160 vittoria perrone compagni

“DISPERSA INTENTIO.” ALCHEMY, MAGIC AND

SCEPTICISM IN AGRIPPA*

VITTORIA PERRONE COMPAGNI

University of Florence

Some influential scholars maintain that Agrippa’s final stand-

point regarding alchemy is to be sought in De vanitate scientiarum
et artium (1530). In fact, this radical dismissal of human reason
would constitute Agrippa’s last word on all occult sciences and the
culmination of a profound intellectual evolution, brought on by
the events of the Reformation. According to this view, there is a
clean cut between the young Agrippa, who in 1510 drafted the
project for the restoration of magic in De occulta philosophia, and
the later Agrippa, a radical reformer and sceptic, who from 1526
on no longer believed in the conceptual foundations of his early
project. Indeed, his De vanitate reduces magic to a mere meteoro-
logical-botanical activity, condemns astrology as the mother of all
superstitions, and harshly criticizes alchemy.1 Particularly with re-
spect to alchemy, then, Agrippa did not go—following this view—
beyond reiterating a position that had always been ironical and
disenchanted. The fierce chapter 90 of his De vanitate would be the
foreseeable conclusion of a long critical itinerary, totally devoid of
any second thoughts.2
I beg to differ from this interpretation. From a specific point of
view, it is somewhat disconcerting that Agrippa, having criticized
alchemy in De vanitate, should have continued not only his prac-
tical involvement by personally performing transmutatory ope-
rations, but also by theoretical involvement. In fact, the final
draft of De occulta philosophia (1533) contains a set of chapters on

*
Research funded by a contribution from M.U.R.S.T. Translated from the
Italian by Camilla Cyriax.
1
P. Zambelli, “Magic and Radical Reformation in Agrippa of Nettesheim,”
Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 39 (1976), 69-103, L’ambigua natura
della magia (Milano, 1991), 20, 160, “Cornelius Agrippa, ein kritischer Magus,” in
Die okkulten Wissenschaften in der Renaissance, ed. A. Buck (Wiesbaden, 1992), 83-
84.
2
W.D. Müller-Jahncke, “The Attitude of Agrippe von Nettesheim (1486-1535)
towards Alchemy,” Ambix 22 (1975), 134-50.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2000 Early Science and Medicine 5, 2

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 160 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 161

alchemy which did not appear in the earlier one and whose
importance was stressed some time ago in an exhaustive and con-
vincing contribution by William Newman.3 Instead, from a more
general point of view, Agrippa’s attitude towards alchemy offers us
the chance to reconsider the general interpretation of his magic
treatise and its connections with De vanitate. In the same years in
which he wrote the sceptical declamation, Agrippa was busy revis-
ing and amplifying his first draft of De occulta philosophia. Is it pos-
sible that the detailed and painstaking reordering of his early
manuscript really be looked upon as only an excuse to discuss
religious themes, which had by then become for him dominant
and all-absorbing? I do not think so. In my opinion, the very
chronological order of the printing (first De vanitate, then the fi-
nal draft of the expanded magic treatise) hints at a comprehen-
sive design, which englobed a cultural, religious and moral project
for the reform of contemporary society. De vanitate in no way con-
tradicts the program of De occulta philosophia, and indeed the ‘scep-
tical’ contraposition of human sciences and divine Revelation has
its purpose in the pursuit of the restoration of Christian magic.4
In order to gain a clearer outline of this utopia which Agrippa
was trying to sketch, we must abandon his traditional portrayal as
someone who ‘re-arranged and successfully popularized’ Marsilio
Ficino’s and Giovanni Pico’s natural magic.5 Agrippa did not nec-
essarily ‘vulgarize other people’s ideas,’6 but often re-interpreted

3
W. Newman, “Thomas Vaughan as an Interpreter of Agrippa von Nettes-
heim,” Ambix 29 (1982), 125-40.
4
V. Perrone Compagni, “Introduction,” in Cornelius Agrippa, De occulta
philosophia (Leiden, 1992), 29, 49-50, and “Riforma della magia e riforma della
cultura in Agrippa,” I castelli di Yale. Quaderni di filosofia 2 (1997), 115-40. M. van
der Poel, Cornelius Agrippa, the Humanist Theologian and his Declamations (Leiden,
1997) also insists on the theological and anti-scholastic intentions in De vanitate and
the other declamations, but does not analyze their link with the project for the
refounding of magic. He maintains, p. 9, that Agrippa’s occult studies reflect “his
Neoplatonic conviction that God manifests Himself in various ways in the created
world,” but then adds that “he himself disdained such popular belief [astrology].”
Van der Poel ignores both Reuchlin’s De arte cabalistica and Francesco Giorgio’s De
harmonia mundi from which De vanitate’s most important concepts are taken.
5
Zambelli, L’ambigua natura, 139, 160, 308.
6
B. Copenhaver, “Natural Philosophy/Astrology and Magic,” in The Cambridge
History of Renaissance Philosophy, eds. C.B. Schmitt, Q. Skinner, E. Kessler, J. Kraye
(Cambridge, 1988), 264; F. Secret, “L’originalité du De occulta philosophia,” Charis.
Archives de l’Unicorne 2 (1990), 61, 66, 84; S. Matton, “Marsile Ficin et l’alchimie,”
in Alchimie et philosophie à la Renaissance, eds. J.C. Margolin and S. Matton (Paris,
1993), 166.

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 161 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 162 vittoria perrone compagni

his sources, thereby producing new contexts of meaning. His line

of thought is sometimes obscured by an intentionally fragmentary
composition strategy, which hides his true purposes beneath a
heap of quotations and borrowed matter. Instead, this is but a
precise theoretical choice that was intended to spread knowledge
in disguise, according to a literary technique typical of the sapien-
tial—and especially alchemical—tradition.7 It is exactly to this
technique that the conclusion of De occulta philosophia refers when
it invites the reader to search for the dispersa intentio that is know-
ingly concealed within an unsystematic exposition:
These are the elements that I have gathered, with a variety of compilations
from ancient works, as an introduction to magic, with concise expression,
but sufficient for those who are meant to understand. Some of the notions
are expounded in an orderly manner, others disorderly, others are fragmen-
tary, yet others are hidden and entrusted to the research of those who are
capable of comprehension [...] Thus you, children of doctrine and knowl-
edge, search the book with zeal and piece my dispersed intention together,
since I have spread it in different parts: what in one place is concealed, in
another is manifest, so that it may be revealed to you who are wise.8

Agrippa writes this page, like almost all the others in De occulta
philosophia, by freely reconstructing his sources. Here in particular
he recomposes and arranges different passages of the alchemic
Summa perfectionis by pseudo-Geber, a work that, significantly,
makes its appearance in his bibliography only in 1533.9 It is there-
fore necessary to take on the supplementary task of assembling the
disiecta membra of an argumentation that, though consistent, is dis-
tributed in various parts of the text, when not actually in different
texts. Once this task is carried out, one will find a coherent and
unexpected structure.

7
See W. Newman, Book Review, Isis 86 (1995), 105.
8
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, 599-600: “Haec sunt quae ad magiae
introductionem ex traditione antiquorum compilatione diversa in hunc librum
coegimus, sermone quidem brevi, sed sufficienti his qui intellecturi sunt. Horum
autem quaedam cum ordine, quaedam sine ordine scripta sunt, quaedam per
fragmenta tradita, quaedam etiam occultata et investigatione intelligentium relicta
[…]. Vos igitur, doctrinae et sapientiae filii, perquirite in hoc libro colligendo
nostram dispersam intentionem, quam in diversis locis proposuimus: et quod
occultatum est a nobis in uno loco, manifestum fecimus illud in alio, ut sapientibus
vobis patefiat.”
9
W. Newman, The “Summa perfectionis” of Pseudo-Geber. A Critical Edition, Trans-
lation and Study (Leiden, 1991), 249-50, 264-66, 296-97, 589-90. The range of
Agrippa’s borrowings from Geber can be assessed by comparing it with the hasty
epilogue of his juvenile draft, cf. ms. Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M. ch. q.
50, f. 128v (henceforth called “W”).

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 162 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 163

The notion of a restauratio magiae is Agrippa’s central idea, just

as it had been for Ficino and for Giovanni Pico. The intentions of
the three authors are, however, very different. The reform pro-
gram of Agrippa’s Florentine forerunners had taken the shape of
a precise division between ‘true’ and ‘false’ magic. In order to
decide on the epistemological legitimacy of natural magic it was
necessary to establish its contents, aims and means, to expunge all
elements of superstition and to base the transforming activity of
magic upon knowledge of the neo-Platonic cosmos. The relation-
ship between science and magic was a matter of collaboration. On
the one hand, magic was defined as ‘the practical side of natural
philosophy,’ which implied that it was subordinated to philosophy,
since to practice it required the contribution of reason. On the
other hand, magic could also be considered the ‘absolute
fulfillment of natural philosophy’ owing to its capacity to trans-
form theory into practice and to perfect knowledge by rendering
it active.
On the whole, the early draft of De occulta philosophia accepted
this reform program except for one important change. Under the
influence of Reuchlin, Agrippa stressed that the origin of magic
was not rational, but revealed and divine. It is in fides that the way
to true knowledge lies and this bestows a solid foundation upon
man’s operative activity. Reuchlin could describe magic as a reli-
gious experience of regeneration and deification because he main-
tained that the only legitimate ars miraculorum was cabalistic and
founded on the use of God’s name and on the IHSUH pentagram.
It was therefore a very powerful thaumaturgy, but magic only by
analogy. Since Agrippa combined his sources as he saw fit, his
perspective was different. The superior essence of fides was in-
volved as a foundation and guarantee of a wider definition of
magic that was to embrace all the areas of human knowledge and
make them operative. This contamination of different derivations
had significant consequences. In the first place, magic was up-
graded to super-rational dimensions, thereby coinciding with
man’s attainment of religious perfection to which even reason was
subjected. In the second place, the expansion of the sphere of
magical activity suggested the need for a global revision of the
philosophical tradition, which aimed at recovering the harmoni-
ous link between faith and science, essential for the restoration of
a powerful operative philosophy. In 1510, Agrippa was already
aware of the relationship between the reform of magic and the

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 163 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 164 vittoria perrone compagni

reform of culture—two parallel exigencies and both connected to

the need for a moral and religious reform of contemporary soci-
ety. This is not to say that Ficino’s and Pico’s proposed reform of
the contents of magic along the lines of neo-Platonic reason and
humanistic philology was absent from Agrippa’s thought. Instead,
he integrated it into his own project of reform that aimed above
all at the users of magic.
Between the first and the second drafting of De occulta
philosophia, Agrippa was able to focus upon the relationships be-
tween religion, culture and magic and establish the direction of
his general design once and for all. This new orientation did not
depend simply upon his in-depth study of theological authors.
Rather, it was based on his contacts with the Christian Hermeti-
cism of Ludovico Lazzarelli and Francesco Giorgio Veneto. The
reading of Lazzarelli’s Crater Hermetis, which took place before
1516, is clearly reflected in at least two of the works that, by tradi-
tion, are looked upon as a transition from the encyclopedic and
magic interests of Agrippa’s youth to the religious interests of his
mature age. In De triplici ratione cognoscendi Deum and in De originali
peccato, Agrippa gives a first taste of the arguments against the
scholastic and Aristotelian philosophy, which were to be fully de-
veloped later in De vanitate. He further insists on the subject of the
religious foundation of magic, which finds its legitimation in fides.10
Francesco Giorgio’s De harmonia mundi, on the other hand, be-
comes one of the main sources to which Agrippa repeatedly refers
when drafting De vanitate and when reviewing De occulta philo-
sophia.11 In both cases, however, his bibliographic up-dating should
not be seen as moment of conceptual rupture, but rather as a
deeper analysis and elucidation of themes already touched upon
in the youthful drafting of De occulta philosophia. This particularly
concerns the tripartition of the soul that had given a Platonic and
anti-Aristotelian interpretation to the relationship between faith
and reason since 1510. Ficino’s psychological conception, to which
10
Critical edition of Crater Hermetis by C. Moreschini, Dall’Asclepius al Crater
Hermetis. Studi sull’ermetismo latino tardo-antico e rinascimentale (Pisa, 1985), 221-65;
partial edition by M. Brini in Testi umanistici su l’ermetismo, ed. E. Garin (Rome,
1955), 51-74. On Agrippa’s debt to Lazzarelli, cf. M.H. Keefer, “Agrippa’s Dilemma:
Hermetic ‘Rebirth’ and the Ambivalences of De vanitate and De occulta philosophia,”
Renaissance Quarterly 41 (1988), 625, 639.
11
V. Perrone Compagni, “Una fonte di Cornelio Agrippa: il De harmonia mundi
di Francesco Giorgio Veneto,” Annali dell’Istituto di Filosofia. Università di Firenze 4
(1982), 45-74, “Riforma della magia,” 123-33; Secret, “L’originalité,” 57-87.

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 164 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 165

Agrippa was to remain faithful, places reason in between the

senses, so as to guide and control them, and the mens, which is the
divine spark within man, the sphere of contact with God, and the
creator’s imprint on his creature. The dimension of free reason is
decisive not only for man’s eschatological destiny, but also for the
value of his historic existence.12 It is by respecting its submission
to the mens that reason fulfills the role which the plan of creation
has conferred upon it, which is to meet God in the ‘book of crea-
tures.’ In such a way its activity acquires positiveness and efficacy.13
On the other hand, by denying its condition as creature and
proudly proclaiming an autonomy of its own, reason shatters its
harmonious relationship with God and repeats Adam’s sin. Once
the gnoseological hierarchy has been destabilized, reason looks for
its contents in the senses, which are fallacious and deceptive, and
builds up a science both dubious and vain, that is, devoid of foun-
dation, inert and morally pernicious.14 Contemporary culture, be-
ing the fruit of this rebellious reason, which is the Aristotelian and
scholastic reason, is fated to touch but lightly upon the structure
of reality. This is the Pauline ‘knowledge of the flesh’ which is re-
flected in those who practice it. Fatuous, arrogant, quarrelsome
and immoral, they are incapable of transforming their notions into
actions and of solving the crisis of which they are both authors and
victims. It is this particular reason, and not reason in general, that
the scepticism in De vanitate wishes to do away with. To point out
those who are historically guilty of the contemporary crisis is but
the essential critical preliminary to setting off the restoration of
that hermetic magic sapientia that is founded on Platonic-Christian
reason. In fact, magic is the thaumaturgic ability that was Adam’s
by right, so long as his reason was rooted in God and not in senses.
For Agrippa, the restoration of magic means the reestablishment
of the harmony between faith and reason, the renewal of the rela-

12
M. Ficinus, Theologia platonica, ed. R. Marcel, 3 vols., (Paris, 1964-70), 2:206-
14; J. Reuchlin, De verbo mirifico, s.l.a. [Basel, 1494], b4r, f6r.
13
Agrippa, De triplici ratione cognoscendi Deum, in Opera, 2 vols., (Lyons, s.d., repr.
Hildesheim, 1970), 2:457-61 and 468-69. Part edition by P. Zambelli, in Testi
umanistici, 145-62.
14
Agrippa, De originali peccato, in Opera, 2:552-3. The fruit of the tree of knowl-
edge of good and evil (“prudentia terrenorum”) had been forbidden to Adam
(faith), but not to Eve (reason). But Eve is not entirely free of blame for the origi-
nal sin (as van der Poel, Cornelius Agrippa, 235, says) because she led Adam to trans-
gression.

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 165 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 166 vittoria perrone compagni

tion between man and God, and the return to prelapsarian per-
fection. Magic is the operative side of the believer’s spiritual re-
birth. This aspect has been clearly perceived by M.H. Keefer, who
has shrewdly emphasized the presence and unifying role of the no-
tion of hermetic deificatio both in De occulta philosophia and in De
vanitate. However, I do not agree with Keefer when he concludes
that for Agrippa “illumination is, in fact, a substitute for those philo-
sophical methods and occult arts against which he rails in De
vanitate.”15 Rather, the hermetic concept is balanced and modified
by the acceptance of the neo-Platonic doctrine of the tripartition
of the soul. Instead of having a basic contrast between rational
science and revealed knowledge, Agrippa envisages a connection
between the two. The magician is the hermetic ‘perfect philoso-
pher,’ not because enlightenment endows him with a wisdom that
is alternative to rational knowledge, but because the sense of hu-
man knowledge is disclosed to him by the experience of spiritual
regeneration, which also enables him to put science into practice.
Yet reason still has the task of assembling the elements of a vast
and refined culture, upon which fides bestows dynamism, thereby
raising it to the level of knowledge and power. Magic is the result
of man’s attitude towards God. It is the fruit of a correct orienta-
tion and the reward for a willed and trusting adherence to the
divine message imprinted in the heart of man. This is why the
reform of magic calls primarily for man’s spiritual reform, the
reorientation of his reason, and a re-appropriated awareness of his
destiny.
This perspective, which links ‘scepticism’ and magic as two com-
ponents of the same program, leads us on to a different, and not
contradictory, interpretation of the specific subject of alchemy.
The argument in De vanitate against alchemists can thus be seen
for what it is. There is no longer a radical hostility towards the
science of alchemy, but simply a condemnation of a certain way of
viewing and applying it. Instead, the inclusion of alchemical
themes in the final draft of De occulta philosophia proves that
Agrippa’s interest in alchemy had undergone a profound evolu-
tion, which in itself contradicts his alleged turn to scepticism as the
refuge of a magician who is disillusioned with his former passion
and has turned his mind entirely towards current religious argu-
ments.
15
Keefer, “Agrippa’s Dilemma,” 633 (my italics).

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 166 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 167

W.D.Müller-Jahncke bases his opinion concerning Agrippa’s

persistent distrust towards alchemy upon a careful examination of
his two main treatises and his letters. According to Müller-Jahncke,
De occulta philosophia contains a stratification of different but not
substantially contradictory positions. In the first draft, Agrippa con-
siders alchemical transmutation as possible but is unable to offer a
plausible theoretical justification, being well aware of “the weak-
ness of the alchemists.” In the later draft, there emerges a new
interest in the theoretical questions about the elements, but
Agrippa
merely brought together current ideas, with a predilection for authors who
were followers of neo-Pythagorean number-theory. So Agrippa holds
throughout to the theory of elementary change, but denies its practical ap-
plication in the transmutation of metals into silver and gold by means of the
quinta essentia.
His letters, on the other hand, report his failure in carrying out
various alchemical operations and his increasing doubts as to the
possibility of producing gold, although he did continue to apply
alchemical procedures in making medicines.16 Finally, De vanitate
launches a global attack on alchemy. Agrippa denies both the
possibility of transmuting metals into gold and that of discovering
the panacea by means of the elixir. According to Müller-Jahncke,
however, the originality of his contribution consists in the themes
that he adds to the well-known subject of deceptive alchemists and
in “the refined satirical style in which he admits that he has done
something which was hopeless from the start.” Thus, chapter 90 of
De vanitate is a summary of Agrippa’s personal experience,
“marked by profound scepticism at all stages of his literary activity.”
It is here that Agrippa “reaches the peak of his critical attitude to
alchemy, already noticeable in earlier phases.” Müller-Jahncke is not
disturbed by Agrippa’s laconic admission that he is familiar with
this science. This admission of faith “must have had the effect,
both in Agrippa’s mind and in that of contemporary critical read-
ership, of bitter mockery, [...] simple sarcasm, and no more than
a literary usage.”17 Clearly Müller-Jahncke excludes from that ‘criti-
16
Müller-Jahncke, “The Attitude,” 137-44, 150, who gives special emphasis to
the letters between Agrippa and Brennonius (Jean Rogier) about the alchemical
experiments of their common friend Tyrius. For the pharmaceutical application of
alchemical processes, cf. W.D. Müller-Jahncke, “Agrippa von Nettesheim in Ant-
werpen,” in Perspektiven der Pharmaziegeschichte. Festschrift für Rudolf Schmitz zum 65.
Geburtstag (Graz, 1983), 243-68.
17
Müller-Jahncke, “The Attitude,” 147-150 (my italics).

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 167 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 168 vittoria perrone compagni

cal leadership’ all those readers from the great Erasmus down to
the less famous Valerio Valier who did not understand the De vani-
tate as a confutation of sciences in themselves.18 He also excludes
those alchemists, discussed by W. Newman, who considered Agrip-
pa to be their predecessor in the search for the lapis benedictus.
I am of the opinion that the material gathered by Müller-
Jahncke may be interpreted differently. The letters bear witness to
a constant interest in alchemic operations, of which Agrippa ac-
knowledged to be “curiosissimus.” Above all, they show that he
played a central role within his group of friends at Metz who were
all adepts of the opus.19 From a letter dated 1526, which was during
the period of his so-called sceptical crisis, we learn that Agrippa
was hoping to find an improbable solution to his hopeless situa-
tion at Louise of Savoy’s court precisely by means of alchemical
transmutation. Midas’ gold is what is needed—he writes to his
friend Chapelain—so as to face up to that Ninus and that Semi-
ramis (King Francis and the Queen Mother); but the transmuta-
tion he was working on was probably not going to give him Midas’
gold (aurum), but only his ears (auriculas).These words, however,
are not an expression of distrust in the conceptual foundations of
alchemy, but they express the bitterness of an intellectual courtier
who had fallen into disgrace with his erstwhile protectors whose
malevolent power appeared to be stronger than the art in which
he continued to believe. In 1529, when his alleged conversion to
scepticism should have already taken place, Agrippa was engaged
in an alchemical transmutation and continued to direct it from
afar, sending instructions to a relative. In the end, he announced
that “successit optatum et inventum est lucrum,” even if the quan-
tity of gold produced turned out to be insignificant compared with
the effort involved.20

18
Erasmus, Opus epistolarum, ed. P. S. Allen (London, 1906-58), 9: 352; 10: 203;
209-10, saw in De vanitate an attack on theologians. Valerius de Valeriis, Opus
aureum, in Raimundus Lullus, Opera (Strasbourg, 1651, repr. Stuttgart, 1996), 1109,
referred to De vanitate for a wider treatment of the sciences and the arts, which he
himself could not investigate in detail for lack of time. A. Bonner, “Introduction”,
31*, mentions this “surprising recommendation” and comments that evidently “not
everybody considered De vanitate scientiarum as the classic of Renaissance
deconstruction it has come to be for modern readers.” I thank M. Pereira for hav-
ing indicated Valier’s text to me.
19
Agrippa, Epistolae, II, 52, in Opera, 2:708. Agrippa’s and Brennonius’s irony
seems to constitute rather jocular remarks addressed to their common friend, who
was an amateur alchemist, and not to alchemy as such.
20
Agrippa, Epistolae, IV, 56; V, 73-76, 82-83, 840, 923-26, 932-33. Müller-Jahncke,

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 168 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 169

According to Müller-Jahncke, the originality and decisiveness of

Agrippa’s criticism in De vanitate centers around his satire against
the alchemists. However, this very element proves that Agrippa’s
confutation is not of the art of alchemy in itself, but instead of the
distorted use that man makes of it.21 The sciences, which are neu-
tral in themselves, acquire ethical standing and practical useful-
ness according to the direction in which reason autonomously
guides them. The sciences are valid, steady and fruitful when
“regulantur ad verbum Dei” and when reason proceeds in har-
mony with faith, keeping to its own place. But they become
unstable, sterile and noxious when reason strays from the divine
foundations of truth and turns to the senses for a confirmation of
its knowledge.22 Alchemy is no exception to this rule; therefore
Agrippa can attack it without really questioning its principles. The
ability to render these principles operative and to apply them to
the transformation of the world is not within everyone’s reach, but
is the privilege of those who have experienced spiritual rebirth.23
Science is a power only in the hands of a true Christian. In the
hands of ‘the knowledgeable people of this world,’ it is no more
than a clumsy and miserable caricature, if not a shameful deceit.
The discriminating factor does not reside in the quantity or the
quality of the known contents, but in their orientation.
This is clearly expounded in the famous letter of 1527, which
has often been quoted as evidence of the dramatic inner conflict
which allegedly caused Agrippa’s conversion from magic to scepti-
cism. When answering Aurelius ab Aquapendente, who had asked
him for some books with which to continue his own studies of
occult philosophy (astrology, magic and, of course, alchemy),
Agrippa felt the need to warn his interlocutor against deceptive

“The Attitude,” 150, thinks that the disappointing results “can have done nothing
to convince him of the truth of alchemy.” The delayed date of the experiments can
hardly have had a crucial influence on De vanitate, which had already been written,
although it is possible that Agrippa may have made some changes and additions
before printing.
21
Newman, “Thomas Vaughan,” 135. Müller-Jahncke, “The Attitude,” 147, 150,
twice suffers from a curious slip of the pen which incidentally takes him in the
direction of my own interpretation. For he calls chapter 90 of De vanitate not by its
true title, “De alcumistica,” but “De alcumista.”
22
Agrippa, De incertitudine et vanitate scientiarum atque artium, in Opera, 2:2-5, 34-
35.
23
See pseudo-Geber, Summa perfectionis, 266: “Nec etiam adinvenire nitatur
sophisticam metam operis sed soli sit complemento intentus, quoniam ars nostra
in potentia divina servatur et cui vult elargitur et subtrahit qui est gloriosus et sub-
limis et omni iustitia et bonitate repletus.”

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 169 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 170 vittoria perrone compagni

teachers and false doctrines. But the seemingly admonishing tone

of the initial lines, consistent with real scepticism, is counterbal-
anced by the immediately succeeding explanation which restores
value to science, provided it is formulated correctly.
And yet these doctrines have been handed down and taught us by great and
influential philosophers and by holy men; who will dare hold their precepts
as false? […] Therefore there exists a different meaning from the one that
is apparent in the letter. This is covered by a veil of mysteries and no scholar
has yet disclosed it entirely. And I do not know if anyone will succeed in pen-
etrating it without an expert and reliable guide, through the study of books
alone, unless he be enlightened by the divine power: but this is granted to
few indeed.

Agrippa provides us with a summary of his intellectual biography

and enables us to follow a path of cultural and religious progress
which is undeniably complex yet coherent, within which each of
his works occupies its rightful position. First, De triplici ratione
cognoscendi Deum, Dehortatio gentilis theologiae and De originali peccato,
which are the acknowledgement of reason’s virtual condition,
man’s reality, and humankind’s dire need of radical inner trans-
formation. Secondly, the De vanitate, where he passionately lays the
blame on those who are historically responsible for corruption and
indicates the only possible alternative of redemption. Finally, the
second draft of De occulta philosophia, where restored magic coin-
cides with the retrieval of that ‘divine essence’ which the Creator
had generously bestowed upon His creatures.
So the efforts of he who attempts to master the innermost secrets of nature
are vain when he concentrates his attention on the mere concatenation of
arguments, [...] searching without for that which is within himself. In fact it
is this that I want you to know now: the artificer of all miraculous actions is
to be found precisely within ourselves. Whatever astrologers, soothsayers,
magicians, marvel-workers, or alchemists, envious emulators of nature, or
wicked necromancers, worse than demons, may dare promise - this interior
artificer is able to understand it and bring it about; and this can be done
without committing sin, without offending God, and without outraging reli-
gious faith.24

24
Agrippa, Epistolae, V, 16, 873-74: “Cave ne decipiare ab his qui fuerunt de-
cepti! O quanta leguntur scripta de inexpugnabili magicae artis potentia, de
prodigiosis astrologorum imaginibus, de monstrifica alchimistarum metamorphosi
[…] Quae omnia comperiuntur vana, ficta et falsa, quoties ad literam practicantur.
Atque tamen traduntur ista scribunturque a magnis gravissimisque philosophis et
sanctis viris, quorum traditiones quis audebit dicere falsas? […] Alius ergo est sen-
sus, quem literis traditur isque variis obductus mysteriis, sed hactenus a nullo
magistrorum palam explicatus. Quem nescio, si quis sine perito fidoque magistro,
sola librorum lectione possit assequi, nisi fuerit divino numine illustratus: quod

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 170 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 171

These words do not imply any dramatic soul searching, nor are
they the expression of a tormented dilemma in the destiny of his
soul. If anything, they suggest an awareness of his own mission in
the world. Unlike Lazzarelli, Agrippa does not make an enthusias-
tic proclamation of his own perfect regeneration as a filius Hermetis.
But he does believe that he has made sufficient progress on his way
towards self-knowledge as to be able to propose himself as critical
guide for his fellow men.25 Above all, Agrippa’s distinction between
true and false magic refers less to their respective contents than to
the subjective conditions of the person who employs magic. This
letter seems to me perfectly consistent with chapter 48 of De
vanitate, which, according to M.H. Keefer, reveals the disturbing
state of doubt into which Agrippa sinks regarding his own in-
tellectual experience, along with his deeply felt eschatological
anguish:
Whosoever should pretend to vaticinate or to prophesy not according to
truth nor according to the power of God, but according to the deceit of
demons [...] and whosoever should boast of performing miracles, that im-
mediately vanish, by means of magical falsehoods [...] shall be condemned
to the torment of eternal fire.26

As a Christian magician, Agrippa thinks that the threat of the fire

of hell does not menace himself, but rather the quacks, the igno-
rant, and the ‘demoniacal’ magicians, in short, those who are not
regenerated and who practise science by replacing the support of
faith by the conceit of rebellious reason.27 Therefore Agrippa’s

datur paucissimis. Ideoque in vacuum currunt multi, qui haec secretissima naturae
arcana persequuntur, ad nudam lectionis seriem referentes animum, […] quae-
rentes extra se, quod intus possident. Atque hoc est, quod te nunc scire volo, qui
in nobis ipsis est omnium mirabilium effectuum operator. Qui quicquid portentosi
mathematici, quicquid prodigiosi magi, quicquid invidentes naturae persecutores
alchimistae, quicquid daemonibus deteriores malefici necromantes promittere
audent, ipse novit discernere et efficere: idque sine omni crimine, sine Dei offensa,
sine religionis iniuria.”
25
Agrippa, Epistolae, V, 19, 880-81.
26
Agrippa, De vanitate, 48, 103-4. Van der Poel, Cornelius Agrippa, 53-54, recog-
nizes the continued feasibility of a legitimate, non-demonic occultism and connects
this passage to the Apologia drawn up by Ficino in defense of his De vita coelitus
comparanda (not De vita sua!). Personally, I do not think that Agrippa distinguishes
between two forms of magic in Ficino’s sense. I tend to believe instead that for
Agrippa, the same contents take on different features depending on the attitude
of the person who uses them.
27
Thus I explain the disdain with which, in February 1528, Agrippa, Epistolae,
V, 26, 885-88, tells a friend about the arrival at Court of a “vir quidam daemonio-
rum,” summoned from Germany to upgrade the Emperor’s political and military

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 171 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 172 vittoria perrone compagni

palinode of his earlier curiositas towards magic is by no means a

global retraction, but an admission of the limits of his first project,
which did not properly take into account the religious roots of the
reform of magic.28
Let us end with Agrippa’s De occulta philosophia, where we find
important indications of his attitude towards alchemy. The early
draft of this work contained only two references to this art. While
the first of them is a similitude of scarce significance,29 the second
reference is a literal repetition of Ficino’s well-known identifica-
tion of the spiritus mundi with the alchemists’ quinta essentia.30
Agrippa’s sole original contribution is located in the chapter’s
brief conclusion. There, the evolution between the first and the
second draft provides an excellent yardstick with which to meas-
ure Agrippa’s changing line of thought. The first draft recognized
the decadence of alchemy, corrupted by its own practitioners. Al-
chemists, being unable to understand the theoretical principles
upon which their art is based, exercise their craft deceitfully.
Their ignorance and avarice discredit and ridicule this “noble sci-
ence.”31 Agrippa implicitly suggests that the cultural and moral
reform of mankind is the essential and sufficient condition for the
rehabilitation of alchemy, too. It is simply a matter of restoring the
purity of doctrine and intent. This fleeting mention of the subject
in 1510 proves that Agrippa was not hostile towards alchemy as
such. On the contrary, he seemed to consider that alchemy was
linked to the rehabilitation of magic. In his draft of 1533, this
deploratio of the state of alchemy is removed and substituted. It
would be incorrect to assume though that the modification of the
text implies a mature state of scepticism. Agrippa merely points

situation. To the diabolic abilities of the German magician, Agrippa opposes the
thaumaturgy of some “viri, sapientia graves, scientia insignes, virtutibus et potestati-
bus pollentes, vita et moribus integri, prudentia invicti,” in whose hands the wel-
fare of society would have fared much better, had not Court potentates despised
them “ut ab instituto eorum longe diversos.” Upon more careful scrutiny, one will
notice that Agrippa’s opposition is not about the results achieved, but about the
foundations on which the former and the latter base their activities.
28
A severe judgment on his early compilation is also expressed in Agrippa’s first
letter to Aurelius, Epistolae, V, 14, 875.
29
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, W, 109r (p. 553 in the 1533 edition).
30
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, W, 8v-9r (pp. 113-14 in the 1533 edition).
31
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia , W, 9r: “Sed hec nobilis scientia abiit in
ridiculum ob plurimos indoctos et vilissimos quosque cultores, avaritia potius quam
sciendi cupiditate captos; qui, cum veram semitam ignorantes deficiunt, falsificis
deceptionibus et irrisionibus omnia complent.”

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 172 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 173

out that the alchemical extraction of spiritus from gold and silver
to which Ficino referred does not actually increase the quantity of
precious metal.
I know how to do it and I have sometimes seen it done, but I was not able
to obtain a weight of gold increased in comparison with that of the gold
from which I had extracted the spirit: in fact the spirit, being a form that is
extensa [inherent in a material body] and not intensa, is unable to transform
an imperfect body into a perfect one beyond its own measure. I do not deny,
however, that this may be obtained by means of a different procedure.32

The only negative remark concerns the economic aspect of the

process and not its theoretical grounds. His final observation is far
from being sceptical as such. The generic reference to an aliud
artificium has not been sufficiently appreciated by the supporters
of Agrippa’s scepticism.33 William Newman, having successively
examined four chapters of De occulta philosophia, has found an
operational description for the alchemical reduction of elemen-
tary earth to the purity of first matter. In chapter 3 of book I,
Agrippa describes the relationships between the four elements and
stresses the non-transmutable character of earth following Ficino’s
comment on Plato’s Timaeus and rejecting Aristotle.34 Chapter 4
explains the existence of three orders of elements corresponding
to the levels of being: pure and incorruptible elements; compound
and impure elements, which can be reduced to “pura simplicitas”;
and decomposed elements, which are convertible into one an-
other. The ability to change impure back into pure and plurality
back into simplicity guarantees the ‘perfection of both science and
operation.’ Agrippa does not immediately explain the process by
which compound elements of the third order are made to corre-
spond to elements of the first order. Rather it is in the subsequent
chapter that a further fragment of his dispersa intentio is to be
found. This chapter investigates the marvellous nature of fire and

32
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia., 114: “Et nos illud facere novimus et aliquando
vidimus, sed non plus auri fabricare potuimus, nisi quantum erat illud auri pondus
de quo spiritum extraximus: nam, cum sit ille spiritus forma extensa et non intensa,
non potest ultra suam mensuram imperfectum corpus in perfectum permutare;
quod tamen fieri posse alio artificio non inficior” (my italics).
33
Müller-Jahncke, “The Attitude,” 146, omits the conclusion (“quod tamen [...]
non inficior”), as Newman has pointed out in his “Thomas Vaughan,” 126. J.M.
Mandosio, “L’alchimie dans les classifications des sciences et des arts à la Renais-
sance,” in Alchimie et philosophie, 39, also ignores the passage. The words ‘alio artifi-
cio’ were added to the final edition of 1533 and were absent from the partial edi-
tion (Book I) of 1531.
34
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, 89.

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 173 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 174 vittoria perrone compagni

earth, considered by Hermes to be sufficient “ad omnium mira-

bilium operationem.” Agrippa states that earth is the base and
foundation of other elements, because it confers solidity on them,
mixing with but not changing into them. Earth is the receptacle
of every celestial influence, because it is continuously animated by
heavenly virtue conveyed by the spiritus. Earth is also the founda-
tion and mother of all things, because it encloses the seminal vir-
tues of creation, being therefore mineral, vegetable and animal.
Once earth has undergone a process of purification and simplifi-
cation, it becomes “restaurationis ac conservationis nostrae
purissima medicina.”35 In order to explain the nature of this proc-
ess, Newman refers to chapter 4 of book II, which investigates the
power of numerical unity, whose presence is traced by Agrippa to
all levels of existence: Iod in the archetypal world, anima mundi in
the intellectual sphere, the Sun in the heavenly realm, the heart
in the microcosm, and Lucifer in hell. In the elementary world,
there is one thing created by God, the subject of all wonders that are in the
sky and on earth. It is animal, vegetable and mineral in act; its presence is
everywhere; it is known by very few; none call it by name, but veil it with
numberless images and allusions. Without this it is possible neither for al-
chemy nor for natural magic to attain their perfect end.36

The attached diagram of the scala unitatis specifies that Agrippa is

referring to the “lapis philosophorum, unum subiectum et in-
strumentum omnium vritutum naturalium et transnaturalium.”
The process of universal simplification of the elements to which
Agrippa alludes in book I can therefore be carried out by simply
reducing earth to the original purity of first matter. This process
is the “aliud artificium” which is more effective than Ficino’s
method for the extraction of the spiritus from gold and silver. But
this too is an alchemical process, as Newman points out.
Besides belying Agrippa’s alleged aversion towards alchemy, the
four chapters, which were all added in 1533, bear witness to the
enormous increase of his sources as a whole. This is the fundamen-
tal difference between the early draft and the later one. In this
case, Agrippa’s sources should be sought in his recent past as

35
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, 93. Newman, “Thomas Vaughan,” 132-34.
36
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, 256-57: “una res est a Deo creata, subiectum
omnis mirabilitatis, quae in terris et in coelis est: ipsa est actu animalis, vegetalis et
mineralis, ubique reperta, a paucissimis cognita, a nullis suo proprio nomine ex-
pressa, sed innumeris figuris et aenigmatibus velata, sine qua neque alchymia
neque naturalis magia suum completum possunt attingere finem.”

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 174 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 175

indicated by Newman, rather than in ancient times as Blaise de

Vignère suggested.37 In fact, they are extracts from two letters by
his master Trithemius in which the latter offered a cosmological
interpretation of the Tabula Smaragdina casting a shadow on the
universal “progressus ad supremam unitatem.” It is a “progressus”
that is in truth a “reditus” to the original unity accomplished by
eliminating the binary, which is the source of confusion and ob-
scurity.38 The amalgamation of three into one may be seen in
many different ways. It is admissible to view this as applicable to
material reality as well. Neither Trithemius nor Agrippa supply
precise technical instructions. But this does not exclude the possi-
bility that they tried out these operations in their laboratories. In
any case, Agrippa certainly did try, for we understand from his
letters that the alchemical operations he mentions are not mysti-
cal, but concrete transmutational processes,39 by which he sought
“lucrum,” and not without success.
The significant additions of 1533 concerning the properties of
elements are decidedly not the meaningless compilation of which
the supporters of Agrippa’s scepticism speak or a jumble of cur-
rent ideas copied from unidentified neo-Pythagorean numero-
logists. On the contrary, the new chapters contain a coherent for-
mulation of the relationship between alchemy and magic, which
emerged exactly in the very years in which Agrippa was writing his
harsh pages against the perpetrators of transmutational decep-
tions. The congruency with his letters proves that alchemy has a
significant role in his project for the restoration of magic.40 The
magician makes use of alchemy when he operates on the elemen-
tary world, just as he makes use of astrology and religion to oper-
ate on the heavenly and divine worlds. There are not three kinds
of magic, but there are three levels of being to which magic ap-
37
Quoted by Matton, “Marsile Ficin,” 166.
38
Trithemius, Epistulae (Cologne, 1567), 82-97.
39
Newman, “Thomas Vaughan,” 125.
40
But nobody has ever considered De occulta philosophia an alchemic treatise, as
is misunderstood by Müller-Jahncke, “The Attitude,” 146-47: “Already the first print-
ing (Antwerp, 1531) of De occulta […] gained Agrippa the reputation of having writ-
ten an ‘alchemical’ work. Thus a friend reported that he had been to Heidelberg
and talked to Erasmus about this book, which ‘they call a natural Magic and Cabala
and one of the Alchemy.’” See Agrippa, Epistolae, VI, 32, 988, where the correspon-
dent tells Agrippa of his visit to Erasmus in Freiburg (not Heidelberg!) and of how
he asked him “two or three questions on occult philosophy [not about Agrippa’s
book!], that is usually called natural magic and cabala, and one question on al-
chemy.”

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 175 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 176 vittoria perrone compagni

plies. Magic is in the first place an attitude of man and a choice of

reason in regard to God. The magician’s only purpose is im-
mensely ambitious. It is to produce, or rather to reproduce, a su-
perior reality in which all division is overcome. Primitive unity, as
Agrippa explains in De vanitate, was shattered by original sin, which
caused an otherwise perfect nature to degenerate. The magician’s
reformatio is not simply a personal spiritual redemption, it also li-
berates the body from the destructive cycle of generation and cor-
ruption. It would appear that this is the conclusion drawn in book
III of De occulta philosophia, which debates the chief motive of man
as God’s image. Agrippa bases his argument on material abun-
dantly borrowed from Francesco Zorzi, who postulated that there
is an analogy between spiritual regeneratio and alchemical trans-
mutatio.41 Agrippa dispenses with Zorzi’s colorful alchemical meta-
phors (such as purging one’s soul in the melting pot, or to become
purest gold in place of base and shapeless metal). Those changes
are compensated for by the insertion of a brief quotation from the
Summa perfectionis by pseudo-Geber which substantiates Zorzi’s
reexamination of the concept of man as microcosm:
Whosoever knows himself, within himself will know all things. Foremost he
will know God, in whose image he is created; he will know the world, of
which he bears the simulacrum; and he will know all creatures, to which he
is united by a symbol [...]. And Geber in the Summa Alchymiae imparts that it
is not possible for anyone to reach perfection in that art unless he has rec-
ognized its principles within his own self. Instead, the better every man will
know himself, the greater will be the force of attraction he is able to obtain
and the more wonderful the operations he will succeed in performing. He
will rise to such a level of perfection as to become a child of God and be
transformed into the very image that is God, united with Him [...]. Once
man is united with God, all that is in him is united with God. Foremost the
mind, thereafter the spirit, the animal faculties, the vegetable potency, the
elements down to the matter. Furthermore, the mind, which is the form of
the body, draws and leads it onwards to a nobler condition and a heavenly
nature, until it attains the glory of immortality.42

41
F. Secret, Hermétisme et Kabbale (Naples, 1992), 15-36.
42
Agrippa, De occulta philosophia, 509: “Quicumque igitur seipsum cognoverit,
cognoscet in seipsum omnia: cognoscet in primis Deum, ad cuius imaginem factus
est; cognoscet mundum, cuius simulacrum gerit; cognoscet creaturas omnes, cum
quibus symbolum habet […] Et Geber in Summa Alchymiae docet neminem ad eius
artis perfectionem pervenire posse, qui illius principia in seipso non cognoverit:
quanto autem magis quisque seipsum cognoscet, tanto maiorem vim attrahendi
consequitur tantoque maiora et mirabiliora operatur ad tantamque ascendet
perfectionem, quod ‘efficitur filius Dei transformaturque in eandem imaginem
quae est Deus’ et cum ipso unitur. […] Homine autem Deo unito, uniuntur omnia
quae in homine sunt, mens imprimis, deinde spiritus et animales vires vegetandi-
que vis et elementa usque ad materiam, trahens secum etiam corpus, cuius forma

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 176 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

 “dispersa intentio” 177

The nosce te ipsum, by which man rejoins the Prime Cause, trans-
forms him into a superior nature. Since man “symbolizat cum
omnibus,” this unifying link can be projected onto the world, be-
coming the instrument by which opposites can be joined: body
and soul, matter and spirit. This process of universal redemption
enormously stretches the boundaries of natural magic which had
been so carefully traced by the Florentine models of De occulta
philosophia. Agrippa believes that man, the magician, is something
more than the diligent minister and peaceable overlord of nature.
Rather, he pursues a utopia, namely that of producing a renewed
world in which the transformation of matter and the deification
of man follow the same path.

SUMMARY

The study of Agrippa’s works confirms his constant interest in the theory
and practice of alchemy. The apparent contradiction between De occulta
philosophia, which uses alchemical doctrines, and De vanitate scientiarum,
where alchemy is harshly criticized, is to be resolved in the light of a
moral and cultural reform founded on a Hermetic-Christian perspective
on the relationship between faith and reason. The analysis of the al-
chemic passages in De occulta philosophia proves that Agrippa’s transmuta-
tory operations have no secondary role in his ‘restored’ magic. Further-
more, these operations are oriented towards a utopia, where original
unity is to be regained.

extitit, deducens illud in meliorem sortem et coelestem naturam, quousque glori-

ficetur in immortalitatem.”

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

117.p65 177 5/10/00, 1:58 PM

Copyright of Early Science & Medicine is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.