas ran far
beyond the pale of thinking acceptable to the Church,
and in many areas. Please do not equate me with the
Church in saying this; I am far from defending the
Church, and I am sure I would have been burned in
Bruno's time, too. I am only reiterating the point
th! at Bruno's ideas were more compatable with
Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, and Gnosticism than with
Catholic Christianity, and I believe it is likely upon
one of these points that he was charged by the Church.
Others who know more about the Inquisition may correct
me on this, but it is my understanding that he could
only be charged as a heretic as a result of
propounding ideas which attacked stated church dogma;
and in 1600, I get the impression that the Church
hadn't even begun to envision, let alone formally
address, the widely divergent thinking that Bruno
proposed when he referred to other Suns and other
Although Bruno challenged the idea of the crystalline
spheres, which today we may concurr with on an
astronomical basis, we also know that he was an
astrologer. When I say that astrology could be used
in ways unacceptable to the Church, Bruno comes
immediately to mind. He was known for his use of
astrological magic; in particular he is associated
with astrolgical magical techniques involving
Here is one of my favorite quotes of Bruno's:
"There are three gates through which the hunter of
souls [animarum venator] ventures to bind: vision,
hearing and mind or imagination. If it happens that
someone passes through all three of these gates, he
binds most powerfully and ties down most tightly."
"He who enters through the gate of hearing is armed
with his voice and with speech, the son of voice. He
who enters through the gate of vision is armed with
suitable forms, gestures, motions and figures. He who
enters through the gate of the imagination, mind and
reason is armed with customs and the arts."
"A General Account of Bonding" from Cause, Principle
and Unity, ed. Blackwell & Lucca (Cambridge, 1997)
Bruno was an expert in his day in concepts of "media
manipulation! ", its use in magic, and how to prevent
its mind-numbing effects. This resistance to
"group-think" is evident in how he lived his life as
well as how he died.
Here is a site where many of this prolific writer's
works can be read:
Here is a list of works available on that site:
De Umbris Idearum ('The Shadow of Ideas') (1582)
Bruno became a noted expert in the art of memory while
still a Dominican monk. He repeatedly demonstrated his
memory techniques, including to Pope Pius V. Bruno
carried the traditional mnemonic training well beyond
the Dominican traditions.
This is Bruno's first book on memory, and presents a
rich system which integrates mnemonics, psychology
(ala Ficino), and hermetic magic. This work is dealt
with at some length by Frances A. Yates in her
Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (1964).
Ars Memoriae ('The Art of Memory') (1582) ! (Latin)
Cantus Circaeus ("Incantations of Circe") (1582)
An early work by Bruno on the art of memory with
strong magical elements. It is written in the form of
a dialogue between the great sorceress Circe and her
assistant or apprentice Moeris.
Ars Reminiscendi -- Triginta Sigilli (1583) (Latin)
Explicatio triginti sigillorum (1583) (Latin)
The Heroic Frenzies... ('De Gli Eroici Furori')
Another major work of Bruno's, almost impossible to
find, dealing with the philosophy of love and love as
a means of mystical ascent.
De Magia (Latin)
One of the very few of Bruno's books to deal
explicitly with magic. It remained unpublished until
Tocco's edition of 1891. I consider this text of equal
importance with Agrippa's Occult Philosophy. For a
translation, see Cause, Principle and Unity, ed.
Blackwell et al.
Theses De Magia (Latin)
Magia Mathematica (Latin)
By "mathematical magic" Bruno means magical practices
that use characters, seals, and figures.
De vinculis in genere (Latin)
This is Bruno's other great book on magic, dealing
with "bonding in general." Couliano characterizes it
as "one of those little-known works whose importance
in the history of ideas far outstrips that of more
famous ones." (E&M p. 89) It explains how the masses
can be manipulated with psychological and magical
bonds, and how one can escape these snares.
--- Rene Zandbergen
> Dear all,
> Giordano Bruno is a truly interesting character.
> Before going into Pamela's post, I'd like to mention
> that there is a little-known threory that the VMs
> was actually written by Bruno. I wonder if anyone
> has read the publication in question and could
> summarise its main points to the list. It is cited
> at! Jim Reeds' bibliography, which I cannot access
> right now (I tried Stolfi's mirror copy).
> Bruno was in Prague for a few months in 1588.
> He dedicated a book to Rudolf, for which the
> emperor gave him 300 Thalers.
> (I have no no idea how that relates to ducats).
> --- Pamela Richards
> > [...] this one contains a description of the
> > setting of the few facts we know of the death of
> > Giordano Bruno.
> > The records of Bruno's inquisition trial no longer
> > exist, from what I understand. So we are not able
> > to state clearly for which of his unorthodox
> > he suffered.
> What one may read in reliable literature is that
> he stated that the Sun is not unique in the
> but that all stars are like our Sun; furthermore
> the universe is infinite. This was seen by the
> as an insult to God, for which he was burnt.
> Rather, it was not so much his thesis, as the fact
> that, when challenged by the church, he took a
> polemic stance and refused to phrase his theory
> in more acceptable terms. It is believed that he
> should not have died if it weren't for this
> > [...] he did concurr with Copernicus on the
> > of the Earth relative to the Sun, this was not the
> > major thrust of his writing.
> In my daily work (orbit computation of artificial
> satellites) I don't know what is the centre of the
> Universe but I do know what is the centre of my
> coordinates system, and that is the centre of
> the Earth. Thus, I use the Tychonic system:
> Moon and Sun revolve around the Earth and the
> rest! revolves about the Sun. I also know that it
> doesn't matter at all. Now why did it matter to
> the people in the 15th-17th Century? That is
> because they came from the belief that the
> heavenly bodies were attached to crystalline
> so their orbits could never intersect (it would
> the spheres).
> Bruno also maintained that this idea of crystalline
> spheres was 'silly', and modern thought of course
> agrees with him (as it does on the topic of
> Sun and stars).
> Cheers, Rene
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
> with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list
"I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing, than to teach ten thousand stars how not to dance."
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: