A History of Magic and Experimental Science, Volume 1 (of 2) by Lynn Thorndike

attributed to Nechepso by the sixth century medical writer, Aetius, seems to have overlooked the “Emplastrum Nechepsonis e cupresso,” Aetius, _Tetrabibl._, IV, Sermo III, cap. 19 (p. 771 in the edition of Stephanus, 1567). [1312] Bouché-Leclercq, _L’Astrologie grecque_, 1898, p. xiii. Axt and Riegler, _Manethonis Apotelesmaticorum libri sex_, Cologne, 1832. Also edited by Koechly. [1313] E. Riess, On Ancient Superstition, in _Transactions American Philological Association_ (1895), XXVI, 40-55. Grenfell (1921), p. 151, announces that J. G. Smyly is about to publish “a remarkable fragment of an Orphic ritual” among some thirty papyrus texts in the _Cunningham Memoirs of the Royal Irish Academy_. [1314] The Greek text of the Lithica is contained in _Orphica_, ed. E. Abel, Lipsiae et Pragae, 1885. A rather too free English verse translation, _Orpheus on Gems_, is given in C. W. King, _The Natural History, Ancient and Modern, of Precious Stones and Gems and of Precious Metals_, London, 1865. [1315] Pp. 397-98. [1316] Line 94, περίφρονι Θειοδάμαντι; line 165, δαιμόνιος φώς. [1317] Lines 410-411. [1318] _Confessio S. Cypriani_, in _Acta Sanctorum_, ed. Bollandists, Sept., VII, 222; L. Preller, _Philologus_ (1846), I, 349ff.; cited by A. B. Cook, _Zeus_, Cambridge, 1914, I, 110-111. The work is treated more fully below in Chapter 18. [1319] Franz Cumont, _op. cit._, Chicago, 1911, p. 189. See also Windischmann, _Zoroastrische Studien_, Berlin, 1863. [1320] See below, Chapter 26. [1321] Cap. 16. [1322] Edited by Kroll, _De oraculis Chaldaicis_, in _Breslau Philolog. Abhandl._, VII (1894), 1-76. Cory, _Ancient Fragments_, London, 1832. [1323] L. A. Gray in A. V. W. Jackson, _Zoroaster_, 1901, pp. 259-60. [1324] G. Wolff, _Porphyrii de philosophia ex oraculis hauriendis_, Berlin, 1886. Pitra, _Analecta Sacra_, V, 2, pp. 192-95, Πρόκλου ἐκ τῆς Χαλδαικῆς φιλοσοφίας. Many quotations of oracles from Porphyry’s _De philosophia ex oraculis hausta_ are made by Eusebius, _Praeparatio evangelica_, in PG, XXI. [1325] Bouché-Leclercq, _L’Astrologie grecque_, p. 599. [1326] Paul Allard, _La transformation du Paganisme romain au IVe siècle_, pp. 113-33, in _Compte Rendu du Congrès Scientifique International des Catholiques. Deuxième Section, Sciences religieuses_. Paris, 1891. [1327] _Plotini opera omnia, Porphyrii liber de vita Plotini, cum Marsilii Ficini commentariis_ ... ed D. Wyttenbach, G. H. Moser, and F. Creuzer, Oxford, 1835, 3 vols. Page references in my citations are to this edition, but I have also employed: _Plotini Enneades_, ed. R. Volkmann, Leipzig, 1883; _Select Works of Plotinus translated from the Greek with an Introduction containing the substance of Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus_, by Thomas Taylor, new edition with preface and bibliography by G. R. S. Mead, London, 1909; K. S. Guthrie, _The Philosophy of Plotinus_, Philadelphia, 1896, and _Plotinos, Complete Works_, 4 vols., 1918, English Translation. Where my citations give the number of the chapter in addition to the _Ennead_ and Book, these agree with Volkmann’s text and Guthrie’s translation,—which, however, are not quite identical in this respect. A noteworthy recent publication is W. R. Inge, _The Philosophy of Plotinus_, 1918, 2 vols. [1328] H. F. Müller, _Plotinische Studien II_, in _Hermes_, XLIX, 70-89, argues that the philosophy of Plotinus was genuinely Hellenic and free from oriental influence, that all theurgy was hateful to him, and that he opposed Gnosticism and astrology. Müller seems to me to overstate his case and to be too ready to exculpate Plotinus, or perhaps rather Hellenism, from concurrence in the superstition of the time. [1329] For Gnosticism see Chapter 15. [1330] _Ennead_, II, 9, 14. Πλωτίνου πρὸς τοὺς Γνωστικούς, ed. G. A. Heigl, 1832; and _Plotini De Virtutibus et Adversus Gnosticos libellos_, ed. A. Kirchhoff, 1847; are simply extracts from the _Enneads_. See also C. Schmidt, _Plotin’s Stellung zum Gnosticismus u. kirchl. Christentum_, 1900; in TU, X, 90 pp. [1331] _Ennead_, IV, 4, 40 (II, 805 or 434). Τὰς δὲ γοητείας πῶς; ἢ τῇ συμπαθείᾳ, καὶ τῷ πεφυκέναι συμφωνίαν εἶναι ὁμοίων καὶ ἐναντίωσιν ἀνομοίων, καί τῇ τῶν δυνάμεων τῶν πολλῶν ποικιλίᾳ εἰς ἓν ζῷον συντελούντων. _Ibid._ 42 (II, 808 or 436) ... καὶ τέχναις καὶ ἰατρῶν καὶ ἐπαοιδῶν ἄλλο ἄλλῳ ἠναγκάσθη παρασχεῖν τι τῆς δυνάμεως τῆς αὐτοῦ. _Ennead_, IV, 9 (II, 891 or 479). Greek: εἰ δὲ καὶ ἐπωδαὶ καὶ ὅλως μαγεῖαι συνάγουσι καὶ συμπαθεῖς πόῤῥωθεν ποιοῦσι, πάντως τοι διὰ ψυχῆς μιᾶς. [1332] _Ennead_, IV, 4 (II, 810 or 437). [1333] _Ennead_, IV, 4, 43-44. [1334] _Ennead_, IV, 4, 44. [1335] See Chapter XII, pp. 323-4. [1336] _Vita Plotini_, cap. 10. [1337] _Vita_, cap. 10. [1338] Cap. 10. [1339] A748. [1340] Shown in the article on “Jewelry” in the eleventh edition of the _Encyclopedia Britannica_, Plate I, Figure 50. The article says of the pendant, “Here we find the themes of archaic Greek art, such as a figure holding up two water-birds, in immediate connexion with Mycenaean gold patterns.” See further A. J. Evans in _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 1893, p. 197. [1341] J. E. Harrison, _Themis_, Cambridge, 1912. p. 114, Fig. 20. [1342] _Vita_, cap. 15. It will be noted that like some of the church fathers Plotinus attacked genethlialogy rather than astrology. Προσεῖχε δὲ τοῖς μὲν περὶ τῶν ἀστέρων κανόσιν οὐ πάνυ τι μαθηματικῶς, τοῖς δὲ τῶν γενεθλιαλόγων ἀποτελεστικοῖς ἀκριβέστερον. καὶ φωράσας τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τὸ ἀνεχέγγυον ἐλέγχειν πολλαχοῦ καὶ (τῶν) ἐν τοῖς συγγράμμασιν οὐκ ὤκνησε. [1343] _Ennead_ II, 3, Περὶ τοῦ εἰ ποιεῖ τὰ ἄστρα. Porphyry arranged his master’s treatises in the form of six enneads of nine each and perhaps somewhat revised them at the same time. [1344] _Matheseos libri VIII_, ed. Kroll et Skutsch, Lipsiae, 1897. I, 7, 14-22. [1345] See below, pp. 353-4. [1346] _Ennead_ II, 3 (p. 242), Ὅτι ἡ τῶν ἄστρων φορὰ σημαίνει περὶ ἕκαστον τὰ ἐσόμενα ἀλλ’ οὐκ αὐτὴ πάντα ποιεῖ, ὡς τοῖς πολλοῖς δοξάζεται, εἴρηται μὲν πρότερον ἐν ἅλλοις. See also _Ennead_ III, 1, and IV, 3-4. [1347] I, 18. [1348] Cap. 19. [1349] _Polycraticus_, II, 19, (ed. C. C. I. Webb, 1909, I, 112). Mr. Webb (I, xxviii) holds that John of Salisbury “certainly did not have Plotinus,” and derived some passages from his works through Macrobius and Augustine; but he is unable to state in what intermediate source John could have found the passage now in question. It does not seem to reflect Plotinus’ doctrine very accurately. [1350] _Ennead_ IV, iv, 6 and 8. [1351] _Ibid._, 30. Guthrie’s translation, “We have shown that memory is useless to the stars: we have agreed that they have senses, namely, sight and hearing,” is quite misleading, as caps. 40-42 make evident. [1352] _Ennead_ II, iii, 6 and 13 (249-50). [1353] _Ennead_ IV, iv, 31. ὅτι μὲν οὗν ἡ φορὰ ποιεῖ ... ἀναμφισβητήτως μὲν τὰ ἐπίγεια οὐ μόνον τοῑς σώμασιν ἀλλὰ καὶ ταῖς τῆς ψυχῆς διαθέσεσι καὶ τῶν μερῶν ἕκαστον εἰς τὰ ἐπίγεια καὶ ὅλως τὰ κάτω ποιεῖ, πολλαχῇ δῆλον. [1354] _Idem._ Guthrie heads the passage, “Absurdity of Ptolemean Astrology.” See also _Ennead_, II, iii, 1-5. [1355] _Ennead_ II, iii, 6. [1356] _Ennead_ II, iii, 4. [1357] Guthrie’s translation, _Ennead_ IV, iv, 35. εἰ δὴ δρᾷ τι ὁ ἥλιος καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ἄστρα εἰς τὰ τῇδε, χρὴ νομίζειν αὐτὸν μὲν ἄνω βλέποντα εἶναι. [1358] _Idem._ καὶ ἐν τοῖς παρ’ ἡμῖν εἰσι πολλαί, ἃς οὐ θερμὰ ἢ ψυχρὰ παρέχεται, ἀλλὰ γενόμενα ποιότησι διαφόροις καὶ λόγοις εἰδοποιηθέντα καὶ φύσεως δυνάμεως μεταλαβόντα, οἷον καὶ λίθων φύσεις καὶ βοτανῶν ἐνέργειαι θαυμαστὰ πολλὰ παρέχονται. [1359] _Ennead_ IV, iv, 34. καὶ ποιήσεις καὶ σημασίας ἐν πολλοῖς ἀλλαχοῦ δὲ σημασίας μόνον. [1360] _Ennead_ II, iii (p. 256). [1361] _Ibid._ (pp. 250-1). [1362] _Ibid._, II, iii (pp. 243-6, 254-5, 263-5). [1363] _Ennead_, II, ix, 13. τῆς τραγῳδίας τῶν φοβερῶν, ὡς οἴονται, ἐν ταῖς τοῦ κόσμου σφαίραις. [1364] The references for the statements in this paragraph are in the order of their occurrence: _Ennead_, II, iii (pp. 257, 251-2); III, iv (p. 521); IV, iv (p. 813); II, iii (p. 260); III, iv (p. 520); IV, 3 (p. 711): in these cases the higher page-numbering is used. [1365] Edited Venice, Aldine Press, 1497 and 1516; Oxford, 1678; by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1857. In the following quotations from it I have usually adhered to T. Taylor’s English translation, London, 1821. [1366] Carl Rasche, _De Iamblicho libri qui inscribitur de mysteriis auctore_, Aschendorff, 1911, 82 pp. [1367] Bouché-Leclercq, _L’Astrologie grecque_ (1898), p. 599, citing Kroll, _De oraculis Chaldaicis_. [1368] _De mysteriis_, I, 5. [1369] VIII, 2. [1370] I, 9. [1371] I, 17 (Taylor’s translation). [1372] IV, 6. [1373] I, 10. [1374] V, 10-12. [1375] I, 20. [1376] II, 6. [1377] II, 7. [1378] IV, 1. [1379] IV, 2. [1380] IV, 10. [1381] II, 11. [1382] II, 3. [1383] V, 20. [1384] I, 9; VI, 6; II, 11. [1385] I, 11. [1386] V, 23. [1387] IV, 2. [1388] I, 12. [1389] I, 15; III, 24 (Taylor’s translation). [1390] VII, 4. [1391] VII, 5. [1392] III, 29. [1393] II, 10. [1394] IV, 10. [1395] IV, 12. [1396] IV, 3. [1397] IV, 10; III, 31. [1398] IV, 7. [1399] II, 10. [1400] VI, 5; III, 25; III, 13. [1401] II, 10. [1402] E. S. Bouchier, _Syria as a Roman Province_, Oxford, 1916, p. 231. [1403] _De abstinentia_, II, 48. [1404] III, 1, 10. [1405] III, 2-3. [1406] III, 11. [1407] III, 24; III, 17. [1408] III, 14. [1409] III, 25. Although, as stated above, one may be divinely inspired while diseased. But there is no causal connection between the two. [1410] III, 26. [1411] III, 15. [1412] I, 17. [1413] VIII, 4. [1414] VIII, 6. [1415] IX, 3-4. [1416] I, 18. [1417] Iamblichus, _In Nicomachi Geraseni arithmeticam introductionem et De fato_, published by Tennulius, Deventer and Arnheim, 1668. [1418] Zeller, _Philos. d. Gr._, III, 2, 2, p. 608. cites passages to show Porphyry’s leanings towards astrology; but F. Boll, _Studien über Claudius Ptolemaeus_, 115-17, and Bouché-Leclercq, _L’Astrologie grecque_, 601-602, are inclined to the opposite view. [1419] CCAG, _passim_. [1420] Ed. Hieronymus Wolf, Basel, 1559, Greek and Latin. [1421] III, 28. [1422] III, 29. [1423] Eusebius, _Praep. evang._, IV, 6-15, 23; V, 6, 11, 14-15; VI, 1, 4-5; etc., in Migne, PG, XXI. [1424] Loeb Library edition of Julian’s works, I, 398, 412, 433. [1425] I, 482, 498. [1426] I, 405. [1427] I, 374-75. [1428] I, 366-67. [1429] I, 368. [1430] I, 419. [1431] XXII, xii, 8. [1432] XXI, i, 7. [1433] XXVIII, iv, 24. [1434] XXII, xvi, 17-18. [1435] Published at Venice (Aldine), 1497, along with the _De mysteriis_, and other works edited or composed by Marsilius Ficinus. See also _Procli Opera_, ed. Cousin, Paris, 1820-1827, III, 278; and Kroll, _Analecta Graeca_, Greisswald, 1901, where a Greek translation accompanies the Latin text. [1436] _Eusebii Caesariensis Opera_, _Pars II_, _Apologetica_, _Praep. Evang._, IV, 22; V, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14; VI, 1, 4; XIV, 10 (Migne, _Patrologia Graeca_, vol. 21). [1437] X, 9-10. [1438] Berthelot (1889), p. ix. [1439] Περι ζώων ἰδιότητος. I have used both the _editio princeps_ by Gesner, Zurich, 1556, and the critical edition by R. Hercher, Paris, 1858, and Teubner, 1864. The work will henceforth be cited without title in the notes. [1440] See PW, and Christ, _Gesch. d. griech. Litt._, for further details. [1441] I, 22. [1442] I, 24. [1443] I, 35. D. W. Thompson, _Glossary of Greek Birds_, p. 57, notes that in the _Birds_ of Aristophanes, where the hoopoe appears, “the mysterious root in verse 654 is the magical ἀδίαυτον.” [1444] I, 48. [1445] I, 52. [1446] I, 54. [1447] II, 2 and 31; III, 5. [1448] III, 17. [1449] III, 23 and 25. [1450] III, 26; in I, 45, the woodpecker similarly employs the virtue of an herb to remove a stone blocking the entrance to its nest. [1451] III, 32 and 38. [1452] IV, 10, 14, 17. [1453] IV, 27. [1454] IV, 29. [1455] IV, 53. [1456] V, 37. [1457] VI, 4. [1458] VI, 16. [1459] VI, 33. [1460] VI, 41. [1461] VI, 59. [1462] VII, 7-8. [1463] VII, 14. [1464] VII, 16. The story is also found in Pliny NH, X, 3, where it is added that Aeschylus remained out-doors that day, because an oracle predicted that he would be killed by the fall of a (tortoise’s) house. [1465] VIII, 5. [1466] VIII, 22. [1467] IX, 1. [1468] X, 40. [1469] XI, 2 and 16. [1470] XII, 21. [1471] XIII, 3. [1472] XIV, 19. [1473] _C. Iulii Solini Collectanea rerum memorabilium iterum recensuit_ Th. Mommsen, Berlin, 1895, pp. xxxi-li. Beazley, _Dawn of Modern Geography_, I, 520-2, lists 152 MSS. [1474] Beazley, _Dawn of Modern Geography_, I, 247. [1475] Mommsen (1895), p. 48. [1476] _Ibid._, p. 7. [1477] Yet one medieval MS of Solinus is described as _De variarum herbarum et radicum qualitate et virtute medica_; Vienna 3959, 15th century, fols. 56-74. [1478] In Mommsen’s edition critical apparatus occupies more than one-half of the 216 pages. [1479] C. W. King, _The Natural History, Ancient and Modern, of Precious Stones and Gems_, London, 1865, p. 6. [1480] Mommsen (1895), pp. 132, 188. [1481] _Ibid._, 46-7. Mommsen could give no source for these statements concerning Sardinia, and they do not appear to be in Pliny. But it is from a footnote in the English translation of the _Natural History_ by Bostock and Riley (II, 208, citing Dalechamps, and Lemaire, III, 201) that I learn that the laughter which Pliny (NH, VII, 52) speaks of as a premonitory sign of death in cases of madness, “is not the indication of mirth, but what has been termed the _risus Sardonicus_, the ‘Sardonic laugh,’ produced by a convulsive action of the muscles of the face.” This form of death may be what Solinus has in mind. Agricola in his work on metallurgy and mines still believes in the poisonous ants of Sardinia; _De re metallica_, VI, near close, pp. 216-7, in Hoover’s translation, 1912. [1482] Mommsen (1895), p. 57. [1483] _Ibid._, p. 39. [1484] Mommsen (1895), p. 82. [1485] _Ibid._, pp. 45-46. [1486] _Ibid._, pp. 13, 68. [1487] _Ibid._, pp. 18, 41, 159. [1488] _Ibid._, p. 50, and elsewhere, “siderum disciplinam.” [1489] _Ibid._, p. 5, “mathematicorum nobilissimus.” Solinus probably takes this from Varro, who, as Plutarch informs us in his _Life of Romulus_, asked “Tarrutius, his familiar acquaintance, a good philosopher and mathematician,” to calculate the horoscope of Romulus. See above, p. 209. [1490] Mommsen (1905), pp. 75-6. [1491] _Ibid._, p. 66. [1492] PW, for the problem of his identity and further bibliography. [1493] I have used the text and English translation of A. T. Cory, _The Hieroglyphics of Horapollo Nilous_, 1840. Philip’s Greek is so bad that some would date it in the fourteenth or fifteenth century. The oldest extant Greek codex was purchased in Andros in 1419. The work was translated into Latin by the fifteenth century at latest; see Vienna 3255, 15th century, 82 fols., Horapollo, Hieroglyphicon latine versorum liber I et libri II introductio cum figuris calamo exaratis et coloratis. [1494] I, 1; II, 61; II, 65; II, 36 and 59; II, 57; II, 83; I, 34-5; II, 57; II, 44 and 39 and 76-7 and 85-6 and 88. [1495] II, 45. [1496] II, 46; Aelian says the same, however, as we stated above. [1497] II, 64. [1498] NH, XXVIII, 27. [1499] II, 72. [1500] I, 6. According to Pliny (NH, XX, 26), the hawk sprinkles its eyes with the juice of this herb; Apuleius (_Metamorphoses_, cap. 30) says that the eagle does so. [1501] I, 3. [1502] II, 57. [1503] I, 10. [1504] I, 11. [1505] I, 14. [1506] I, 16. [1507] I, 13. [1508] I, 23. [1509] Sir William Muir, “Ancient Arabic Poetry, its Genuineness and Authenticity,” in _Royal Asiatic Society’s Journal_ (1882), p. 30. [1510] Ascribed to Enoch in Harleian MS 1612, fol. 15r, Incipit: “Enoch tanquam unus ex philosophis super res quartum librum edidit, in quo voluit determinare ista quatuor: videlicet de xv stellis, de xv herbis, de xv lapidibus preciosis et de xv figuris ipsis lapidibus sculpendis,” and Wolfenbüttel 2725, 14th century, fols. 83-94v; BN 13014, 14th century, fol. 174v; Amplon, Quarto 381 (Erfurt), 14th century, fols. 42-45: for “Enoch’s prayer” see Sloane MS 3821, 17th century, fols, 190v-193. Ascribed to Hermes in Harleian 80, Sloane 3847, Royal 12-C-XVIII; Berlin 963, fol. 105; Vienna 5216, 15th century, fols. 63r-66v; “Dixit Enoch quod 15 sunt stelle / ex tractatu Heremeth (i. e. Hermes) et enoch compilatum”; and in the Catalogue of Amplonius (1412 A. D.), Math.