In Part 1 of this series, I enumerated several unexpected coincidences involving the Jesuits and the history of natural history. I also introduced several names on the academic tree of natural history including Darwin, Buffon, and Chardin. In this post, I introduce several more historical figures, symbols, and coincidences. The academic tree I reconstructed using the names of prominent Marxists and naturalists in the university system converged into a single academic ancestor in the 16th century. The common academic ancestor is Theodor Zwinger Sr. The important point regarding Zwinger, relevant to the rest of tree, is that he was a humanist. This is relevant to the tree because the common thread on the academic tree is that they are all naturalists and humanism and naturalism typically come as a package deal.
“The unique message of humanism on the current world scene is its commitment to scientific naturalism.” https://web.archive.org/web/20130507114431/http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=manifesto
This is the primary reason why the association between the Jesuits and natural history is such an odd coincidence.
Humanism
Humanism places humans in the place of primary importance in one’s thinking. The image below shows the definition of humanism from Oxford Languages.
Humanism - an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems. define: humanism - Google Search
What does it mean to attach primary importance to human? As indicated in the definition above, the humanist assigning primary importance to humans is best understood when contrasted against a religious world view that would attach the primary importance to God, rather than humans. This distinction makes the appearance of Jesuits on the academic tree all the more striking. There are many ways the two world views appear to differ. Consider the difference in the source of immortality between a religion such as Christianity and humanism.
What is the source of immortality for the Christian? God.
What is the source of immortality for the Humanist? Humans/Technology.
This is easy to see because in the absence of God, technology is one’s only hope of overcoming mortality. It is only through technology that a humanist would gain victory over death, which brings us to the first symbol we can find associated with humanism, the laurel wreath symbol.
The Laurel Wreath Symbol
As I began researching the origins of humanism, it led to a piece of artwork called, “Six Tuscan Poets” by artist Giorgio Vasari (see image below). The six figures in the image are humanists; from left to right their names are Cristoforo Landino, Marsilio Ficino, Petrarch, Giovanni Boccaccio, Dante Alighieri, and Guido Cavalcanti. Petrarch is considered the father of humanism. I have highlighted several notable symbols in the artwork below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Tuscan_Poets
As you might have already noticed, several of the figures, including Petrarch, are wearing the laurel wreath, head wear many of us are familiar with from Roman imagery. The laurel wreath is the symbol of triumph (to achieve a victory). For a Humanist, what is this symbol supposed to represent victory over? As indicated above, it would make sense if this happened to be a reference to achieving victory over death via one’s own power. Humanists are not the only people to use the ancient symbol, the Jesuits use the symbol as well. The image below is of another Jesuit map showing they share a fondness for this symbol of triumph and victory (highlighted in blue below).
I highlighted a knot at the bottom of the laurel wreath (red), to familiarize the reader’s eye with this feature as well.
The Second Book Symbol
Returning to the “Six Tuscan Poets” from above, I have highlighted two books in the image. Notice Dante is holding a book in his hand (green), which he focuses his eyes upon to draw attention to it, while pointing at a second book held by Petrarch (red). This to me indicates the existence of two words/doctrines; one for the many to see and one to be concealed or less noticeable and esoteric. This potential meaning of the “two books” or “second book” symbol will be discussed further along in this post.
The Sovereign’s Orb
The last symbol I highlighted in the Six Tuscan Poets image is the globe in the bottom-left of the artwork (blue), which I labeled “God-like Power”. The globe or orb has been used as a symbol of the monarch's sovereignty, to represent the idea of worldly dominion. Consider the Sovereign's Orb, part of the Crown Jewels, which is a symbol of godly power. When combined with the cross above the orb, it is a symbol of a Christ's dominion over a worldly empire. It represents a worldly empire because the division of the orb into three sections is meant to represent the continents known to medieval rulers.
It is presented to the Sovereign after they put on the Imperial Robe. The orb is brought from the altar by the Dean of Westminster, and given to the Archbishop of Canterbury to place into the Monarch’s right hand. There he says: “Receive this orb set under the cross, and remember that the whole world is subject to the Power and Empire of Christ our Redeemer.”...The pearls divide the orb into three sections, which represent the three continents medieval rulers believed existed. https://thecrownchronicles.co.uk/state-and-ceremonial/symbols-of-monarchy-sovereigns-orb-and-sceptre/
There are no divisions on the globe in the Six Tuscan Poets, so the connection to the Sovereign's orb given the evidence so far is tenuous at best. These examples are simply meant to introduce the symbols and associated concepts before showing more examples of them in the same clusters. So, to summarize the symbols introduced so far, we have seen the Jesuit seal from the Church of the Gesu, the Laurel Wreath (coincidentally associated with the Jesuits as well), the Sovereign’s Orb, and two books. Let’s return to the academic tree to find more coincidences and examples of these symbols utilized by historical figures from the tree.
More Academic Ancestors
Two more figures from the academic tree are Alexander von Humboldt (Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander von Humboldt) and Herman Boerhaave, highlighted in yellow in the image below, with the aforementioned historical figures (Darwin and Buffon) highlighted in red.
Herman Boerhaave is the great, great, great, great grandfather of Charles Darwin on the academic tree and the academic great grandfather of Alexander von Humboldt (lineages traced in yellow). While researching the names on the academic tree, I googled the name Alexander von Humboldt and began to notice a familiar set of symbols.
Alexander von Humboldt
Alexander von Humboldt and his brother Wilhelm von Humboldt were influential in the founding of the University of Berlin, and it now carries their name, Humboldt University of Berlin. The university produced prominent scientists including Albert Einstein and also notable figures such as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. The university contained the Natural History Museum of Berlin until 2009, so it clearly heavily influenced by a naturalist worldview. There is a statue of each brother on either side of the entrance to the university (see image below). When I examined the statues to see if there was anything to see, coincidentally, I found the same set of symbols highlighted in the Six Tuscan Poets artwork above.
Statues of the Humboldt Brothers (Wilhelm left, Alexander right)
Coincidentally, both brothers have their names displayed prominently within the symbol of triumph/victory, the laurel wreath. By pure coincidence, the bottom of Wilhelm’s laurel wreath is secured with a knot (left side of image above).
Taking a look at the image below, Wilhelm is holding a book open for all to see, with a second book relegated to the shadows of his clothing (top-left of image below). On the other side we have Alexander’s statue (bottom left), he doesn’t have a large open book; coincidentally, we can still find the concealed book behind the sovereign’s orb by his side.
The two statues combined contain all of our new symbols, including a very Jesuit-looking laurel wreath. Another coincidence is that the Alexander von Humboldt Memorial in Chicago takes care to include some of the same symbols (right side in image above).
The meaning of the laurel wreath symbol is well understood, and assuming the globe symbol is being used to represent the sovereign's orb, we know the meaning of that symbol as well. Which leaves the two books as the remaining new symbols without a clear associated meaning. Considering the second book seems to be partially concealed or relegated to parts of the picture which draw less attention and the first book is held out for all to see, it makes sense to interpret the prominent book as the world view that is presented for the world to see. Others are intended to believe this to be the world view of the person utilizing the symbol, while we can interpret the second book to represent a second world view which the person utilizing the symbol actually subscribes to, but is intended to remain concealed from the public. Assuming that is the case, the Humboldts are presenting a humanist worldview to the public as the worldview they both subscribe to. If the assumption is correct and the Humboldt’s present one world view to the world, while subscribing to a second world view which is concealed, how would one determine the identity of the second (sincere) world view? I will propose an answer to this question in the summary of this post. Now let’s look at a symbol associated with Alexander von Humboldt’s academic great grandfather, Herman Boerhaave.
Herman Boerhaave
Herman Boerhaave was employed as a professor at Leiden University and would teach in the anatomical theater, where a paying audience could observe live demonstrations of dissection. I found an artist’s depiction of the theater from the 1600s and part of the picture stood out to me above the rest, the tree in the bottom center of the image with a skeleton on either side (see highlighted portion in image below).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leiden_anatomical_theatre#/media/File:Anatomical_theatre_Leiden.jpg
I have highlighted the serpent in the tree (green) and the fruit of the tree (yellow) to emphasize the obvious reference to symbolism from the Bible, where Eve eats of the fruit of the tree of knowledge in the garden of Eden in Genesis 3. Taking a look at Genesis 3, the serpent in the story uses three tactics to achieve its aim. The three tactics of the serpent are to induce doubt in God’s word, to appeal to a desire for immortality, and to appeal to a desire to be like the gods (elohim).
"Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" Genesis 3:1
"And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:" Genesis 3:4
"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Genesis 3:5
Eve is seduced by the desire to become wise and be like a god and she takes and eats the fruit. Many of us are already familiar with this story, but this raises several questions.
Why would one of the first anatomical theaters to exist in the university system prominently display such a symbol?
Is there a connection between this imagery and the symbols associated with humanism or is this an indication of a different worldview?
Was this just the artist adding symbolism to a rendition of the theater or was this a realistic depiction of the theater’s historical appearance?
Searching for an answer to the last question, I found another depiction from the same artist and a photo of the modern replica housed in a museum in Leiden (image below).
Even the replica takes care to display the same symbolism (right side in image above), which I find striking. This does seem to indicate that this portion of the artist’s rendition retains some historically accuracy.
Three Hundred and Twenty-Two Coincidences
“And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:” Genesis 3:22
The subtitle of this post is a reference to Genesis 3:22, or more specifically, a reference to the coincidences surrounding natural history and their relation to Genesis 3:22. In the first post, I highlighted strange coincidences surrounding the Jesuit connection to the propagation of the concept of natural history. In this post, I have highlighted several humanist symbols, including a symbol shared by humanists and the Jesuits, the laurel wreath. In this post the primary riddle is: Why would a University devoted to natural history be founded by men who claim to be naturalists, yet have an academic lineage which uses theological symbols (serpent/tree of knowledge) from Genesis 3 in their imagery? Could there be a narrative which unifies the use of these symbols, with the Jesuits, Marxists, naturalists, humanists, and the university system or are all of these coincidences truly coincidences?
Although a subset of the symbols being used to represent the use of technology to accumulate power and to triumph over death corresponds nicely with a humanist world view, there are other symbols in the images I have introduced thus far that do not seem to fit into a humanist world view, such as the tree of knowledge. Humans reuse symbols all the time and often attribute different meaning to them. How would we know if the symbols are being used by coincidence, or if the symbols show some sort of relationship between the people utilizing them? Earlier in this post, I raised the question of how one would determine the meaning of the second book symbol, assuming the first book represented the doctrine of humanism. Perhaps both of these questions share the same answer.
The strategy we can use to answer both questions is to take into account the entirety of the symbols presented and their associated meaning. In this way we can determine which interpretation for the symbols, and relationships between the historical figures, accounts for the entirety of the evidence. Hypothetically, this would reveal the world view to which the historical figures truly subscribe and why they would choose to portray a different world view to the public. In the next part of this series, I will re-examine the images we have looked at thus far and take into account the symbols we have overlooked to see what they have to reveal. Here are some questions for the reader to ponder while I prepare the next part of this series:
What is the meaning of the symbols in the image below?
Why would a proponent of natural history have these symbols on his statue?
Do these symbols have meaning relevant to a humanist world view?