Abstract
This chapter begins with a brief description of some anti-pluralist writings from the seventeenth century. The argument is made that while a belief in pluralism rarely meant abandoning astrological thinking, the outright denial of pluralism did necessarily involve the reaffirmation of an astrological teleology. The first main section of the chapter analyses a debate between Henry More and John Butler, an Anglican minister, about the legitimacy of astrology. The chapter then continues with a discussion of how pluralism was starting to take over teleological ground from astrology. The last section of the chapter concentrates on the program of natural theology, arguing that there was a conscious effort to deny the role of celestial influence in generation, and to re-orient the understanding of God’s providence around a widely populated cosmos rather than an astrological one.
On the other Hand, how is it possible to conceive that, that immense Number of glorious and Sun-like Bodies of the fixt Stars, those vast and huge Bodies of some of the Planets (in respect of our Earth) with their noble Attendance, were made for no other use but to twinkle to us in Winter Evenings, and by their Aspects to forebode what little Changes of Weather, or other pitiful Accidents were to be expected below, or to be peep’d at by some poor Paltry Fellows of Astronomers?
(Cheyne 1705, 110)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Apart from the obvious cases of Copernicus , Bruno and Kepler , other works containing heterodox cosmological views were condemned, such as Palingenius ’ Zodiacus vitae (1536) and Patrizi’s Nova de universis philosophia (1591).
- 3.
Morin 1661, 170: ‘Nam Planetae causae sunt universales mixtorum omnium duntaxat Elementalium, ipsiusque hominis de communi Philosophorum consensu, unde illud Aristotelis, Sol et homo generant hominem, proindeque non sunt de genere mixtorum ipsorum; alioquin essent etiam sui causa, quod absurdum est.’
- 4.
Morin 1661, 177: ‘Ergo etiam a ratione et veritate alienum est, alios Mundi globos creaturis rationalibus, et multo minus solis irrationalibus esse habitatos. Sed corpora omnia Coelestia eo tantum fine facta sunt, ut praeter Dei gloriam quam enarrant, suo lumine, calore, frigore, influxu, atque motu homini deserviant, cuius solius gratia, conditus est totus Mundus corporeus ante hominem ipsum; et post omnia homo ipse, huius Mundi finis; utcunque non pauci ingratissimi tantum erga se Dei beneficium negent.’
- 5.
It has recently been argued that the use of astrology as a basis for arguments against the new astronomy served only to maroon it in the old cosmology. Figures such as Morin thus precipitated the downfall of astrology by provoking leading figures of the new philosophy, such as Pierre Gassendi , to attack its theoretical foundations. See Hatch 2017.
- 6.
Those dates are based on the assumption that this John Butler, B.D., author of Christologia (London, 1671) and Hagiastrologia (London, 1680), made rector of Litchborough in 1651, is the same as the John Butler, B. D., who was married to Martha Perkins in nearby Weedon Bec in that same year, and later wrote The True State of the Case (London, 1697) to defend himself from claims of adultery. Other biographical details support this identification. See Butler 1697; Baker 1822–1841, I, 409–10; Burke 1835–1838, III, 253; Foster 1891, 222.
- 7.
Selden 1661. Anthony Wood had noted this postscript in his entry on Selden in the Athenae Oxonienses, calling Butler a pretender to the art of astrology and assuming that he was a Cambridge man. Butler actually graduated B. D. from Trinity College Oxford in 1660. See Wood 1691–1692, I, 110; Foster 1891, 222.
- 8.
- 9.
See Geneva 1995.
- 10.
For analysis of the anti-atheistic mission of More and other Cambridge Platonists, especially in terms of their refutations of Hobbes , see the chapter ‘Anti-Atheist Plato ’ in Sheppard 2015, 137–81. For an introduction to atheism and the new science, and on More’s dispute with Boyle , see Henry 1990; Henry 2009. On Henry More and the nature of spiritual extension, see also Reid 2012.
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
Saumaise 1648, 775–76: ‘Quandoquidem igitur Luna mundus est et caeteri planetae mundi haud minus quam haec terra, ut mundus mundum non creat, ita nec quidquam eorum quae in altero mundo gignuntur, ab alterius mundi potestate dependet quo meliora fiant, majora, vegetiora aut vivaciora. Ex sui mundi naturali proprietate unumquodque in eo gignentium accipit suas qualitates, et substantialem formam qua existit, non ab altero. … Non magis itaque Luna vel alii planetae nostri orbis animaliam originem ac genituram inspiciunt, actus dirigunt, fata componunt, finem determinant, quam haec terra eorum quae in orbe Lunae nascuntur et vivunt.’ Translated in Vermij 2016, 309.
- 15.
Vermij argued that Saumaise’s use of Copernicanism and pluralism against astrology is ‘a very rare case, proposed at a time when the idea of celestial influence had already lost much of its credit’ (Vermij 2016, 312), and thus the role of the new astronomy in the marginalisation of astrology should not be overstated (Hirai and Vermij 2017, 407). Hopefully this chapter will demonstrate that such arguments were not in fact so rare.
- 16.
References are thus to Hunter 1995.
- 17.
Hunter identifies Borellus as Giovanni Alfonso Borelli (1608–1679), but considering the subject matter and the fact that the following sentence refers to the Cartesian philosophy, it is more likely Pierre Borel (1620–1671).
- 18.
For suggestions of reasons why not, see Hunter 1995, 261–66.
- 19.
See Capp 1979.
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.
- 23.
This is Dialogue 6 in the third section containing dialogues of the moderns: Fontenelle 1683, I, 247–63.
- 24.
Fontenelle 1683, I, 252–53: ‘le grand leurre des Hommes , c’est toûjours l’avenir, et nous autres Astrologues nous le sçavons mieux que personne’.
- 25.
Fontenelle 1683, I, 254: ‘Ecoûtez; un Mort ne voudroit pas mentir. Franchement, je vous trompois avec cette Astrologie que vous estimez tant.’
- 26.
As just one example, see Crawford 2018.
- 27.
There is a large body of literature on Spinoza , but one more relevant article in this context is Simonutti 2001.
- 28.
- 29.
See Raven 1986, 98.
- 30.
Ray had long been sceptical about spontaneous generation, and his strong assertion in the first edition of The Wisdom of God that there was no such thing drew an attack by an anonymous correspondent. This led to Ray expanding his refutation in the second and subsequent editions. See Raven 1986, 375.
- 31.
See Farley 1977, 14–18.
- 32.
- 33.
It is tempting to see this as evidence for an early interest in astrology, but Bentley’s motivations for the edition were probably more philological than scientific. See Haugen 2011, 212–13.
- 34.
On Bentley’s relationship with Newton in regard to pluralism, see Dick 1982, 144–49.
- 35.
See also Goodrum 2002.
- 36.
Richard Bentley to Edward Bernard (May 28th, 1692), no. 19 in Wordsworth 1842, 38–41.
- 37.
The figures referred to are Girolamo Cardano (1501–1576), Andrea Cesalpino (1519–1603) and Claudius Berigardus (1578–1663).
- 38.
The idea of a thema mundi, a horoscope showing the positions of the planets at the beginning of the world, has a long tradition. The idea of a particular astrological configuration being responsible for the first creation of man has a somewhat different lineage, seemingly derived from Zoroastrianism, but being transmitted via the Pseudo-Aristotelian Hermetica. See Burnett 1997, 41–42; Raffaelli 2001; De Callatay and Saif 2017.
- 39.
‘Quaecunque ex semine fiunt, eadem fieri posse sine semine’, in Cesalpino 1593, fols 104v–109v.
- 40.
Cesalpino 1593, fol. 109v: ‘Concludimus igitur ab his principiis, ab intelligentia quidem tanquam primo movente, a coelo autem tanquam instrumento: omnia quae hic sunt oriri primo, secundario autem a se invicem in iis quae perfectiorem naturam adepta sunt.’
- 41.
It should be mentioned that Cesalpino excluded the production of souls, human or otherwise, from this process. See Cesalpino 1593, fol. 104v.
- 42.
See Poole 2015.
- 43.
- 44.
- 45.
- 46.
This might support Henry’s claim that early modern natural philosophers didn’t commit themselves exclusively to either voluntarism or intellectualism, but were more pragmatic, ‘cutting their cloth to suit the prevailing conditions’. See Henry 2009, 82.
- 47.
References
Almond, Philip. 2006. Adam, pre-Adamites, and extra-terrestrial beings in early modern Europe. Journal of Religious History 30: 163–174.
Baker, George. 1822–1841. History and antiquities of the county of Northampton, 2 vols. London: John Bowyer Nichols & Son and John Rodwell.
Bentley, Richard. 1836–1838. In Works, ed. Alexander Dyce. 3 vols. London: Francis Macpherson.
Borel, Pierre. 1658. A New Treatise, Proving a Multiplicity of Worlds. Trans. D. Sashott. London: John Streater.
Boyle, Robert. 1688. A disquisition about the final causes of natural things: Where in it is inquir’d, whether, and (if at all) with what cautions, a naturalist should admit them? London: John Taylor.
Brewster, David. 1855. Memoirs of the life, writings, and discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton, 2 vols. Edinburgh: T. Constable and Co.
Burke, John. 1835–1838. A genealogical and heraldic history of the commoners of Great Britain and Ireland, 4 vols. London: Colburn.
Burnet, Thomas. 1697 [1690]. The theory of the Earth, 3rd ed. 4 bks. London: Walter Kettilby.
Burnett, Charles. 1997. The introduction of Arabic learning into England. London: British Library.
Butler, John. 1680. Hagiastrologia, or, the most sacred and divine science of astrology. London: John Butler.
———. 1697. The true state of the case of John Butler, B.D., a minister of the true Church of England, in answer to the libel of Martha, his sometimes wife. London: John Butler.
Capp, Bernard Stuart. 1979. Astrology and the popular press: English almanacs 1500–1800. London: Faber.
Cesalpino, Andrea. 1593. Quaestionum peripateticarum libri V. Venice: Giunta.
Cheyne, George. 1705. Philosophical principles of natural religion. London: George Strahan.
Clucas, Stephen. 1991. Poetic atomism in seventeenth-century England: Henry More, Thomas Traherne and scientific imagination. Renaissance Studies 5: 327–340.
Crawford, I.A. 2018. Widening perspectives: The intellectual and social benefits of astrobiology (regardless of whether extraterrestrial life is discovered or not). International Journal of Astrobiology 17: 57–60.
Crowe, Michael J. 1986. The extraterrestrial life debate, 1750–1900: The idea of a plurality of worlds from Kant to Lowell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cudworth, Ralph. 1678. The true intellectual system of the universe: Wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and its impossibility demonstrated. London: Richard Royston.
Curry, Patrick. 1989. Prophecy and power: Astrology in early modern England. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
De Callatay, Godefroid, and Liana Saif. 2017. The astrological and prophetical cycles in the pseudo-Aristotelian Hermetica and in the Ikhwān al-Ṣafā’. Presented at the ‘Bilan et perspectives des études Sur les encyclopédies médiévales: Orient-occident, le ciel, l’homme, le verbe, l’animal’ organized by the ARC project speculum Arabicum, Brugelette, 2017. https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:182356. Accessed 28 Nov 2017.
Derham, William. 1720 [1713]. Physico-theology, or, a demonstration of the being and attributes of God from his works of creation: Being the substance of sixteen sermons preached in St. Mary-le-Bow Church, London, at the Honourable Mr. Boyle’s lectures, in the years 1711, and 1712: With large notes, and many curious observations, 5th ed. London: W. and J. Innys.
———. 1731 [1714]. Astro-theology: Or, a demonstration of the being and attributes of God, from a survey of the heavens, 6th ed. London: W. Innys.
Dick, Steven J. 1982. Plurality of worlds: The origins of the extraterrestrial life debate from Democritus to Kant. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Edleston, J., ed. 1850. Correspondence of Sir Isaac Newton and Professor Cotes: Including letters of other eminent men. London: John W. Parker.
Farley, John. 1977. The spontaneous generation controversy from Descartes to Oparin. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Fletcher, John E. 1970. Astronomy in the life and correspondence of Athanasius Kircher. Isis 61: 52–67.
Fontenelle, Bernard le Bovier de. 1683. Nouveaux dialogues des morts, 2 vols. 2nd ed. Lyon: Thomas Amaulry.
———. 1809 [1686]. Conversations on the plurality of worlds. London: Printed for Lackington Allen & co.
Foster, Joseph. 1891. Alumni oxonienses: The members of the University of Oxford, 1500–1714. Oxford/London: Parker and Co.
Gabbey, Alan. 1990. Henry More and the limits of mechanism. In Henry More (1614–1687) tercentenary studies, ed. Sarah Hutton, 19–36. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Geneva, Ann. 1995. Astrology and the seventeenth century mind: William Lilly and the language of the stars. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Giglioni, Guido. 2008. The cosmoplastic system of the universe: Ralph Cudworth on Stoic naturalism. Revue d’histoire des sciences 61: 313–331.
Glomski, Jacqueline. 2015. Religion, the cosmos, and counter-reformation: Athanasius Kircher’s Itinerarium exstaticum. In Acta conventus neo-latini monasteriensis, ed. Astrid Steiner-Weber and K.A.E. Enenkel, 227–236. Leiden: Brill.
Goodrum, Matthew R. 2002. Atomism, atheism, and the spontaneous generation of human beings: The debate over a natural origin of the first humans in seventeenth-century Britain. Journal of the History of Ideas 63: 207–224.
Grew, Nehemiah. 1701. Cosmologia sacra, or a discourse of the universe as it is the creature and kingdom of God. London: W. Rogers, S. Smith and B. Walford.
Guerlac, Henry, and M.C. Jacob. 1969. Bentley, Newton, and providence: The Boyle lectures once more. Journal of the History of Ideas 30: 307–318.
Harrison, Peter. 2002. Voluntarism and early modern science. History of Science 40: 63–89.
———. 2009. Voluntarism and the origins of modern science: A reply to John Henry. History of Science 47: 223–231.
———. 2013. Laws of nature in seventeenth-century England: From Cambridge Platonism to Newtonianism. In The divine order, the human order, and the order of nature: Historical perspectives, ed. Eric Watkins, 127–148. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hatch, Robert Alan. 2017. Between astrology and Copernicanism: Morin – Gassendi – Boulliau. Early Science and Medicine 22: 487–516.
Haugen, Kristine Louise. 2011. Richard Bentley: Poetry and enlightenment. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
Henry, John. 1990. Henry More versus Robert Boyle: The spirit of nature and the nature of providence. In Henry More (1614–1687) tercentenary studies, ed. Sarah Hutton, 55–76. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
———. 2004. Metaphysics and the origins of modern science: Descartes and the importance of laws of nature. Early Science and Medicine 9: 73–114.
———. 2009. Voluntarist theology at the origins of modern science: A response to Peter Harrison. History of Science 47: 79–113.
Hunter, Michael. 1995. Science and astrology in seventeenth-century England: An unpublished polemic by John Flamsteed. In Science and the shape of orthodoxy: Intellectual change in late seventeenth-century Britain, ed. idem, 245–285. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.
Huygens, Christiaan. 1722 [1698]. The Celestial Worlds Discover’d. Trans. John Clarke, 2nd ed. London: James Knapton.
Jaki, Stanley L. 1978. Planets and planetarians: A history of theories of the origin of planetary systems. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
Jenkin, Robert. 1700 [1696–1697]. The reasonableness and certainty of the Christian religion, 2nd ed. 2 Bks. London: P.B. and R. Wellington.
———. 1721 [1696–97]. The reasonableness and certainty of the Christian religion, 5th ed. 2 vols. London: printed by W.B. for Richard Sare.
Keill, John. 1748 [1718]. An introduction to the true astronomy: Or, astronomical lectures, read in the astronomical school of the University of Oxford, 4th ed. London: Henry Lintot.
Kircher, Athanasius. 1660 [1656]. Iter exstaticum coeleste. Wurzburg: Johann Andrea Endter.
Koyré, Alexandre. 1957. From the closed world to the infinite universe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Kubrin, David. 1967. Newton and the cyclical cosmos: Providence and the mechanical philosophy. Journal of the History of Ideas 28: 325–346.
Lambert, Johann Heinrich. 1761. Cosmologische Briefe über die Einrichtung des Weltbaues. Augsburg: Klett.
———. 1976. Cosmological Letters on the Arrangement of the World-Edifice. Trans. Stanley L. Jaki. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
Lovejoy, Arthur O. 1948 [1936]. The great chain of being: A study of the history of an idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Monod, Paul Kléber. 2013. Solomon’s secret arts: The occult in the age of enlightenment. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.
More, Henry. 1681. Tetractys anti-astrologica, or, the four chapters in the Explanation of the Grand Mystery of Holiness: Which contain a brief but solid confutation of judiciary astrology, with annotations upon each chapter: wherein the wondrous weaknesses of John Butler, B.D. his answer called A Vindication of Astrology, & c. are laid open… London: J.M.
Morin, Jean-Baptiste. 1661. Astrologia gallica. The Hague: Adriaan Vlacq.
Parker, Samuel. 1678. Disputationes de Deo et providentia divina …. London: J. Martyn.
Poole, William. 2015. Lucretianism and some seventeenth-century theories of human origin. In Lucretius and the early modern, ed. David Norbrook, Stephen Harrison, and Philip Hardie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Raffaelli, Enrico G. 2001. L’oroscopo del mondo: il tema di nascita del mondo e delprimo uomo secondo l’astrologia zoroastriana. Milan: Mimesis.
Raven, Charles E. 1986. John Ray, naturalist: His life and works. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ray, John. 1714 [1691]. The wisdom of God manifested in the works of the creation, 6th ed. London: William Innys.
Reid, Jasper William. 2012. The metaphysics of Henry More. Dordrecht: Springer.
Ross, Alexander. 1646. The new planet no planet, or, the Earth no wandring star, except in the wandring heads of Galileans. London: J. Young.
Rutkin, H. Darrel. 2006. Why Newton rejected astrology: A reconstruction, or “Newton’s comets and the transformation of astrology”: 20 years later. Cronos 9: 85–98.
Saumaise, Claude. 1648. De annis climactericis et antiqua astrologia diatribae. Leiden: Elzevir.
Schaffer, Simon. 1987. Newton’s comets and the transformation of astrology. In Astrology, science, and society: Historical essays, ed. Patrick Curry, 219–243. Woodbridge/Wolfeboro: Boydell Press.
Selden, John. 1661. Theanthropos: Or, God made man: A tract proving the nativity of our Saviour to be on the 25. of December. London: F.G.
Sellars, John. 2012. Stoics against stoics in Cudworth’s A treatise of freewill. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20: 935–952.
Sheppard, Kenneth. 2015. Anti-atheism in early modern England, 1580–1720: The atheist answered and his error confuted. Leiden: Brill.
Simonutti, Luisa. 2001. Spinoza and Boyle: Rational religion and natural philosophy. In Religion, reason and nature in early modern Europe, ed. Robert Crocker, 117–138. Dordrecht/London: Kluwer Academic.
Sturmy, Daniel. 1711. A theological theory of a plurality of worlds: Being a critical, philosophical, and practical discourse, concerning visible or material worlds. London: D. Brown and J. Walthoe.
Thomas, Keith. 1971. Religion and the decline of magic: Studies in popular beliefs in sixteenth and seventeenth century England. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
Vermij, Rienk. 2016. Seventeenth-century Dutch natural philosophers on celestial influence. In Unifying heaven and earth: Essays in the history of early modern cosmology, ed. Miguel Á. Granada, Dario Tessicini, and Patrick J. Boner, 291–315. Barcelona: Edicions Universitat Barcelona.
Vermij, Rienk, and Hiro Hirai. 2017. The marginalization of astrology: Introduction. Early Science and Medicine 22: 405–409.
Westman, Robert S. 2011. The Copernican question: Prognostication, skepticism, and celestial order. Berkeley/London: University of California Press.
Wood, Anthony. 1691–1692. Athenae Oxonienses, 2 vols. London: Thomas Bennet.
Wordsworth, C., ed. 1842. The correspondence of Richard Bentley. London: John Murray.
Wright, Peter. 1975. Astrology and science in seventeenth-century England. Social Studies of Science 5: 399–422.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Christie, J.E. (2019). Influence and Inhabitation Opposed. In: From Influence to Inhabitation. International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 228. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22169-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22169-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-22168-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-22169-0
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)