Paula Wagner, BA student
Fall/Winter 2000 - IS102
Nick Campion, advisor

The Decline of Astrology

Pre-reformation astrology had few detractors more influential than the Italian scholar and Platonist philosopher, Pico della Mirandola (1463-1494).  Word of his forthcoming critical attack on astrology in 1490, in his twelve book Disputationes, inspired astrologers, including his former teacher, Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499), to defend and reform astrological practice. As a student, Pico had added to his own study and understanding of the Jewish Kaballah, the Platonic theory, of a detached, higher universe involving the soul and intellect, as being superior to and separate from the body which was considered “weak”.[1]  He had, therefore, constructed “an integrated vision of God and man and the world, … animated from God…. to man, whose potentialities … were virtually infinite; making divinity itself seem scarcely beyond [Pico’s] grasp.”[2]   What right then did man, a mere “earthly” being, a separate reality from his soul, have to use astrology for the materialistic purpose of foretelling?[3]  Pico felt he had to strongly reject astrological practice that portends man’s actions as an inevitable result of a higher reality, independent of man’s will. Thus, the stars, according to Pico, could not influence the physical body, nor could astrology be used in any form “to discover what is hidden.”[4]  Pico’s secondary arguments, aimed at “confuting astrological procedure”, were more damaging in discrediting astrological practice than his moral, theoretical arguments that “negate the influence and function” of the stars.[5]  In dealing with the inaccuracy of astrological predictions, Pico called attention to all the differing opinions among astrologers and frequent mistakes, which he alleged were not due to the oft claimed complexity of the science, but rather to the fact that “the astrologer consults signs that are not signs and examines causes that are not causes”; and, “if astrologers cannot get the large things right, how are they to be trusted with the little”.[6]  This compelled well-respected astrologers to come out in defense of astrology before Disputationes’ publication in 1496, and for many years after, thereby creating an era of astrological reformation. One correspondence relating this was written from one professional astrologer to another, that author Remo Catani brings to light, is “…the assertion that the heavens are proof of God’s glory… sciences such as medicine can be attained only through a knowledge of both superior and inferior causes…” giving astrology a “privileged position” in being the “essential link” between both worlds; “hence the constant need for rigorous observation and technical reform.”[7]  This illustrates the momentum Pico’s attack generated—resulting in a call to astrologers to clean up their act, as well as a long-standing dialogue on astrological theory and practice via books, letters, treatises and public forum. 

The public controversy and arguments on astrology that developed with Pico, and extended into the 1520’s, involved not only the “impersonal battle of ideas dependent on logical demonstration and confutation”, but the “persuasive tactics” necessary to avoid suspicion from the Catholic church and the opinions of its followers.[8]  Defenders of astrology repeatedly found themselves addressing the accusations of “barking theologians” and professing “false avowals of orthodoxy and feigned submissions to ecclesiastical judgment”[9] in order to avoid being imprisoned or put to death for heresy.  Growing Catholic hostility was becoming a real threat, with papal bulls in force from 1452-1486 against magic, asserting that any non-Christians were enemies of the church[10].  This was made patently evident by the apprehension of noted astrologer, Simon de Phares (1440-c1499), who was condemned by the Church and jailed shortly after the death of his employer, the king of France, Charles VIII, in 1498.[11]  This vindictive trend involving the church continued and intensified during the Reformation of early sixteenth century but, meanwhile, the antidote for Pico’s critical attack was increased communication among astrologers and reform of astrological methodology.

An important transformation of individual thought and ethics, which affected astrological decline, grew from another revolutionary figure, Martin Luther (1484-1546), who initiated the division of Christianity, with his attack against the Catholic church in 1517.  This period of time in history is referred to as the Protestant Reformation.  This movement towards  “personal faith rather than adherence to the practices of the church” began when Luther, an ordained monk, sought relief from his fears of eternal damnation by reading the Bible.[12]   Was his fear expressly related to his belief in  “a personal Satan” as postulated by the author of Religion and the Decline of Magic, Keith Thomas?  Then “Protestantism was a response to a deep conviction of human sin, a sense of powerlessness in the face of evil”…since, “for Luther the whole world of visible reality and the flesh belonged to the Devil, the Lord of this world”.[13]  Whatever the underlying cause, Luther did not feel he could be saved by the rituals of the Catholic Church or monastic life, but found solace upon reading the passage in the Bible: “He who through faith is righteous shall live” (Romans 1:17) and others, that gave him the feeling of a direct communion with God.[14]  Luther went head-to-head with the Catholic Church when he posted his ninety-five theses against the “selling of indulgences”, or ‘buying one’s way to heaven’, by giving money to the church, attending mass, praying, or performing charitable acts; a form of bargaining Luther despised, since Catholic doctrine forewarned that if one did not receive forgiveness for his sins before dying, he could “writhe in hell eternally” or for an undetermined amount of time in purgatory.[15]  Luther proposed publicly that one did not need the church to mediate and interpret God’s words, that individuals could interpret the scripture themselves, and faith alone would assure salvation; essentially, advancing the “idea of equality” when he “held that there was no spiritual distinction between the laity and the clergy.”[16]  While Catholic authorities stalled in addressing Luther’s proclamations, he gained support and protection politically.  From the time of his posted theses in 1517, until 1520 when the Pope acted, by issuing a papal bull against Luther, which he burned, he had already promoted his views, and congregations had been formed for worship.[17]

The Reformation flourished, especially in Germany and lands furthest from Rome, due to resentment of papal intervention, church taxes and what was seen as an “opportunity to confiscate church lands” and release themselves from foreign control.[18]  Another proponent of the Reformation, who extended its growth into Northern Europe and England, was John Calvin (1509-1564), who preached more complete and rigorous obedience to God along with pursuit of “social and moral righteousness.”[19]  The followers of this adjunct ideology to Protestantism, eventually known as Puritanism in the seventeenth century, helped create the Protestant work ethic, associated with the “capitalist spirit”, “inner self-assurance” and the “self-discipline” necessary for prosperity.[20]  The Reformation then, was a major turning point toward social change; when individuals were ready to let go of being told how to think and live, and saw a chance to leave traditional dogmas behind, and believe in a God that wanted men to take charge of their lives and move forward. Luther’s revolt began as a quest for faith and comfort, but with the added Calvinist principles, it became known for relating spirituality with materialistic pursuit.  Personal values gradually changed as secularism took root following the Reformation; creativity and individual initiative helped one shape his destiny. However, the transformational effects of this period on astrology, papal rule, scientific development and intellectual thought would cover the next one hundred years.

Just as religious and astrological arguments were reaching a larger audience, so too were responsive enthusiasts of both factions, following the Renaissance, when printed material ignited. Astrological almanacs increased in popularity from 1600, when “over six hundred different almanacs” were published, to 1659 when astrologer, William Lilly’s (1602-1681), almanacs were “selling nearly 30,000 a year”.[21]  The readers of these almanacs could cast their own charts by using the astrological tables that gave the daily positions of the planets, the signs they were in and the forthcoming “conjunctions and oppositions”.[22]  This was a time, Keith Thomas explains, when most astrologers felt united in portraying a “coherent and comprehensive system of thought”, as intellectuals were curious, and seeking  “freedom which comes from self-knowledge”, along with a “desire to reduce things to order, and a conviction that they had the tools with which to do so”.[23]  These almanacs filled a void for those who were not yet involved in the hard work of the Protestant ethic and relied on knowing that human temperament and lifetime trials had purposeful direction and cause, thus perhaps allaying guilt for a family member’s death or a failed crop.[24] It became a means of understanding or accepting that which man had no control over, whether a personal loss or an advantage of one’s ability to succeed in political and worldly events.[25]  As late as 1666 and 1708, Thomas relates testimony that the almanacs were consulted for “supposed influence” in choosing a date for a “republican plot” by soldiers and checking “events of the year, at home and abroad” for “hunting match” dates.[26]  So post-Reformation censorship did not prevent the immense popularity of astrological almanacs; in fact, it increased it’s public allure as Thomas points out…”repression, unaccompanied by intellectual refutation, did more to foster belief than to end it.”[27]  To explain mistakes and erroneous prognostications, astrologers often blamed miscalculations, the intervention of a licenser employed for censorship, or that the analysis of “natural causes…did not pretend to be able to explain God’s miracles”. [28] This unitive voice of astrology was dependent upon the still scientific entity of divination and the cohesiveness of its members.

 Skepticism of astrological practice surfaced due to the church tightening its grip and issuing papal bulls, internal astrological divisiveness, and astronomical discoveries, all competing for a central voice in late seventeenth century Europe.  As inaccuracies in astrological predictions rose, and tactics to account for them became less believable, so followed published criticism and discontent. Thomas addresses the astrologers’ “highly flexible” nature in using a system that was “far from being exact” and the “judgment and common sense” necessary when no rules of interpretation were available. [29] The public was asking tougher questions, to which some astrologers thought they must give answers “their customers wanted” in order to stay in business, despite whether the horoscope indicated it or not; the consequences of these “less scrupulous practitioners” actions cast a shadow on the entire profession. [30]   The practice of using astrology to recover stolen goods, where a person’s appearance is described in order to apprehend the culprit, often backfired, as one astrologer lamented in 1676: “that ‘no man ever yet could force back stolen goods by the help of astrology only’”, and another recorded: “too many embarrassing failures”. [31] Although this practice of recovering stolen goods had appeared successful in the past, its popularity began to stimulate competition to see which side was right, and once doubt was inflected, the entire process became a dubious one. Lilly, in fact, was “indicted in 1654 for deceitfully taking money for locating stolen goods”. [32] The other tool astrologers often used, the self-fulfilling prophecy, also created public controversy. When they predicted famine, it would occur mainly because it compelled anxious farmers to hoard crops, and indeed scarcity followed; so an astrologer “could rely upon a certain proportion of his predictions to fulfill themselves simply because they had been predicted.” [33]   This led to open criticism and ridicule of the almanacs’ weather forecasts as being imprecise, the cause of increased food prices, and arguments that generic prophesies were not authentic but simply probable outcomes that anyone could foresee. Astrology remained on firmer ground as long as it stuck to helping people with their personal problems, but when it engaged in the divinity of larger, worldly events and prominent political authorities or popes, without the benefit of accurate horoscopes or congruent augurs of integrity, it lost footing.

Political predictions were taken seriously due to “its self-fulfilling character” and arrests could be made on these grounds alone. [34]   Nicholas Culpepper (1616-1654), physician and medical astrologer, wrote that the eclipse of 1652 “would bring republicanism to Europe; as well as Lilly’s published remarks announcing “the permanent downfall of monarchy…urging his readers to buy confiscated lands” are perfect examples of political entanglement and invitation to trouble; along with Lilly’s principal competitor, astrologer John Gadbury (1627-1704), “correctly predicting the death of the Swedish monarch in 1660”. [35]   Keith Thomas noted in Religion and the Decline of Magic: “astrological prediction had long been associated with conspiracy and rebellion”, and he backs this up with one critic’s remark: “all malcontents intending any invasive violence against their prince and country run headlong to his oracle”; the contribution of the ‘oracle’ being-- the calculation of the “reigning monarch’s life expectation”.  Since John Gadbury and William Lilly, two of the most popular astrological writers and almanac publishers of this time, had become arch competitors, as James Holden notes in A History of Horoscopic Astrology, their frequent quarrels via print caused astrologers and the populace “to choose up sides”.   Could this have become a matter of one-up-man-ship in gathering private astrology clients as well as readers, and, therefore, a push towards more daring and newsworthy prognostications?  If so, it worked toward increasing sales of their almanacs but the flip side was inciting the animosity of political and papal authorities against the whole of astrology, and presenting a less coherent voice to the public.

The papal bulls against astrology, issued in 1585 and 1631, were “partly driven by religious qualms and partly by annoyance at those astrologers who circulated or published predictions about when the incumbent pope was going to die. [36] So the Catholic Church was taking advantage of the contentious climate among astrologers as well as preventing further loss of its constituents to astrology, which it was also doing against any denomination not in complete accordance with its belief system. The Church already had in place the Inquisition and The Index of Prohibited Books, which promoted persecution for “unrepentant Protestants” and heretics, that did “succeed in bringing thousands of people…back into the church”; and censorship, placing “the works of many leading thinkers on the Index”. [37] The Church was basically another competing agency, “offering rival methods of divination”; however, the Puritans also ”wrote strongly against astrology” and held the most “sustained opposition to it in post-Reformation England. [38] However, the Catholics, believed that any predictive knowledge the astrologers professed came directly from the devil, since the devil, they also believed, did have mystical powers, which previously only witches were accused of invoking; so the papal bulls allowed astrologers to be condemned on the same grounds.  The aim of the church was both a counter attack to astrologers’ perceived threat to their leader, the Pope, and to show authority in protecting its ideology, thereby preventing further loss of followers.  The clergy saw the “cunning folk and astrologers as their deadly rivals”, not only because of competition for members, but “ to replace a magical explanation of misfortune by a theological one”. [39] Historically and psychologically, ideology provides “interpretations and solutions to what is felt to be an unsatisfactory social condition” serving a “number of ends”, one of which is providing a “tangible enemy”, a devil, to keep a group within boundaries. [40] The Church not only used the devil literally as being an entity employed by astrologers, but also as the figurative enemy of the church, since anyone that is not with the church is, therefore, against the church.  Despite its deepening troubles with organized religions and within its own ranks, astrology maintained its “prestige among many educated persons” due to its claim to “be a genuinely scientific system”. [41]

In 1632, Galileo’s confirmation of a heliocentric universe by telescope was published, continuing and intensifying the controversy started by Copernicus more than fifty years earlier.  This considerably loosened astrology’s scientific underpinning as well as focusing the Catholic Church’s animosity toward yet another ‘devil’.  The geocentric Aristotelian cosmology had existed since the fourth century BC and was adapted to Christian theology by Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century.  This was a universe with earth (and therefore, man) at its center, surrounded by revolving, translucent spheres to which were attached the sun and the planets; the stars were beyond this in an outer sphere, closest to God. This was a finite, orderly universe that fit perfectly into the minds of man and gave a secure feeling of belonging to the whole or oneness of God’s plan. [42]   The study of a mathematical universe had been revived during the Renaissance and appealed to the astronomer and mathematician, Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), who found the Ptolemaic system “complex” and offensive to his “sense of mathematical order”, which led him to remove the earth from the center. [43] His theory was not observable until the invention of the telescope by Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) in 1610, which broke with Aristotle’s universe of perfection since Galileo discovered the planets were not perfect and unchangeable, but were as imperfect as the earth, so the universe was one, not two separate worlds. [44]   Galileo contributed to the development of the scientific method by studying nature and motion and declaring that knowledge “should be derived from direct observation and from mathematics”; [45] experimentation then became the method for discovering the facts of nature. Because Galileo supported the Copernican theory, and stood up to the church in doing so, he was “condemned by the Inquisition” and “forbidden to write on Copernicanism” again, and both his book and Copernicus’ were added to the Index of Prohibited Books. [46] The sense of security provided by traditional cosmology and therefore, astrology and its hermetic wisdom, diminished, leaving a rift to be filled with solid answers to this new infinite universe.

Resolutions about this boundless universe, began appearing as the scientific method developed, from mathematics to deductive and inductive reasoning, and became important ways to serve humanity in later seventeenth century. Astronomers, who were also astrologers, did not want to abandon astrology, but made a “determined effort to bring the subject up to date” during the mid-seventeenth century. [47] There were also those who felt Galileo had indeed “overthrown all astrology”, but Francis Bacon (1561-1626), an influential teacher of the scientific method and inductive reasoning, was one who wanted to clean up astrology rather than destroy it. According to Jim Tester, Bacon recorded his objections to astrology thus: “I do not hesitate to reject as idle superstition the doctrine of horoscopes…houses…elections, inquiries, and the like frivolities…nothing sure or solid, and are plainly refuted and convicted by physical reasons.” [48] He allowed, however, that astrology had merit over natural events, “let the greater revolutions be retained…” on “masses, large numbers, rather than individuals”, but “smaller revolutions of horoscopes and houses be dismissed.” [49] Perhaps Bacon had been influenced by Pico’s beliefs, as presented in his Disputantes, printed one hundred years earlier, and still studied.   Bacon envisioned a different astrology, one that dealt with the influence of the celestial bodies acting “by those rules laid down above, and not otherwise”, (which seems to follow the Platonic theory of cosmology, of God’s plan for earthly events, yet without confidence in man’s interpretation of His plan), …but “other influences besides heat and light” that “lie concealed in the depth of Physic, and require a longer dissertation” [50] . Although Bacon didn’t like the occult aspect of astrology, he seems to infer that the hidden knowledge needs inspection, experimentation and discussion. Anything to do with medical research or agriculture was reasonable, but needed further research; however, the practice of divination was not, due to insufficient and verifiable evidence. Bacon spoke out for leaving “old authorities”, [51] and for complete autonomy where science was concerned, without religion or astrologers impeding its progress.  His inductive method involved the “careful observation of nature and the systematic accumulation of data; drawing general laws from the knowledge of particulars; and testing these laws through constant experimentation”, thereby utilizing “nature for human advantage”…and improving “the quality of human life by advancing commerce, industry, and agriculture”. [52] Thus astrology could be useful for these large advances, perhaps, after more study; however, not done secretly, but in the open for criticism and public scrutiny.

The deductive method of inquiry was another approach to knowledge, espoused by Rene Descartes (1596-1650), in his Discourse on Method published in 1637, contributing greatly to people’s awareness “of their capacity to comprehend the world through their own mental powers”. [53]   This was a rational approach to the philosophy of attaining truth, whereas Bacon’s was an empirical system.  Descartes called for “the individual to question and if necessary to overthrow all traditional beliefs” for absolution of doubt in knowing one truth, starting with “his dictum ‘I think therefore I am’”. [54]   The deductive method was based on mathematics, which Descartes believed to be the only certain route to truth; and he applied this “mathematical reasoning to philosophical problems”, such as comprehension of “human existence”, which would be deduced from known mathematical principles, “then deducing other truths from it through logical reasoning”. [55] Attention was being drawn irrevocably toward freedom of the mind, and away from any practice requiring outdated processes or traditional thought. The attempts to reconcile astrology with the new science were unsuccessful, since scientific advantages were being actualized by technological innovations in agriculture, commerce and medicine, and astronomical contributions to astrology diminished to this end.

Even with the advancement of more accurate astronomical tables by the well-known astronomer, mathematician and astrologer, Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), [56] astrology lost its voice in scientific, educational and intellectual forums.  Kepler published his astrological findings from 1602 in The More Certain Fundamentals of Astrology, to 1627 with his “major work” ‘Rudolphine Tables’. [57] These tables, based on his observations and mathematics, allowed astrologers to form more accurate predictions. One of his major astronomical discoveries was that planets traveled at various speeds in elliptical orbits rather than constant speeds in circular orbits, which allowed him to “construct the first set of astronomical tables to give reasonably accurate positions for the Sun and the planets”. [58]   It wasn’t until the discovery of the gravitational theory, by Newton in 1687, that the moon’s position could be completely certain, but Kepler made important practical additions to astrology such as planetary aspects and progressions, and reformed astrological technique because of his thorough investigation into the science of the stars. [59]

Universities with chairs of astrology in Paris, Padua, Bologna and Florence in the sixteenth century were being lost by the late seventeenth century, as the subject of astrologia was disappearing from the study of medicine and astronomy.  With the advances in anatomy and physiology being directly related to empirical observations and experimentation, by surgical intervention and autopsies, the need for astrology in medicine became less, as it was deemed unscientific or unverifiable in comparison. [60] With astrology being “deprived of its educated underpinning”, and the “world of learning” changing [61] and advancing one’s understanding of how the universe operates, it follows that the intellectual movement also changed direction, toward disregarding the old beliefs in problem solving, to new provable outcomes.   The full significance of the new cosmology was not fully realized by everyone during this transitional period; people did not necessarily understand how or why magic did nor didn’t work in the past any more than they realized how to explain the new “underlying scientific rationale” of the latest discoveries. [62]   However, “intellectual prestige” naturally shifted as Thomas explains, under “society’s constant pressure towards intellectual conformity”; so the discovery of new ‘truths’ might have relied solely  “…on the authority of others” or, upon new and “ more stable intellectual foundation, based on the mechanical philosophy". [63]   Either way, the populace did feel they had some measure of control over their environment, as evidenced by modern agricultural equipment for production of food in larger quantities, leading to larger profit margins for spending, and the availability of goods with improved shipbuilding and trade routes. [64]   When technology equals economic growth, as it did during the late seventeenth century, and advertisement of lost property via the newspaper is possible, and life is significantly enriched by banking, land ownership and materialistic gain, its no wonder problems were brought to local gathering spots or the newspapers rather than astrologers. [65]  

Astrology gradually lost collective support in Europe, as its theoretical foundation and wisdom no longer fit it with the heliocentric cosmology and the new scientific methods of empirical observation and mathematical deductive reasoning; and new values replaced the old which were based on the traditional geocentric cosmology.  The confusion and discordant resonance started with astrological polemics in 1490 and blended with the Reformation’s influence toward individual self-assurance, equality and expectations of a better future, culminating with technological innovation. Although, it is possible, the characteristics of this transformation started back in the fourth century BC, with Socrates’ premise that humanity requires exchange of viewpoints [66] for universal knowledge to evolve, thus inspiring intellectual sophistication of thought and reasoning to be shared, in order to discard seemingly worn and dysfunctional systems. As cumulative voices rose in disharmony from competing religious leaders and scholars about the merits of their beliefs, in claiming truth, over those of astrology, and were further magnified by the media, it is easy to understand how difficult it was for astrology to retain its voice of credibility, let alone prosper. A period of silence becomes, albeit reluctantly, the inevitable result and perhaps the only means of restoring a coherent, authoritative voice. Even with many educated people knowing the absolute value of astrology in realizing human potential and worldly events, keeping it viable during this period of astrological adjustment was not likely, with the intellectual majority’s changing mindset, espousing new, creative ideas and modern styles of accruing knowledge of the world, particularly in academic arenas. So even though the astrological premise of humans receiving divine guidance through the influence of the planetary spheres had been a very believable and important part of peoples' lives for many years, its practical use was built upon a faulty mechanical foundation, with no immediate means to verify its true value.  Intellectuals, the people interested in new ideas, the academics and scholars, who promulgated their thoughts by publication, open discussion and teaching, were very influential; and their lack of approval for the current astrological practice lead to the conveyance of social censure in seeking the guidance of astrologers. Although the sale of almanacs continued to prosper beyond the seventeenth century, the astrological practice of casting horoscopes withered due to this changing societal attitude.  Maintaining justification for astrology then, became a formidable task, after the success of experimental methods toward advancement of technology and medicine, and the questionable practices of many astrologers, even with some of the best astronomers in their league. Once separated from science, the pace of dynamic cultural change along with technological innovation, was a prohibitive factor in any reconciliation effort of astrology with its former peers in the scientific field.  This does not discount the many other factors contributing to the decline of astrology, from post Renaissance to the end of the seventeenth century; in fact, they all contributed to this point in history when the factious voice of astrology could not be heard above the collective intellectual voice, speaking of experimental evidence rather than traditional theoretical reasoning.
Endnotes