Johannes Paepp: Schenckelius detectus

nemonik (μνᾶσθαι, erinnern; μνήμον, achtsam; τὸ μνημονικόν, sc. τέχνημα, was das Gedächtnis mechanisch unterstützt, ars memoriæ), die allgemeine Bezeichnung für Methoden zur Unterstützung des Gedächtnisses. Das Prinzip besteht darin, den Geist in die Lage zu versetzen, eine relativ ungewohnte Idee und insbesondere eine Reihe dissoziierter Ideen zu reproduzieren, indem er sie mittels eines künstlichen Ganzen verbindet, dessen Teile sich gegenseitig andeuten. Zu den bekannten Beispielen für metrische Mnemonik gehören die „Geschlechterreime“ der lateinischen Grammatik, die von Logikern erfundenen Hexameterlinien, der Vers zum Erinnern der Anzahl von Tagen in den Monaten. Die Methoden sind zahlreich. Das Gedächtnis wird von Psychologen üblicherweise danach klassifiziert, wie es (a) mechanisch, durch Aufmerksamkeit und Wiederholung trainiert wird; (b) umsichtig, durch sorgfältige Auswahl und Koordination; und (c) mittels künstlicher Methoden, i. e. Mnemotechnik, Mnemonik. Es muß beachtet werden, daß nur Mnemonik mit den Eigenschaften (a) und (b) irgendeinen Wert besitzt. Es handelt sich im Wesentlichen darum, Aufmerksamkeit und Wiederholung zu verwenden, zudem ist eine sorgfältige Auswahl erforderlich. Im technischen Sinne beschränkt sich das Wort auf jene Anwendungssysteme, die von verschiedenen Schriftstellern, Philosophen und Wissenschaftlern ausgearbeitet wurden.

Mnemonische Systeme wurden von griechischen Sophisten und Philosophen gepflegt und finden sich bei Platon und Aristoteles wiederholt erwähnt. In späteren Zeiten wurde deren Erfindung dem Dichter Σιμωνίδης ὁ Κεῖος, Simonides von Keos (557/556 – 468/467) zugeschrieben, vielleicht aus keinem anderen Grund als dem, daß die Kraft seines Gedächtnisses berühmt war. Cicero, der dieser Kunst Bedeutung beimißt, aber mehr dem Ordnungsprinzip als bester Erinnerungshilfe, spricht von Καρνεάδης, Karneades von Athen (214/213 – 129/128), einem Skeptiker, und Μητρόδωρος ὁ Σκήψιος, Metrodorus von Skepsis (um 145 – 70) als Vorbilder für die Verwendung geordneter Bilder als Gedächtnishilfe. Letzterer soll nach Plinius die Kunst „ut nihil non iisdem verbis redderet auditum“ weitergetragen haben. Die Römer schätzten solche Methoden als Hilfsmittel öffentlicher Rede. Cf. Rhetorica ad Herennium, III,16-24; Quintilian: Institutio Oratoria, XI,ii,17-22, dessen Darstellung jedoch etwas unvollständig und unklar ist. Zu seiner Zeit hatte die Kunst fast aufgehört, praktiziert zu werden.

Das griechische und römische System der Mnemonik beruhte auf der Verwendung von mentalen Orten und Zeichen oder Bildern. Die übliche Methode bestand darin, ein großes Haus zu wählen, dessen Wohnungen, Wände, Fenster, Statuen, Möbel u.s.w. durch Bilder mit bestimmten Namen, Phrasen, Ereignissen oder Ideen verbunden waren. Um sich an diese zu erinnern, war es notwendig, die Wohnungen des Hauses zu durchsuchen, bis der bestimmte Ort entdeckt wurde, an dem sie durch Imagination deponiert worden waren. „Itaque eis, qui hanc partem ingeni exercerent, locos esse capiendos et ea, quæ memoria tenere vellent effingenda animo atque in eis locis conlocanda; sic fore, ut ordinem rerum locorum ordo conservaret, res autem ipsas rerum effigies notaret atque ut locis pro cera, simulacris pro litteris uteremur.“ — Cicero: De oratore II,354.

Abgesehen davon, daß sich Martianus Capella auf Regeln der Mnemonik bezieht, ist bis zum 13. Jahrhundert über deren Ausübung nichts weiter bekannt. Zu den umfangreichen Schriften Roger Bacons gehört ein Traktat De arte memorativa. Raimon Lull widmete der Mnemonik im Zusammenhang mit seiner Ars Generalis Aufmerksamkeit.

Verfasser der ersten ars memoriæ oder ars memorativa ist Jacobus Publicius (gest. um 1510?) aus Salamanca in Spanien: Artis oratoriæ epitoma, Ars epistolandi, Ars memorativa. Venedig: Erhard Ratdolt, 30.11.1482, das Werk beeinflußte noch Robert Fludd. Die Ars memorativa wurde ab Ende des 15. Jahrhunderts auf Basis philosophischer, rhetorischer, religiöser und medizinischer Fachgebiete betrieben, als eine Technik benötigt wurde, anwachsende Wissensmengen zu bewältigen und nach Belieben zu selektieren, abzuspeichern und aufzurufen.

Die erste wichtige Modifikation der römischen Methode war die des deutschen Dichters Konrad Celtes, der in seinem Epitoma in utramque Ciceronis rhetoricam cum arte memorativa nova (1492) anstelle von Orten die Buchstaben des Alphabets verwendete. Gegen Ende des 15. Jahrhunderts erweckte Petrus de Ravenna (1448 – 1508) in Italien durch seine mnemonischen Taten ein derartiges Erstaunen, daß er von vielen als Nekromant angesehen wurde. Sein Bestseller Phoenix, sive artificiosa memoria (Venedig, 10. Januar 1491) durchlief mehrere Ausgaben, die siebte erschien 1608 in Köln. Einen ebenso großen Eindruck hinterließ Anfang des 16. Jahrhunderts Lambert Thomas Schenkel (1547 – 1625): Gazophylacium artis memoriæ, Argentorati: Antonius Bertramus, 1609. Er lehrte die Mnemonik in Frankreich, Italien, Deutschland und veröffentlichte, obwohl er von der Universität von Louvain als Zauberer denunziert wurde, seinen Traicté de la mémoire divisé en deux livres, Arras: Guilaume de la Rivière, 1593, mit der Sanktion der theologischen Fakultät von Douai. Die vollständigste Darstellung seines Systems findet sich in zwei Werken seines 1619 in Venedig erschienenen Schülers Martin Sommer. 1618 veröffentlichte John Willis (1575 – 1625) in London: Mnemonica; sive Ars Reminiscendi: e puris artis naturæque fontibus hausta, et in tres libros digesta, necnon de Memoria naturali fovenda libellus e variis doctissimorum operibus sedulo collectus mit einer klaren Darstellung der Prinzipien der aktuellen oder lokalen Mnemonik. Giordano Bruno hat im Zusammenhang mit seiner Darstellung der Ars Generalis von Lull eine memoria technica in seine Abhandlung De umbris idearum aufgenommen. Weitere Autoren dieser Zeit sind Johann Romberch (1533); Hieronimo Morafiot: Ars memoriæ (1602); Giambattista della Porta (1535 – 1615): Ars reminiscendi, 1602.

Giambattista della Porta bietet einen faszinierenden Überblick zu frühneuzeitlichen Ideen über das Gedächtnis, seine Bedeutung sowie eine ausführliche Methode zur Stärkung der Erinnerungsfähigkeit. Für ihn steht Erinnerung als grundlegende Verteidigung gegen Sterblichkeit und Vergänglichkeit. Wissen und Erfahrung haben weder Nutzen noch Existenz, es sei denn, auf sie kann über das Gedächtnis zugegriffen werden. Um dies zu organisieren, empfiehlt Porta, eine Bildergalerie mit eindrucksvollen Bildern von Personen oder Personengruppen zu erstellen. Er erwähnt die wichtige Rolle zeitgenössischer Gemälde und Skulpturen bedeutender Künstler seiner Zeit, darunter Tiziano Vecelli, Raffaello Sanzio da Urbino und Michelangelo Buonarroti, die dem Gedächtnis stärker anhaften als gewöhnliche dies könnten. Porta behauptet, daß das Wiederherstellen des Gedächtnisses dem Auffrischen der Farben eines verblaßten Gemäldes gleiche. Seine Herangehensweise an die antike Erinnerungskunst ist ausgesprochen ikonisch – nicht architektonisch, wie es für viele mittelalterliche und frühneuzeitliche Werke der Mnemonik typisch ist, daneben sowohl linear wie räumlich. Besonders in der 1566 erschienenen italienischen Arte del Ricordare empfiehlt Porta bildlich-erotische Fantasien wie den sodomitischen Geschlechtsverkehr als stärkste Erinnerungshilfe. Um seinen Standpunkt zu veranschaulichen, benennt er Beispiele aus den Metamorphosen von Ovid und Lucius Apuleius. In einer Weise, die deutlich an seine Rezepte mit halluzinogenen Drogen erinnert, sowie an seine naturalistische Herangehensweise im allgemeinen, ist er der Ansicht, daß solche erotischen Phantasmata derart wirksam sein können, daß sie möglicherweise in der Lage seien, das Gedächtnis zu zerstören, das Bild nicht aufzufrischen, sondern zu verwischen.

Johann Just Winckelmann (1620 – 1699), Pseudonym Stanislaus Mink von Weunßhein, gab 1648 sein „fruchtbarstes Geheimnis“ der Mnemonik bekannt, nämlich die Verwendung von Konsonanten für Ziffern, um Zahlen durch Wörter auszudrücken, wobei Vokale nach Bedarf beizufügen sind. Leibniz übernahm ein dem von Winckelmann ähnliches Alphabet im Zusammenhang mit seinem Schema für eine allen Sprachen gemeinsame Schreibweise. Der Winckelmannsche Zifferncode wurde von den meisten nachfolgenden Systemen mit geringfügigen Änderungen übernommen.

Richard Grey (1694 – 1771) veröffentlichte 1730 eine Memoria technica, Or a New Methods of Artificial Memory, Applied to and Exemplified in Chronology History Geography Astronomy, Also Jewish, Grecian and Roman Coins, Weights, Measures, &c. With Tables Proper to Their Respective Sciences and Memorial Lines Adapted to Each Table. Seine Methode lautet kurz: „Um sich an irgendetwas in der Geschichte, Chronologie, Geographie u.s.w. zu erinnern, wird ein Wort gebildet, das beginnend damit, daß es die erste Silbe oder die ersten Silben des Gesuchten darstellt, durch häufige Wiederholung der andere Teil nachgezogen wird, der so konstruiert ist, daß er die Ergänzung gibt. So geschah die Sintflut im Jahr zweitausenddreihundertachtundvierzig vor unserer Zeit; dies wird durch das Wort Del-etok bezeichnet, Del steht für Sintflut und etok für 2348.“ Um die mnemonischen Wörter im Gedächtnis zu behalten, wurden sie zu Gedächtnislinien geformt, die sich jedoch aus seltsamen Wörtern in schwieriger Hexameterskandierung zusammensetzen und sich keineswegs leicht merken lassen. Der Vokal oder Konsonant, den Grey mit einer bestimmten Figur verband, wurde willkürlich gewählt.

Gregor von Feinaigle (1760 – 1819), ein deutscher Mönch aus Salem, der sich nach der Säkularisierung seinen Unterhalt als Wanderlehrer und Gedächtniskünstler in Frankreich und England verdiente, veröffentlichte 1804 in Straßburg: Kunst des Gedächtnisses, alle Arten von Wissenschaften auf eine ebenso leichte als haltbare Weise zu erlernen und im Gedächtnis zu befestigen. Die beste Darstellung findet man in der von John Millard herausgegebenen englischen Version: The New Art of Memory, founded upon the principles taught by M. Gregor von Feinaigle, and applied to Chronology, History, Geography, Languages, Systematic Tables, Poetry, Prose, and Arithmetic. To which is added some account of the principal systems of artificial memory, from the earliest period to the present time; with instances of the extraordinary powers of natural memory, London, 1812. Eine Eigenschaft seines Systems der Mnemonik, das auf Winckelmann basiert, besteht darin, die numerischen Zahlen durch Buchstaben darzustellen, die aufgrund einer Ähnlichkeit oder einer zufällige Verbindung ausgewählt werden. Dieses Alphabet wird durch ein kompliziertes System von Orten und Zeichen ergänzt. Er kam 1811 nach England, einer seiner Schüler veröffentlichte: Mnemonik oder praktische Gedächtniskunst zum Selbstunterricht nach den Vorlesungen des Herrn von Feinaigle, Frankfurt a. M., 1811.

Eine vereinfachte Form von Feinaigles Methode wurde von Aimé Paris (1798 – 1866) in: Principes et applications diverses de la mnemonique, 7. Aufl., Paris, 1834, veröffentlicht. Die Verwendung symbolischer Bilder wurde in Zusammenhang mit dieser von Antoni Jaiwifisky wiederbelebt, dessen System in einem Bericht des polnischen Generals J. Bern: Exposé general de la methode mnémonique polonaise, perfectionnée à Paris, Paris, 1839, veröffentlicht wurde. Verschiedene andere Modifikationen der Systeme von Feinaigle und Aime Paris wurden von späteren Mnemonisten entwickelt, darunter Major Beniowsky: A handbook of phrenotypics for teachers and students. Part I., Development of the principle of familiarity. London: Published by the Author, 1842; François Fauvel Gouraud (1808 – 1847): Phreno-Mnemotechny or The Art of Memory, Houel and Macoy, 1844; Carl Christian Otto (1817 – 1873), Pseudonym Karl Otto Reventlow: Lehrbuch der Mnemotechnik nach einem durchaus neuen auf das Positive aller Disciplinen anwendbaren Systeme, Stuttgart und Tübingen: Cotta, 1843, Wörterbuch der Mnemotechnik nach eignem Systeme, Stuttgart und Tübingen: Cotta, 1844, sowie zwei weitere Werke für Schulen; solche bildhaften Merktechniken wurden besonders im Unterricht angewandt, um mathematisches und historischen Wissen aufzunehmen, die Technik „nicht zerlegbarer Grundbilder“ gilt als maßgeblich für die Entwicklung der Mnemonik; und Pliny Miles (1818 – 1865): American Mnemotechny, or Art of Memory, theoretical and practical; on the Basis of the Most Recent Discoveries and Improvements in Europe and America: Comprising the Principles of the Art, As Applied to Ancient History, Sacred and Profane; Modern European, Asiatic and American History; Remarkable Battles, Treaties of Peace, Great Discoveries and Inventions, Biographies of Eminent Persons, Sovereigns of England and France, Presidents of the United States, Geographical Tables, Latitudes and Longitudes, Chemical and Astronomical Statistics, Sentiments of Flowers, Mythology, Prose, Poetry, Names, Etc., Etc., Etc. with a Mnemotechnics Dictionary, 3d ed., New York: Pub. for the author, by Wiley and Putnam, 1848; und Elements of phreno-mnemotechny, or, Art of acquiring Memory, Richmond: H. K. Ellyson, 1845.

Diese komplizierten Gedächtnissysteme sind fast völlig außer Mode geraten. Doch Methoden, die hauptsächlich auf den sogenannten Assoziationsgesetzen beruhen, wurden weiterhin veröffentlicht, so von Hermann Kothe: Lehrbuch der Mnemonik oder Gedächtnißkunst, Hamburg & Leipzig: Schuberth & Co., 1848, System der Mnemonik oder Gedächtnißlehre. Theoretisch praktische Anleitung zur raschen Erlangung eines vorzüglichen Kunstgedächtnisses, Kassel: J. G. Luckhardt, 1853, und Katechismus der Mnemotechnik oder Gedächtnißlehre. Zweite, sehr verbesserte und vermehrte Auflage von J. B. Montag, Leipzig: J. J. Weber, 1863; und Hugo Weber-Rumpe: Mnemonischen Zahlwörterbuch, Breslau, 1885, und Mnemonische Unterrichtsbriefe, 1882-1888; Edward Pick: On memory and the rational means of improving it, London: Trübner & Co., 1861, und Lectures on memory culture, New York, Chicago: E. L. Kellogg & Co., 1899.

he Roman orators used a mnemonic which is described in the Ad Herennium and referred to by Cicero and Quintilian. It consisted in memorising a series of places in a building, and attaching to these memorised places, images to remind of the points of the speech. The orator when delivering his speech, passed in imagination along the order of memorised places, plucking from them the images which were to remind him of his notions. Not only buildings could be used as a memory place system: Metrodorus of Scepsis is said to have used the zodiac as the foundation of his memory-system.

This classical art, usually regarded as purely mnemotechnical, had a long history in the Middle Ages and was recommended by Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas. In the Renaissance, it became fashionable among Neoplatonists and Hermetists. It was now understood as a method of printing basic or archetypal images on the memory, with the cosmic order itself as the ‘place’ system, a kind of inner way of knowing the universe. The principle is already apparent in the passage in Ficino’s De vita coelitus comparanda in which he describes how the planetary images or colours, memorised as painted on the vaulted ceiling, organised for the man who had so memorised them, all the individual phenomena which he perceived on coming out of his house. The Hermetic experience of reflecting the universe in the mind is, I believe, at the root of Renaissance magic memory, in which the classical mnemonic with places and images is now understood, or applied, as a method of achieving this experience by imprinting archetypal, or magically activated, images on the memory. By using magical or talismanic images as memory-images, the Magus hoped to acquire universal knowledge, and also powers, obtaining through the magical organisation of the imagination a magically powerful personality, tuned in, as it were, to the powers of the cosmos. This amazing transformation, or adaptation, of the classical art of memory in the Renaissance has a history before Bruno, but in Bruno it reached a culmination. The De umbris idearum and the Cantus Circaeus, which we discuss in this chapter, are his two first works on magic memory. They reveal him as already a magician before he came to England.
— Frances A. Yates: Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1964. pp. 191-192.

he other book on magic memory published in Paris has for its heroine that great sorceress Circe, the daughter of the Sun. The title of it is Cantus Circaeus, and it is dedicated by Jean Regnault to Henri d’Angouleme, Grand Prieur de France, an important personage at the French court for he was semi-royal, being the illegitimate son of Henri II. Regnault says that Bruno had given him the manuscript and asked him to edit it for publication. Published in 1582, the same year as the De umbris idearum, it is later than that work which is referred to in the preface as having been dedicated to the Most Christian King.

It opens with a terrific incantation to the Sun by Circe, mentioning all his names, attributes, animals, birds, metals, and so on. From time to time, her assistant, Moeris, has to look out to inspect the line of the sun’s rays and to see if the incantation is working. There is a distinct though slightly garbled reference to Ficino’s De vita coelitus comparanda in this incantation, on the sun as the vehicle of inscrutable powers reaching us from the ‘ideas’ through ‘reasons’ in the soul of the world, and on the power of herbs, plants, stones, and so on to attract spiritus. Circe then makes equally terrific, though not quite so long, incantations to Luna, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury, finally adjuring all the seven rulers to listen to her. She is at the same time doing magic with arrangements of plants, stones, etc., and holding out ‘writings of the sacred gods’ on a plate, drawing characters in the air, whilst Moeris is instructed to unfold a parchment on which are most potent notae, the mystery of which is hidden from all mortals.

Bruno’s main source for the incantations in this work, as for his celestial images in the De umbris, is the De occulta philosophia of Cornelius Agrippa.
— Frances A. Yates: Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1964. pp. 199-200.
 

irce: Sol qui illustras omnia solus. Apollo, carminis audior, pharetrate, arcitenens, sagitti-potens, Pythie, lauriger, fatiloque, pastor, vates, augur, & medice. Phæbe, rosee, crinite, pulchricome, flaue, nitide, placide, cytharæde, cantor, & veridice. Titan, Milesi, Palatine, Cyrrhæe, Timbræe, Deli, Delphice, Leucadice, Tegæe, Capitoline, Smynthæe, Ismeni, & Latialis. Qui mirabiles impertiris naturas elementis: quo dispensante tumescunt, & sedantur maria: turbantur & serenantur aër & æthera: viuida quoque intenditur, reprimitúrque ignium vis atque potentia. Cuius ministerio viget istius compago vniuersi, inscrutabiles rerum vires ab ideis per animæ mundi rationes ad nos vsque deducens & infra, vnde variæ atque multiplices herbarum, plantarum cæterarum, lapiduinque virtutes, quæ per stellarum radios mundanum ad se trahere spiritum sunt potentes. (...)
 

Circe: Principio isthæc domestica vestigemus animalia. En proximos nobis porcos qui fugam versus tecta arripuere, facillime omnium istos sub humano cortice cognouisses.

Moeris: Facillime quidem.

Circe: Porcus enim est animal A, auarum. B, barbarum. C, coenosum. D, durum. E, erroneum. F, foetidum. G, gulosum. H, hebes. K, kapitosum. L, libidinosum. M, molestum. N, nequitiosum. O, ociosum. P, pertinax. Q, quærulum. R, rusticum. S, stultum. T, turgidum. V, vile. X, lunaticum. Y, auriculatum. Z, mutabile. Ψ, non bonum nisi mortuum.

Moeris: Cum elementarium porcinum institueres Circe, vnum de mage necessariis elementum prætermisisti.

Circe: Non illud inconsulte factum, quia ipsum est tum in aliis omnibus elementis implicitum, tum & ipsorum elementum videtur elementorum. In vno ergo adferantur omnia, sicut in omnibus allatum est vnum. A ingratum. B immundum. C inconsultum. D infidum. E inconstans. F impaciens. G indiscretum. H inciuile. I impudens. K impetuosum. L incautum. M infaustum. N ineptum. O iniquum. P inhumanum. Q immite. R inuerecundum. S inquietum. T insanum. V intemperatum. X ignobile. Y incultum. Z inhospitale. Ψ immemor.

Moeris: Et ego per numeros ex naturalibus ipsum considerabo. j. paruos habet oculos, hosque non nisi gulæ inseuruientes. ij. acutas habet aures. iij. peramplas fauces. iiij. immunditias ad omnes nares adpositas. v. læsiuos dentes. vj. augustum, angustum volo dicere frontem. vij. cerebrum pinguisculum. viij. caudam semper mobilem, semper adnodantem, nunquam vero nodantem, quasi semper negociantem, & nunquam proficientem. ix. ventrem habet unum & ampliorem. x. dentes nunquam amittit. xj. intra eius ossa nihil aut modicum reperies medullæ. xij. quadrupedum omnium difficile pilum mutat, aut amittit. xiij. habet pediculorum genus familiare. xiiij. propriam habet ad coitum vocem. xv. foemina eius ipso mare est vocalior. xvj. acerrime sæuit tempore coitus. xvij. foecundissimum multorum animalium. xviij. non est vno cibo constans. xix. facile in omnibus cibi generibus assuescit. xx. pabuli mutatione, & varietate maxime gaudet. xxj. illius qui glandibus est pastus caro, magis, meliusque sapit. xxij. in urbanum & syluestre genus diuiditur. xxiij. ibi deliciosius degit vbi lutum repperit. xxiiij. brutale omnino.

Tot igitur indicia sui cum porcus habeat, quis ipsum facile (quantumcumque sub homine lateat) non cognoscet? Si tibi videtur domina, cætera vnico, magisque adcommodato signo persequamur: præstare enim videtur leuius multa tangere, quam duo comprehendere, vel vnum.

Circe: Ita faciendum.

irce: O, Sun, who alone illuminate all things. Apollo, the originator of song, quiver-bearer, bowcarrier, arrow-wielder, the Pythian, laurel-crowned, prophet, shepherd, seer, augur, and doctor. O, Phoebus, rosy-colored, of beautiful long golden locks, brilliant, peaceful, Cytherean, singer, speaking truth. O Titan, Milesian, Palatine, Cyrrhaean, Timbrean, Delian, Delphian, Leucadian, Tageean, Capitoline, Smynthaenus, Ismenian, and Latialis. You, who impart amazing characteristics to the elements: by whose regulation the seas swell and become calm, the air and ether becomes disturbed and calm, and likewise the living force and power expands and that of fire is held back. You, by whose action the connective network of the universe flourishes, who draw the inscrutable forces of things—from which derive the numerous and varied virtues of herbs and other plants, as well as stones, with the power of drawing to themselves the force of the world-soul through stellar rays—from archetypal ideas, through the order of the world-soul, all the way down to our level and below. (...)
 

C: First let us examine these domestic animals over here. Look at those nearest to us, the pigs, rushing to shelter: you recognized the presence of those under human shell the easiest, didn’t you?

M: Quite easily indeed.

C: In truth, the pig is an animal characterized as follows: A, avaricious; B, barbarous; C, filthy; D, rough; E, erring; F, fetid; G, glutonous; H, dull; K stubborn; L, libidinous; M, annoying; N, vile; O, idle; P, pertinacious; Q, querulous; R, gross; S, stupid; T, turgid; V, vile; X, crazy; Y, big-eared; Z, changeable; Ψ, not worth much good unless dead.

M: As you were setting up this porcine alphabet, Circe, you omitted one of the more necessary letters.

C: I did not do it without discretion, however, since the characteristic of that letter is implicitly contained in all other letters, and so it seems to be a letter or element of all other letters. All are therefore brought together in one letter, just as the one is introduced into all others: A: ingrate; B, impure; C, ill-advised; D, untrustworthy; E, inconstant; F, impatient; G, indiscreet; H, ill-mannered; I, impudent; K, impetuous; L, incautious; M, ill-omened; N, inept; O, iniquitous; P, inhumane; Q, immature; R, immodest; S, restless; T, insane; V, immoderate; X, ignoble; Y, ignorant; Z, inhospitable; Ψ, inadvertent.

M: And I will examine the animal based on its natural characteristics, in numerical order: I. it has small eyes, which can only serve gluttony; II. it has sharp ears; III. more than ample gullet; IV. filth plastered all over its nostrils; V. harm-inducing teeth; VI. it is august, majestic, if viewed from the front; VII. it has most dull brains; VIII. perpetually moving tail which, tangled as it is, always appears to be making a knot, without ever actually tying anything—as if always busy with something without completing anything at all; IX. a single and most ample stomach; X. teeth that never fall out; XI. bones in which little or no marrow is found; XII. it changes or sheds its hair least easily among all quadrupeds; XIII. is on most familiar terms with the genus of the lice; XIV. its voice is appropriate to the sexual act; XV. female of this species is endowed with better voice than the male; XVI. it is at its fiercest and most savage during rut; XVII. is among the most fertile of animals; XVIII. not dependent on any one kind of food; XIX. easily adjusts to all kinds of fodder; XX. is greatly pleased with change and variety of its feed; XXI. if fed with acorns, its meat tastes better and has more flavor; XXII. is of two varieties: domestic and forest-dwelling; XXIII. finds more pleasure and flourishes wherever mud is found; XXIV. is thoroughly gross.

Presented with all these identifying characteristics proper to the pig—however many be hidden under human shape—who would not easily recognize it? Now, if it seems appropriate to you, my lady, let us pursue other animals, selecting for each of them a single, more broadly applicable characteristic, since it seems more convenient to treat many animals briefly than to concentrate all attention on understanding only one or two.

C: It will be done just as you say.
— Cantus Circaeus Giordano Bruno, translated by Tomas Zahora, pp. 5 & 13-14.

uppositis iis quæ in complemento communis artis de ratione locorum & imaginum sunt allata: nunc in aliquorum gratiam aliam producimus artem, quæ ad nostram integra pertinet inuentionem. Ipsam perfecte subsequenti enunciamus ænigmate.

Bis duodena locum capiant seclusa seorsum
 Corpora, quæ argutum finxerit efficiens.
Spiritus adstantes habeant d’ hinc singula quinos.
 Queis sit quintuplicem promere posse sonum.
Proind’ elementa duo dent consistentia quinque.
 Queis solers medio, quæstaque calce dabis.
Quid sit, quid faciat, quid habet, quid suscipit, & quid
 Adstet, proponant posita quinque tibi.
Ii sibi perpetuam firment in corpore sedem:
 Quos coniurator non queat eiicere.
Interea varias poterunt errare per oras.
 Multaque constando milibus esse locis.

Albericus: Quid credis ipsum sibi velle per hoc ænigma?

Borista: Dicam ut possum. Habeas ab inuicem seposita subiecta quatuor & viginti, quæ universa non adiaceant, non inhærant, non contigant. Sed libera, & solitaria vel situentur vel situata intelligantur.

Tuo ipsa tibi poteris eligere arbitrio, huius tamen esse debent generis B. Arbor. C. Columna. D. Puteus. F. Ara. G. Patibulum. H. Mensa. K. Lectus. L. Statua. M. Tribunal. N. Cathedra. P. Fornax. Q. Focus. R. Incus. S. Archa. T. Saxum. V. Pyramis. X. Horologium. Y. Fouea. Z. Sepulchrum. A. Feretrum. E. Sacrarium. I. Ignis. O. Lapidum cumulus. V. Fons. Quæ quatuor & viginti tibi designent elementa.

Proinde ad constituendas eorum primas combinationes addicas subiectorum dictorum singulis adsistentia quinque, quæ duplici differentia præcedentem vel subsequentem tibi notam demonstrent. Extant quinque cardinales differentiæ. Occidentale, Orientale, Septentrionale, Australe, & Medium. Extant aliæ quinque situales, prostare, flecti, sedere, cubare, iacere. Extant aliæ quinque locales, ante, retro, sursum, deorsum, in medio. Quibus quidem trinis differentiis, subiectum, insigne, & operationem quintuplicare consonando valebis.

Adsistentia quinque, per diuersos actus ad quatuor & viginti differentias multiplicatos elementum sonans atque consonans addere possunt. Qui quidem differentiarum numerus, in diuersis compleatur generibus, vt commode veniat in vsum.

Pro liquidis mediantibus elementis, iis denique & aliis primam combinationem ex duobus videlicet conflatam consequentibus, similiter per aliquot differentias prouidebis.

Quibus ita dispositis, determinatis & menti firmiter adfixis: prompte poteris ex mutuatis insigniis, cæterisque olim propriis quascunque combinationes effingere.

Iam vides quemadmodum signa viginti quatuor elementorum, per quinarium deducantur. Quam si considerauis industriam, in alias plures poteris per temetipsum promoueri.

Albericus: Propositum videor satis (ni decipiar) intelligere. Sed rogo te, aliquid expeditius pro cantu Circæo digneris elargiri.

Borista: Faciam.

aving set down precepts concerning the order of places and images that were introduced as a complement to the general art of memory, we now bring forth another art, for the benefit of some readers, which wholly pertains to our system of mnemonics, and is best disclosed in the following riddle:

Shaped by a keen, skilled maker, twice twelve bodies,
 secluded from one another, take their places.
The bodies have assisting spirits, five to each,
 through whom they can produce a quintuple sound.
Then, two elements produce five-fold arrangements,
 By which you will, with skillful application place sought
elements in the middle and at the foot.
What is, what does, what has, what takes up, and
 What stands by: this is what the five representations relate to you.
Those establish a permanent seat in the body:
 No plotting will be able to eject them from the body.
All the while they will be able to wander through various regions,
 as thousands of memory-places will have been established.

A: What do you think is the import of this puzzle?

B: I will tell you as much as I am able. You should have a set-up of twenty-four mnemonic backgrounds, placed apart from one another, which neither border, cling to, nor touch upon all others, but are placed or are understood to be placed as free and solitary.

You will be able to choose the specific characteristics of your backgrounds as you judge fit, but in kind they ought to be as follows: B. Tree; C. Column; D. Well; F. Altar; G. Pillory; H. Table; K. Bed; L. Statue; M. Platform or Tribune; N. Armchair; P. Furnace; Q. Fireplace; R. Anvil; S. Ark; T. Rock; V. Pyramid; X. Clock; Y. Pit; Z. Sepulchre; A. Bier; E. Shrine; I. Fire; O. Stone Heap; V. Spring. These twenty-four represent your letters.

Next, in order to compose first letter combinations, you should assign to each of the said backgrounds five assisting forms, which will represent to you preceding or following letters by a double difference. There are five cardinal distinctions: West, East, North, South, and Medium. There are five situational distinctions: standing up, bent, sitting, sleeping, reclining. There are also five spatial distinctions: before, behind, above, below, center. Through these three sets of distinctions you will be able to multiply the background, sign, and mnemonic operation fivefold in a harmonious fashion.

The five assisting forms can, by taking up various positions and being multiplied and attached to the specific characteristics of the twenty-four letters, add vowels and consonants to the expression. Distinctions should be supplied in various numerical combinations, to facilitate practical use.

To represent vowels letters in the middle of the word, you will be able to provide those and others by the basic combination made up of two consequent letters in a similar way, using several distinctions.

Once you arrange, delineate, and firmly anchor these forms in your mind, you will be able to promptly fashion any combinations from the variously adjusted signs and their properties.

You see now how the twenty-four signs of letters of alphabet are drawn out in five ways. If you apply yourself to this technique, you will be able to expand it in many other directions.

A: Unless I am misled, I seem to understand what you present satisfactorily. But I still humbly ask you to quickly share with me something about the Circean incantation.

B: I will.
— Cantus Circaeus Giordano Bruno, translated by Tomas Zahora, pp. 53-55.

abes in Circæo dialogo duas generalissimas formas, alteram quæ cantum, alteram quæ multiplicem cantus includit effectum. Harum alteram ad vnum generalissimum subiectum, alteram vero ad alterum referas.

Secundo in prima formarum generalissima, habes septem deorum ypostases. Et in secunda tria animantium genera. Illa generalia sub generalissimis septem: ista ad generalia sub suo supremo tria referas subiecta.

Tertio habes sub singulis septem ypostaseon, tres terminorum species: quarum duæ sunt incomplexæ, tertia vero complexa est. Habes etiam, sub singulis trium animantium generum, plures infimas pro commodo enumeratas species. Illæ in specialibus subiectis illorum multiplicentur in trinum. Istæ vero in propriis pariter subiectis deducantur.

Quarto sub trium terminorum speciebus istis & illis ad singulas pertinentia species habens indiuidua, in indiuiduis pariter hæc & illa subiectis situabis.

Itaque generalissima forma generalissimum consequatur subiectum: generalis, generale: specialis, speciale, indiuidualis, indiuiduale. Adeo vt subiectum aliud, aliud includat & contineat. & forma alia aliam includat & contineat: & memoriam facilem non modo cantus circæi, sed & omnium quæ tibi memoranda proponentur adipisceris.

Albericus: Experiar.

here are two general forms in the the Circaean dialogue: one of the song itself, which refers to the most general backgrounds, and one of the manifold effect that the song commands, which refers to the the other kind of background.

Secondly, in the first, most-general form, you have seven hypostases of gods, and in the second, general form, you have three classes of living things. The general ones are under the seven most-general ones, to each of which you should assign three general subjects.

Thirdly, under each of the seven hypostases, you have three kinds of terms, two of which are simple, and the third complex. You even have, in each of the three classes of animated things, many starting points for a convenient enumeration of species. The former are multiplied thrice in specific backgrounds. And the latter are in turn equally deduced from the most specific, individual backgrounds.

Fourthly, you will place the former and the latter in individual backgrounds, under the three kinds of the former and latter terms which pertain to single things and have individual species.

Thus the most general form follows the most general background, general form follows a general background, specific follows specific, and individual follows individual. Therefore, since every background contains and includes the other, and likewise every form includes and contains the other, you will be able to achieve a ready rememberance not only of the Circaean incantation, but of all things presenting themselves to your memory.

A: I will try it out.
— Cantus Circaeus Giordano Bruno, translated by Tomas Zahora, p. 55.

nd the dialogue in the De umbris idearum makes it quite clear that the instructor of Philothimus — and therefore of Filoteo or Teofilo, of the Nolan, of Giordano Bruno — is Hermes Trismegistus. It is Hermes who hands the book with the new philosophy and the new art in it to Philothimus; and this is the book on the Shadows of Ideas by Giordano Bruno, which is, in fact, written by Hermes — that is to say it is a book about magic, about a very strong solar magic. The allusion to the Lament in the Asclepius, describing how the magical religion of the Egyptians came in late, bad times, to be forbidden by legal statutes, relates this new Hermetic revelation vouchsafed to Giordano Bruno to the Egyptian religion, the religion of the intellect, or of the mind, reached beyond the worship of the visible sun. Those who forbade that religion by law, were, in the Augustinian interpretation of the Lament, the Christians, whose purer religion superseded that of the Egyptians. But, according to Bruno, the false Christian ‘Mercuries’ have suppressed the better Egyptian religion — an anti-Christian interpretation of Hermetism of which much more evidence will be adduced from Bruno’s works later on. (...) The book is arranged in groupings of thirty. First, there are thirty short paragraphs or chapters about intentiones, or seeking the light of the divinity through having an intention of the will towards shadows or reflections of it. (...) Then come thirty short chapters on ‘concepts of ideas’; these are vaguely Neoplatonic, with several mentions of Plotinus. (...) The lists of these images take up a considerable part of the book. They are arranged in thirty groups, each subdivided into sets of five, making one hundred and fifty images in all. (...) The magic images were placed on the wheel of the memory system to which corresponded other wheels on which were remembered all the physical contents of the terrestrial world — elements, stones, metals, herbs and plants, animals, birds, and so on — and the whole sum of human knowledge accumulated through the centuries through the images of one hundred and fifty great men and inventors. The possessor of this system thus rose above time and reflected the whole universe of nature and of man in his mind. (...) Bruno’s magic memory system thus represents the memory of a Magus, one who both knows the reality beyond the multiplicity of appearances through having conformed his imagination to the archetypal images, and also has powers through this insight. It is the direct descendant of Ficino’s Neoplatonic interpretation of the celestial images, but carried to a much more daring extreme.
— Frances A. Yates: Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1964. pp. 194-199.