Giordano Bruno: Herald of the Enlightenment

By Tom Malone

The night of the Middle Ages lasted for a thousand years. The first star that enriched the horizon of this universal gloom was Giordano Bruno. He was the herald of the dawn. —Robert Ingersoll¹

In the long battle for freedom of thought and speech, few figures stand out as boldly as Giordano Bruno. Born in 1548 in Nola, Italy, Bruno emerged as the most radical thinker of the Italian Renaissance and exhibited an unwavering commitment to reason, science, and freedom of expression. He was a beloved philosopher, poet, teacher, and lover of life whose gruesome and untimely death by fire at the hands of the Catholic Church has burned his memory vividly into the minds of his countrymen.

Many Italians still consider him the greatest, most daring thinker their country has produced. A contemporary of Shakespeare, Bacon, and Galileo, Bruno influenced many scientists and thinkers including Newton, Kepler, Descartes, Spinoza, and Goethe, as well as such modern thinkers as Carl Sagan. In 1872, the University of Leipzig in Germany honored Bruno as a pioneer of modern philosophy by publishing his works in its “Philosophical Library” series. In 1942, the prestigious Collège de France in Paris established a chair in the history of philosophy, acknowledging Bruno as a foundational figure in the transition from the Renaissance’s revival of classical learning to the emerging modern worldview rooted in reason, science, and skepticism of religious dogma that would become known as the Enlightenment.

In America, 19th-century freethinkers such as Robert Ingersoll and Walt Whitman paid tribute to Bruno, recognizing him as a martyr for liberty and for freedom of conscience. NASA has even acknowledged Bruno by naming a lunar crater, the Giordano Bruno Crater, in his honor.²

Bruno’s unique work in memory enhancement (which he called “the art of memory”) has been cited as a precursor to the modern field of artificial intelligence research.³

Bruno was a blend of philosopher, scientist, and teacher who stood at a crossroads in the evolution of human thought. His courage in speaking about his ideas during times when it could be deadly to do so was remarkable, as was his unwillingness to accept any shackles on his mind. He sought to integrate his time’s most important knowledge by studying multiple disciplines to create an overarching understanding of the universe and of man’s role in it. The essence of his vision centered on liberating human thought from the constraints and dogmas of religion, thereby enabling individuals to freely explore reality and use the forces of nature for human flourishing and peace.

In 1876, because of a popular movement in Italy in support of Bruno, a statue of him was installed in Rome’s Campo de Fiori (Field of Flowers) on the spot where the Catholic Church burned Bruno as an “impenitent, obstinate, pertinacious heretic.”⁴ Today, the statue of a hooded, glowering Bruno stares at the Vatican in eternal, silent rebuke.

***

Giordano Bruno was born in 1548 into a modest family in the Kingdom of Naples. His birthplace, Nola, was a small village in the fertile hills beneath Cicada Mountain. As a young boy, Bruno loved to wander the hills and contemplate the stars at night. He often spoke of gazing at Mount Vesuvius, which he could see in the distance. His father, a soldier, and his mother, a homemaker, instilled in him a sense of curiosity and reverence for knowledge. Renaissance humanism, which emphasized classical learning (Greek and Roman), individual potential, and critical inquiry, was a significant part of Nola’s intellectual environment.

Nola was under Spanish rule at the time; the Spanish Habsburgs controlled the Kingdom of Naples. The Spanish crown enforced strict Catholic orthodoxy via the violent Inquisition, making Nola a dangerous place for radical thinkers such as Bruno.⁵ Though Nola itself was not a major intellectual hub, Naples—just fifteen miles away—was home to the University of Naples, one of the oldest universities in Europe. It had a strong tradition of Aristotelian thought, which influenced Bruno’s early education when he joined the Dominican Order of Naples in 1565 at the age of seventeen.

From an early age, Bruno displayed a keen intellect. The Dominicans introduced him to the teachings of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and other classical philosophers. The Renaissance’s emphasis on inquiry and exploration ignited his passion for knowledge. Influenced by the works of Plato and Aristotle, Bruno began to question established beliefs, setting the stage for his future challenges to the teachings of the Catholic Church. He was ordained as a priest in 1572 at age twenty-four after completing his ecclesiastical studies. However, his devotion to reason and truth soon brought him into conflict with his religious teachers. He began to question dogma, such as the Trinity and the Virgin Birth; removed or hid religious images placed in his room; and started reading “forbidden” books, such as the works of Erasmus.⁶ These behaviors raised suspicion among his superiors; and in 1576, when he learned that he might face an Inquisition trial, he fled the monastery and abandoned his Dominican habit, becoming a wandering scholar across Europe.

The Nomadic Philosopher

Bruno’s first destination was Geneva, a city known for its Calvinist reformers and supposed tolerance of new ideas. Although Bruno was aware that John Calvin had executed the theologian and physician Michael Servetus for “heresy” in 1553, that did not stop him from speaking his mind. He had hoped to find protection among fellow critics of Catholic dogma, but it was not long before he found Calvinism just as rigid as the Church he had escaped. When Bruno openly criticized a respected professor, he was excommunicated and forced to move on.

In France, his fortunes improved briefly. Settling in Toulouse, he secured a doctorate in theology and lectured at the university for a time. But it was in Paris where he truly began to make his mark. His prodigious intellect and mastery of mnemonics—a technique for enhancing memory—earned him the patronage of King Henry III, who took an interest in the radical young thinker. With the king’s favor, Bruno published several of his early works, including The Shadows of Ideas and The Art of Memory, which showcased his unique ideas about enhancing memory as a way of improving one’s ability to retain knowledge and integrate facts about the natural world. One striking example from The Art of Memory is Bruno’s use of a “wheel of memory,” a conceptual diagram wherein ideas and facts are organized around a central wheel divided into segments, each linked to vivid, symbolic images. Bruno proposed that to retain and integrate knowledge about the natural world (e.g., celestial bodies, elements, or philosophical concepts), one should assign each piece of information to a specific segment of the wheel and pair it with a striking, emotionally charged image. These images act as mental “hooks” to aid recall of abstract or complex ideas.

Encouraged by his growing reputation, Bruno traveled to England in 1583 under the protection of the French ambassador, Michel de Castelnau. He lectured at Oxford University and boldly debated the conservative scholars who still clung to the outdated geocentric model of the cosmos, arguing instead for a boundless universe filled with infinite worlds—a notion that scandalized the academic community. He famously called Oxford “the widow of true learning” because of its dogmatic clinging to religious orthodoxy and traditional scholasticism.⁷ His most important works on cosmology, including On the Infinite Universe and Worlds, were written during this period, but his confrontational style made him enemies. By 1585, he had again worn out his welcome and was forced to leave, despite the intellectual recognition he had gained in England’s literary and philosophical circles—most notably from the highly respected soldier and poet Sir Philip Sidney.

Returning to mainland Europe, Bruno drifted through the courts of kings and the universities of Germany and central Europe, always searching for a place to teach freely. In Wittenberg, he found temporary stability and lectured at the university, though his unorthodox views remained controversial. In Prague, he gained an audience with Emperor Rudolf II after dedicating a book to him (a common Renaissance tactic to secure patronage). Bruno must have made a positive impression on Rudolf, because he was rewarded with the equivalent of a year’s wages.⁸ However, Rudolf offered no further patronage, and after a few months, Bruno moved to Helmstedt and enrolled in the local university, hoping to gain a teaching position. The university, Academia Julia, was a Lutheran institution known for its relatively progressive theological scholarship. However, soon after arriving and engaging in debates, he was excommunicated by the Lutherans—yet another rejection from the very type of institution that should have fostered his intellectual pursuits.⁹

Ideas and Major Works

Despite his nomadic lifestyle, Bruno produced a remarkable body of work, including dialogues, treatises, plays, and poems. His key texts, such as On the Infinite Universe and Worlds, articulated his theory of an unbounded cosmos. These writings were provocative, often using metaphor and allegory to challenge readers to reconsider their understanding of existence. Bruno was a proponent of Copernicus’s heliocentric theory, which posited that Earth revolves around the sun. This radical idea contradicted the geocentric model that the Church endorsed, which placed Earth at the center of the universe. Bruno expanded on the Copernican theory, positing an infinite universe with numerous worlds, each potentially inhabited.

Although Bruno’s works contain some elements of Neoplatonist mysticism (which is understandable given the context of his time), his philosophic ideas championed reason and empirical observation. He advocated a worldview that valued rational thinking, saying, “He who desires to philosophize . . . must not assume a position in a debate before he has listened to the various opinions and considered and compared the reasons for and against.”¹⁰

Bruno also warned against appeals to authority or consensus, saying that one should never “judge or take up a position” based on “the opinion of the majority, the age, merits, or prestige of the speaker concerned, but he must proceed according to the persuasion of an organic doctrine that adheres to real things, and to a truth that can be understood by the light of reason.”¹¹

Bruno recognized that existence is axiomatic and made the point that anything outside the universe was by definition nonexistent: “The universe comprises all being in a totality; for nothing that exists is outside or beyond infinite being, as the latter has no outside or beyond.”¹² This completely contradicted the Christian concept of a supernatural deity that created and controls a finite universe.

His twenty published works cover an astounding breadth of topics, including philosophy, cosmology, theology, mnemonics, and social satire. He conveyed his ideas in a variety of styles as well, including formal treatises, philosophic dialogues, satire, and poetry.

His first defense of the heliocentric theory is in his book The Ash Wednesday Supper (1584), a philosophic dialogue. Written during Bruno’s time in England, the work is structured as a conversation between several intellectuals, Bruno himself being one of the participants. The book presents Bruno’s theory that the Earth is not the center of the cosmos but merely one of many celestial bodies in an endless, dynamic universe. In it, Bruno criticized Oxford scholars and the Church for their unwillingness to accept new scientific and philosophical perspectives, portraying them as ignorant and dogmatic. Beyond astronomy, The Ash Wednesday Supper promotes intellectual freedom and the pursuit of truth through reason rather than blind adherence to authority. In a passage speaking about his own character, The Nolan, he writes,

Here, then, you see the man who has soared into the sky, entered the heavens, wandered among the stars, passed beyond the boundaries of the universe, effaced the imaginary barriers constituted by the first, the eighth, and tenth spheres, and many others they might wish to add on authority of false mathematics and distorted vision of the commonly accepted philosophy. By the light and sense of reason, and with the key of diligent inquiry, he has opened those cloisters of truth which it is given to us to open, stripped the veils and coverings from the face of nature, given eyes to the moles and sight to the blind who were unable to contemplate her image in the mirrors which reflect her on every side.¹³

Bruno intertwined Copernican thought with his own metaphysical ideas, suggesting that understanding nature requires a break from rigid traditions and a mind willing to accept new ideas. The work’s bold and often acerbic critique of established institutions contributed to Bruno’s growing reputation as a heretic.

His 1584 book, The Infinite Universe and Its Worlds, was a revolutionary work that not only supported heliocentrism but also proposed that the universe itself is infinite, with no fixed center, populated by countless suns and planets like our own. The idea of an infinite universe, with the earth floating freely in space, had been proposed by the Greek philosopher Anaximander (ca. 610–546 BCE).¹⁴ However, Bruno took this idea even further, arguing that the universe has no center at all and that countless worlds revolve around their own suns. Bruno further deduced that the countless other worlds he theorized could be inhabited by beings like or unlike humans, a concept virtually unheard of at the time. Although Bruno was not a scientist in the modern sense, his work was profoundly philosophic and logical. He defended Copernicus and extended his ideas deductively, saying, “If the Earth moves, why not other earths around other suns?” He drew from Copernican heliocentrism but went beyond it by thinking through the logical implications of what Copernicus had proposed. This led Bruno to conclude that the universe was far larger and more complex than Copernicus himself had thought:

There are countless suns and countless earths, all rotating around their suns in the same way as the seven planets of our system. We see only the suns because they are the largest bodies and are luminous, but their planets remain invisible to us because they are smaller and non-luminous.¹⁵

Scientists would later prove that Bruno’s amazing deductions were correct. Bruno rejected Aristotle and Ptolemy’s finite, hierarchical view of the cosmos, which regarded the “perfect and unchanging” heavens as separate from the “corruptible” Earth.¹⁶ Instead, he argued for a decentralized and dynamic universe governed by the same natural laws everywhere. Bruno’s conception of the universe had strong elements of Pantheism—he believed that the universe itself was a manifestation of God and that divinity was immanent in all creation (also an idea that had been common in pre-Socratic Greek philosophy).¹⁷ This contrasted sharply with the Catholic Church’s theological view of God as a transcendent being separate from the rest of the universe.

Bruno’s On Magic, written in the 1590s and published posthumously, is a philosophic treatise that explores his ideas about the nature of “magic,” its role in human understanding, and its connection to the natural world. Compared to its generally accepted meaning today, the connotation and understanding of the word “magic” were significantly different in the late 16th century. In the Renaissance, magic was a multifaceted concept rooted in natural philosophy, theology, and humanism and seen as a legitimate intellectual pursuit as opposed to mere illusionist tricks or supernatural nonsense. Bruno’s conception of “magic” is not about supernatural or occult practices but rather is rooted in his broader philosophy, emphasizing the universe’s interconnectedness, the power of the human mind, and the potential for humans to harness natural forces to shape their environment. Bruno distinguished between an idea he called “natural magic”—which he viewed as a legitimate, rational study of the forces and principles of nature—and “superstitious magic,” which he dismissed as irrational and tied to baseless beliefs. For example, he viewed magnets attracting iron or the moon’s influence on the tides as “natural magic.”

In his view, we use “magic” by understanding and manipulating causal connections. This idea resembles Francis Bacon’s observation that “nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.”¹⁸ However, unlike Galileo and Bacon, Bruno focused heavily on deductive versus inductive reasoning. Bruno didn’t use induction in the scientific sense—collecting observations (e.g., star positions, planetary motions) to form a theory. He lacked instruments such as telescopes (Galileo’s came in 1609, after Bruno’s death) and didn’t record empirical data like Tycho Brahe. His “evidence” was intellectual—Copernicus’s model, ancient texts, and his own logic—not sensory.

Bruno presented the magician (or “Magus”) as a philosopher-scientist who seeks to uncover and master the hidden principles of nature—much like the scientists of today seek to understand the fundamental nature of reality. Bruno’s approach to “magic” was deeply rational and scientific for his time, seeing it as a means of extending human understanding rather than a form of mystical or religious practice. In fact, he viewed rational mastery of natural laws as a way to puncture the Church’s claim of miracles. Bruno’s “Magus” was much closer to an Edison, Tesla, or Einstein than to Jesus or the mythical Merlin of Arthurian legend.

Bruno was an expert in mnemonic techniques, and his works on memory demonstrate his interest in combining logic, imagination, and philosophy to enhance human understanding. In Bruno’s time, books were scarce and extremely valuable. The ability to memorize large amounts of information was essential for scholars and intellectuals who could not easily obtain written texts. Scholars, clergy, and philosophers needed to rely on their memory to preserve and transmit knowledge. Mnemonic techniques were considered an essential tool for education and for intellectual life, especially in an era when oral communication played a significant role in disseminating ideas.

In On the Shadows of Ideas (1582), Bruno explained how to use mnemonic techniques to recall and organize complex information. This work blends classical memory systems with his philosophic ideas. For example, he explains the classical memory trick of using vivid images by imagining a list of animals—lion, eagle, dolphin, snake, bull—each paired with a mythological figure such as Hercules wrestling the lion or Apollo riding the dolphin, making the figures easy to recall. He infuses this with his philosophy, turning the list into a reflection of the living universe, where these active gods mirror natural forces (such as strength for Hercules), blending practical recall with his pantheistic vision.

The Art of Memory (1582) is a detailed exposition of Bruno’s mnemonic techniques, showing how imagination and visualization can improve the mind’s ability to understand and retain concepts. For example, Bruno asks readers to memorize a list of virtues by picturing them as animated statues in a grand hall. He suggests imagining Justice as a towering woman in a flowing robe, blindfolded, holding scales that tip and sway as she strides forward. The idea is that her movement and vivid detail stretch the mind beyond simple recall to actively engage with the concept and thus improve retention.

Bruno believed that memory was not merely a capacity for recalling information but an active force for enlightenment and knowledge that could be enhanced using specific techniques. His system of mnemonics also involved visualization techniques, in which the mind arranges symbols, images, and concepts into a structured mental “memory palace” or “theater.” Bruno viewed the memory palace as a mental storage system and a way to expand knowledge, saying, “By the orderly arrangement of images in the mind, man strengthens his intellect and discovers the truths that lie beyond mere sensation.”¹⁹

Bruno’s ideas about memory were subversive because they suggested that knowledge and “divine” insight did not come from the Church or scripture but from within the human mind. His memory training system was a form of intellectual empowerment, teaching individuals to break free from dogma and examine reality for themselves. Bruno saw memory as a dynamic system for synthesizing new insights, enabling the mind to make connections beyond the stored data. Modern neural networks, through large-scale data training and continuous learning, similarly expand their knowledge base over time, making it a kind of digital successor to Bruno’s vision of infinite intellectual potential.

Bruno’s The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast (1584) is an allegorical and philosophic dialogue that critiques religious dogma, moral corruption, and traditional (geocentric) cosmology. Written as a celestial debate among the gods of Olympus, the work reimagines the constellations as a symbolic stage for reforming human virtues and vices. The book challenges the hypocrisy of religious institutions and the rigid moral structures imposed by Christianity. It offers a vision of moral and intellectual progress based on reason, self-improvement, and respect for the laws of nature. Unfortunately, Bruno weaves in elements of Neoplatonism, suggesting that humans should align themselves with the divine order through knowledge and virtue rather than blind faith, but the book is nonetheless a powerful attack on the Christian hegemony of his day.

His portrayal of the gods expelling vices and replacing them with new, enlightened virtues symbolizes his call for philosophic and spiritual renewal. Bruno saw human potential as limitless when guided by reason rather than faith. He often used the sun as a metaphor for reason and enlightenment: “He is blind who does not see the sun, foolish who does not recognize it, ungrateful who is not thankful unto it.”²⁰ A bold and provocative work, The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast contributed to Bruno’s eventual persecution; its critiques of religious authority were considered deeply heretical by Church authorities.

Bruno’s growing body of work, combined with his notoriety and polarizing reputation as a thinker, inevitably set him on a collision course with the Catholic Church.

Betrayal and Inquisition

In 1591, weary of endless exile, Bruno made the fateful decision to return to Italy, perhaps believing that Venice, with its reputation for relative openness, might be a safe haven. He accepted an invitation from a Venetian nobleman, Giovanni Mocenigo, who wished to learn Bruno’s famed memory techniques and to drink from the well of his astonishing intellect. But this supposed benefactor soon turned against Bruno, betraying him to the Venetian Inquisition in 1592. It’s not clear whether Mocenigo acted on his own or he had been conspiring with the Church, but whatever his motive, he accused Bruno of spreading heresies that threatened the very foundation of the Church’s power.

From that moment on, Bruno’s fate was sealed. The Venetian authorities, eager to appease Rome, arrested him and threw him into a cold, damp cell with foul air, the first of many dungeons that would become his world for the remainder of his life. They then handed him over to the Roman Inquisition, and he was dragged in chains to Rome, where he faced the full wrath of the Church.²¹ Bruno, the man who had gazed at the stars and dreamed of infinite worlds, who had dared to say that the universe was not a prison of divine order but an endless expanse of possibility, now found himself trapped in a place where no light could reach him, where he would never again see the stars shine above him.

For eight long years, he suffered under the relentless cruelty of the Inquisition. He was not allowed legal counsel and had to defend himself. The Inquisition did not simply question him—they tried to break his body and his spirit. He was subjected to psychological and physical torment, interrogated over and over, his own words twisted and used against him. Among other things, he was accused of:

• heresy for rejecting the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the doctrine of Virgin Birth, the doctrine of transubstantiation, and other dogmas such as eternal damnation.

• blasphemy for saying that God was not a distant ruler but present in all things—that divinity was within and around, not above.

• sedition for claiming that the Church was corrupt and that it had used faith as a tool of control.

• treason for saying that the universe was infinite, that the Earth was just another world among countless others—a mere speck in a vast cosmos.²²

To the men who sat in judgment over him, Bruno’s greatest crime was not simply heresy—it was his very freedom. He refused to let them dictate what he could think, what he could say, or what he could believe. Over and over, they called him an “obstinate” heretic. But Bruno did not break. Amazingly, he stood against the darkness, even as it closed in around him. For eight years, they demanded that he recant. They offered him mercy—if only he would bow his head and surrender his mind. But Bruno refused. His soul was his own; his thoughts belonged to no man.

Bruno stood alone against the Catholic Church, which at the time was a deadly combination of religious mysticism and authoritarian statism—twin forces designed to suppress the individual mind and strangle human freedom. Bruno’s story is an essential reminder that faith and force often go hand in hand. Because faith cannot rationally persuade, it ultimately resorts to coercion—whether through social and moral pressure, religious persecution, censorship, or political tyranny.

At last, in 1600, under the authority of Cardinal Robert Bellarmine and with the blessing of Pope Clement VIII, the Inquisition made its final decision.²³ Bruno was to be put to death. Upon pronouncing his sentence, his Inquisitors asked Bruno if he had anything to say. He lifted his head and, in a powerful voice that belied his physical suffering, said, “Perhaps your fear in passing this sentence upon me is greater than mine in receiving it.”²⁴

Giordano Bruno was not only a genius thinker far ahead of his time, he was a rare soul with the courage of his convictions and an indomitable spirit. Unlike his accusers, he had no fear of hell:

When we consider the being and substance of that universe in which we are immutably set, we shall discover that neither we ourselves nor any substance doth suffer death, for nothing is in fact diminished in its substance, but all things, wandering through infinite space, undergo change of aspect.²⁵

On February 17, 1600, a cold Ash Wednesday in Rome, the Inquisitors led a gaunt Bruno from his cell, his body weak but his spirit stronger than ever. They gagged him by driving a metal spike through his cheeks to pin his tongue, terrified that in his final moments he would speak the truth one last time and that his words might ignite rebellion. They marched him to Campo de Fiori, where Rome’s public executioners had prepared a pyre. Then they stripped him naked, bound him to a stake, and lit the fire at his feet.

As the flames rose and Bruno writhed in agony, the Church believed that it had won. It thought that it had erased him, silenced him, and burned away his obstinate defiance.

But it failed.

Bruno’s body turned to ash after his death, but his ideas burned brighter than ever. The universe did not shrink back into the Church’s narrow, ignorant vision. Instead, it expanded, just as Bruno had foretold. Centuries later, when modern science confirmed much of his thinking—when telescopes gazed into the endless cosmos he had imagined—the world finally saw what he had seen.

Giordano Bruno’s execution stands as one of the greatest crimes of Christianity—a perverse monument to its irrationality, fear, cruelty, and desperate need to crush what it cannot control. But Bruno lives on in the stars, in the infinite worlds beyond our own, in every mind that refuses to bow—in every mind that dares to think, to question, and to seek the truth.

---

This article appears in the Spring 2025 issue of The Objective Standard.

---

1. Robert Ingersoll, The Great Infidels (London: FB&C, 2017).

2. NASA, “Giordano Bruno Crater,” October 5, 2017, https://science.nasa.gov/resource/giordano-bruno-crater.

3. Zhen Wang and Di-Tau Wu, “Giordano Bruno’s Prescience: Tracing the Renaissance Influence on Artificial Intelligence,” AI & Soc 39 (2024): 3033–35, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01744-8.

4. Ingrid D. Rowland, Giordano Bruno: Philosopher/Heretic (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2008), 259.

5. The Catholic Inquisitions began in the 12th century, and it is estimated that the Church murdered 10,000–15,000 people directly. Hundreds of thousands more were subject to interrogation, torture, imprisonment, and public shaming. These practices did not end until the 19th century. See Edward Peters, Inquisition (University of California Press, 1989), 87–94.

6. Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) was a Dutch Renaissance humanist, scholar, and Catholic priest. In 1559, his works were placed on the Church’s Index of Forbidden Books because they were seen as sowing doubt about Church authority. See Joseph Hilgers, “Index of Prohibited Books,” Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 7 (Appleton, 1910), http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07721a.htm.

7. Scholasticism in medieval times aimed to reconcile classical logic (especially Aristotelian philosophy) with Christian theology. Key figures included Thomas Aquinas, Albertus Magnus, and Peter Abelard. It sought to harmonize faith and reason, but by the Renaissance, rationalism and new scientific approaches had increasingly challenged it.

8. Frances A. Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (University of Chicago Press, 1964), 295.

9. Frances A. Yates and E. A. Gosselin, “Giordano Bruno,” in E. N. Zalta, ed., Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Stanford University, 2023);
Michael White, The Pope and the Heretic: The True Story of Giordano Bruno, The Man Who Dared to Defy the Roman Inquisition (HarperCollins, 2009), 53.

10. In Neoplatonism, The One (or the Good) is the ultimate source of all reality. Bruno identifies God with the infinite Universe, rejecting the idea of a transcendent deity separate from creation. He states that God is immanent in all things, reflecting the Neoplatonic belief that reality flows from a divine source and that all elements of reality are interconnected;

11. White, The Pope and the Heretic, 53.

12. Giordano Bruno, Cause, Principle, and Unity, trans. Jack Lindsay (International Publishers, 1962).

13. Giordano Bruno, The Ash Wednesday Supper = La Cena de le Ceneri, ed. and trans. Edward A. Gosselin and Lawrence S. Lerner (University of Toronto Press, 1995), 35.

14. Daniel W. Graham, “Anaximander,” in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta (Stanford University, 2021).

15. Giordano Bruno, On the Infinite Universe and Worlds, trans. Dorothea Waley Singer (New York: Greenwood, 1950. Because Uranus had not been discovered yet when Bruno referred to the “seven planets” of our system, he included the Moon as one of the traditional “planets,” along with the five visible to the naked eye (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) and the Sun.

16. Aristotle and Ptolemy’s views of a hierarchical cosmos were deeply theocentric, meaning that they placed Earth—and humanity—at the center of God’s creation. Their geocentric model placed Earth at the center and viewed the heavens (the celestial bodies) as perfect and unchanging. Their ideas dominated Western thought for more than a millennium until the Copernican Revolution in the 16th century, which eventually displaced the geocentric model.

17. Pantheism is the belief that God and the universe are identical, meaning that the divine is present in all things, and the cosmos itself is sacred. It rejects the idea of a personal, transcendent deity and instead views nature and existence as an expression of the divine reality. Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677) popularized pantheism in Western philosophy.

18. Francis Bacon, born in 1561, was a young man during Bruno’s tenure in London. Although there’s no record of them meeting, it’s plausible that Bacon was aware of Bruno’s presence and ideas, as Bruno caused a stir in England with his unorthodox views. Despite his inductive approach, Bacon never embraced heliocentrism.

19. Giordano Bruno, The Art of Memory, trans. Frances A. Yates (London: Routledge, 1966), 215.

20. Giordano Bruno, The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast, trans. Arthur D. Imerti (University of Nebraska Press, 1960), 69.

21. Frances A. Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (University of Chicago Press, 1964), 349–55.

22. Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, 352–55.

23. Bellarmine was not only the key inquisitor responsible for Bruno’s death but also was involved in persecuting Galileo. In the inverted moral world of the Catholic Church, it later canonized Bellarmine as a saint. To this day, the Church has not apologized or admitted any wrongdoing in Bruno’s death.

24. White, The Pope and the Heretic, 16.

25. Bruno, The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast, 238.