The leading Renaissance scholar of our time, Dame Frances A. Yates ("the most life-enhancing historian I knew", Hugh Trevor-Roper) in this enthralling reconstruction gave us the best example of her original scientific method. Using a new approach ("to history through imagery"), she focuses on the symbolism of Elizabethan 'imperial theme'. These allegorical intellectual portraits of Protestant chivalry in England and the French Pleiadist movement seems to contain an inspiring meta-historical documents. The genesis of this far-sighted study on "Queen Elizabeth I as Astraea" goes back to a sermon lecture (on Arcadian 'Virgo-Regina' and her apologists, prophetical poets like Peele, Spenser or Sidney) given in 1945 and first published in the famous "Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institute", X,1947. Out of a central essay grew the four "Empire Lectures" originally given at London University Senate House (in January 1952), on the very same theme (imperial political theme in the Middle Ages and Renaissance). Later, it appeared as academic seminars at her favourite "Warburg Institute" and at the Cornell University (1967-70). Summa summarum, this part of Yate's final "Astraea:The Imperial Theme in the Sixteenth Century" have been at first published as a French translation(!). Other texts from the present volume was originally contributed to a various symposiums, colloquiums, Warburg "Journal", "Slade Lectures" and even for a "Annales musicologiques"! Of course, some important parts of the paper were newly written just for this book. Anyway, this is thorough re-analysis of literature, mithology, science and philosophy in Elizabethan (many use to call it rather: "Shakespearian") times. It really challenges the current "modernist" ortodoxies of thinking "without history" and give shape and meaning to traditional ("neo-Hermetic") point of view. Those series of important and inovative essays reflects (through the competitive jugment by thinkers like Charles Schmitt, George Boas, Asa Briggs and Lord Dacre):"one of the most exciting and original of modern English historians: original because she came out of no pre-existing English school but created her own discipline; exciting because, by her enthusiasm and vitality, she inspired pupils who now continue her work...she was essentially a HISTORIAN OF THOUGHT". Or: "Frances Yates is that rare thing, a truly thrilling scholar. Her books on Renaissance history and thinking are alive with poetic instinct and inspired speculation, densely cross-patterned with recurring themes like one huge, continuous tapestry". Believe it or not, you can find at real unexpected places - even in nowadays Serbia - Miss Yates's fans and inspired pupils; just look (if it is anyhow possible) Dragoslav Bokan's recent study on relate subjects titled "Ognjeni Ljiljani" ("Fire Lillies", SKC 1998) or Belgrade translation of her thoughtful "The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age", with extensive preface by domestic authorities. In the context of a dominant,post-modern culture Frances Yates summary-books stands (eighteen years after her death) as the best and concrete proof for abilities of one typical European metaphysical soul to place famous incarnation of mythical "Faerie Queene" Elizabeth in the global (more than) historical context. A superb study!

The leading Renaissance scholar of our time, Dame Frances A. Yates ("the most life-enhancing historian I knew", Hugh Trevor-Roper) in this enthralling reconstruction gave us the best example of her original scientific method. Using a new approach ("to history through imagery"), she focuses on the symbolism of Elizabethan 'imperial theme'. These allegorical intellectual portraits of Protestant chivalry in England and the French Pleiadist movement seems to contain an inspiring meta-historical documents. The genesis of this far-sighted study on "Queen Elizabeth I as Astraea" goes back to a sermon lecture (on Arcadian 'Virgo-Regina' and her apologists, prophetical poets like Peele, Spenser or Sidney) given in 1945 and first published in the famous "Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institute", X,1947. Out of a central essay grew the four "Empire Lectures" originally given at London University Senate House (in January 1952), on the very same theme (imperial political theme in the Middle Ages and Renaissance). Later, it appeared as academic seminars at the semi-misterious "Warburg Institute" and at the Cornell University (1967-70). Summa summarum, this part of Yate's "Astraea:The Imperial Theme in the Sixteenth Century" have been finaly published as a French translation(!). Other texts from the present volume was originally contributed to a symposiums, colloquiums, Warburg "Journal", "Slade Lectures" and even for a "Annales musicologiques"! Of course, some importamt parts of the paper were newly written just for this book. Any way, this is thorough re-analysis of literature, mithology, science and philosophy in Elizabethan times. It really challenges the current "modernist" ortodoxies of thinking "without history" and give shape and meaning to traditional (Hermetic) point of view. Those series of important and inovative essays reflects (through the competitive jugment by thinkers like Charles Schmitt, George Boas, Asa Briggs and Lord Dacre):"one of the most exciting and original of modern English historians: original because she came out of no pre-existing English school but created her own discipline; exciting because, by her enthusiasm and vitality, she inspired pupils who now continue her work...she was essentially a HISTORIAN OF THOUGHT". Or: "Frances Yates is that rare thing, a truly thrilling scholar. Her books on Renaissance history and thinking are alive with poetic instinct and inspired speculation, densely cross-patterned with recurring themes like one huge, continuous tapestry". Believe it or not, you can find - even in nowadays Serbia - Miss Yates's fans and gifted pupils; just look (if it is anyhow possible) Dragoslav Bokan's recent study on relate subjects titled "Ognjeni Ljiljani" ("Fire Lillies", SKC 1998) or Belgrade translation of her thoughtful "The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age".

Actually, this book can not be evaluated at once. Rather, you should concede four stars to the greater part of the book and not any star to the rest. For this is widely an excellent book. Yates does not only prove that Bruno is not the pioneer of modern science he is often stated to be, but convincingly exposes the background against which his works have to be understood. To that purpose, she shows the impact of the Hermetic writings, an ancient source written in the second and third centuries A.D., but by some Christian Renaissance writers such as Ficino or Pico della Mirandola held to be of an authority greater and older than even Moses, on Renaissance thought. Thus it is demonstrated in chronological order how the corpus Hermeticum was received by Renaissance writers, focussing on magic that was derived from some passages of the corpus Hermeticum. Bruno is placed within this tradition. Congeniously, Yates acknowledges the significance of Casaubon's exact dating of what had been held a prophecy of Christianism for more than two centuries and discusses the following dispute which finally made the type of the Renaissance magus disappear, although this tradition of thinking never completely vanished. So this is, without any doubt, the fundamental book about Giordano Bruno and the impact of Hermetism on Renaissance thought. It provides information clear and dear also on magic in general and thus illuminates even some passages of Shakespeare and (unconsciously) Goethe's Faust.Thus the book inspires to study Renaissance authors such as Pico or Ficino or more literature on Renaissance Thought ( I recommend the overwhelming collection „Renaissance Thought and the Arts" by Paul Oskar Kristeller).
All the more it is a pity that Yates, writing with transigating passion, is lead astray to some statements about science and antique thought in general that cannot be left uncommented upon. Ancient philosophy in the time when the corpus Hermeticum was written did NOT necessarily, not even realy, stagnate (p.4, p. 449). On the contrary, Plotinus, writing about 250 A.D., renewed philosophical thought in a way that he is now often considered to be one of the greatest metaphysicians that ever lived. Furthermore, the reason for this presumed stagnation is, according to Yates, that the ancient philosophers did not know the principle of experimentation. But this principle is completely alien to philosophy, be it ancient or modern (this is quite evident, but if someone still doubts, he should read e.g. Wenisch's „Die Philosophie und ihre Methode"). The exhausting prize of modern science at the end of the book (p. 447-55) is not to the point and ignores that ancient thought must not be treated as a failing attempt at Galileo's achievements (as the German scholar Jörg Kube emphasized). Her sideswipe against Descartes (p. 454-55), finally, seems to me completely out of place. So I recommend this book to anyone who wants to know the truth about Giordano Bruno and the essence of magic, but you should not believe what is said about ancient philosophy and philosophy in general.

Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake in 1700 because he believed in the authenticity of the Hermetic Traditon that purported to be of ancient Egyptian origin. It proved to be a fraud more correctly dated during the first century AD adding significance to the symbolism of the Gospels written about the same time, probably in the following order: Mark, Matthew, Luke and John. The Hermetic Tradtion compliments the expanding elaborations of the Gospels when read in this order. Indeed, the Gospels can hardly be comprehended without the benefit of this work that spells out how gods are created, first in stone, then by extrapolation, converted to a spiritual power. Giordano Bruno is the vehicle by which the author makes her point because of his misguided belief. The work is an eye-opener to the serious student of the Christian religion who ought also to read Iasiah for a more rounded interpretation of the symbolism of the Bible. The book is intended for the serious student, but is essential to all who want better to understand the value of the myth and its symbolic relationship to the creation of the Christian religion. Fascinating reading for anyone who has met the prerequisites, including having read Plato's REPUBLIC and will fit into his positive philosophy.

Interesting how a modest historian should happen to write a book of such critical interest to students and practicioners of the western esoteric traditions. Sheds enourmously penetrating light, especially in the first part of the book, into the people and historical events that shaped the powerful undergound traditions of independent spiritual philosophy-- what we now know as Magick or Magic, both high and low, alchemy, illuminisms of various sorts, and the whole spectrum of western metaphysics.

This book is very well written and contains alot of valuable info on the Rosicrucians. But as you were always told, do not believe everything you read. I know for certain that the twists and turns and HUGE assumptions she makes in this book have been proven false. If you are interested in an OK history lesson and are capable of sifting threw lies and facts, then you will love this book.

This book is easily the most accessible work in the English language on the Rosicrucian furore, and, by default, has become somewhat of a standard text in the absence of any other "general history" of the movement.

Much of the information it provides is essential to any student, and, as always, Yates' presents her subject in emminently readable prose. This book is the departure point for English language students of the subject. However - tread carefully. Yates' continually misreads and misinterprets her sources, creating a dubious and occassionally fanciful argument concerning the role of Rosicrucianism in contemporaneous European politics. While elements of her broad thesis may still be proven correct, for the most part, the true value of this text lies in the many source documents it consults and discusses.

Intitially lauded by influential scholars D.P. Walker and Hugh Trevor Roper (who, strangely enough, were invloved in the supervision of the production of the text...) later research has poked significant holes in this work. Nevertheless, it must still come highly recommended. After all, whatever its deficiencies - it's still an impressive read!

This book began a revolution in encouraging scholars and laypersons to take the role of Esoteric movements as a legitimate element in the study of Western history. Though there have been recent disputes with some conclusions drawn by Dame Yates in this work, it still remains a pioneering document of historical research. The recent collection of essays by Christopher Bamford, "The Roscicrucian Enlightment Revisited" goes toward validation of much of this work. A seminal book in esoteric studies, highly recommended.

If you are fascinated by history or by scholarship throughout recorded time, you should enjoy this book. Francis Yates has created a detailed examination of memory techniques and their evolution over the course of generations. Beginning in ancient Greece and continuing through the Middle Ages, Yates shows how the art of remembering began as a sort of parlor trick and developed into an important skill in both religion and the occult. The influence from both individuals and cultures is described in a scholarly (yet not annoyingly so) way. While this book is not for everyone, its intended audience should be delighted.
NOTE: This book is not a "how-to" manual for memory. It provides only a very general description of memory methods and is instead an exploration of the history of the art.
An excellent companion piece to this book is _The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci_. Both books were listed in the acknowledgements of Thomas Harris' _Hannibal_.

An incredible book and very historical in nature. I would refer to the previous reviews of this book in the light of their individual statements. The reviewers helped me in the purchasing of this book, also Yates, and her research on the art of memory does not disappoint me. In fact, this book has taken me in many different directions regarding memory: Loci, mnemonics, mnemotechnics, history, mysticism, magic, mathematics, Egyptology, alchemy. This book is very special because of the implications that a "art of memory" has on our history, and I believe in our future. This book is not the easiest of reading material (I am no history buff) but is a spectacular read.

A book about memory? Mnemonics, eh? Dull stuff...

WRONG!!! This is just about the most engrossing scholarly work I have ever read. Quite apart from displaying a masterly grasp of her subject, which is far more interesting than I would have believed before reading the book, Yates throws fascinating light on a number of seemingly unrelated topics: the Roman art of rhetoric, the architecture of the Globe theatre, the foundations of Renaissance syncretism, the rise of the scientific method, the delightful irony of a patron saint of science turning out to be an arch-magician, psychological aspects of imagination... -- the list is a long one.

However, for me, it is Yates' illumination of the profound relationship between the scientific method and earlier attempts at mastering the universe by magical means, that stands out as a single, most important aspect of the book. In fact, I would go as far as to say that no study of history and/or philosophy of science can be complete without acknowledging and exploring the relevant insights of "The Art of memory".

If you have any interest in human attempts to comprehend and control the universe, a well-thumbed copy of this book should be on your bookshelf!

Frances Yates was first recommended to me more than a decade ago and I'm sorry that I waited so long to read her. THE OCCULT PHILOSOPHY IN THE ELIZABETHAN AGE challenged many things I thought I knew about the Renaissance and Reformation, and it more than whetted my appetite for Yates's biography of Giordano Bruno.

Beginning with the strange figure of Raymond Lull, a 13th-century Spanish mystical philosopher who could read both Arabic and Hebrew (an unusual accomplishment for a Christian of his or any other time), Yates traces the influence of the "occult philosophy" on Western Christendom through the Italian and continental Renaissance to Elizabethan England. "Occult philosophy" seems to me be the wrong terminology for the Hermetic/Cabalistic spiritual science that inspired some of the greatest minds of the age, if for no other reason than that it rather discredits the whole enterprise from the outset. Part of Yates's design, after all, is to remind us that there was a time when science and religion were not at loggerheads with one another, a time before "the connections of the psyche with the cosmos" were cut off at their roots.

In the first part of the book, Yates sets the stage with brief discussions of the thought of Lull, Pico della Mirandola, Johannes Reuchlin, Francesco Giorgi, and Henry Cornelius Agrippa, and she offers a new interpretation of an engraving by Albrecht Durer. At the heart of what Yates calls Christian Cabala were two central ideas: that the name of Jesus is the Tetragrammaton, the "ineffable name" of God; and that there is a unity of truth behind the appearance of things accessible to those afflicted (or blessed) by "inspired melancholy".

In the second part of the book, Yates examines the influence of Christian Cabala on English philosphers and poets, including John Dee, Edmund Spenser, Shakespeare and Milton. The backlash against the occult philosophy -- signalling the end of the Renaissance -- is also examined.

You will walk away from this book with a profound sense of the largely unrecognized contribution made by Jewish culture to the development of modern Western philosophy and science. The expulsion of the Jews (and the Moors) from Spain after 1492 (not to mention the unintended consequences of forced conversions) takes on new meaning in the light of Yates's researches.

One weakness of this book, however, is its failure to consider the possible Islamic influence on the development of the occult philosophy in Western Europe. Lull, after all, studied not only Cabala but also the great Muslim philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes). While one cannot discount the enormous influence of the exiled Sephardic Jews, one should also remember that medieval Spain was home to a most fruitful cross-fertilization of Jewish and Islamic thought. Yates admits that she's no Hebrew scholar, but a knowledge of Arabic might also have been of benefit here.

Another weakness is Yates's rather prosaic and unengaged approach to her subject matter. This is understandable perhaps in a scholar, but her reluctance to let slip her passion is our loss.

As the title states this book sets out to find the philosophical roots of Elizabethan culture of the late XVI and early XVII century. The question posited by Dame Frances Yates is : What was the underlying Philosophy of the Elizabethan age and she points unmistakably to the occult philosophy i.e. Hermeticism tempered by Christian Neoplatonism and Qabbalah. Origins of the Elizabethan culture are traced straight to the Medici court, Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola. Yates being no believer of the operative work of magic, still provides enough food for thought for the student of Renaissance humanism, history of ideas or budding hermeticist. Although this book grew out from a series of lectures on "Inspired Melancholy" it still manages to tie in such diverse subjects as historical background of Ben Johnson's The Alchemist and Christopher Marlowe's Doctor Faustus (Henry Cornelius Agrippa seen as the inspiration for the character), philosophico/magical/religious meaning of Elizabethan poetry (Spencer, Raleigh), the dramas of Shakespear (specially the Tempest and King Lear) and content of Durer's famous print Melencolia. The strengths of Frances Yates writing is precisely the ability to show the unifying idea behind these seemingly diverse works of art and philosophy. An important part of this book is connected to the destiny of the exiled Spanish Sephardim jews who spread the medical writings of Avicenna and rich literature of Iberian Qabbalism.

Yates history provides an alternative view of English history at the time of Tudor and Stewart dynasties most importantly in their relation to Ecclesiastical powers and politics of continental Europe.

This is a wonderful book that will stimulate a fundamental rethinking of the view of European Political and intellectual history.

Writer of this review is the translator of the book into Serbian .

Dame Frances Yates had an incredible impact on the study of early modern magic and occultism. Although she wrote on other subjects, her primary legacy is in this field, particularly her books _Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition_ and _The Art of Memory_. For anyone interested in the occult Renaissance, these books are both absolutely required reading.

As a scholar, Yates had some bad habits, and these are most obvious in _The Rosicrucian Enlightenment_ and, to a lesser extent, _The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age_. In these books, we see her habit of beginning with a "What if?" proposition, then repeating it in stronger and stronger formulations until it has become an accepted fact.

_The Occult Philosophy_ has this problem to some degree, but the primary problem is that Yates tries to deal with a subject on which she is not qualified to pronounce: Kabbalah. As she asmits, she is not a Hebraist, and her only access to Kabbalah comes from reading some of Gershom Scholem's work. Of course, she cannot be faulted for writing on the subject before Kabbalah became a large and accepted field of study within Jewish Studies, but Yates here displays her usual tendency to overstate her case.

A related problem is that she can be rather offhanded in her treatment of figures peripheral to her obsessions (i.e. anyone not John Dee or Giordano Bruno), and this can lead her to distort matters by repeating others' second-hand analyses.

Having said all this, bear in mind that it's Frances Yates we're talking about here. Stacked up against her best books, _The Occult Philosophy_ looks pretty sad; stacked up against almost anything else in the field, it's drop-dead brilliant: it's very well written, charming, stimulating, and extremely accessible. If you like Yates, read this book now, just take it with a little grain or so of salt; if you haven't experienced Yates yet, DON'T buy this --- read _Giordano Bruno_ NOW!

Yates had her faults, certainly, but she almost singlehandedly invented a field of study. This is an important part of the Yates corpus, but by no means its core.