When the Greek Hermetica reached Florence in the fifteenth century they were received as the work of an Egyptian sage older than Moses, a first source from which Plato and the later philosophers had drawn, and that dating gave them extraordinary authority for two centuries of European thought. In 1614 Isaac Casaubon examined the language and showed the texts could not be that old: the Greek is of the Roman imperial period, and the writings engage with philosophical positions that did not exist before it. The finding held and is not disputed. What it did not do is empty the texts. Modern scholarship reads them as genuine religious and philosophical writing from Roman Egypt and continues to argue about how much authentically Egyptian material they carry, which is a separate and open question. The older claim is recorded here because it shaped the tradition's reception for so long that a reader will certainly meet it, and because the tradition made the claim itself rather than having it imposed.
Facts
Origins
Held ByHermeticism, as received in Renaissance Europe 1 Defining MomentIn 1614 Isaac Casaubon examined the language and showed the texts could not be as old as claimed: the Greek is of the Roman imperial period, and the writings engage with philosophical positions that did not exist before it. 1 Scholarship and Forensics
Scholarly NoteThe finding held and is not disputed, and it did not empty the texts. Modern scholarship reads them as genuine religious and philosophical writing from Roman Egypt and continues to argue about how much authentically Egyptian material they carry, which is a separate and open question. 2 Belief
SubjectRevelation and scripture 1 Status
Status Within the TraditionDefined and binding within this tradition 1 Doctrinal Category Learn More
The Dating That Arrived a Century Too Late to Matter
Isaac Casaubon's 1614 case against the Hermetica's ancient Egyptian authorship was philological rather than doctrinal, which is why it held. He identified Greek philosophical vocabulary and argumentative moves in the texts that belong demonstrably to the Hellenistic and early Roman periods, along with linguistic features inconsistent with the archaic Egyptian date the texts had been assigned, and laid the evidence out systematically enough that even scholars invested in the older dating could not answer it on its own terms. The texts were not, as claimed, the work of an Egyptian sage predating Moses and standing behind Plato; they were composed centuries after Plato, by writers working within a Greco Egyptian milieu of the Roman imperial period.
The finding arrived too late to affect how earlier Renaissance readers had already used the texts, since those readings were built a full century or more before Casaubon wrote, treating the supposed antiquity of Hermes Trismegistus as license to read Hermetic material as a philosophical and even proto Christian revelation. Casaubon's dating did not undo that reception history, it simply meant every subsequent reader encountered the Hermetica already knowing the ancient authorship the earlier reception had found so authoritative was itself a mistake, without the texts' content as Greco Egyptian religious philosophy becoming any less real for that correction.
Cross-Tradition Connections
Belongs to Tradition
Hermeticism, Religions Why this is corrected. Recorded as a claim the tradition made about its own antiquity, and found false. The texts themselves remain genuine writing of Roman Egypt.
Sources
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.