THE FOLLY OF GIORDANO BRUNO
PROF. RICHARD W. POGGE
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
|
by Prof. Richard W. Pogge,
Ohio State University
Fillipo Bruno (1548-1600) was born in Nola
near Naples. Taking the name Giordano upon
becoming a member of the Dominican order,
he was educated in the Aristotelian and Thomist
traditions and eventually came to espouse
a mystical Neoplatonism mixed with ideas
imbibed from a resurgent interest of that
time in the works of the apocryphal Hermes
Trismegistus. His heterodox beliefs soon
attracted the attention of the Inquisition,
first in Naples and then in Rome. To avoid
prosecution, he renounced his Dominican vows
and fled from Italy in 1576. Between 1576
and 1591, he traveled widely about Europe,
writing and teaching under the sponsorship
of various patrons. In 1591, he was invited
to Venice to be tutor to a prospective patron
who shortly thereafter denounced him to the
Inquisition. He was sent to Rome in 1592
where he was put on trial and then imprisoned
and interrogated intermittently for eight
years. Unrepentant, he was convicted of heresy
by the Inquisition and executed by burning
at the stake in the Piazza Campo di Fiore
in Rome in 1600. Among his writings, which
cover a wide range of topics of only academic
interest to us today (chiefly, Neoplatonism,
Hermetical philosophy, and pantheism in a
decidedly mystical blend), was an espousal
of Copernicanism and an assertion that the
stars were an infinity of suns like our own,
each circled by worlds inhabited by intelligent
beings like ourselves.
In popular accounts of the life of Bruno,
it is often said that he was condemned for
his Copernicanism and his belief in life
on other worlds. He is portrayed as a martyr
to free thought, and an early, prosecuted
proponent of the modern view of the universe,
hounded across Europe by the Inquisition
for his beliefs and finally paying the ultimate
price for them in a fiery public death. He
has become a symbol of the intolerance of
authority in the face of new ideas. These
accounts, however, often leave out two fundamental
aspects of the case of Giordano Bruno that
cast matters in a somewhat different light.
The first calls into doubt how closely we
should link Bruno with the history of astronomy
and what came to be called the "Scientific
Revolution", and the second offers a
perspective on the undeniable tragedy of
his life that make him less of a symbol,
but in the balance makes him more human.
The one key fact of the study of Bruno's
life is that we do not actually know the
exact grounds of his conviction on charges
of heresy. The simple reason is that the
relevant records have been lost. This is
quite unlike the state of affairs in the
later trial of Galileo, where we have extensive
documentation including the forgeries that
played a role in the case against him. In
the case of Bruno, we must seek clues in
contemporary accounts and in an examination
of his writings.
Except for certain particular passages that
excite our interest today, much of his work
had little to do with astronomy. Indeed,
Bruno was not an astronomer and demonstrated
a very poor grasp of the subject in what
he did write. The theme of his On the Infinite
Universe and Worlds is not Copernicanism
but pantheism, a theme also developed in
his On Shadows of Ideas. It appears that
his personal cosmology informed his espousal
of Copernicus, not the other way around.
Much of his work was theological in nature,
and constituted a passionate frontal assault
on the philosophical basis of the Church's
spiritual teachings, especially on the nature
of human salvation and on the primacy of
the soul (or in modern terms, he opposed
the Church's emphasis on spiritualism with
an unapologetic and all-encompassing materialism).
Copernicanism, where it entered at all, was
supporting material not the central thesis.
This suggests that the Church's complaint
with Bruno was theological not astronomical.
Further support for the idea that Copernicanism
was likely to have played only a minor role
if any in his conviction comes from the contemporary
record of the discussion of this idea. What
many popular accounts seem to miss is that
the Church did not formally condemnation
Copernicanism until well after Bruno's death.
While Copernicanism was indeed a topic of
discussion and controversy in Bruno's time,
few astronomers supported it in 1600, and
the Church itself was not to express an official
opinion on the matter until 1616. By that
time, Galileo's telescopic observations (from
1610 on) had completely changed the intellectual
landscape, and the Church only then felt
compelled to respond to the rapidly growing
controversy. The issue was brought to the
fore by the publication of a book by Paolo
Antonio Foscarini (1565-1616) that defended
Copernicanism against charges made by itinerant
preaching monks that it was in conflict with
Scripture, casting the issue in theological
terms that the Church could no longer ignore.
If Copernicanism were really the grounds
upon which Bruno was executed as a heretic
in 1600, it would have been explicitly proscribed
at that time. It is interesting to note further
that one of the inquisitors who condemned
Bruno was the Jesuit theologian Robert Bellarmine
(1542-1621). This is the same Cardinal Bellarmine
who as head of the Collegium Romanum in 1616
was charged by Pope Paul V with examining
Copernicanism in the Foscarini case, and
who in that same year would admonish Galileo
in a private audience not hold or defend
the idea (the particulars of what was or
was not said in that audience would form
the basis of Galileo's trial on charges of
heresy in
1633). In none of Bellarmine's writings on
the subject in 1616 is any mention made of
Bruno's earlier case.
Further, Copernicanism was not actually specifically
proscribed as heretical in 1616. After Bellarmine's
examination, Copernicus' De Revolutionibus
and Foscarini's book
(among others) were placed on the Index of
Forbidden Books, the former to remain on
the Index until specific, minor revisions
were made (a few words deleted and some passages
excised, but on the whole leaving the basic
ideas intact). An official response to be
sure, but still a long ways from a definitive
ban on Copernicanism in general. Indeed,
copies of De Revolutionibus were published
in Italy after 1616 (with the prescribed
revisions, of course), and the situation
was sufficiently ambiguous that Galileo felt
free to proceed with his work until his trial
in 1633. Had Bruno been executed for heresy
on the grounds of Copernicanism, there would
have been no room for doubt as to where the
Church stood on the matter. Final condemnation
did not come until 1664 when Pope Alexander
VII prefixed a papal bull to the Index specifically
condemning the idea of heliocentricism in
general by explicitly banning "all books
which affirm the motion of the earth''. The
final condemnation, but not the final word.
The following two years, 1665-66, were the
"Plague Years'' in England during which
Isaac Newton, on leave from Cambridge, did
his seminal work on calculus, optics, mechanics,
and gravity.
The second often overlooked fact of Bruno's
life concerns his period of exile between
1576 and 1591. Most brief popular accounts
state the bare facts of his peregrinations
around Europe, but what is left unsaid is
that his wanderings appear to have had less
to do with his being hounded by the Inquisition
as it did with his own rather difficult personality.
While Bruno was fairly successful for a time
at finding powerful and sympathetic patrons
to shelter him, he invariably did something
to alienate and outrage them, usually fairly
quickly after entering their service. The
Inquisition had little to do with it, as
once he left Italy, he was effectively out
of their reach. This was especially true
of his time spent under the protection of
the French Ambassador to protestant England
(1583-85) during the reign of Queen Elizabeth
I, and his wandering around protestant Germany.
An examination of his actions during this
period of exile makes clear that almost all
of his misfortunes were brought down upon
himself without the Inquisition's help. He
outraged the faculty at Oxford with his lectures,
he became embroiled in violent quarrels over
trivial matters, and generally succeeded
in alienating those people best able to protect
him. His actions during this period reveal
the very hallmark of folly, namely repeated
failure to act in his own best interests
even when reasonable alternatives were available.
His final return to Italy (which resulted
in his arrest in Venice a year later) can
be seen as being motivated in part by the
fact that by 1591 he had effectively burned
most of his bridges behind him and thus he
had little choice. In many ways, Bruno thrust
himself into the flames that rose into the
winter skies of the Campo di Fiore on the
17th day of February in 1600.
Bruno was brilliant, contentious, and ultimately
self-destructive. There is nothing in his
writings that contributed to our knowledge
of astronomy in any substantial way, indeed
his astronomical writings reveal a poor grasp
of the subject on several important points.
I think we pay attention to him today in
large measure because among other things
he vocally espoused (but apparently did not
really understand) Copernicanism, an idea
which was to become the key insight that
led to our view of the world. In addition,
his On the Infinite Universe and Worlds appeals
to many today because of its apparent resonance
with the deeply held conviction that life
exists elsewhere in the Universe, despite
the fact that proponents of extraterrestrial
life would find little of interest within
its difficult pages. It also does not hurt
his mystique that he came to a rather spectacular
and violent ending, ostensibly in punishment
for these beliefs by the reigning authorities
of his day. In the end, Bruno bet on the
right horse (if perhaps for questionable
reasons), and thus has become a kind of culture
hero instead of a footnote in books on Renaissance
philosophy.
History is funny that way.
Sources:
Broderick, James, 1961, Robert Bellarmine,
Saint and Scholar (Westminster, MD.: Newman
Press)
di Santillana, Giorgio, 1955, The Crime of
Galileo (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press)
Singer, Dorothea Waley, 1950, Giordano Bruno,
his Life and Thought. (New York: Schuman)
[contains an annotated translation of On
the Infinite Universe and Worlds]
van Helden, Albert, 1995, Giordano Bruno,
hypertext biography as part of the Galileo
Project.
White, Andrew Dickson, 1896, The Warfare
of Science with Theology in Christendom (New
York: D. Appleton & Company), 1978 reprint.
Yates, Frances, 1964, Giordano Bruno and
the Hermetic Tradition (Chicago: Univ. of
Chicago Press)
The opinion by Ramon G. Mendoza
Caro Guido, perdone que le escriba en espanol,
pero mi italiano no es bueno y pienso que
Ud. preferira una lengua romance a la inglesa
y germana. En primer lugar quiero agradederle
la interesante informacion sobre Bruno que
continuamente nos esta enviando. Es una obra
laudable y muy necesaria para mantener viva
en nosotros la llama tanto de la devocion
personal como del entusiasmo profesional
academico que sentimos por Bruno. Respecto
al articulo que nos envia me parece que el
autor tiene toda la razon. A Bruno no lo
condeno la Inquisicion por su Copernicanismo,
sino por su Ultracopernicanismo. Un mundo
infinito y sin centro, ni siquiera solar,
era y sigue siendo totalmente deletereo e
inaceptable para un edificio dogmatico total
y esencialmente antropocentrico como es y
sigue siendo el de la Iglesia. Mejor que
nadie el docto y sagaz Belarmino lo comprendio
demasiado bien y por eso contribuyo decisivamente
a la condenacion de Bruno. La otra razon
para la condena de Bruno, que tampoco nada
tiene que ver con su alegado Copernicanismo,
es su panteismo y su menosprecio de Cristo
como se hizo evidente para los Inquisidores
despues que recibieron el Spaccio de la bestia
trionfante. Otro error del autor del articulo
es la motivacion que le atribuye a Bruno
para su "peregrinacion" por Europa.
Bruno buscaba, ante todo, una catedra en
una universidad donde pudiera ensenar su
nueva concepcion ultracopernicana del universo
infinito y acentrico y de su revolucionario
concepto antiaristotelico de la materia activa
y madre fecunda de formas, y en general,
terminar para siempre con la tirania de Aristoteles
en las universidades europeas. En mi opinion,
sin embargo, hay todavia un motivo aun mas
poderoso para los viejes de Bruno. Bruno
abrigaba el plan revolucionario de una total
inversion de valores en la Europa devastada
por las guerras de religion. Creo que, como
para Nietzsche, una "Umwertung aller
Werte" o transvaluacion radical en Europa
era el objetivo principal y ultimo de Bruno,
y para eso necesitaba una plataforma firme
y segura desde donde organizar, ganar adeptos,
y lanzar su revolucion ideologica. Para eso
fue a Wittenberg y Padua aunque desafortunadamente
fracaso, como sabemos, en su intento. Es
lastima que todavia se desconozca tanto a
un hombre de la talla de Giordano Bruno.
Bruno no es el heroe y simbolo de todos los
librepensadores y anticlericales, es algo
mucho mas grandioso. Es el genio visionario
que se anticipo por decadas a sus contemporaneos
en la comprension de que el mundo es infinito
y acentrico y sobre todo fue el gran revolucionario
que comprendio, como Nietzsche, la verdadera
"follia" de todas las religiones
teistas imperantes con sus libros sagrados,
fuente constante de la carniceria universal
e interminable en que han sumido a la humanidad,
y la necesidad urgente de hacer lo que Marx
hizo con Hegel, a saber, ponerles los pies
donde tienen la cabeza. Es lastima que el
autor de ese articulo no haya leido mi libro,
porque en el me dedico expresamente y en
detalle a demostrar con documentos y, a mi
parecer, buenos razonamientos y fuertes argumentos
precisamente los puntos que acabo de senalar.
Aunque no me prometo mucho de su cambio de
parecer por esa lectura, si quisiera contribuir
en algo a hacerlo consciente de su mala fe.
Seria bueno, mi caro Guido, dada la necesidad
urgente de aclarar estos puntos, que anadiera
mi libro a la lista de tres que pone en su
relevante bibliografia, aunque se que los
que mas necesitan leerlo no son aquellos
que disfrutan y aprenden tanto de sus correos
electronicos. De nuevo le expreso mi agradecimiento
por su preciosa informacion sobre todo lo
que atane a Bruno. Lo animo a que continue
su gran "cruzada," a la que me
uno con fervor ultrareligioso, al grito de
"Deus le volt!" Afectuosamente,
Ramon G. Mendoza The Acentric Labyrinth:
Giordano Bruno's Prelude to Contemporary
Cosmology by Ramon G. Mendoza Publisher:
Harper Collins - UK (June 1995)
Comments:
Pedro Serra (Uruguay)
This is a typical case "let us investigate
the victim, not the victimates". Mr.
Pogge says Bruno was executed because it
was his own´s fault, alas! He was the author
of his own execution, ja, ja. He was the
innocent victim of religious intolerance,
he was murdered because he disbelieved in
dogma, he was a free thinker, a scientist
and philosopher, and the lousy inquisition
murdered him. May his soul rest in peace,
and cardinal ´s Bellarmine´s burn in hell.
Lots more on Bruno in The Athenaeum Library
|