Idea Transcript
SERGIUS KODERA
RENAISSANCE READINGS OF THE MYTH OF ARISTOPHANES FROM PLATO'S 5KMP05/^Af (189C-193D): MARSILIO PIGINO, LEONE EBREO, GIORDANO BRUNO For more than a century Ficino's commentary on the Symposium (1469)
was imitated by
who wrote philosophical treatises on love among European readers.' It is curious and interest-
several authors
that circulated widely
ing, for the transmission
on
love, filled as
it
of works and their interpretation, that
was with implicit and
explicit
Plato's text
homoeroticism, should
have had such a profound impact on sixteenth-century
Italian culture.
Indeed, the transformation of Platonic erotic doctrines into something
compatible with the moral standards of both Christianity and Judaism
is
a
fascinating chapter in the history of the domestication of pagan discourse
and
a
textbook case of deliberate misreading. This
Renaissance philosophers
—
respective
(ca.
Giordano Bruno (1548-1600) of a
interpretations
Aristophanes' account of the
mordial beings.
The
examines three
the Christian Neo-Platonist Marsilio Ficino
(1433-99), the Sephardic Jew Leone Ebreo radical thinker
article
crucial
myth of
1480
—
-
ca.
1520), and the
in order to discuss their
speech
the
in
the birth of love, the
assimilation of this part of the
Symposium:
myth of
pri-
Symposium was espe-
Christian and the Jewish traditions because in this
cially difficult for the
passage Plato speaks approvingly of homosexuality and lesbianism, thus outlining a Greek anthropology relating to the Athenian city state vastly different
This
from that of
later societies.- In
was
written
article
originally
for
commenting and attempting
conference
a
on
"Sexualities
to
and
Knowledges" organized by Margarite Waller and held at the University of California, Riverside, a
workshop held
22-24 February 2002.
anonymous
earlier version
University of Vienna in June 2000.
at the
Pechriggl, Valéry Rees, Marguerite Waller several
An
I
was presented
at
wish to thank Alice
and Konrad Eisenbichler
as well as
reviewers for their encouraging remarks, criticisms, and valu-
able suggestions.
^The terms homoerotic and sent context, they are
or between
heterosexual are no doubt anachronistic; in the pre-
meant only
men and women and
jective identities. In his
to
denote sexual relationships between males
they do not refer to the constitution of sub-
ground breaking study on homosexuality and male
ture in Renaissance Florence, Michael
Quaderni
d'italianistica,
Rocke
cul-
characterizes the situation as fol-
Volume XXVI, No.
1,
2005, 21
Kodera
Sergius
from an (otherwise welcomed) pagan authority into
integrate such passages their
own
ed to
cultural environment, the authors
spell
own
out their
Christians alike
fell
own
under consideration
felt
oblig-
about the relationships between the
sexes,
between bodies and minds. In that context, Jews and
as well as the links
akin to their
ideas
back on philosophical anthropologies that were more
respective discursive formations.
Plato in the Renaissance
To
start
with some well-known, but fundamental
sion of Plato's works,
genuine
texts
facts
about the transmis-
should be recalled that during the Middle Ages few
it
from Plato were
accessible in Latin, with the notable excep-
tion of parts of the Timaeus, in the versions of Cicero
Nevertheless, Christians,
due
we
among
perhaps most influential
in part to the praise that the
church authority, Augustine, gave to God,
and Chalcidius.
Platonic philosophy had a very fine reputation
pagan philosopher. In the City of
this
read that Plato was "nearer to the truth than the whole ancient
troop of philosophers."^ This positive assessment must have contributed largely to the high
esteem in which Plato was held
fourteenth-century
(and indeed before).
Petrarch (1304-74),
who
is
at the
beginning of the
One prominent example
is
reported to have obtained from Byzantium a
Greek manuscript of Plato's dialogues; although
it
was one of his most
trea-
sured belongings, Petrarch had no Greek and, though he tried, was unable to find a translator for
It
it.^
was only with Leonardo Bruni
(ca.
1369-
1444), chancellor of the Republic of Florence and one of the foremost
humanists of
his day, that the
Renaissance translation of Platonic works
began. Bruni was modeling Plato into the foremost theoretician of vita
lows:
"Some
scholars, if they have not
with other males
in this
simply assumed that males
who had
sex
period were exclusively 'homosexual,' have adopted the
seemingly more appropriate word 'bisexuality' to characterize men's interest in
both
sexes.
But
lacking in this society, late
term
this anachronistic
drawn contemporary
is
only a hybrid product of the sharply
categories 'homosexual'
and
it
and
'heterosexual,'
which were
probably misrepresents the cultural specificity of
medieval and early modern understandings of erotic experience and senti-
ment." (124) See also below. •'Augustine, City of God, 8,
by Augustine see
S-IL For
his Confessions,
7
,
a
9.
more ambivalent assessment of Platonism
The
story of the reception of Platonic texts
during the Renaissance has been told in great detail by Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance.
"^Copenhaver/Schmitt, Renaissance Philosophy, 127-128; Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance, 1:25-26.; Kristeller, Eight Philosophers, 11.
— 22 —
Renaissance Readings of the
of
of Aristophanes
kind of cultural hero of the Ciceronian brand char-
activa, or active life, a
acteristic
Myth
much of
fifteenth-century
phrased parts of the Symposium.
humanism. But Bruni only
What was
para-
actually so difficult about the
speech of Aristophanes?
Aristophanes' speech In Aristophanes' speech in the Symposium, Plato recounts a story about the
origin of love species of sort of
and sexual
human
mixed
desire. In the old days,
he
were three
states, there
beings, not just two: double males, double females
had four hands and
species; they
two
legs,
sets
and
a
of genitals
with a single head and two faces (189 DE), their shape was round, com-
forming
plete,
from the
a circle.
earth,
The males descended from
and the mixed, androgynous
of the moon. These people were twice
were able to move eight limbs,
the sun, the females
was under the patronage
strong as ordinary people and
they supported themselves with their
effortlessly, as
moving
as
sex
rapidly around
and around
in circles (190A).'' In this
of frightful power the primordial double humans decided to assault
state
the Olympians,
who
—
after
some
attackers (because otherwise there
the gods) but rather to punish
them
in halves,
deliberation
—decided not
would have been no one
left
(190B-D). The
tried to
be with
it;
to be grafted together.
to
worship
and weaken them permanently by cutting effects
were disastrous:
"It
was
essence that had been spliced into two; so each half missed
and
to kill their
their very
other half
its
they threw their arms around each other and longed
As
a result, [...] they died
of starvation and general
humans move the genitals of the sliced halves to their front side, thus enabling them to have sex or, in the case of homosexual relationships, at least to relax and to continue living in a more apathy" (191 A). As a remedy for this situation (and to prevent
from dying out) Zeus ordered Mercury
balanced emotional
state:
and
relationships
offspring,
so that people
male
would
to
"male female relationships leading to procreation
relax, get
would
on with
at least involve sexual satisfaction,
their
work, and take care of other
aspects in life"(191D).6
Spiato, Symposium, trans. Warerfield, 27. Ficino translates this passages, Plato, Opera omnia, 1602, (1 divisa fuit,
cum
quisque dimidium
186B)
sui
as:
agnitum cuperet,
et
torpore deficiebant
unum
affectantes,
[...]."
"Plato, Symposium, trans. Waterfield, 28; Plato, Opera omnia, 1602, "!...]
per
masculum quidem
in
ita
inter se concurrebant,
circumiactisque brachiis se invicem complectebantur, conflari
linde fame
and the following
"Postquam natura hominum
foemina, hac de causa, ut
inae commisceretur, genita prole speciem
— 23 —
hominum
si
in
amplexu
1186CD: vir
foem-
propagarent. Sinautem
Sergius
The
desire for sexual
Kodera
union functions here
as a substitute for a pri-
which remains, however, unrecoverable. Men and women descending from the mixed race are heterosexual, producing the highest quantity of adulteresses and adulterers respectively. mordial unity,
Any women who bians
are ofifcuts
men. They
interested in
come from
this
And any men who While
from the female gender aren t particularly
incline
more towards women and
therefore les-
group. (191 E)^
are ofifcuts
from the male gender go
for the males.
they're boys, because they're slices from the male gender, they
fall
in love with men, they enjoy sex with them, and they like to be embraced
by them. These boys are the ones
who
are outstanding in their
more manly than
and youth, because they are inherently they sometimes get called immoral, but
that's
childhood
others.
I
know
wrong: their actions
aren't
prompted by immorality, but by courage, manliness, and masculinity. [...]
there's
good evidence
men who end up
in
for their quality: as adults, they're the
only
government. (192A)
In an important shift, in this passage Plato links sexual orientation to
the political structure of classical Athens, a city governed by a small
men who
ber of
practiced a sort of ritualised homosexuality that was inti-
mately related to the maintenance of power. There '^
highlight
what
sort of feelings this
is
probably no need to
apology of male homosexuality,
acknowledgement of lesbianism, might have induced
as the
num-
Christians and Jews alike.
masculo masculus,
satietate
The
as well
in Renaissance
value of heterosexuality, the only possible
ab amplexu amoverentur,
et
ad
res
gerendas conver-
"
si
victum, curarent.
'Spiato,
Symposium,
trans.
"Quae vero mulieres
Waterfield, 28; Plato,
mulieris pars existunt,
Opera omnia, 1602, 1186E:
baud multum
viros desiderant, sed
foeminas magis affectant, atque hinc foeminae quae foeminas cupiunt nascuntur."
"Plato, Symposium, trans. Waterfield, 28; Plato, 1 1
Opera omnia, 1602, 1186E-
87A: "At vero qui maris portio sunt, mares sequuntur. At
dum
pueri sunt,
utpote qui maris particula sunt, viros diligunt, virorumque familiaritate assidua
congressuque gaudent: hique sunt puerorum adolescentulorumque generosissimi, quippe per natura prae caeteris
omnibus sunt
viriles.
omnium
Hos quidam
falso apellant. Neque enim impudentia uUa, sed generositate, & forquadam mascula virilique natura hoc agunt [...]. Huius evidens argumentum est, quod cum adoleverint, soli ad civilem administrationem conversi
impudicos titudine
viri
praestantes evadunt [...]."
^Waterfield
in: Plato,
Diotima
Woman?
a
Symposium, '
passim.
trans. Waterfield,
— 24 —
XV- VI.;
Halperin,
"Why
is
Renaissance Readings of the
Myth
of Aristophanes
form of intercourse (and only with procreative hand,
is
on the other
intentions),'"
parodied in Aristophanes' speech.
Renaissance readers had to domesticate the text
if
they wanted to con-
tinue to study Plato or to use his texts as a support for their
own
could they assimilate such passages into their
without discrediting Plato
forever,
been notoriously
him
alone endorse
let
Christian of all pagan philosophers? In
own
ideas:
the most
as
even for modern readers
fact,
how
background
cultural
has
it
tone of Aristophanes' speech, or
difficult to assess the
even to give a consistent and convincing interpretation of the story:
intended
as
mere parody, or more of an Aesopian
fable,
and
if so,
is
what
it
sort
of morals are to be construed from the narration? To what extent are genuine Platonic concepts about Eros
we
embedded
to think of the idea that sexuality
course, far
beyond the scope of this
as attractive as
alike,
it
are
It is,
One
of
aspect
was mysterious to
the idea that sexuality
is
is
actually
of some sort that has been
a substitute, ersatz^ for a primordial unity
for good, a
What
inborn and hereditary?"
is
article to treat these issues.
of the Aristophanes myth that was Renaissance and modern readers
in the narration?
lost
kind of emotional sensation. According to Plato, lovers "obvi-
some other objective, which only glimpse what it is and articulate it ously have
their in
minds
can't formulate;
they
vague terms" (192CD).'- Here
Eros becomes a signifier for the pursuit of lost primordial wholeness, which allows the matching halves to desire such close proximity that they
^^See, for example Ficino, Commentaire sur
le
would
Banquet, VI, 14: 229-230; see also
below.
^^See Guthrie,
Symposium, provides
a
A
History of Greek Philosophy, IV: 384; Waterfield in Plato,
trans. Waterfield,
"Aristophanes' speech in
its
XXIII-IV; Nehamas, Virtues ofAuthenticity, 307,
good example of
use of myth,
is
it is
contemporary assessment of
a
stunning in
on the whole
its
originality.
Although
a highly serious work,
has no parallel in earlier Greek literature.
It
it
this
text:
contains parody
and
actually anticipates
its
view of love
more romantic
versions of love, particularly the idea that love draws together two unique indi-
viduals to join as one person. For
all its
comic elements,
a sad note
sounds
fre-
quently in the speech: the goal of loving, the forging of one person out of two, is
not to be achieved.
ual relationships,
and
What we
and these
have instead
are at best a
is
the temporary satisfaction of sex-
promise of a more permanent happiness
a closer union."
^^Plato, Symposium, trans. Waterfield, 28-9; Plato, Opera omnia, 1602, 1187B:
"Aliud
quiddam
est profecto,
quod animus utriusque
cupit, nee exprimere valet,
sed vaticinatur potius conijcitque, et affectum insitum vestigiis signât obscuris."
See also Halperin, "Platonic
Eros,''
67-69.
— 25 —
Sergius
even gladly
Kodera
Hephaestus, '^ the divine blacksmith, bind and fasten them
let
together for eternity. This longing cannot be induced by sex or physical attraction alone, but only
by some
sort of desire for
an ontologically high-
(192DE).
er unity
On the other hand,
such noble and high-flying ideas in the truest sense
of the word are counterbalanced by the Aristophanes'
tale:
quite
instance, the divine threat to the
satirical
modern halved humans
humorous
(to
mood
characteristic
readers, at least)
of for
is,
that if they continue to
misbehave they would be divided once more, "and
in that
mode of exis-
tence we'd be no different from those profiles on tombstone, sawn in two
down
the line of our noses" (193A).''*
To Marsilio
Ficino, this threat
would
be an integral part of the divine mysteries hidden behind the profane
text.
Marsilio Ficino's Psychological Reading Marsilio Ficino, the
first
complete works of Plato into Latin
translator of the
(published 1484), was a key figure in the transmission of Platonism to the Latin west after the Middle Ages. In addition, Ficino wrote sometimes
lengthy commentaries or introductions to Plato's works, in which his key
was
objective
to endorse Plato as a sort
and formed part of a
larger
whose doctrines could be interpreted doctrine.''' Ficino's translation
century and Ficino's
is
faithfijl to
commentary on
Platonis,
De amore, one
to cover
up the
of Attic Moses
group of prisci
who
wrote in Greek
theologi (ancient theologians)
as forebears
of the truths of Christian
of Plato was influential until the nineteenth-
the text.'^
The
following discussion will focus on
the Symposium, the
Commentarium
in convivium
of his most successful works, where the Author
difficult passages
The fourth book of the De amore is devoted to Aristophanes' From the very beginning Ficino emphasizes the difficulty and obscurity of this passage, which calls for special interpretative
•^This
is,
tries
of the myth of Aristophanes. '^
of course, an ironic allusion to the way
in
speech. alleged
methods
to
which Hephaestus welded
his
unfaithful wife Aphrodite together with her lover Ares in a hunting net to expose
the adulterous couple to the derision of the gods {Odyssey 8. 266-367). ^'*Plato, "[...]
Symposium, talesque
evadamus
trans. Waterfield, 29; Plato,
efficiamur,
quales
qui
in
Opera omnia, 1602, 1187D:
columnis figurantur,
nares
secti
similes [...]."
-'Copenhaver/Schmitt, Renaissance Philosophy, 155; Allen, "Ficino's Theory," /?^5z>w.
For a positive assessment of the quality of Ficino's translations, see Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance, 1:31 1-313.
^See Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance, 2:484 on editions and dates of composition for this work.
— 26 —
Renaissance Readings of the
M\th
of Aristophanes
Unhke
read the story of the primordial humans.
his
other speeches of the Symposium, in this case Ficino entirety.
the the
This allows him
to
commentaries on the retells
the
myth
in its
omit some of the most unassimilable passages:
encomium of homosexual men, and Zeus moving the sexual organs of halved humans to their front side. Only a half sentence alludes to diver-
gent sexual orientations: "Everyone therefore
no matter meets
which sex he
to
it [...].
feels attracted,
is
and
looking for his other gets very excited
"'^
Ficino then takes another step which provides
pagan
basis to domesticate the
text in
ty of Augustine, he claims that
it
is
its
him with
the figments of the
text.'''
a theoretical
entirety: referring to the authori-
indispensable to read the
allegory in order to discover the divine mysteries that
In that process
it is
ing all the items reported in the story, because
lie
myth
under the
as
an
veil
of
possible to avoid interpret-
many
details are
introduced
only to allow for the ordering and the connection of disparate and cult,
half,
when he
and hence
divine, truths.
Even obscenity may turn out
diffi-
to be a safe-
guard against profanation. In that context, Ficino links allegorical reading metaphorically to a tool, the iron part of the plough used to turn the earth and, therefore, the essential element to which other (non-essential) parts are added.
For
it
was the custom of the ancient theologians to conceal
pure mysteries in the shadows of metaphors, profane and impure.
[...]
lest
their holy
For even Aurelius Augustine says that not
the things that are represented in figures must be thought to thing. For
many is
all
mean some-
things are added for the sake of order and connection,
on account of the ploughshare
and
they be defiled by the
parts
do mean something. Only by the
that
the earth turned, but in order that this can be done, other
parts too are joined to the plough. 20
^"Ficino, Commentaire sur
suum
alicui
[...]"
{Symposium 191A).
^^On
le
Banquet, IV, 2:167-168: "Quotiens itaque dimidium
cuiuscumque sexus avidus
sit
occurrit,
vehementissime concitatur
Ficino and allegorical reading, see, for instance, Copenhaver/Schmitt,
Renaissance Philosophy, 155-6; Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance, 1:343-347.
^^Ficino, Commentary on
puraque arcana, ne
Nam
Plato's
Symposium, 72-73; Ficino, Commentaire sur
"Mos enim
Banquet, IV, 2:169: a
prophanis
erat
et
le
veterum theologorum sacra ipsorum
impuris poUuerentur, figurarum umbraculis
non omnia inquit, que in figuris finenim propter ilia que significant ordinis et connexionis gratia sunt adiuncta. Solo vomere terra proscinditur sed, ut hoc fieri possit, cetera quoque huic aratri membra iunguntur." tegere. [...]
et
Aurelius Augustinus
guntur, significare aliquid putanda sunt. Multa
— 27 —
Sergius
But
allegorical exegesis
more
Kodera
not the sole strategy for avoiding some of the
is
difficult passages in Aristophanes' speech. Ficino also
own
er believe that his
synopsis of the
myth
makes the readand
actually the genuine
is
complete Platonic text on which he subsequently comments verbatim.
Men
formerly had three sexes: masculine, feminine, and mixed, the sons
And
of the sun, the earth, and the moon.
when
account of pride, if
they are proud again, they are to be
sion having been made, half restitution of wholeness will
they were whole. But on
they wished to equal God, they were cut in two;
drawn
may
is
two
split in
to half
by
parts again.
The
divi-
love, in order that the
be effected. This achieved, the race of
men
be blessed. 21
uncommon
This stratagem, not
in Ficino's allegorical interpretations,
allows for a reading of the physical details of Aristophanes speech as alle-
human
gories for the fate of the
soul:22
Men,
that
God,
are whole, they are provided with
is,
the souls oi
men, formerly,
that
two
is,
when
lights,
other infused, in order that by the innate light they
they are created by
one innate and the
may
perceive inferi-
or or equal things, and by the infused, superior things. They wished to
equal God.
They turned themselves toward the innate light alone. Hence They lost the infused splendor when they were turned
they were divided.
toward the innate they
much will
Ficino,
light alone,
and they
immediately into bodies. If
and natural
to the natural power, that innate
is,
they trust too
if
which remains
light
be extinguished in some measure.23
Commentary on
Banquet, IV, 2:168-169:
propter superbiam,
Symposium, 73; Ficino,
Plato's
"Homines quondam
femininum, promiscuum,
terrae,
solis,
cum deo
ut integritatis restitutio
fiat.
Qua
très
lunaeque
equare se vellent,
biant, bifariam discindendi. Sectione facta, tur,
fell
become more proud, they will be divided again, that
Commentaire sur
le
sexus habebant, masculinum, filios.
scissi in
duo
Erant
et integri.
sunt, iterum
si
dimidium amore ad dimidium
completa, beatum genus
Sed
supertrahi-
hominum
est
fiiturum."
Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance, 1:355 says accordingly:
we
seems to be praising something
"[...]
when
Plato
and which we, with our earthly vision, are not able to see." ^Ficino, Commentary on Plato's Symposium, 73; Ficino, Commentaire sur le heavenly form of
a
deo creantur. Integrae
infuso.
is
in fact praising a purified
it
Banquet, IV, 2:169: ''Homines, id
do
abhor, he
Ut ingenito equalia
sunt, est
est,
hominum
animae. Quondam, id
est,
quan-
duobus sunt exornate luminibus, ingenito inferiora, infuso superiora conspicerent.
et
Deo
equare se voluerunt. Ad unicum lumen ingenitum se reflexerunt. Hinc divise sunt Splendorem infusum amiserunt, quando ad solum ingenitum sunt converse sta-
— 28 —
Renaissance Readings of the
Myth
According to Ficino, Aristophanes' myth
of Aristophanes
is
an allegory for a condition
of the soul and points to a mental process. The
humans
signifies the loss
Equipped
lect.
solely
of the divine ray of
with their other
split
light, the
of the primordial supernatural intel-
humans
half, natural reason,
are con-
fronted with the task of regaining their connection with the numinous. In these circumstances, Aristophanes's speech soul's
descent into matter and
becomes an allegory
through ascent to the divine. The way back, upwards, so to
by Eros. (Here
of Aristophanes'
Ficino's reading
myth
cavalcade in Plato's Phaedrus, a central
The
for the
subsequent regaining of the beatific vision
its
division having been made, half is
say, is
powered
tale refers to the
divine
for Ficino's theory of love.)^^
drawn
already divided and immersed in bodies,
to
first
half by
When
love.
souls,
have come to the years of
adolescence, they are aroused by the natural and innate light which they retained (as
if
by
of themselves) to recover, through the
a certain half
study of truth, that infused and divine
which they
blessed with a vision of
light,
once half of themselves,
This once recovered, they
lost in falling.
will
be whole and
God. 25
The main thrust of Ficino's reading rests on the claim that the myth of humans does not refer to the entire physical human being, but
the double
which
rather exclusively to soul, clearly superior to bodies.
in the
"When
souls, in the Platonic way."26
in
Severing bodies from souls, Ficino's
corpora cecidere. Superbiores facte iterum dividentur, id
nimium confidant
dammodo Mirandola er 2"*
ingenio,
extinguetur." see his
is
This reading has important consequences for
Ficino's philosophical anthropology.
timque
Neoplatonic hierarchy of being
Aristophanes said men, he meant our
lumen
illud
ingenitum
et naturale
est, si
quod
naturali
restitit
quo-
For an interesting parallel in Giovanni Pico della
Commento
sopra
una canzona de amore IL
4:
527-529, togeth-
with Wind, Pagan Mysteries, 200-202.
Allen,
The Platonism of Marsilio Ficino, 88-111, myth of the divine cavalcade
interpretation of the
sur
le
Banquet,
^^Ficino,
7. 14:
Banquet, IV, 2:169: divisae et
tiae venerint,
Symposium, 73; Ficino,
Plato's
"Sectione facta,
the
Commentaire sur
dimidium amore ad dimidium
le
trahitur.
immersae corporibus, cum primum ad annos adolescen-
naturali et ingenito
dimidio excitantur ad infusum
um, quod cadentes
On
Commentaire
259-260.
Commentary on
Animae iam
esp. 105, 111, 166.
see also Ficino,
illud
lumine quod servarunt, ceu
sui
quodam
divinumque lumen olim ipsarum dimidi-
amisere, studio veritatis recipiendum.
Quo
recepto iam inte-
'
grae erunt et dei visionae beatae.
"Ficino,
Commentary on
Banquet, IV, 3:171:
"[...]
Plato's
Symposium, 75; Ficino,
cum homines
co animas nostras significavisse."
Commentaire sur
le
Aristophanes nominavit, more platoni-
— 29 —
Sergius
Kodera
sweeping and, even for him, rather unusual claim that Aristophanes' myth refers exclusively to souls lends his
anthropology an almost Cartesian ten-
dency.
Man
Hence,
said to procreate, nourish, grow, run, stand,
is
make works of art, does.
And
and understand. But
feel
for this reason the soul will be
and creator of the body,
He
Man.
the essence of the
is
sit,
speak,
these things the soul itself
the soul, as father
[...]
and nourishes. 27
begets, feeds,
maintains that the soul
all
human
being, w^here-
the body becomes a mere (and thus) dispensable attachment, generated
as
by soul
author argues, the content of Aristophanes'
itself In that case, the
myth could not
of physiology, the story
refer to bodies; instead
psychology. In this reading, the soul instrumentalizes the ty,
an interpretation which
body
in
is
its
about entire-
in blatant contradiction to Aristophanes'
is
description of erotic physical desire leading towards the spiritual realm
and
thus reuniting the torn soul. Moreover, and as a corollary, according to
drama of the
Ficino the
splitting in half
of the primordial
humans
signifies
the descent of soul into the physical world: here the lower part of the soul
thinks of itself as sovereign, which only the creator himself can be, and
punished by loosing
meaning of the
hence
is
revolt
of the primordial beings against the Olympians in Aristophanes'
its
higher
light.
This
is
the
speech.
But our soul
own
its
whom
nothing
body when, neglecting the divine
into the
fell
light alone is
and began
lacking, above
with
to be content
whom
there
is
itself
God when
it
wished to be content with
sufficient to itself
no
used
it
to
nothing, remains content
with Himself, sufficient to Himself Therefore the soul to
light,
Only God,
made
itself alone, as if
itself
equal
could be
it
than God.
less
Aristophanes says that this pride was clearly the cause of the soul, which
was born whole, being this
it
body seized
the
split,
that
is,
with regard to
its
twin
as
though into the
by the senses and
river Lethe, lust, as
and forgetting
itself for a time,
though by police and a
body has matured, and the instruments of the
tyrant.
Commentary on
Banquet, IV,
3:
Plato's
Symposium, 74; Ficino,
anima
ipsa facit.
Ideoque anima
erit
homo.
corporis ipsum gignit, auget atque nutrir.
»
— 30 —
[.
homo .
.]
Here the
little.
Commentaire sur
170-171: "Hinc generare, nutrire, augere, currere,
loqui, artis opera fabricare, sentire, intelligere
it is
But when
senses have been
purged, with learning contributing, the soul wakes up a
'Ficino,
lights; after
used one but neglected the other. Plunged into the abyss of the
asseritur.
le
stare, sedere,
Omnia
vero haec
anima tamquam pater
et artifex
Renaissance Readincìs of the
natural light shines forth
Myth
of Aristophanes
and searches out the order of natural
this investigation the soul perceives that there
huge machine. And
it
desires to see
gation and appetite
is
true love
[...].-^^
why we
Aristophanes' narration explains is
and possess
things. By some architect of this Him, [...]. But this instiis
feel erotic desire, a drive that
physical but nevertheless transcends the body, and hence underscores the
intimate connection between bodies and souls. Ficino
with
is
because in his conceptual framework there
this idea
is
unable to deal
no place
for a
positive assessment of physical desire, let alone for non-reproductive forms
of sex
as vehicles to discover the transcendent. In this interpretation
Aristophanes' myth, the body
is
propelled by his urgent need to eradicate the pagan
anthropology expressed in splitting in half
of
excluded and discarded as an impediment
from the beginning.
to spiritual fulfillment Ficino's reading
is
Plato's text. In that process Ficino transposes the
of the primordial humans from the
phenomenon
Aristophanes' narration, to a
of the body,
level
relating to higher
as in
and lower
parts of the soul. Ficino therefore translates the violence of the original sep-
aration of
two bodies into a psychological
to this formulation soul,
which
is
human
that the
entails a radical separation
clear division stands
process.
being
is
An
now
important corollary
defined in terms of
its
between bodies and minds. Such
a
not only in sharp contradiction to contemporary
Aristotelianisms,29 but even to ideas Ficino himself expresses in other writings,
tual
where the emphasis
is
on
a gradual transition
from the bright
intellec-
forms to the darkness of matter, with soul in the centre of Creation. ^o
The
price of domesticating the pagan
"^^On which
,
myth
is
high indeed:
it
amounts
see for instance Kef^ler (2001).
more or less embodied garments of the soul, and Demonic Magic, Ficino, Three Books on Life, 41-42 (introduction to the De vita libri très) and ibid. Ill, 3: 256 "Ipse [sc. Spiritus] vero est corpus tenuissimum, quasi non corpus et quasi iam anima, item quasi non anima et quasi iam corpus." See also ibid. Ill, 26: 384-385: [Mundus est] non solum corporeus, sed vitae insuper et intelligentiae particeps. [...] Quamobrem praeter corpus hoc mundi sensibus familiariter manifestum latente
-'^For the author's doctrine oi spiritus, see Walker, Spiritual
:
in eo spiritus ligentia.
ignis
cum
mam
corpus
Atque
sicut
quoddam
aqua, nisi per aerem,
corpori
copulandum
Théologie platonicienne.
rumque confmio quae a
In spiritu viget anima; in
[...].
sub Luna nee miscetur aer
III,
sic in
est
137:
ille
universo esca ipse
"[...]
creata est." Ibid.
Ill:
Deo componuntur, medium,
cum
quem
anima 153:
[...]
quaedam
fulget intel-
per aquam, nee
sive
fomes ad ani-
spiritum apellamus.
[...]
"[...]
anima
terra, nisi
in
'
Ficino,
medio mentium corpo-
anima verissimum omnium,
in ea, ut caetera praetermittam, part-
— 31 —
Kodera
Sergius
to nothing less than the complete substitution of Plato's anthropology
construct which
is
seemingly more compatible with Ficino's
own
by a
discursive
formation. His reading emphasizes, even exaggerates, the difficulties that
many ual
Christian writers had in attempting to assess the position of the sex-
body
By
in Creation.
linking the
myth of the
ascent of the soul in Plato's Phaedrus, Ficino's
interpretation completely neglects the catch-line of Aristophanes' speech,
namely that our longing
and
gratified,
that sex
is
to be united
with our original halves will never be
just a pale imitation
since Ficino cannot retell the
myth
in
of our original unity. However, physical detail, he
full
its
is
conse-
quently unable to adapt this line of thought, which might in fact have been very appealing to Christians. So,
no wonder
it is
that the author assumes-in
blatant contradiction to the original text— that Eros acts as a leveler of desire,
who
even has the ability to appease or
fulfil all
wishes. Hence, by confound-
ing Eros with philia, Ficino identifies both terms with spiritual redemption.
Therefore by the beneficence of Love various degrees of bliss each envy.
any
It
.
.
.
sum up
Therefore, to
of Love: that by restoring
briefly,
tent in that distribution; that,
own he
ders
it
tary
'
we
all
among
feasts eternally
without
and sweet
and makes
seat,
con-
all
removed, by a certain love of if
new
in the soul
and ren-
fruition.^'
alterum eodem, motus statu quasi actum gravi harmonice tem-
A related phenomenon
is
to be
found
in Ficino's theory
powers of the color green, which he says
is
the
extremes black and white; Ficino, Three Books on
about the
mean between
Life,
II,
salu-
the two
On
the
Kristeller,
The
14: 405.
importance of the principle of mediation in Ficino in general, see
Phibsophy of Marsilio Ficino, 101-102. On the principle of mediation in magic and cosmology, see Ficino, Three Books on Life, 41, with references. -^^
Ficino,
Commentary on
Banquet, IV, itatis
the
portion without any
shall praise three benefits
own
his
distaste
perpetually kindles the pleasure as
blessed with enticing
ibile impartibili,
peratur.
own
formerly divided, to a whole, he leads us
us,
back to heaven; that he assigns each to
his
brought about that
happens that souls enjoy the same
also
satiety.
it is
content with his
is
6: 177:
Plato's
Symposium, 80; Ficino,
"Quapropter amoris beneficio factum
gradibus portione sua quilibet sine ulla invidia
sit
his
Commentaire sur
le
est ut in diversis felic-
contentus. Fit etiam ut
sine ulla sacietate animi iisdem vescantur dapibus in eternum.
[.
.
.]
Tria igitur ut
brevi complectar amoris beneficia collaudabimus:
quod nos olim divisos in integrum restituendo reducit in celum, quod suis quemque collocar sedibus facitque omnes in ilia distributione quietos, quod omni expulso fastidio, suo quodam ardore oblectamentum quasi
blanda
et dulci fruitione
novum
iugiter accendit in
beatum."
— 32 —
animo redditque ilium
M\th
Renaissance Readings of the
This reading allows Ficino to eclipse not men,
it is
more; instead,
all
aims
gendered aspects of the myth:
women,
or androgynes, longing for each other's halves any-
sorts
of non-sexual (and hence, male) disembodied souls
all
are desirous of immaterial divine virtues
on
divine unity
of Aristcìphanes
their
way back
which enable them
to the godhead.
As
a
merely spiritual relationships between male
at
for
young men
non-sexual
souls,
friendships which, to a limited extent, reflect Aristophanes'
homosexual men. Love
to regain
consequence, Ficino
encomium of
engendered by an inborn or
is
acquired desire for immortal and higher learning which
is
aptly directed
toward male friends, simply because they are more intelligent than women.
Again we
body and
see its
how
Ficino's text,
although seemingly
far
removed from the
physical aspects, nevertheless very stringently argues for a
women and
body
politic that marginalizes
them
to the comparatively inferior level of the generation of offspring.
reduces any relationship to
But some, either by nature or by education, are better
progeny
fitted for
of the soul than of the body, and others, certainly the majority, the opposite.
The former
follow heavenly love, the
latter, vulgar.
For this reason
the former naturally love males and certainly those already almost adult
women or boys, since in them sharpness of intellect flourishmore completely, which on account of its more excellent beauty, is most suitable for receiving the learning which they wish to procreate. rather than
es
The
others the opposite, motivated by the pleasure of sexual intercourse,
and the achievement of corporeal reproduction.
After what has been said, displays a tendency to
it is
obvious that, although Ficino's reading
disembody humans,
hierarchical relationships
between
-''^
at the
same time
men and women. The
it
establishes
careful avoidance
of physical aspects in Aristophanes' myth does not prevent Ficino from introducing a theoretical framework in which the bodies of inferior to those
by Aristophanes (made
•^^Ficino,
women
are
of men. This becomes obvious on the occasion of a remark in passing) that
Commentary on
Plato's
male homosexuals,
as
descendants
Symposium, 135; Ficino, Commentaire sur
le
Banquet, VI, 14: 229: "Ceterum ahi vel propter naturam vel educationem ad
animi fetus sunt
quam
corporis aptiores,
celestem secuntur amorem,
isti
vulgarem.
alii, Illi
dem iam pene adultos potius quam feminas magis admodum viget mentis acumen, quod turi sunt,
et
quidem
plurimi, contra.
natura iccirco mares et aut pueros amant
ad disciplinam,
illos
quoniam
quam
illli
Illi
qui-
in eis
genera-
propter excellentiorem sui pulchritudinem est aptissimum. Alii contra,
propter congressus venerei voluptatem et generationis effectum."
— 33 —
Sergius
of the sun, are especially of primordial
by
God
humans
brave.'*'*
Kodera
Ficino claims that
all
three different kinds
actually symbolically reflect divine virtues instilled
into the soul: the male virtue of courage,
which
is
akin to the sun,
the female virtue of temperance, and the androgynous one of that context, Ficino establishes a hierarchy of the sexes,
male element
is
active, the
androgynous
element entirely passive. This related to the original text,
is,
active
and
justice. In
by stating that the
passive,
and the female
of course, once again only very distantly
where homosexual males were the best pairings
while mixed ones belonged to adulterers; Aristophanes does not, however,
much
have
to say
about lesbian couples.
The Courage of men we call masculine because of its hardness and boldness. Temperance we call feminine because of a certain restrained and cooler habit of desire and its soft nature. Justice we call mixed. Feminine certainly inasmuch as because of its innocence it brings harm to no one. But masculine inasmuch as it does not permit harm to be done to others, and with very severe judgment But because
levies
punishments upon wicked men.
proper to the male to give and to the female to receive,
it is
we call the sun male, since it receives light from none and gives to all. The moon giving and receiving -receiving from the sun it gives to the elements— we call mixed. And the earth, since it certainly receives from all and gives to none, we call female.^'* for that reason
It is
rather
amusing
be read only
as
element in
to learn that the female, procreative
account "gives" to none;
this
seems to be so extravagant an idea that
it
this
can
an unintentional allusion to the lesbians in Aristophanes'
myth.
^^The
of the different sorts of primordial
celestial origin
into the
more general theory
dered by analogous Ficino, •^"^Ficino,
celestial origin
Commentaire sur
Commentary on
Banquet, IV,
5:
174
that love
:
le
and was hence due
Banquet, IV,
Plato's
human
beings fitted well
between individuals was actually engen-
5:
to
cosmic causes: see
174.
Symposium, 77-78; Ficino, Commentaire sur
"Fortitudinem
hominum masculam
ciam nuncupamus. Temperantiam, feminam, propter remissum frigidiorem
desiderii
habitum miteque ingenium.
Feminam quidem prout prout
aliis inlerrri
non
lustitiam,
innocentia sua iniuriam inferi nemini.
sinit et severiori
le
propter rubor et auda-
quemdam
et
promiscuam.
Masculam vero
censura in homines iniquos animadver-
Quia vero maris dare, feminae suscipere proprium est, iccirco solem qui lumen a nullo accipiens exhiber omnibus, marem vocamus. Lunam, quae acciptit.
iens a sole, dat elementis, a
accipiat lel
quidem ab omnibus,
dando
et accipiendo,
tributa nulli,
promiscuam. Terram, cum
feminam nuncupamus." For
passage in Pico della Mirandola, see Pico,
— 34 —
De
hominis dignitate, 530.
a paral-
J
Renaissance Readings of the
removed from Aristophanes speech),
about physical love between tial
of Aristophanes
only in the sixth book of his commentary on the Symposium (that
It is
in a place far
is,
M\th
men
—and only
to reject
that Ficino speaks as
it
an entirely bes-
waste of sperm, a crime equivalent to murder.
But since the reproductive drive of the
makes no
aroused lor copulation whenever
who
often happens that those
it
the
without cognition,
soul, being
distinction between the sexes, nevertheless,
demands of
we judge any body
to
it
is
naturally
be beautiful; and
associate with males, in order to satisfy
the genital part, copulate with them.
[...]
But
it
should
have been noticed that the purpose of erections of the genital part the useless act of ejaculation, but the function of fertilizing ating; the part should
think that
it
which Plato
Ficino's
have been redirected from males to females.
Laws roundly
in his
curses as a
him
number of individuals
must have been
to re-write the entire story. His opposi-
to be the
most
comes
it
Commentary on
los
no
as
homosexual
activ-
Given the implicit misogyny of surprise that he considers virile
Plato's
Symposium, 135; Ficino, Commentaire sur
"Quoniam
vero genitalis
ilia vis
le
animae, utpote cog-
sexu[u]m nullum habet discrimen, natura tamen sua totiens
ad generandum, quotiens lormosum, corpus aliquod iudicamus, con-
incitatur tingit
be related to a broad-
attractive.^^
Banquet, VI, 14: 229-230: nitionis expers,
may well
in Florence involved in
considerable.-'*^
Ficino's anthropology,
•^^Ficino,
form of murder.^5
of fifteenth-century Florence. According to a recent
er sociological context
women
We
determined rejection of the pagan anthropology outlined in
tion to the physical forms of same-sex love
ities
not
was by some error of this kind that that wicked crime arose
Aristophanes' speech caused
study, the
is
and procre-
plerumque ut qui cum masculis conversantur, quo genitalis partis stimuillis se misceant. [...] Opportebat autem animadvertere partis illius
sedent
incitamenta non irritum hoc iacture opus, sed serendi et procreandi ofificium afifectare
atque a masculis ad feminas
nepharium
scelus illud
eam
traducere.
exortum putamus quod
Huiusmodi quodam
in Legibus suis Plato
errore
tamquam
homicidii spetiem acerime detestatur."
^"Rocke, Forbidden Friendships, 175, estimates that of up to one-third of the teenth-century Florentine male population was accused of sodomy. (125): "As an accusation
unusual in the
fact that
from 1512
men might
suggests, Florentines
desire
He
found nothing
fif-
writes at all
and have sexual intercourse with both
boys and women."
^^In that context
it is
interesting to note that in the early sixteenth-century pros-
titutes in
Venice and Florence cut their hair to attract more customers; Rossiaud,
Medieval
Prostitution,
1
33.
— 35 —
Kodera
Sergius
Women,
of course, catch
men
easily,
and even more
easily
Men catch men women are, and they
display a certain masculine character.
more
since they are
which
spirit
is
like
men
than
still
warmer, and thinner, which
clearer,
is
women who more
easily,
have blood and
the basis of erotic
entrapment. ^^
On
the other hand,
and
will consider next, Ficino
is
pointed contrast to Leone Ebreo,
in
able to
type of sublimated sexuality that
whom we
open a philosophical perspective on
a
expressed in intellectual friendships
is
between men. 39
Leone Ebreo,
The
Plato,
Moses and the Book of Genesis
work during
Dialoghi d'amore, a very popular
the sixteenth-century,
probably written around 1512 but published only in 1535, opens an entirely
new perspective on Aristophanes'
speech.'^o Its author,
(Judah Abravanel), was a Jewish philosopher and physician
emigrated from the Iberian peninsula to insofar as refers to
seems to be the
it
own
sion of his
Dialoghi a
Jew
is
in
1492
remarkable
that extensively
to Ficino's attempt to por-
one of the prophets of Christianity. As with Ficino before him,
Leone Ebreo,
story,
work written by
Greek mythology. Leone was reacting
tray Plato as for
first
The
Italy.
Leone Ebreo
who
too, Aristophanes' speech served as a pretext for a discus-
anthropology. Leone, too, omits important parts of the
though he recounts Aristophanes' speech in greater
Christian predecessor. This
is
detail
than his
especially true of the physical details of the
primordial humans: in the Dialoghi, one finds a description of the double genitals, the
respectively,
progeny of the male and female halves from sun and earth
and the relationship of the mixed parts
also reports that the fear that
to the
moon. Leone
gods refrained from killing the rebellious creatures for
no one would worship them anymore, and the subsequent movCommentary on
'"Ficino,
Banquet, VII,
9:
Plato's
Symposium, 165; Ficino, Commentaire sur
253: "Feminae profecto viros
quae masculam quandam indolem prae to similiores sunt viris
quam feminae
facile capiunt, facilius
se ferunt.
et
autem
le
ille
Et tanto facilius masculi quan-
sanguinem spiritumque habent
lucid-
iorem, calidiorem, subtiliorem, qua in re amatoria consistit illaqueatio."
-'^On
this
Ficino,
kind of friendship, which became famous
Commentaire sur
le
Banquet,
II,
as "Platonic Love,"
8-9; Nelson, Renaissance Theory
see
of Love,
75; Field, The Origins of the Platonic Academy, 195-196; Hankins, Plato in the Renaissance, 1:355; Ebbersmeyer, Sinnlichkeit Sofia
und Vemunfi, Kodera,
Filone
und
and "Masculine/Feminine."
On the date of the composition of the Dialoghi, see Garvin, The Language of Leone Ebreo's Dialoghi d'amore," 207-210. On the Dialoghi in general, see Perry, "Dialogue and Doctrine"; Perry, Erotic
Spirituality, Peri,
— 36 —
Die Idee der
Liebe.
Renaissance Readings of the
Myth
of Arist(~)PHanes
ing of their genitals by Zeus in order to avoid the waste of sperm ejaculate
on the
fell
At
earth.
this
point in the Dialoghi, there
is
an
when inter-
polation which states that out of the semen grew the mandrake, a plant
notorious for
One
connections with magic. ^'
its
gets the impression that
the Jewish physician was deeply intrigued by Plato's description of surgery to separate Siamese twins. (Ficino, trast
much
to have been
who was
also a physician,
seems by con-
enthusiastic about the anatomic details in
less
Aristophanes' account.) Swollen with pride gods, to
at their
do them hurt and
the other gods, after
own
much
be
left
to
with
deliberation decided that the androgynes
should not be destroyed, for
would be none
strength, they dared to give battle to the
injury. Jupiter, therelore, taking counsel
in the
human
absence of the
pay honor to the gods; nor yet should
race there
their arrogance
unrebuked, because tolerance would bring insult upon the gods.
Therefore he determined to divide them in twain, and he sent Apollo to cut
them
in half lengthwise
only walk upright on two
and
feet;
nes that
if
warn the androgy-
to
they sinned further against the gods, he would return and
divide each half into two.
And
half a head and face, one
have to hop along
on columns
as if
left
with one eye and one
foot,
on which they would
they would be
hand and one
lame, and thus would be like figures sculptured
in basso-rilievo. Apollo then cut the androgynes in half
through the breast and the
which was cut so
side
make of one two, so that they could way the number of divine wor-
in this
would be doubled. Moreover, Apollo was
shippers
ear,
to
and
belly,
and turned the
that, seeing the incision,
faces
round towards the
man might
be reminded
ways and the better observe the section cut off from himself Over the breast-bone he placed skin, and drew together all parts of the
of his
which had been cut over the
skin ter,
evil
and
this
made by sin
knot
is
belly
called the navel.
and
And
the scars of incision, that seeing
and punishment.
became desirous of
When
tied
he
them together
left
round
them man might remember
each part saw that
reintegration,
at the cen-
a few winkles
it
it
his
lacked the other
it
and the two came together and were
united in close embrace; and thus they stayed, taking neither food nor
drink until they perished. For their parts of generation were behind, facing the same
way
"^^On the mandrake and ple,
as their shoulders,
its
which before had been the
uses in magic, notably as a love-potion, see, for
hanged men.
k
who
exam-
I:
318 {sub
reports the belief that this plant grows out of the
sperm of
Bachtold-Staubli, Handworterbuch des deutschen Aberglaubens,
voce "Alraun"),
ftont of
could be important for the textual history of the Dialoghi to find
a source for this interpolation, because the original speaks
translation accordingly reads:
"[...]
of cicadas and Ficino's
sed in terram spargentes semina cicadarum
instar concepiebant, atque generabant." Plato,
— 37 —
Opera omnia, 1602, 1186 C.
Sergius
man,
so that they cast their
Kodera
sperm upon the ground, where
human
drakes. Jupiter, therefore, seeing that the
bred man-
it
was completely
race
dying out, sent Apollo to turn their genitals to the front of the
mutual embrace they might beget
that in
and return
what
to seek
is
own kind and
their
belly, so
be satisfied
needful for the preservation of life.^-
In contrast to Ficino's reading, Leone's account of Aristophanes' speech
does not suppress the physical content of the myth: sexual intercourse indispensable for a normal and shall see,
it is
happy
remedy
the (partial)
life,
hence sex
we
valuable and, as
is
through original
for division created
is
sin.
Also in contrast to Ficino, this reading of the Platonic myth allows Leone to repeat Plato's original idea that physical desire
is
a longing for integra-
tion or for a sort of primordial unity.
^"^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 343-344; Leone Ebreo Dialoghi d'amore, 81v-82r: "Insuperbito delle forze sue, prese audacia di contendere con
III,
Dei,
&
Dei, poi diverse sententie
gl'altri
do
il
genere humano,
ciarli in la
non
parve non doverli ruinare, per che mancan-
gli
saria chi
honorasse
ne
gli dei,
manco
sua arrogantia, perche tollerarla sarebbe vituperio
determinò che
si
gli
molesto, onde Giove consigliandosi sopra ciò con
d'esserli contrario e
mandò
dividissero, et
Apolline che
gli
alli
parve di divini,
dividesse per
gli
las-
onde
mezo
a
& ne facesse di uno due, perche potessino solamente andare dritti per una banda sopra due piedi, & saria doppio numero de divini cultori, ammonenlungo,
il
li
dolgli che se più peccassero contra gli dei,
due,
che tornaria à dividere ogni mezo in
& restariano con uno ochio, & una orechia, meza & un' pie, col quale caminariano saltando come
mano,
li
come gl'huomini
modo
dipinti ne le colonne à
divise, dalla parte del petto,
li
tagliata, acciò
che vedendo l'incisione
perche potessero meglio guardare misse cuoio,
&
mezo
legolle in
&
pigliò tutte le di quello,
il
la
si
mezo
viso.
voltogli
si
&
suo resto desiderando reintegrarse s'approssimava a ciandosi s'univano strettamente,
finche perivano. Erano era anteriore,
dragore.
i
&
l'altro
il
sperma fuora cadeva
Vedendo adunque Giove che
viso alla parte
raccolse insieme,
circa del quale las-
vedendole l'huomo li
mezi mancare del
suo mezo
senza mangiare ne bere,
genitali loro alla parte posteriore
onde gittando
le
chiama ombelico,
& de la pena. Vedendo ciascuno de
ricordasse del peccato,
il
& ancora & offesa, sopra l'osso del petto
ciò alcune rughe fatte dalle cicatrici de l'incisione, acciò che si
con una
quale Apolline in questo
tagliate del ventre,
quale ligame
viso,
zoppi, et restarebbeno
ricordassero del suo errore,
parte tagliata,
bande
Il
&
del ventre,
&
testa
il
genere
de
si
& abbrac-
stavano cosi
le spalle,
che prima
in terra, e generava
humano
man-
totalmente periva,
mandò
Apolline che
ante
quali uniendosi generavano suo simile, restando satisfatti cercavano le
li
cose necessarie a retain the it is
la
gli
tornasse
genitali a la parte anteriore del ventre,
conservatione de
orthography used
somewhat
[i]
la vita."
[Here and elsewhere for
in the editio princeps
unusual.] .
—38 —
medi-
this text,
I
oi 1535, even though in places
Myth
Renaissance Readings of the
From
which
that time forth, love,
of Aristophanes
heals man's
wounds and
restores the
unity of his primeval nature, was engendered amongst men; and by restoration of
two into one
remedy of the
the
it is
man
being made into two. Love in every for each of
them
in
its
its
one
male and female,
therefore,
other half "^^
Significantly, physical attraction
strictly
is
men and women,
of intercourse between
led to
but a half and not a whole man, and therefore desires
is
made whole
to be
is,
which
sin
confined to the perspective
whereas other kinds of sexual
ori-
entations are not mentioned.
Hence,
what
in
characteristic for his cultural
is
and
ground, Leone Ebreo describes the primordial humans
any reference
to
human
homosexual or lesbian pairings
the
Aristophanes' original account.
of the speech
as exclusively het-
thereby (and even more unambiguously than Ficino)
erosexual pairs, eclipsing
intellectual back-
The
strategy of avoiding the difficult parts
simple: according to Leone's reading, the primordial
is
being was androgynous-male and female— and seems to have
ed apart from "single
"
men and women
In the Symposium, in the
beginning of love was on
human
race
embraced
as
man
derives
derived from the
gyne was thus
as
great, might}^
and
^ Leone Ebreo, IH, 82r:
woman
from the
earth, so that kind
made up of the sun and terrible,
together at the breast, and two heads
things, the
once both male and female.
at
from the sun and is
all
which was not mere man or woman,
a third species
moon, which
Plato declares that the
At the beginning of
this wise.
exist-
we know them.
name of Aristophanes,
but was called androgynous, being
And
in
having two
earth.
human
on one neck with two
An
andro-
bodies joined faces
[...].'^'^
The Philosophy of Love, 344-5; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, in qua fu generato l'amor' fra gli huomini reconcil-
"Da questo tempo
iatore, e reintegatore
de l'antica natura, e quello che torna à fare di due uno
remedio del peccato, che fece quando de l'uno fu fatto due, è adunque l'amor' in ciascuno
de gl'huomini maschio,
mezo huomo con
mezo,
l'altro
'*'*Leone Ebreo,
8 Ir:
&
non huomo
&
femmina, però che ognuno
onde ogni mezo
desia
la
di loro è
reintegratione sua
[...]."
The Philosophy of Love, 343; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, IH,
Platone
"[...]
intero,
[...]
dice nel convivio in
nome
d'Aristofane, che l'origine del'
modo, che essendo nel principio de gli huomini un'altro terzo genere di huomini, cioè non solamente huomini, & non solamente donne, ma quello che chiamavano Androgeno, il quale era maschio e femmina insieme
amore fu
[...]."
IH, 81
in questo
Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy ofLove, 343; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, r-v: "[...] e cosi come l'huomo depende dal Sole, e la donna da la terra,
cosi quello
dependeva da
la
Luna
participante di Sole, e di Terra, era
— 39 —
adunque
Sergius
Kodera
Leone's interpretation, however, does not stop here. According to him,
and female halves of the primordial being
the male
body
respectively.
double humans
is
As
will
soon become
discreetly replaced
by an account of androgynous
containing male and female aspects story referred to the relationship
to each other; they are actually
between bodies,
how
and
in the perspective
intellect
unity,
Plato's original
and body
of the
are related
matching, or in need of harmonization,
again in strong contradistinction to Ficino's Christian reading,
is
where the soul
What
degree.
Hence, while
alike.
Dialoghi Aristophanes' speech explains
which
refer to intelligence
Aristophanes' original tale of
clear,
at stake
is
from the body
imprisoned or exiled in the body,
is
as
here
opposed
is
the
model of a
at least to a certain
blissful separation
both principles. According to Leone Ebreo, sexual intercourse of achieving unity between mind and body, because that the intellect
it
is
a
means
was God's intention
and the body should take care of each other jointly. from
Plato says that
[...]
desires
of the soul
and harmonious coexistence of
to the peaceful
and
this division love
loves reintegration with
its
was born, because each half
other half; in other words, the
would take no heed of the body save for the love which it bears half, nor would the body be governed by the intelwere it not for the love and affection which it bears for its husband
intellect its
consort and female
lect
and masculine half Moreover, the story halves
came together
in love they did
tells
us that even
when
the two
not seek those things which were
necessary for their sustenance, and they perished; wherefore the Jupiter caused their other, their
members of generation
and so they remained
kind their division was
satisfied
and
in
god
to be turned facing each
union and
in procreation
of
healed.'*'^
In a characteristic move, Leone exploits and at the
same time
signifi-
cantly alters or subverts the language of traditional Hellenistic as well as
Androgeno grande,
quello legati le
ne
la
forte, e terribile,
parte del petto, e
due
però che haveva due corpi humani
teste colligate nel collo,
un
viso à
una parte de
spalle e l'altro a l'altra [...]."
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 363; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, 93r: "
[...]
III,
dice [Platone] che da questa divisione nacque l'amore, però che ogni
& ama la reintegratione del suo mezo restante, cioè che in effetto l'innon haveria mai cura del corpo, se non fusse per l'amore che ha al suo consorte mezo corporeo femminino, ne il corpo si governarla per l'intelletto se non per l'amore & affettione che ha al suo consorte & mezo masculine, & in mezo
desia
telletto
quello che dice uniendosi l'un'mezo con
li
fece tornare
li
l'altro,
per l'amore
non cercavano
le
& perivano; onde per remedio luppiter genitali de l'uno verso de l'altro, & satisfatti per coito & gen-
cose necessarie per
eratione del simile
il
sostenimento loro
il
si
reintegrò
la
loro divisione, [...]."
— 40 —
Myth
Renaissance Readings of the
of Aristophanes
Christian body-discourses: according to the Peripatetic tradition,
it
was
female matter that loved male intellectual forms, but, as Aristotle points out, this affection
was not reciprocal
{Physics
9 192a 20). In Ficino's
I,
account, Aristophanes' tale was read as a purely psychological
between the higher and lower parts of the
soul, the
drama
body remaining com-
pletely left out. In Leone's Dialoghi, instead, the story relates to a recipro-
between mind and body within a single human being. Like
cal relationship
Ficino before him, Leone concludes by saying that his interpretation of
Aristophanes' tale
is
exhaustive and that the rest of the Platonic story
merely ornament (hence, one
had
out certain important
left
states that heterosexual
may conclude details, that
men and women
that he
is
was well aware that he
the part where Aristophanes
is,
descending from the mixed race
of androgynes, produce the highest number of adulterers (191E).'^7 This
the allegorical
is
details
like, are
in
In fers
its
meaning of the Platonic myth, and the other
concerning the actual incision, the council of the gods and such but ornaments of the story to
what has been
said so
from that of Ficino on
it
more
pleasing
and
lifelike
far,
Leone's reading of Aristophanes' story dif-
several crucial issues: the positive assessment
heterosexual relationships, rather than
of the mutual love between should
make
form.^'S
strive for
of
derision, as well as the appraisal
and body, which
intellect
union rather than
its
in order to
be saved
for separation. In that context,
Leone
claims the textual authority of the Jewish tradition by maintaining that Plato
is
in fact repeating a
key story from Genesis and that the philosopher
presents Moses' words in the loquacious
and disorderly way
characteristic
of the Greeks. '^9
'^^In a similar vein, Ficino
souls
had regarded the body
down from heaven and
Opera omnia, 1602, 1186 D:
'^'^Plato,
as a well
designed trap to lure
trap them. "[...]
quamobrem quicumque
ex
viris
promiscui generis portio sunt, quod olim androgynum vocabatur, ex his reperiuntur,
Ex hoc sane genere moechi ducunt originem."
^"Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 364; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, III, 93 v: "Questo è quello che significa la favola Platonica allegoricamente, & l'altre particularità che scrive nel modo del dividere, e del consultare & simili sonno ornamenti de
la favola,
'^^The ornate Greek
style
which were formative Cicero,
De
was censured for
oratorell, 17-20,
et loquaci et fortasse
loquar
per farla più bella
many and
in
& verisimile."
many of the
Latin textbooks of rhetoric
Renaissance humanists. See, for instance, I,
102: "[...]
tamquam
alicui graeculo otioso
docto atque erudito quaestiunculam, de qua
[...]."
— 41 —
meo
arbitrio
Sergius
Moses did not
Kodera
the story so plainly, nor in such detail, but the sub-
tell
stance of the story he told briefly;
myth, amplifying and polishing
it
it
was from him that Plato took
manner of Greek
after the
new and confused account of the Hebrew
thus giving a
his
oratory,
version. 50
This stratagem allows Leone to wrestle with the authority of the Greek
What
as well as the Christian tradition:
(but also in
lical text
many
is
a (talmudic) reading of
God
other instances), Leone stresses that even
has male and female aspects, and that
male and female, that
his likeness,
follows
ensuing comparison of Aristophanes to the bib-
Genesis 1, 26-27.''' In the
is,
Adam,
the
first
man, was created
androgynous, an idea that
in
repeat-
is
ed several times in the Dialoghi.
God
created
Adam
(that
This
the
is
is
man)
in his
own
image, in the image of
God
and female created he them.)
created he him; male
book of the generation of Adam.
In the day that
God
creat-
ed man, in the likeness of God
made he him; male and female created he them, and called their name Adam (that is man), in
them; and blessed
when
the day
The
first
world,
is
they were created.
man, and indeed every other human being made,
as Scripture testifies, in the
both male and female
The
at
in the
whole wide
image and likeness of God,
once. 52
idea that the primordial
human was androgynous
allows Leone to
maintain that the separation of the double humans in the Platonic story actually refers to the creation of Eve in Genesis,
merely from his
from Adam's
side,
and not
rib.
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 345; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, 82v: "Non ha già favoleggiata [Moise] con questa particularità e chiareza, 1'
ha posta pliò,
la sustantia
de
la
favola sotto brevità, e Platone la prese da
& ornò secondo l'oratoria grecale,
dinata de
le
facendo
in
lui,
III,
ma
& l'am-
questo una mescolanza inor-
cose hebraic[h]e."
^^See also Yavneh, "The Spiritual Eroticism," 88, for a reference to the Zohar.
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 346; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, III, 82v: "Creo Dio Adam cioè l'huomo in sua forma, in forma di Dio, creò esso maschio
di e
e
Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 34683r-v: "Questo è il libro de la generatione che Dio creò l'huomo in somiglianza di Dio, fece esso maschio
femmina, creo
essi [...]."
Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore.
7;
Adam
nel di
femmina,
creò
gli
& gli benedisse, & chiamò
nel di che fiirono creati."
Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore. di quanti
ne vedi è fatto
Dio, maschio
e
III,
il
nome
loro
Adam,
cioè
huomo
Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 354; Leone 87v: "PHL: Il primo huomo, & ogn' altro huomo
III,
come
dice
la scrittura, a
femmina."
— 42 —
immagine,
&
similitudine di
Myth
Renaissance Readings of the
God
that
created
them, and
would
was
in the beginning, as
narrative, speaking
It
him
taking one of Adam's ribs from
[...]
was not made
He
of the offspring of
man
name Adam
Adam
and
took one of his
.]
and elsewhere
The
it
sides, the
in
stands for side, that
and then
in the plural
realize that divine mysteries are
to infer a
speaks of
[.
.
.]^^
Adam
in
the thoughtful reader to
in the text.
seem
deliberately.
Hence
credible that he wished
[Moses] wants to say that
Adam,
in himself
that
male and female without
created
Adam
Hebrew commentators
in his
is
the
first
man,
human
division;
Own likeness,
in their
is
further sub-
traditions:
ed on the sixth day of the Creation, being a
God
it is
man was androgynous
by the Hebraic commentary
that
first
but here
to rib,
hidden mystery beneath these obvious discrepancies. 5"*
evidence that primordial
stantiated
—Moses
at
subse-
narrated.)
is
the side or feminine person
—encourages
hidden
and female
woman) was not made
Hebrew being equivalent
is,
read
inconceivable that the divine Moses should contradict himself
[...] it is
so obviously as to
The
word
we
seen),
day that they were created.
in the
that (the
contradiction in the sacred text
the singular
you have
(as
God, male and female created He
quently by the withdrawal of the side or rib as .
therefore,
Again, at the end of the
appear, therefore, that there was at once both male
the beginning of the Creation,
[.
The woman,
in sleep.
first said.
in the Hkeness of
called their
oh Aristophanes
whom God
individual,
and therefore the
[...].
creat-
combined text says
Wherefore the ancient
Chaldean commentary here
say,
Adam
was created of two persons, the one part male the other female. '55
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 347; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore. III, 83v: " [...] fece dormendo [... Adam] d'uno dei suoi lati, non era adunque fatta nel principio
Adam
dice
come havea
(come
femmina, creò quegli,
Adunque chio,
detto ancora nel fine volendo narrare
hai veduto) che
&
chiamo
Dio il
pare che nel principio de
& femmina, &
non
gli
nome la
loro
Adam,
la
progenie di
Dio maschio,
creò in somiglianza di
e
nel di che fiarono creati;
creatione sua di continente fussero mas-
di poi per sottratione del lato,
o
costa,
come ha
detto
Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy ofLove, 349; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, 85 r: "[...] pigliò uno de li suoi lati, il quale in hebraico è vocabolo equivo-
[...]." III,
co a
costella,
femminile
ma
qui et in altre parti ancora sta per lato, cioè
il
lato,
o persona
[...]."
5^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 348; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, III, 84r: "[...] non è da credere ch'el Santo Moise si contradica cosi manifestamente che par'che
egli
procuri contradirsi.
occulto misterio sotto
la
Onde
è
da credere che vogli
inferire
qualche
manifesta contraditione."
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy ofLove, 348-9; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore. III, 84v: "Vuol dire che Adam cioè huomo primo, il qual Dio creò nel di sesto de la
— 43 —
Sergius
By
Kodera
referring rather casually to linguistic details that as well as
non-Jews to grasp,
Leone
Christians,
Mosaic authority over the
establishes
over the Platonic tradition.
were
difficult for
to a body of commentaries inaccessible to
No wonder he has
and
biblical text
Sofia saying approvingly: "It
indeed pleasing to learn that Plato drank of the waters of the sacred
is
font."56
This appropriation of Aristophanes' myth in the Dialoghi hus an
important consequence: in contrast to Ficino, for
whom
Diotima's speech
was of key importance while the story of the double humans was somewhat secondary, Leone emphasizes
what humans
are because
it
life
role in the
understanding of
human
outlines the entire story of the
man
All these things the first
symbolic of the
fundamental
its
really suffered in his
and works of every man,
race.
body; and they are
his ultimate happiness, the
demands of his corporeal nature, and the consequences of excessive sin together with its punishment and the possibility of eventual salvation. If you look
man
into the story,
you
with his good and his
will evil,
behold
as in a
and you
mirror the
must be shunned and the way which must be followed nal happiness
where there
is
of every
life
will recognize the
way which
to attain to eter-
no death. 57
Consequently, Aristophanes' myth serves Leone as a pretext to devel-
op
of anthropology that
a type
reflects his
Jewish background.
The androg-
ynous primordial human, Adam, was a harmonious unity of body and
mind who did not
feel
the intentions of Plato telling the story
were
double humans are
becomes
any inclination to
sin.
Thus, Leone concludes that
and Moses were the same, even
different. In first
ways of
if their
Leone Ebreo's anthropology the
original
reduced to a heterosexual pairing which then
related to a division in
mind and body
human
in the first
humano conteneva in se maschio, & & però dice che Dio creò Adam ad immagine di Dio
being.
creatione essendo un'supposto
femmina
senza divisione,
[...]
commentano
Adam
qui
li
commentarij Hebraici antichi
due persone fu creato d'una parte maschio, da
di
però
in lingua caldea dicendo, l'altra
femmina
[...]."
-'"Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 350; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, 85v: "Mi piace vedere che Platone babbi bevuto de l'acqua del sacro fonte [.
III, .
.]."
Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy ofLove, 361-2; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore. III, 92r: "[...] le quali cose intervenne in effetto corporalmente al primo huomo,
-'^
denotano (secondo Qual'
sia
il
l'allegorico) le vite,
cesso del eccessivo peccato, sibilità del
gl'huomini, la
che
si
&
successi di ciascuno de gl'huomini;
sucla necessità de l'humanità, & & la pena de l'accidente di quello, con l'ultima pos-
fine loro beato, ciò
che richiede
il
remedio, se ben'l intenderai in uno specchio vedrai il
loro bene
& male, conoscerai la via che
si
debbe
la vita di tutti
fuggire,
& quel-
debbe seguire per venire a eterna beatitudine senza mai morire."
— 44 —
Myth
Renaissance Readings of the
of Aristophanes
Notably, Plato does not speak of a hermaphrodite, but rather of double
humans:
"[...]
man and woman,
individual in marriage
tion, sexual intercourse
union that
[...]
and sexual
come
and procreation
performed by humans
is
body and
together again as one
intercourse. "58 Contrary to Ficino's posiare a remedy for sin:
it is
a sacred
to regain temporarily their divine
unity once again. According to Leone, to sin means to turn away from the
body and neglect the (Moreover, after the
sex
is
mind and body owe each
the only
as
he was
made
mortal, he
came
means or another the human
means
myth according
own
potentially
aid
by
when through
raising
upon him,
to
Leone again
Aristotle,
up
his like,
so that
by one
which
sexuality
discreetly sub-
not viewed primarily
is
to create offspring but rather as an urge to reestablish a primor-
dial unity (at least temporarily) in order to ical
for mortality. Therefore
race should not perish. ^9
from
interpreting a quotation
verts the original as a
remedy
to his
other.
to perpetuate the species.)
long as immortal, did not procreate his kind; but
which power God had bestowed
By
means
generation, as Aristotle says, was a
[...]
man, sin
that
duties
Fall,
equilibrium.
As
in Ficino, there
tion; yet in the perspective
division between higher ration of male Sin
is
is
and lower
in
he
is
we can
single,
in
man
man and
thing, or at least
may
man
he has no inclination to do
two inseparable
— and
and preserves the
truly say that division in
things, the
be said to spring from division
sion of the Scriptures
cuts his nature in
to be single
impair his union. Therefore since sin and division in
the other, sin
result in a
one and the same individual.
which causes division
unity of his nature. Again,
same
psycho-phys-
parts of the soul, but instead in the sepa-
twain, just as righteousness makes a
sin, for in so far as
own
of the Dialoghi, that nexus does not
minds and female bodies truly that
maintain one's
a connection between sin and separa-
division
man
produces
evil
nor to
are almost the
one always implying
—according
from sin-according
to the ver-
to Plato. '^o
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 350; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore, III, 85r: " [...] I'huomo e la donna si tornano à reintegrare nel matrimonio, & coito in
uno medesimo supposto
carnale,
& individuale
"
1...].
^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 354; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore. III, 87v: "La generatione (come dice Aristotile) fu per remedio de la mortalità, & però l'huomo in quanto fu immortale non generò, quando già per il peccato fu fatto mortale si soccorse con la generatione del simile, alla quale Dio li diede potentia accioche o a un'modo, o a un'altro non perisca l'humana spetie." ^^Leone Ebreo, The Philosophy of Love, 351; Leone Ebreo, Dialoghi d'amore. III, 85 v: "In effetto il peccato è quello che incide l'huomo e causa in lui divisione, cosi
come
la
giusta dritteza
il
fa
uno,
& conserva la sua unione, & anchora pos-
— 45 —
s ERG us I
Fall, that
it is
is,
tied to the bibhcal story of the
is
related to a theological context in a rather arbitrary way.
Symposium the separation of the primorhumans and to prevent them
to the
And, of course, according dial
and division
identification of sin
The
KODERA
beings occurs in order to weaken
human
from sinning
one cannot speak of the
plotting) against the gods. (If
(e.g.
concept of sin in Aristophanes' perspective, then in the political context of a coup detat a.g2i'mst the gods.) In the Dialoghi, on the other hand, the con-
myth of the androgyne with theology is much closer than in commentary of Ficino, who perhaps deliberately sought to avoid too
nection of the the
close an association of Aristophanes' speech with Christian doctrine. also briefly discusses the idea that the story in itself
Leone
gorical, that
that the primordial
is,
myth
blood. Hence, the
not
feel
which
hermaphrodite never existed
indicates that
men and women
only
is
mankind's true purpose in
life
and
is
and
before the Fall did
the urge to have sex because they were busy contemplating
is
alle-
in flesh
God,
brought about by a harmo-
nious proportion between the male and female aspects of the individual.
SO.:
[...]
For
I
do not
believe that
other than divided into rwo bodies
of the
but of
flesh,
human
man and woman
[...].
PHI.:
[...]
were
at
to denote
any time
union not
essence and intellectual inclination, that
is,
they were united in blessed contemplation of the Divinity, not in sexual intercourse
and carnal
Finally, the idea
missed because
God
way that
adise) in a
delights, but in order that they
might be of greater
one another.