historical periods, we everywhere come upon intersecting threads and overlapping characteristics. Thus, as we shall see, Gassendi and Boyle, in the seventeenth century, take hands with the Atomism of the ancients, while Leonardo da Vinci and Luis Vives, undoubtedly men of the freshest type of the new movement, are already passed far beyond the traditions of antiquity, and attempt to found a science of experience in complete independence of Aristotle and the whole of antiquity.

Similarly, it is very difficult to mark off sharply the beginnings of the reflorescence of antiquity. We spoke above of the middle of the fifteenth century, because it was at that time that Italian philology attained its complete development, and that Humanism entered upon its struggle against Scholasticism. But this movement had its prelude a full century earlier in the era of Petrarca and Boccaccio, and we cannot deny that the new spirit which then showed itself in Italy may be traced at least. as far back as the age of the Emperor Frederick the Second, whose importance we have ascertained in the first chapter of this section. In this connection, however, the transformation of Scholasticism through the knowledge of Aristotle and the spread of Arabian literature,41 may also be regarded as one of the first and most important facts in the great process of regeneration. Philosophy, which forms the conclusion of the whole movement, and impresses its seal upon the completion of the great revolution, appears also at the beginning of the movement.

We have already seen, in the two last chapters, how, in the last centuries of the middle ages, under the influence. of Arabian philosophy and Byzantine logic, there appeared now unbridled freethinking, and now painful struggle for

4 Prantl, Gesch. d. Logik, iii. S. 1, remarks that it cannot be often enough pointed out "that the socalled revival of antiquity, as regards philosophy, mathematic and natural

science, took place in great part as early as the thirteenth century, and chiefly through the knowledge then made possible of Aristotle and of Arabian literature.

liberty of thought. A special form of this abortive effort after liberty of thought is the doctrine of twofold truth, philosophical and theological, which may exist side by side in spite of their entire inconsistency. It is obvious. that this doctrine is the true original of what has recently been called by a very ill-chosen but now firmly-rooted expression, 'book-keeping by double entry.' 42

The chief seat of this doctrine in the thirteenth century was the University of Paris, where, even before the middle. of the century, in fact, there appeared the curiously sounding doctrine," that there have been many truths from eternity till now which were not God himself." A teacher at Paris, Jean de Brescain, excused himself in the year 1247 for his errors,' by observing that he had maintained the doctrines found heretical by the bishop as not 'theologically' but only 'philosophically' true. In spite of the bishop's absolute prohibition of all such subterfuges, the audacity of these 'merely philosophical' assertions appears to have gone on increasing. For in the years 1270 and 1276, there is another long series of such propositions condemned, the whole of which are of obviously Averroistic origin. The resurrection, the creation of the world in time, the changeableness of the individual soul, were denied in the name of philosophy, while it was at the same time admitted that all these doctrines are true 'according to the Catholic faith.' Their real attitude, however, by this freely admitted theological truth, appears by the circumstance that doctrines of the following kind appear among the condemned doctrines: "Nothing more can be known, because of the science of theology." "The Christian religion prevents us from learning anything more." "The only wise men in the world are the philoso

42 The facts will be found exhaustively given in Renan's Averroès (Paris, 1852), ii. 2, 3. A summary statement of all that specially relates to the doctrine of twofold truth is

contained in Maywald, Die Lehre von der Zweifachen Wahrheit, ein Versuch der Trennung von Theologie und Philosophie im Mittelalter (Berlin, 1871).

phers." "The teachings of the theologians are based upon fables." 43

It is true that we do not know the originators of these propositions. They may possibly in great part never have been maintained in books, at least, not with this openness, but maintained only in lectures and disputations. But the way in which the bishops attack the evil shows plainly enough that the spirit which produced such doctrines was widely spread and venturesome. The modestly sounding statement that all this is only 'philosophically true,' taken in connection with doctrines that exalt philosophy far above theology, and find the latter a hindrance to science, is obviously nothing more than a shield against persecution, and a means of keeping open a retreat in case of a trial. It is clear, moreover, that there was at that time a party which did not occasionally only, when interpreting Aristotle, advance these propositions, but also put them forth deliberately in opposition to the orthodox Dominicans. The same spirit appeared also in England and Italy, where, in the thirteenth century, almost simultaneously with these events in Paris, exactly similar principles crop up and are condemned by the bishops.44

In Italy, at this time, Averroism was quietly taking deep root at the High School of Padua. It was this university that gave the intellectual tone to the whole northeast of Italy, and it was itself in turn under the influence of the statesmen and merchants of Venice, who were freethinking men of the world, with an inclination to practical Materialism. 45 Here Averroism held its ground,

43 Maywald, Zweif. Wahrh., S. II.; Renan, Averroès, p. 219.

44 Maywald, S. 13; Renan, p. 208, where may be found also, after Hauréau, Philos. Scholast., some remarks on the connection of English Averroism with the Franciscan party.

45 Renan, Averroes, p. 258: "Le mouvement intellectuel du nord-est de l'Italie, Bologne, Ferrare, Venise, se rattache tout entier à celui de Pa

doue. Les universités de Padoue et de Bologne n'en font réellement qu'une, au moins pour l'enseignement philosophique et medical. C'étaient les mêmes professeurs qui, presque tous les ans, émigraient de l'une à l'autre pour obtenir une augmentation de salaire. Padoue d'un autre côté, n'est que le quartier latin de Venise; tout ce qui s'enseignait à Padoue, s' imprimait à Venise."

although, to be sure, in company with the worshipping of Aristotle and all the barbarism of the Scholastics, until the seventeenth century; less controverted than at any other university, and on that account also seldomer mentioned. Like a strong fortress of barbarism,' Padua struggled against the Humanists, who, especially in Italy, almost all inclined to Plato, whose beautiful forms of language and conceptions charmed them, while they took care, with a few exceptions, not to lose themselves in the mystical side of Platonism. As against the Humanists, so the Scholastics of Padua, rationalistic indeed, but fettered by their traditions, struggled as long as they could against the physicists. Cremonini, the last of this school, taught at the University of Padua contemporaneously with Galilei while the latter taught the Elements of Euclid for a trifling remuneration, Cremonini received a salary of 2000 gulden for his lectures on the scientific writings of Aristotle. It is said that when Galilei discovered the satellites of Jupiter, Cremonini would from that time never again look through a telescope, because the thing was contrary to Aristotle. But Cremonini was a freethinker, whose views as to the soul, although not strictly Averroistic, were certainly anything but ecclesiastical; and he maintained his right to teach anything that was in Aristotle with a firmness that deserves our recognition.46

One man in this series of scholastic freethinkers deserves to be specially mentioned here: Petrus Pomponatius, the author of a book which appeared in 1516 on the immortality of the soul. The question of immortality was at that time so popular in Italy, that the students of a newly-appointed professor, whose tendency they wanted to learn, called to him in his first lecture to discuss the soul.47 And it does not appear that the orthodox doctrine was the favourite one; for Pomponatius, who, from beneath the shield of the doctrine of twofold truth, delivered per

46 Renan, Averroès, pp. 257, 325 foll.

47 Renan, Averroès, p. 283.

haps the boldest and acutest attacks upon immortality which were then known, was a very favourite teacher.

He was certainly not an Averroist; nay, he was the head of a school which engaged in a bitter war with the Averroists, and which quoted the commentator Alexander of Aphrodisias as the authority for its doctrines. But the apple of discord in this controversy was in reality only the doctrine of the soul and of immortality, and the 'Alexandrists' stood on all main points in the full current of Averroistic modes of thought. With regard, however, to the question of immortality, the Alexandrists' went more thoroughly to work; they rejected monopsychism, and declared the soul simply," according to Aristotle," to be not immortal-the rights of the Catholic faith being at the same time reserved as already explained.

Pomponatius, in his book on immortality, adopts a very respectful attitude towards the Church. He zealously approves the confutation of Averroism by Saint Thomas. But all the more bold are the ideas conveyed in his own criticism of the question of immortality. The treatment is on the whole strictly Scholastic-the bad Latin inseparable from Scholasticism not excluded. But in the last section 48 of the work, where Pomponatius discusses "eight great difficulties" in the doctrine of immortality, he is by no means content with verbal expositions and quotations from Aristotle. Here all the scepticism of the age finds expression, even to the extent of very distinct approbation of the theory of 'the three impostors.'

49 Cap. xiii. and xiv. In the last cap. (xv.) is expressed his submission to the judgment of the Church. There are no natural proofs of immortality, and it rests therefore solely upon revelation. The strongest passages are in pp. 101 until near the end in the edition of Bardili (Tübingen, 1791), pp. 118 foll. in an edition without any place, 1534. The earlier

editions are unknown to me. The passages quoted in my first edition were taken from M. Carriere, Die Philos. Weltanschauung der Refor mationszeit, Stuttg. u. Tüb., 1847. They are, indeed, in essential points faithful, but are freer than is necessary, and the somewhat pathetic and elevated tone is foreign to the origi nal.