43 Hermes Trismegistus. Poimandrès. Asklèpiou horoi pros Ammona basilea. [...] Poemander, seu de potestate ac sapientia divina. Aesculapii definitiones ad Ammonem regem.
Paris, Adrien Turnebus 1554

First printed edition of the Greek text of the Corpus Hermeticum, published by the French humanist Adrien Turnebus (Turnèbe, 1512-1565), who held the Chair of Greek at the Collège Royal from 1547. In the years 1552-1556 he was furthermore responsible for the Imprimerie Royale's department of Greek texts. Turnebus published several translations of Greek writers in Latin (amongst others Plutarch and Philo) and wrote a number of commentaries on the works of Cicero.

The Turnebus edition contains CH I-XVIII and is based on only one Greek manuscript, which is related to the fifteenth-century Corpus Hermeticum manuscript kept in Vienna (Vindob. phil. 102). Discourse XV is composed of three fragments which are derived from the Johannes Stobaeus anthology [no 16]. In the standard edition of Nock and Festugière discourse XV is therefore not included as such, the order being I-XIV and XVI-XVIII. The total Hermetic corpus thus consists of seventeen discourses. The three final discourses, the so-called Definitiones Asclepii are incorrectly presented as a textual unity in the Turnebus edition.

The edition is preceded by a preface written by Ange Vergèce (Angelus Vergicius or Vergerius), a calligrapher from Crete, whose handwriting was so exemplary that it served as a model for the engravers of the Greek type in the royal printing house, the Grecs du Roi.

Vergicius claims in his preface that Hermes Trismegistus lived prior to Moses and he stresses the close relationship between the Hermetic teachings and Christianity. He quotes from the great Byzantine encyclopedia Souda (=bulwark), which in his days was attributed to Suidas, and which states that Hermes advocated the doctrine of the Trinity. Vergicius adds that he found excerpts from the writings of Hermes in Stobaeus' anthology.

Ref. Scott I, 33-34; Scott IV, 235 (Suidas); Stobaeus (ed. Wachsmuth and Hense) 3.11.31, 2.1.26, 4.52.47 (=CH XV); MEW Turnèbe s.v.; Biogr. univ. Vergèce s.v.

44 Hermes Trismegistus. Pimandras utraque lingua restitutus, D. Francisci Flussatis Candallae industria.
Bordeaux, Simon Millanges 1574

François Foix de Candale (1512-1594), Bishop of Aire, was an esteemed scientist and alchemist in his time. Agrippa d'Aubigné described a tour of his laboratory (Oeuvres, ed. H. Weber et al., 414). This is where he produced his medicines, including the famous panacea 'Eau de Candale'.

In 1566 he provided an annotated edition of the Elements of Euclid, which was reprinted in 1578 and 1602. In 1574 Foix published a new Latin translation of CH I-XVI, together with the first Greek edition of Turnebus [no 43], which had been corrected on the authority of Josephus Scaliger (1540-1609) and other learned men. In those instances where the Greek deviates from that of the Turnebus edition, Foix supplies the latter's reading in the margin.

As was the case in the Turnebus edition, discourse XV consists of the three fragments from Stobaeus, to which has been added the locus in Suidas (Scott IV, 235), which Vergicius quoted in his preface to the Turnebus edition. The fragment which has come down to us as discourse XVII is omitted by Foix, possibly because of the magical implications which are reminiscent of the Latin Asclepius. It was incorrectly added to CH XVI in the manuscripts and in the Turnebus edition. Discourse XVIII is also lacking. Some do not judge it to be an authentically hermetic work.

In his dedicatory epistle to Emperor Maximilian II, Foix remarks that Hermes Trismegistus possessed knowledge of the divine equal to the apostles and the evangelists. For Hermes speaks of the Trinity in the Suidas fragment and elsewhere he speaks of the Logos (CH I), about rebirth (CH XIII), baptism (CH IV) and the resurrection of the body (CH III.4).

In the preface to the reader Foix mentions the work of Ficino and the French translation of Gabriel du Préau [no 53]. In view of its blasphemous passages, for which he faults the supposed 'translator', the evil magus Apuleius [see no 1], the Latin Asclepius is not included in his edition.

Ref. Scott, I, 34-36; Harrie, 499-514; DBF s.v.


45 Hermes Trismegistus. Pymander.
[Ed. Hannibal Roselli]. Cracow, Lazarus 1584-1590 6 parts
(Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam Library)

Little is known about Roselli (ca 1525-ca 1600): he was a Franciscan who taught theology first at Todi and later at Cracow. He met the English Hermeticist John Dee (1527-1608) when the latter remained at the Prague court of Rudolph II, and became his confessor. At that time Roselli was working on his edition of the Corpus Hermeticum.

The voluminous work is not so much a commentary on the Corpus Hermeticum as an encyclopedia of philosophical themes, with passages from CH I-VII and the Latin Asclepius serving as introduction. The first five books are connected with the Corpus Hermeticum: I, De S.S. Trinitate; II, De spiritu et angelis; III, De ente, materia, forma, et rebus metaphysicis; IV, De coelo and V, De elementis, et descriptione totius orbis. Book VI, De immortalitate animae, goes back to Asclepius.

In the fourth part, the first to be published (1584), Roselli announced ten parts, but he never completed his encyclopedia.

The passages from the Corpus Hermeticum which Roselli quotes and occasionally alters are derived from Ficino's translation.

Ref. BU s.v.; Scott I, 36; Clulee, 224

46 Hermes Trismegistus. Pymander.
[Ed. Hannibal Roselli]. Cologne, Peter Cholinus 1630

Another edition of no 46, enlarged with the text of the Greek-Latin edition of Foix de Candale of 1574 [no 44]. This text precedes part I of Roselli's encyclopedic work. The passages from Corpus Hermeticum were reproduced without alterations. They are derived from Ficino's translation.


47 Francesco Patrizi. Nova de universis philosophia.
Ferrara, Benedetto Mammarelli 1591

Latin translatin of CH I-XIV, together with a Greek text in which numerous 'emendations' have been introduced, followed by the Latin Asclepius, and the Definitiones Asclepii (CH XVI-XVIII), also supplied with the Greek text, and edited by Francesco Patrizi (1529-1597). It is part of his Nova de universis philosophia (1591), a work in which the author attempted to undermine the authority of Aristotle with the help of Zoroaster, Hermes Trismegistus and Plato. To this end he also included in his work the so-called Theologia Aristotelis, with which he attempted to 'Platonize' the philosophy of Aristotle. This pseudo-Aristotelian work is in fact a paraphrase of Plotin's Enneads IV-V. Patrizi gives it the title: Mystica Aegyptiorum et Chaldaeorum a Platone, voce tradita, ab Aristotele, excepta et conscripta philosophia.

In the preface to his edition of the Corpus Hermeticum, too, Patrizi fulminates against the godless Aristotle; the true philosophy is to be found in the works of Hermes. The editor discusses the backgrounds of Hermes with reference to such classical authors as Manetho and Jamblichus, and relatively modern writers such as Goropius Becanus, and Calcidius [=Altividius]. Patrizi claims to have altered the texts of Ficino, Foix de Candale and Stobaeus in more than 1040 instances. He also makes mention of a Corpus Hermeticum manuscript which he found in Cyprus, in a monastery called Enclistra.

Patrizi extends the Corpus Hermeticum to 20 books. He changes the order and puts together more or less thematic treatises using fragments derived from Stobaeus, Lactantius and Cyrillus of Alexandria. The sequence is as follows: De pietate et philosophia (Stobaeus 1.41.1); CH I, III, X, V, VI, XIII, VII, II, XI, XII, IV; Minerva mundi, that is the Stobaeus fragment Korè kosmou, enlarged with related passages (1.49.44-45, 1.49.68-69). As an appendix are added Stobaeus fragments under the title De providentia et fato (1.5.20, 1.5.16, 1.4.8., 1.8.41, and 1.21.9 from paragraph 8 onwards, from which it may be inferred that Patrizi used a Stobaeus text similar to the Parisinus Graecus 2129 manuscript, which nowadays counts as one of the two most important Stobaeus manuscripts); De anima (Stobaeus 1.41.4; 1.41.7; 1.49.3-6; 2.8.31); CH IX, De energia et sensu (Stobaeus 1.41.6a; 1.41.8; Lactantius Divinae institutiones VII.13.3; Stobaeus 4.52.41 [Greek fragment of the Asclepius 27]; Stobaeus 4.52.47; 1.42.7; 3.13.65); De veritate (Stobaeus 3.11.31); CH VIII, XIV, and finally Ex III ad Asclepium. In the latter book Patrizi put together a great number of fragments, frequently omitting the divisions between passages and thus suggesting a continuous text. The 'book' contains: Cyrillus Contra Julianum 1 556 A, 552 D (with Patrizi interfering in the text), 556 B. Next Patrizi presents a fragment from the Logos teleios, the Greek original of the Asclepius, which does not occur in the text at all; he derived this passage from Suidas, who copied it from the chronicle of Johannes Malalas (ca 528-573). The latter misinterpreted a pseudo-Orphic passage from Cyrillus (I 552 C) and incorrectly attributed it to Hermes Trismegistus. Patrizi continues his series with Lactantius 4.6.4. and 7.18.4; Stobaeus 2.1.21 (quoted in part by Cyrillus); Lactantius 4.7.3. and 2.15.6. (= Asclepius 29) and Stobaeus 1.41.11. He continues with the Latin text of Cyrillus I 556 B and I 549 C-D in the absence of a Greek version, and concludes with Stobaeus 1.11.2; Cyrillus II 588 B, II 588 A, and a fragment of CH I 18 (cf Genesis 1:28).

Patrizi's edition continues with the Latin Asclepius, and is followed by the Definitiones Asclepii (CH XVI-XVIII), in which he recognizes three separate treatises (the antecedents of this text are discussed under nos 9 and 49). He remarks that Foix de Candale (1574) only included the first part of the Definitiones in his text, whereas Turnebus (1554) had nevertheless published the entire text. Patrizi objects to the title; for nothing is being 'defined': 'Sed primo cur et quomodo titulus, Horoi, definitiones? congruat, nulla certa ratio videtur reddi posse'. He supplies CH XVI with a relevant title, De Sole et Daemonibus, adding fragment CH XVII with the remark that this text is derived from another discourse. He divides CH XVIII in two books: paragraphs 1-10, De anima a corporis passione impedita, and paragraphs 1-16, De bona fama, et encomium Regis. In the modern critical edition of the Greek text this division is maintained, although within one discourse.

Discourse XVI again deals with the relationship between God and the world. God is 'the master, maker, father and container of the whole universe, the all who is one, and the one who is all'. The supreme architect of the universe is the sun, which has joined heaven and earth:

sending essence below and raising matter above, attracting everything toward the sun and around it, offering everything from himself to everything, as he freely gives of the ungrudging light. [...]. But if there also exists some intellectual essence, it is the sun's mass, whose receptacle may be sunlight. Only the sun knows [...] of what this essence is composed or whence it flows since by location and nature it is near to the sun.

The sun is situated in the centre of the universe. Giordano Bruno (1548-1600) who defended the 'new' Copernican world picture, was familiar with this discourse.

The sun exercises authority over the demons, who in conjunction with the planets influence life on earth. They attempt to manipulate the souls:

Those that enter through the body into the two parts of the soul twist the soul about, each toward its own energy. But the rational part of the soul stands unmastered by the demons, suitable as a receptacle for god.

The mind is therefore untouchable, and free of planetary influences. The intelligible world depends on God; the sensible world depends on the intelligible. Through the intermediary of the intelligible and sensible world, the sun receives the flow of goodness, that is: the creative element. There is a sympathetic network between all creatures and things, which ultimately depends on God.

Ref. Scott I, 36-40; Kristeller 1964, 110-26; Purnell 1976.


48 Francesco Patrizi. Nova de universis philosophia.
Hamburg, s.n. 1593
(London, British Library)

Another edition of no 47.

CH XVII contains a fragment of a dialogue between Tat and a king, presumably Ammon, on statues. Scott considers the discourse to be part of the older hermetica and gives as date of origin the third century of our era.

In the Greek manuscripts the fragment succeeds CH XVI without interruption, although it is not related in content. Modern editors have distinguished CH XVI, XVII and XVIII as separate discourses. Lazarelli [no 9] still regarded these discourses as an inseperable whole. His Latin translation of these three texts was included in the Liber de quadruplici vita (1507) of Symphorien Champier (1470-1538) [no 43]. Turnebus (1554) [no 43] likewise presented the Greek text of these three discourses as one whole, namely 'book XVI'; what is nowadays CH XVI and XVII is not differentiated as such in the first edition of the Greek text. Foix de Candale (1574) [no 44] only included the first of the three (CH XVI) in his Greek-Latin edition. Patrizi (1591, 1593) [nos 47 and 48] was the first to note that these three discourses, the so-called Definitiones Asclepii, do not form a unity.

The writer of CH XVII made use of Platonic terminology; he distinguishes between corporeal and incorporeal things (somata versus asomata) and between the sensible world and the intelligible world (aisthèsis kosmos versus noètos kosmos). Tat explains to the king that there exist 'incorporeal images of bodies', like mirror images. Furthermore there also exist 'incorporeal images' such as ideas. 'These are incorporeal and intelligible, even though they manifest themselves in physical shapes'. In fact, Tat claims, 'the sensible world is reflected in the intelligible and the intelligible in the sensible'. In other words, the way a body is reflected as an image in a mirror, ideas (as expressions of the intelligible world) are reflected in the body. Tat then advises to worship images, 'because they embody ideas from the intelligible world'. This is reminiscent of a passage from the Latin Asclepius (24) in which it is said that 'the statues of the gods are animated and filled with the breath of life', and also of Plutarch, who in De Iside et Osiride 77 writes that the statues of the gods function as mirrors in which the noèta (the entities of which the noètos komsos, the intelligible world, consists) are reflected.

It is not unthinkable that Foix de Candale (1574) omitted this fragment because of its magical implications. Later editors for that matter also considered the Definitiones Asclepii to be of a different order than CH I-XIV.


49 Francesco Patrizi. Magia philosophica.
Hamburg, s.n. 1593
(The Hague, Royal Library)

Selection from Patrizi's Nova de universis philosophia (1591), without the Greek text, consisting of the oracles of Zoroaster, the Latin Asclepius, and part of Patrizi's translation of the Corpus Hermeticum, in his revised order Liber I-XVIII. Book XIX (=CH XIV) and book XX (consisting of fragments) are not included in this edition. The text of the Definitiones Asclepii (CH XVI-XVIII) is also lacking.

Another selection from Patrizi's hermetica appeared as: Hermes Trismegistus Opuscula, London 1611 (reprinted 1628). This edition does contain the Definitiones Asclepii (Scott I, 37 n.1). No copies of this edition have been traced.

Discourse XVIII, the last discourse of the Corpus Hermeticum, is somewhat separate from the rest in terms of composition, contents and tone. In the past, various editors did not consider this discourse to be authentically Hermetic. Foix de Candale did not include the discourse in his Greek-Latin edition of 1574 [no 44]. A possible reason for this omission is that there is a reference to the sculptor Phidias (ca 440 BCE) in paragraph 4. To those who believed Hermes Trismegistus to be a contemporary of Moses, this must have been an awkward anachronism.

The discourse contains a Eulogy on kingship, composed according to the rules of rhetoric. In view of the fact that Pharao was regarded as a God-King, the contents of the discourse may be characterized as Egyptian. In paragraph 14 it is said that Love moves the universe:

God, who is good and evershining, who always contains within him the limit of his own eminence, who is immortal, who encompasses within himself the endless portion allotted to him, who always keeps flowing from the energy there above to the cosmos here below and makes the promise that leads to the praise that saves...There above, then, beings are not different from one another, nor does inconstancy exist there above. All think one thought, and all have the same foreknowledge; they have one mind, the father. One sense works in them, and the charm that brings them together is love, the same love that makes one harmony act in all things.

The idea of a cosmogonic Eros has a parallel in the Latin Asclepius (8), in which it is said that God came to love the world as His child. The Gospel of John, too, says that God loved the world (3, 16). In his Epilogue to CH XVIII, G. Quispel points out parallels with gnostic texts, the Chaldean oracles and the Orphic mysteries.

50 Hermes Trismegistus. Poemander.
In: Hermann von der Hardt. Antiquitatis gloria. Helmstedt, Paul Dietrich Schnorr 1737

Extensive paraphrase of the Latin translation of CH I, the Poimandres, by Hermann von der Hardt (1660-1746), a pietist in touch with Francke and Spener. He studied Eastern languages in Jena and became professor at the Julius university of Helmstedt in 1690. Two years earlier he became responsible for the library of Duke Rudolph August of Braunschweig.

In the preface to his paraphrase he writes:

Apud Theophrastum Paracelsum, Rosae crucis fratres, chymicos et mysticos, magnum pretium nominis Mercurii Trismegisti, qui venditatur dux et autor profundae arcanaeque doctrinae theosophicae et pneumaticae.

(The name of Mercurius Trismegistus is held in great esteem by Paracelsus, the Rosicrucians, alchemists and mystics, as he is praised as author of profound and secret theosophical and pneumatic doctrines).

According to von der Hardt, Hermes Trismegistus lived after the birth of Christ, amongst Greek-Alexandrinian Christians. The Orientalist then notes a number of parallels with the text of the Bible, including Jacob's dream from Genesis 28, which shows similarities with the dream c.q. the vision of Hermes Trismegistus (CH I.1). See the illustration.

Ref. ADB, Hardt s.v.

51 Hermes Trismegistus. Il Pimandro, tradotto da Tommaso Benci in lingua Fiorentina.
Florence, [Lorenzo Torrentino] 1548

After Ficino had completed his Latin translation in 1463 he asked his friend Tommaso Benci (1427-1470) to produce a version in the Tuscan vernacular. Benci complied with Ficino's request and completed his translation in September of the same year, after which copies soon circulated for the sake of those unfamiliar with Latin.

The translation was not printed until 1548. In the preface, dated 28 January 1547, the editor, Carlo Lenzoni, writes that Benci's reputation was so impeccable that he was allowed to elucidate Socrates' text for the benefit of Ficino's comment on Plato's Symposion, the treatise on the Eros.

Lenzoni characterizes the printer as a man who promotes Tuscan literature while he also admires his fine letter types.

The translation is preceded by two loci: a fragment from the second book of Calcidius (=Alcydius or Altividius) De immortalitate animorum [see no 5] and a passage from the Hebrew Sefer Raziel, in which it is said that Hermes Trismegistus united in himself the image of the Father, the wisdom of the Son and the prophetic gift of the Holy Spirit.

Benci considers the hymn at the end of CH XIII as a separate textual unit, thus arriving at a total of fifteen discourses.