John Dee: Science, Magic, and Elizabethan Imperial Thought

Introduction: The Enigma of John Dee

The character of the sixteenth-century mathematician and philosopher John Dee presents an intriguing conjunction of science, magic, and imperial patronage seemingly hand-crafted for his time. In order to fully understand the range of Dee's influence on both Elizabethan imperialism and the advance of the sciences, it is necessary to examine some of the key events of his life as well as the philosophy he formulated through years of mathematical and magical thinking. Although Dee's particular blend of the scientific and spiritual may at first glance appear almost anachronistic even within his own era, he in fact demonstrates the confluence of seemingly disparate historical and cultural forces that initiated an expansion of thought and empire beyond anything previously considered.

To begin an analysis of John Dee, it will be useful to briefly examine points in his life that may serve as temporal landmarks, placing the development of his thought in its proper context. For this study, one need not concern oneself with the entirety of Dee's biography, but rather only those details which serve to illuminate his fascinating continuum of scientific spirituality. The word continuum is used here explicitly, because, as will be shown, Dee saw no necessary distinction between the two. Indeed, one may consider Dee's mathematical and scientific work to be an embodiment of Arthur C. Clarke's third law of prediction, which states that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

The veracity of Clarke's law is seen at the point where Dee first gains his reputation as a magician. In 1547, Dee provided stage effects for a production of Aristophanes' Peace that so astounded the audience that whatever mechanism produced Trygaeus' "miraculous ascent onto the roof of Trinity Hall" was, quite literally, indistinguishable from magic (John Dee Chronology; Heppel 40; Strathmann 369). There is no evidence to suggest Dee worked to dispel this notion among the audience; indeed, it seems he was content to maintain an air of secrecy and mystery as long as it did not bring him negative attention from the authorities — which it certainly did, and with relative frequency. In these situations he argued his own case vigorously, and in one instance, perhaps a little too much. Thus, before moving on to Dee's influence during the majority of his life, it will be helpful to leap ahead to the end, when Dee petitioned James I to clear him "of the slander of conjuring."

Dee's Reputation as Conjurer and His Petition to James I

In his essay "John Dee as Ralegh's Conjurer," Ernest Strathmann argues that John Dee — likely erroneously — identified himself as the "conjuror" mentioned by Robert Parsons in the latter's screed against Walter Raleigh and his possible elevation to the Queen's council. Strathmann points out that Dee's assumption stands in opposition to the majority of historians and commentators of the time, who almost unanimously agree that the "conjuror" label was more likely meant to ensnare Thomas Harriot, another scientist and mathematician and close acquaintance of Raleigh (Strathmann 365). Nevertheless, Strathmann offers some evidence that, while perhaps not correct, Dee's assumption was not entirely unfounded. Aside from Dee's already well-established reputation as something of a mystic, Strathmann notes Dee's "long and prominent association with powerful officials and courtiers (including Ralegh) whom Parsons attacked by name." In addition, Strathmann summarizes the various evidence that may have convinced Dee he was one of Parsons' targets:

"first, that he seems to refer to this attack when he addresses King James in 1604; second, that his long association with members of the Court and his reputation as a magician make him a likely candidate for the role of 'adviser' to the Council; third, that his prominence would make Parsons' knowledge of him very probably indeed." (Strathmann 370–371)

Strathmann, like most historians, does not find these reasons convincing beyond explaining why Dee may have thought himself the target, but he does offer one piece of analysis that sheds light on the entire trajectory of Dee's life, especially in relation to his shifting fortunes with the Crown:

"Finally, there is a note of desperation in these published appeals by John Dee in 1603 and 1604. The old man, vain of his reputation, had long smarted under the slanders of his countrymen. When the word 'conjuror' appeared, he was likely to read after it: 'John Dee.'" (Strathmann 371)

Indeed, Dee's petition is almost comically strained in that he is sure to point out that no one could provide evidence of him having conjured damned spirits; he himself had provided plenty of evidence for conjuring in his work on the numerical language of angels (Rattansi 82). Thus, Strathmann offers an explanation for Dee's somewhat unnecessary appeal to James, made all the more so considering it likely would have been in Dee's best interest not to continue reminding everyone about past accusations — especially in light of James' animosity, or at least ambivalence, regarding the mystical:

"…yet some impudent and malicious foreign enemy, or English traitor to the flourishing state and honor of this kingdom, hath in print (Anno 1592. 7. Januarii) affirmed your Majesty's said suppliant to be the conjuror belonging to the most honorable Privy Council of your Majesty's most famous last predecessor (Queen Elizabeth), so that, seeing the said abominable slander is become so highly heinous and disgraceful, that it pretendeth great discredit and disliking to be had, also, of the said most honorable Lords of your Majesty's Privy Council (as to use any conjuror's advice: and your said suppliant to be the man)." (Dee 1604)

Dee's "shaky logic" — which tries to make a possible slander against him extend into a slander against James and his Council — further demonstrates Strathmann's point, and reveals the almost tragic fall of Dee from favored polymath of the Crown to groveling old man. However, Dee's tragic flaw (aside from the obvious vanity noted by Strathmann) was in fact his dedication to his own personal conception of the sciences, and specifically his insistence on the connection between the verifiable, objective sciences and the murky assumptions of magic and alchemy.

Having examined the practical beginning and end of Dee's career as a magician — while acknowledging that this title was both externally imposed and reinforced by Dee himself — it is now possible to look at his activities in the intervening years to see how, for instance, Dee rose to such prominence that he could assume Parsons' "conjuror" to be himself, or that an attack on him was an attack on two heads of English monarchy. Dee's contributions can largely be divided into two categories, though of course there is some overlap: his scientific, mathematical, and alchemical writings, and his imperial and cartographical works. A large swath of Dee's work was, as is obvious now, fantastically incorrect — he was an alchemist, after all — but this does not necessarily render his "scientific" works useless. Rather, they offer insight into the tension between religion and science, and show how Dee, a devout follower of both, blended the two into his particular brand of flawed cosmology. This thinking, in turn, likely informed his imperial arguments, for it is no large leap to assume that one who believes the earth is the center of the universe would also assume that his home country is the destined ruler of that earth.

Scientific and Alchemical Writings

In his review of John Dee's Propaedeumata Aphoristica, A. G. Molland succinctly evaluates the motivating factors and resultant implications of Dee's scientific-spiritual thought. Molland argues that initially, Dee thought himself capable of creating a kind of astrological physics by applying magical thought to a consideration of astronomy, so that he might have access to all the tools of the astrologer without recourse to demons or conjured spirits. To aid in this endeavor, Molland notes that Propaedeumata Aphoristica contains "the odd picture of [Dee] apparently trying to appropriate as a collateral another Englishman" by claiming to have written:

"Mirror of Unity, or Apologia for Friar Bacon the Englishman, in which it is shown that he did nothing by aid of demons, but was a most great philosopher, and performed naturally and in ways allowable to a Christian man the great things which the unlearned crowd is wont to ascribe to the actions of demons." (Molland 256)

Molland points out that despite this appeal to Bacon and natural reason, Dee's work is still obviously astrological, and that for the most part Dee simply replaces demonic information with angelic. In Propaedeumata Aphoristica, this takes the form of a discussion of "the supernatural influence of the Star of Jacob," which Molland illuminates by relating a Biblical prophecy regarding "a star out of Jacob" and noting that "in the exegetical tradition this was often tied up with the star that led the Magi to Bethlehem. According to Aquinas some 'say that the angel that appeared to the shepherds in human form appeared to the Magi in the form of the star'" (Molland 257). Of course, this kind of thinking would eventually lead Dee to argue that "at length I perceived only God (and by his good Angels) could satisfy my desire," and ultimately resulted in his extensive travels with the medium and alchemist Edward Kelley. Furthermore, this insistence on an astrological interpretation of cosmology directly influenced his other "scientific" works, something taken up in J. Peter Zetterberg's analysis of what he calls Dee's "hermetic geocentricity."

Conclusion: The Last Gasp of the Mystical

In some ways, John Dee can be seen as the last gasp of the mystical in the face of a rapidly developing and enlightened planet. Despite his deserved reputation as a mathematician and scientist, it was his astrological, alchemical, and magical contributions which allowed him to rise to the post of favored adviser to Queen Elizabeth and fall to the point of his desperate defense in the face of imagined slights during the reign of King James. Furthermore, his magical thinking permeated even his navigational and imperial texts, so that although he is often credited as coining the term "British Empire," the empire of Dee's imagination was surely more fantastic, divine, and unknowable than any actual British conquests of the following centuries.