AUTOR · PERSONA
Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim
Se declara mago y redefine la palabra en el mismo movimiento: «a magician doth not amongst learned men signify a sorcerer, or one that is superstitious, or devilish; but a wise man, a priest, a prophet» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 53», después de haber escrito que lo acusarán de hechicero y supersticioso, «who indeed am a magician» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 53». Su programa cabe en tres verbos que él mismo enumera: recuperar la magia antigua «from the errors of impiety», purificarla y vindicarla de sus calumniadores «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 56». Y el título fue una elección táctica: compuso tres libros de magia «and titled them Of Occult Philosophy, being a title less offensive» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 56».
En el mismo volumen se retracta, y lo dice dos veces. En el prefacio: «being become a man, I retracted those things which I did being a boy, and in my book Of the Vanity and Uncertainty of Sciences I did for the most part retract this book» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 54». Y al final, en el bloque del *De vanitate* embutido en la propia *Occulta*: lo que fue erróneo «through the curiosity of my youth, I now being more advised, am willing to have retracted, by this recantation» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 780». Publicó de todos modos, y da su razón: el borrador circulaba mutilado «in Italy, in France, in Germany through many men's hands», y prefirió sacarlo enmendado de su mano «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 54».
También se descalifica como iniciado. Ha sido «a soldier, consecrated with man's blood», cortesano y casado, «and therefore could not obtain the sublime gifts of the immortal God» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · pp. 755, 756»; y define su papel: «I would be accounted as a director, who waiting always at the doors, shows to others which way they must go» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 756». Valente resume lo que su vida le costó: murió en Grenoble en casa de M. Vachon «at the untimely age of 49» y quedó sepultado «within a convent of Dominicans, his most hated enemies» «Agrippa — De occulta philosophia, ed. inglés · p. 36».
Henry Cornelius Agrippa · Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa · Enrique Cornelio Agripa · Agripa · Cornelius Agrippa · Agrippa von Nettesheim · Nectes-Heym · Neccesheim · Nettersheim
7 atribuciones recibidas · 48 afirmaciones
Obras que se le atribuyen
con el tipo de cada atribuciónCuarto Libro (pseudo-Agrippa) [DECLARADA]
Cuarto Libro (pseudo-Agrippa) [DECLARADA]
Cuarto Libro (pseudo-Agrippa) [DESCARTADA]
Cuarto Libro (pseudo-Agrippa) [DESCARTADA]
Cuarto Libro (pseudo-Agrippa) [DESCARTADA]
Cuarto Libro (pseudo-Agrippa) [DESCARTADA]
Agrippa — De occulta philosophia [DECLARADA]
Vínculos con tradiciones
Magia ceremonial · Miembro
Magia ceremonial · Crítico
Magia filosófica · Fundador
Cábala · Transmisor
Hermetismo · Comentarista
Alquimia · Crítico
Afirmaciones
48 entradas — la voz del autor, con su fuente y su pasaje«a magician doth not amongst learned men signify a sorcerer, or one that is superstitious, or devilish; but a wise man, a priest, a prophet» — .
Su autodeclaración, en la frase inmediatamente anterior: lo acusarán de ser «a sorcerer, and superstitious, and devilish, who indeed am a magician».
Su cláusula de deslinde: «for I do not approve of them, but declare them to you».
Y su método declarado: «I have writ many things, rather narratively than affirmatively», siguiendo «the judgements of Platonists, and other gentile philosophers».
La retractación, dentro de la propia Occulta: «being become a man, I retracted those things which I did being a boy, and in my book Of the Vanity and Uncertainty of Sciences I did for the most part retract this book».
Se formula a sí mismo la objeción: «behold thou being a youth didst write and now being old hast retracted it; what therefore hast thou set forth?».
Su razón para publicar pese a la retractación: el borrador, interceptado antes de terminarlo, «was carried about imperfect, and impolished, and did fly abroad in Italy, in France, in Germany through many men's hands».
«determined to set it forth myself, thinking that there might be less danger if these books came out of my hands with some amendments, than to come forth torn, and in fragments out of other men's hands» — .
«I thought it no crime if I should not suffer the testimony of my youth to perish.»
Declara la costura del texto: «we added some chapters, and we inserted many things … which the curious reader shall be able to understand by the inequality of the very phrase».
Declara a quién entregó el borrador: «I gave them to Tritemius a Neapolitanian abbot, formerly a Spanhemensian, a man very industrious after secret things» — grafía «Tritemius» tal cual.
Se describe a sí mismo: «who have been always from my youth a curious, and undaunted searcher of wonderful effects, and operations full of mysteries».
Su programa, en tres verbos: «recover that ancient magic the discipline of all wise men from the errors of impiety, purify and adorn it with its proper luster, and vindicate it from the injuries of its calumniators».
El título como elección táctica: «have at last composed three compendious books of magic, and titled them Of Occult Philosophy, being a title less offensive».
Somete el texto a censura de Tritemio: «if I have wrote anything which may tend either to the contumely of nature, offending God, or injury of religion, you may condemn the error».
En la dedicatoria a Hermann de Wied: la obra es «a work of my curious youth, but a doctrine of antiquity, by none I dare say hitherto attempted to be restored».
Y la doble edad del texto: «You have therefore the work, not only of my youth, but of my present age, for I have corrected many errata of the work of my youth, I have inserted many things in many places… which may easily be perceived by the inequality of the style».
La dedicatoria va fechada: «From Mechlinia Anno M.D.XXXI. In the month of January.»
Declara el ocultamiento deliberado: «some of these things are written in order, some without order, some things are delivered by fragments, some things are even hid, and left for the search of the intelligent».
«we have folded up the truth of this science with many enigmas, and dispersed it in divers places» — .
Y a quién excluye: «But ye, envious, calumniators, sons of base ignorance, and foolish lewdness, come not nigh our writings».
En carta a Aurelio de Aquapendente (Lyon, 24 de septiembre de 1527), seis años antes del impreso: las promesas de la magia, la astrología y la alquimia «are found vain, fictitious, and false, as often as they are practised according to letter».
Y el freno, en la misma página: «Yet such things are delivered, and writ by great and grave philosophers, and holy men, whose traditions, who dare say are false? Nay, it were impious to think that they were lies.»
«There is therefore another meaning than what is written in letters… and which I believe no man can attain to by reading of books only, without a skillful, and faithful master, unless he be divinely illuminated» — .
Sitúa el operador dentro: «in us is the operator of all wonderful effects … In us I say is the operator of miracles.»
Y en verso: «Not the bright stars of the sky, nor flames of hell, / But the spirit that these doth make, doth in us dwell.»
Sobre los libros prohibidos que le piden: «those books which you desire of me, some of them were sometimes in my custody, but now are not».
Su juicio sobre su propia obra: «the two former of them were deficient in many things, the third is wholly imperfect, and contains but a certain epitome of my writings», reservando la clave «for most intimate friends only».
Define la filosofía suprema como deificación: conocer a Dios «and to pass into him by a whole image of likeness … whereby thou mayest be transformed, and made as God, as the Lord spake concerning Moses».
Y la muerte mística que exige: «we must die, I say die to the world, and to the flesh, and all senses… not because the body is separated from the soul, but because the soul leaves the body».
Su autodescalificación: no presuma nadie que él haya recibido tales dones divinos, «who hitherto have been a soldier, consecrated with man's blood, having been almost always belonging to the King's Court, bound to a most dear wife by the bond of flesh, exposed to all the blast of inconstant fortune … and therefore could not obtain the sublime gifts of the immortal God.»
Y su definición de papel: «But I would be accounted as a director, who waiting always at the doors, shows to others which way they must go.»
Denuncia la contratación de un nigromante en la corte francesa: «it is not a part of less folly, but of most great impiety, to send devils to hell».
Y acusa a la jerarquía: «the pillars of the Church, bishops and cardinals, winking at, yea furthering this abominable work».
El bloque final del volumen lleva por título «The censure, or Retraction of Henry Cornelius Agrippa, concerning magic, after his declamation of the vanity of sciences, and the excellency of the word of God.»
Y ahí la retractación explícita: «I now being more advised, am willing to have retracted, by this recantation; I formerly spent much time and costs in these vanities. At last I grew so wise as to be able to dissuade others from this destruction.»
El cierre condenatorio: «I say all these shall with Jannes, and Jambres, and Simon Magus, be destinated to the torments of eternal fire.»
Declara supersticiosa hasta su propia obra técnica: «I too have written a geomancy quite different from the rest but no less superstitious and fallacious or if you wish I will even say 'mendacious'».
Sobre los alquimistas, en el *De vanitate*: «Alchemists are of all men the most wicked [perversissimos], since indeed God commanded: you shall eat bread from the sweat of your brow».
Y sobre su ruina: «In total poverty they are compelled to beg … Their plight leads them on to wicked arts [malae artes], such as counterfeiting coins and other falsifications.»
Su fideísmo declarado: la revelación no se alcanza por ningún juicio de los sentidos ni razonamiento ni silogismo, «but only by faith in Jesus Christ».
Su definición de magia natural en el *De incertitudine*: «the pinnacle of natural philosophy and its most complete achievement… so that astonishing wonders often result, not so much from art as from nature.»
Tras la acusación de judaizante: «I am a Christian, but I do not dislike Jewish Rabbis».
Advierte contra el exceso hermético en la *Dehortatio*: si con esos despojos «you enrich the Church of God, then I no longer advise against pagan literature, but I recommend it to you».
Rehúsa retractarse ante Carlos V: «For the Emperor cannot condemn one whom the law hath not judged…».
En la *Querela super calumnia*, su última obra: «I am condemned—unheard-of tyranny—before defense is heard… My folly and impiety have been, I own, worthy of condemnation, in that, against the warning of the Scriptures, I have put my trust in princes.»
Sobre la fabricación de oro, citándose a sí mismo: «And we know how to do that, and have seen it done: but we could make no more gold, than the weight of it was, out of which we extracted the Spirit.»
En el *De vanitate* traducido por Sanford (1569): «descend into your selves you whiche are desirous of the truthe, departe from the clouds of mans traditions, and cleave to the true light» — grafía isabelina tal cual.
Sobre el autor
72 entradas — lo que otros dicen de élTyson data el nacimiento: «Henricus Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim was born on September 14, 1486, in the German city of Cologne», en familia de nobleza menor al servicio de los emperadores.
Tyson sobre los títulos: «Agrippa claimed to possess doctorates in canon and civil law, as well as medicine, but the exact times and places these were earned remains a matter for speculation».
Tyson data y sitúa la primera edición completa: «The first complete edition was published at Cologne in July 1533 without the name of its place or printer. The printer was Soter and Hetorpius, but it was not considered necessary to draw attention to this fact, because the book had encountered considerable resistance from the Inquisitor of Cologne, Conrad Colyn of Ulm.»
Tyson declara no haber visto esa edición: «I cannot speak for the edition of 1533, which I have not seen.»
Tyson explica la publicación por tres factores: Hermann de Wied como último mecenas, Colonia como ciudad hereditaria de la familia, y el privilegio imperial obtenido «under the favor of Margaret of Austria».
Tyson data la muerte y el sepulcro: en Grenoble, en casa de M. Vachon, «at the untimely age of 49», sepultado «within a convent of Dominicans, his most hated enemies».
Tyson declara su base documental: la biografía en dos tomos de Henry Morley (1856), derivada a su vez de las cartas de la *Opera* de Lyon; y añade el contrafáctico: sin ellas «we would today know as little about Agrippa as we know about Shakespeare».
Tyson nombra la contra-tradición: «a second, scattered and unofficial account of Agrippa's life made up of the fables and slanders penned by credulous monks».
Tyson sobre su alquimia: «It is true that Agrippa dabbled in alchemy. But he was probably more concerned with finding useful medicinal extracts than the philosopher's stone.»
Tyson objeta a Thorndike por su nombre: su esbozo biográfico «deserves special mention because of its surprising malignity».
Y Thorndike, citado por Tyson: «He was not a person of solid learning, regular academic standing, and fixed position, but rather one of those wayward geniuses and intellectual vagabonds».
Valente, que firma la entrada del Dictionary, lo ficha así: «Agrippa, Heinrich Cornelius, * 1486 Nettesheim, † 1535 or 1536 Grenoble. German Humanist and theoretician of magic.»
Valente sobre París: «Agrippa seems to have taken part in a secret circle or self-help society, the members of which were interested in studying res arcanae».
Valente data el origen del proyecto: «His study of Reuchlin's work first suggested to Agrippa the project of a radical restoration of magic. In the winter of 1509–1510 he discussed this with Johannes Trithemius, to whom he dedicated the first draft».
Valente consigna el consejo de Tritemio: hablar de los secretos arcanos «only with proper friends».
Valente sobre el juicio de brujería de Metz (1519): Agrippa «argued that the sacrament of baptism was stronger than the pact with the devil», e implicó que el hereje era el inquisidor.
Valente nombra al inquisidor de Colonia como Konrad Köllin, que «denounced De occulta and its author as heretical before the City Council».
Valente ofrece su solución a la contradicción: «the contradiction can be largely resolved by recognizing how sharply Agrippa distinguished between reason and faith».
Valente registra la lectura de Zambelli, que lo sitúa «in the context of the radical Reformation and the spiritualists, nicodemism in particular», y las de van der Poel y Perrone Compagni.
Valente sobre la leyenda del perro negro: el retrato más influyente lo dio Paolo Giovio en sus *Elogia virorum illustrium*; Andreas Hondorff y André Thevet la difundieron; Johann Wier la disputó en *De praestigiis daemonum* (1563).
Valente cita a Pierre Bayle: en su *Dictionnaire*, Agrippa fue tenido por *malheureux* «because of his great curiosity, his all too free spirit, and his unstable mood».
Valente registra la tradición literaria: hay quien lo mira «as an archetype of the Faust figure».
Yates lo baja de rango: «Cornelio Agrippa de Nettesheim no es ciertamente el más importante entre los magos del Renacimiento, ni su De occulta philosophia es, tal como ha sido definido muchas veces, un manual de magia».
Yates propone la escapatoria: publicar el *De vanitate* antes del *De occulta* «puede ser considerada, con toda verosimilitud, una escapatoria del tipo frecuentemente empleado por magos y astrólogos» para tener con qué defenderse ante una condena teológica.
Y la misma tesis, en inglés y con matiz: el *De vanitate* fue «a safety device of a kind frequently employed by writers on dangerous subjects… This may not be the whole explanation but it makes possible the view that the sciences which Agrippa calls 'vain' … may be those in which he was really interested».
Yates mide el salto respecto de Ficino: «La puerta hacia el mundo prohibido que Ficino había simplemente entreabierto, queda abierta de par en par con Agrippa».
Yates verifica la dependencia textual: «Toda esta parte del texto se basa en el primer capítulo del De vita coelitus comparanda de Ficino, que Agrippa cita literalmente».
Yates sobre su temperamento planetario: «mientras la magia de Ficino evita a Saturno, la de Agrippa pretende obtener los dones saturnianos de la contemplación abstracta superior y de la matemática pura».
Yates sobre la deuda de Bruno: «Bruno used easily accessible printed sources for most of his magic, relying chiefly on the De occulta philosophia» — decanos, cuarenta y nueve imágenes planetarias y las veintiocho mansiones lunares.
Yates registra la acusación de Pietro Passi (Venecia, 1614) sobre las estatuas del *Asclepius*, «of which Cornelius Agrippa has dared to affirm in his book on Occult Philosophy that they were animated by celestial influences».
Yates lo hace matriz doctrinal del rosacrucismo: «the basic adherence of the Rosicrucian to the scheme of 'occult philosophy' as laid down by Cornelius Agrippa».
Copenhaver objeta la lectura de la escapatoria: el *De incertitudine* «regrets and rejects but does not refute the arguments made in De occulta philosophia. In fact, this fideist blast at reason and learning offers essentially the same definition of natural magic presented in the earlier work.»
Copenhaver adjudica un motivo a la retractación: «He knew the risks, which helps explain his passionate recantation of magic as he witnessed the turmoil of the Reformation».
Copenhaver sobre su originalidad: su alegato «is systematic, comprehensive, and grounded in authority and evidence, though it is not original. It is a vulgarization of the great revival of ancient magic begun … by Ficino and continued by Giovanni Pico, Johann Reuchlin, and others».
Copenhaver censa a sus lectores: «Paracelsus disapproved but used it. Jean Bodin and Martin Del Rio condemned it bitterly, while Giordano Bruno borrowed Kabbalah from it, John Dee adapted its angel-magic… But Bacon … called Agrippa a fool».
Y registra la burla: «From the first, Agrippa seemed silly rather than subversive to some critics: Rabelais mocks him as a pompous ignoramus whom even the devils would not want to serve.»
Copenhaver y Schmitt datan el *De vanitate* «written by Henry Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim in 1526» y lo llaman «this disorderly diatribe», cuyos blancos son el clero corrupto y «his own earlier belief in occultism».
Hanegraaff sobre el título: cuando publicó su compendio en 1533, «he called it De occulta philosophia: on hidden philosophy», y el título original iba a ser *De magia*.
Hanegraaff data el aprendizaje de Weyer: «From age fourteen to eighteen, between 1530 and 1534/1535, Weyer was an apprentice to Cornelius Agrippa», y «Weyer knew that Agrippa's piety was genuine».
Hanegraaff ofrece una tercera lectura de la contradicción: hay «a specific dimension of concealment to Agrippa's statements on "faith"» — parecía biblicismo, y era «a hermetic doctrine of gnosis strongly influenced by Lodovico Lazzarelli».
Hanegraaff registra su doctrina heterodoxa: «Cornelius Agrippa's heretical belief that the Fall consisted in sexual intercourse».
Brach data la visita: Agrippa «actually visited Trithemius in his Würzburg cloister in 1509, and, the following year, dedicated to him the first draft».
Brach formula el cargo más duro: «Several of these writers he even downright plagiarized in his encyclopedic compilation» — Reuchlin, Francesco Giorgio, P. Rici.
Brach sobre el género de la obra: «More in the nature of a philosophical and symbolic recapitulation than a practical manual, despite its early-gained reputation».
Davies data la publicación en otra ciudad: borrador hacia 1510, «he only had it published in Antwerp in 1533», y declara su perplejidad: «This makes his decision to publish his early views rather curious.»
Priesner y Figala deshacen el nudo 1531/1533: «En 1531 se publicó el primer libro del "De occulta philosophia" impreso en los talleres de Johannes Grafeus en Amberes. En 1533 vieron la luz los tres libros, impresos en dos tipos diferentes por Johannes Soter de Colonia».
Priesner y Figala objetan el pie de imprenta de la *Opera*: se publicó hacia 1550 en Colonia, «aun cuando se suele indicar Lyon como lugar de impresión».
Priesner y Figala sobre su alquimia: «Su postura respecto a la alquimia es cambiante… en el "De occulta philosophia" hallamos referencias directas a la alquimia, que no obstante en el "De incertitudine" rechazará en su totalidad. Agripa debe su fama más como "gran mago" que como alquimista.»
Rampling lo sitúa en Londres: «visited London as part of the imperial embassy of Maximilian I in the fall of 1510», huésped en el círculo de Colet.
Harkness lo compara con Dee: «Henry Cornelius Agrippa underwent a similar crisis of intellectual confidence earlier in the century… His critics pointed out that Agrippa's book disowned the very activities he had championed earlier in his career».
Lévi lo degrada: «Cornelius Agrippa, the least magician of all, and the one whom the vulgar continue to take for the most sorcerous, because he was occasionally satirical and a hoaxer».
Lévi de nuevo: «Agrippa, a man of immense erudition and beautiful genius, but a pure philosopher and a skeptic, was unable to surpass the limits of the analysis and the synthesis of metals».
Lévi convierte su muerte en argumento: «Agrippa died of misery rather than obey those who demanded a horoscope of him».
Farmer propone la analogía inversa: las *Disputationes* de Pico serían «a pseudopalinode of sorts—similar to that reputedly found in Agrippa von Nettesheim's antimagical De vanitate scientiarum».
Saif lo sitúa en la cadena árabe: «Agrippa, who was acquainted with the works of Abu Ma'shar, al-Kindi and the Picatrix».
Thomas Vaughan lo declara su autor: «I follow the principles of Cornelius Agrippa, that grand Archimagus… He indeed is my author, and next to God I owe all that I have unto him».
James Freake, su traductor de 1651, le concede el beneficio de la duda: «consider the time of darkness, and of his youth… and thou wilt rather admire his solidity, than condemn his vanity.»
Nicolas Rémy (1595) lo lista con dos vecinos: «Agrippa, Pierre d'Abano and Picatrix, three masters in damnable magic, have left more prescriptions than is necessary for the good of men».
Bodin infiere de su relación con Wierus que eran amantes, y denuncia su obra, real y falsa, como «the detestable poison of witchcraft».
Kieckhefer registra el círculo mágico «found again in an early sixteenth-century text pseudonymously ascribed to Cornelius Agrippa».
Johann Wier, su alumno, con fecha y cuenta: «a work lately published [1567], and ascribed to my late honoured host and preceptor, Henry Cornelius Agrippa, who has been dead more than forty years; whence I conclude it is unjustly ascribed to his manes, under the title of The Fourth Book of the Occult Philosophy».
Weyer, en la versión que cita Davies, lo llama «pure nonsense, an undone broom with straws scattered everywhere. You can make nothing of it, even if you are an enthusiastic student of this vanity».
Tyson: «under the misleading title Agrippa His Fourth Book of Occult Philosophy—misleading because this is only one of the six tracts, and Agrippa did not even write it».
Tyson SALVA una pieza del mismo volumen: «Of Geomancy seems to be genuine, if the style and content are any guide» — escrita antes de 1526 y después de la Occulta; el *Liber quartus* propiamente dicho es «a spurious and inferior production».
Naudé, vía Copenhaver, adjudica el motivo: no fue responsable del cuarto libro pseudónimo, «a creation of "the avarice of booksellers"».
Waite formula tres dificultades —de tiempo, interna y de testimonio— y añade: «It is to a considerable extent a rechauffé of various portions of the three undisputed books, and, even in the days of Agrippa, it is not likely that any author would have so liberally reproduced himself».
Waite, en contraste, declara indiscutido lo otro: «The authenticity of the famous three books has never been questioned and is indeed beyond challenge».
Brach data la costumbre editorial: el pseudo-cuarto libro se añadió «from 1567 on», junto a materiales atribuidos a Pedro de Abano, Gerardo de Cremona y Tritemio, y realzó su reputación póstuma «(and thoroughly undeserved)» de nigromante.
Priesner y Figala dan otra fecha e impresor: «un cuarto libro, impreso por Andreas Kolbe y fechado en 1559, no es atribuible a Agripa».
Davies da la cadena editorial: «Marburg in 1559, and another edition appeared in Basel six years later», y ediciones posteriores dentro de la *Opera*, «a collation of real and spurious works by Agrippa, along with the Heptameron, and Ars Notoria».
Harkness consigna que en el siglo XVI la atribución SÍ se sostenía: es «the spurious fourth book of Agrippa's De occulta philosophia. In this work (believed authentic during Dee's lifetime), Agrippa pointed out that it was important for those engaged in communication with spirits to have been "religiously disposed for many days to such a mystery"».
Davies: «for demonologists it was the real thing, the proof that Agrippa had been deep in diabolic magic all the time»; y en los procesos «the trial records do not always distinguish between Agrippa's Occulta philosophia and the Fourth Book».