Natural Philosophy Epitomised: Books 8-11 of Gregor Reisch's Philosophical pearl (1503)

Sachiko Kusukawa

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351915700
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Historia
• Subtopic: Historia del mundo

Gregor Reisch's The Philosophical pearl (Margarita Philosophica), first published in 1503 and republished 11 times in the sixteenth century, was the first extensive printed text which discussed the disciplines taught at university to achieve widespread dissemination. This distinguishes it from printed editions of individual texts of Aristotle and other authorities. It is presented as a dialogue between master and pupil, covering the seven liberal arts, natural philosophy and moral philosophy, and with illustrations throughout. It has received remarkably little attention in its own right as a work of education which helped shape the world view of sixteenth-century educated men. Its author was a Carthusian monk. This volume presents an edited translation and an extensive introduction, of the four books which deal with natural philosophy - the predecessor of modern science. These books clearly show the extent to which for Reisch the study of nature was still primarily undertaken for Christian ends. Not only was nature studied as God's creation, but the study of the soul (a central part of natural philosophy pursued on Aristotelian lines) and its fate was here completely integrated with the salvation or damnation of the individual Christian, as taught in the Bible and by the church fathers, especially Augustine. Natural philosophy for Reisch was a discipline which was as concerned with God and the Bible as it was with Nature and Aristotle.

1
Introduction

1 The philosophical pearl

Gregor Reisch’s Margarita Philosophica The philosophical pearl, as we shall call it – was first published in 1503 and republished 12 times or more in the sixteenth century, the last time in 1600. It is well known to historians for its many woodcuts, but it has received remarkably little attention in its own right as a work of education which helped shape the world-view of sixteenth-century educated men. Its author was a Carthusian monk.

What kind of work was The philosophical pearl? One’s first inclination nowadays would be to call it an ‘encyclopedia’, as if it were an early version of eighteenth or nineteenth century encyclopedias, and primarily a work of reference in which one would look up particular topics as required. But a glance at the text should show that The philosophical pearl is clearly not a work of this kind. Moreover, although it has Greek and Roman roots and antecedents, ‘encyclopedia’ is in fact a sixteenth-century term, not coined until some thirty years after the first publication of The philosophical pearl.¹ Nor is The philosophical pearl an encyclopedia in the literal sense (‘the cycle of knowledge’) of a work demonstrating the unity and totality of knowledge.² So this categorisation is certainly misleading for describing The philosophical pearl when it was written by Reisch.³

What kind of work did the author think it was? In the opening Peroratio to the work Reisch says that it is aimed at young men, adolescentes, and that it is an ‘epitome of the whole of philosophy’. He writes: ‘You therefore have, young gentlemen (for this Pearl was first of all intended for you), you have – I say – an epitome of the whole of philosophy, small in quantity but immense in content, in the form of books, treatises, chapters, with summary statements in amazing brevity and simple style, plucked from various commentaries both of philosophers and theologians as well as the Holy Fathers’. The text is presented as a dialogue between a Master and a Pupil over several days, and covers rational philosophy (that is, the seven liberal arts), natural philosophy and moral philosophy. It deals with subjects that were to be studied by a student in the arts faculty of universities, and in the same sequence. It is thus an epitome, that is to say a reduction or distillation, of the Aristotelian philosophy taught in the universities. Indeed, the very first plagiarism of the book called it this in the title in 1504: ‘An epitome of the whole of philosophy’. At one point Reisch points out the limitations both of himself and the epitome format:

‘I … am made the more tardy in responding the more attentively I consider the smallness of my wit, the crudeness of my style and the prescribed limits of an epitome; the first of which does not penetrate the secrets of nature; the second surely explains a concept rather obscurely; and the last does not allow me to back up what has been chosen, nor to confute with reasons what was passed over’ Book 11, Chapter 22).

Elsewhere in the text Reisch frequently refers to his work as a ‘compendium’. So we think epitome and compendium of philosophy more appropriate terms for the work than ‘encyclopedia’, and also give a better sense to the modern mind of what it is about.

The philosophical pearl parallels the university philosophy course, and it was also the first extensive printed text to achieve widespread dissemination which discussed the disciplines taught at university. This distinguishes it from printed editions of individual texts of Aristotle and other authorities.⁴

While it does not seem to have been intended as a course-book for use in pursuing a university degree, The philosophical pearl was certainly intended by Reisch to be read through, rather than dipped into, as the continuing line of argument of the text indicates. It thus puts into a more accessible and attractive format all the materials that a university student would become acquainted with through lectures (literally ‘readings-out-loud’) of the Aristotelian and other prescribed texts, and the commentaries that masters of the schools made upon them.⁵

Moreover, we know that The philosophical pearl was actually in use at certain universities. For instance, Jakob Wimpfeling recommended its use at the University of Heidelberg in 1522.⁶ A copy of the 1517 edition was in use at the Jesuit College of Ingolstadt in 1568.⁷ In the early 1530s, Andreas Vesalius, later to be the most provocative and celebrated anatomist of the sixteenth century, was taught from it when he was at the tri-lingual college at Louvain, though he recalled the event with distaste:

I well remember … when in the University of Louvain … I gave my efforts to philosophy. In those commentaries on Aristotle’s On the soul, then read to us by our teacher, a theologian by profession and therefore, like the other instructors at that Academy, ready to mingle his own pious views with those of the philosophers – the brain was said to have been equipped with three ventricles… That we should follow up more in detail the items which we were thus taught, we were shown a figure from some Philosophical Pearl which presented to the eyes the ventricles so discussed. This figure we pupils portrayed, each according to his skill as draughtsman, adding to it our notes. It was suggested to us that this figure comprehended not merely the three ventricles but all relevant parts of the head, and especially of the brain! Such are the inventions of those who never look into our Maker’s ingenuity in the building of the human body!⁸

Indeed, although The philosophical pearl was never prescribed in university statutes, copies are recorded in contemporary documents in towns from Burgos to Wittenberg, and from Innsbruck to Oxford and Cambridge.⁹ Conrad Pelikan used it to teach philosophy to his fellow Franciscans.¹⁰ Jean Luis Vives recommended the mathematical sections of The philosophical pearl as useful.¹¹

The philosophical pearl and its messages thus had a large audience. It was written to be a popular text, and its many reprints indicate that it succeeded in this goal. It was probably the most widely used resource for educated young men in northern Europe for more than a generation. It was through a ‘popular’ text like this, rather than through the original texts, that the medieval perspectiva tradition of explaining light and sight, for instance, reached a wide audience. Moreover, The philosophical pearl was as up to date as one could want, and was presented in the latest technological format. In short, The philosophical pearl is probably as central a work as we are ever going to find to understand the education and mind-set of sixteenth-century university-level, Latin-reading, men. It was in use before the Reformation, and continued in use in Catholic contexts long afterwards, and it was not until the 1530s that Lutheran Protestants produced works to rival it.¹²

So The philosophical pearl was clearly produced to meet some perceived educational needs of what contemporaries called ‘the modern world’. It is at the same time both a work typical of its age in the attitudes and knowledge it displays, and also (as far as we can determine) a work unique in its form, ambition, presentation and tone.

Our own interest in The philosophical pearl is primarily as a work of relevance to the history of science. Our particular concern in making our translation of the books on natural philosophy has been to produce a text suitable for present-day students studying the history of natural philosophy. In The philosophical pearl ‘natural philosophy’ – the discipline or set of disciplines in which nature was studied – receives extensive treatment from Reisch, who devotes four out of his twelve books to the subject. Our hope is that the translation will give new insight into the scope, state and nature of natural philosophy in the period just before both the Lutheran Reformation and the innovative works of Copernicus in astronomy and Vesalius in anatomy.

In particular, the four natural philosophical books of The philosophical pearl clearly show the extent to which for Reisch the study of nature was still primarily undertaken for Christian ends. Not only was nature studied as God’s creation, but the study of the soul (a central part of natural philosophy pursued on Aristotelian lines) and its fate was here completely integrated with the salvation or damnation of the individual Christian, as taught in the Bible and by the church fathers. Natural philosophy for Reisch was a discipline which was as concerned with God and the Bible as it was with Nature and Aristotle. Most strikingly, the natural philosophy that Reisch presents here is as Augustinian as it is Aristotelian,...