From the time of Albertus Magnus, medieval commentators on Aristotle regularly used a passage from Meteorology 1.2 as evidence that the stars and planets influence and even govern terrestrial events. Many of these commentators integrated their readings of this work with the view that planetary conjunctions were causes of significant changes in human affairs. By the end of the sixteenth century, Italian Aristotelian commentators and astrologers alike deemed this passage as authoritative for the integration of astrology with natural philosophy. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, however, criticized this reading, contending that Aristotle never used the science of the stars to explain meteorological phenomena. While some Italian commentators, such as Pietro Pomponazzi dismissed Pico’s contentions, by the middle of the sixteenth century many reevaluated the medieval integration. This reevaluation culminated in Cesare Cremonini, who put forth an extensive critique of astrology in which he argued against the idea of occult causation and celestial influence, as he tried to rid Aristotelianism of its medieval legacy.

从艾伯特斯·马格努斯（Albertus Magnus）时代起，亚里士多德（Aristotle）的中世纪评论员经常使用气象学的一段话1.2作为证据，证明恒星和行星影响甚至支配着地面事件。这些评论员中的许多人将他们对这项工作的阅读结合在一起，认为行星结是人类事务发生重大变化的原因。到16世纪末，意大利的亚里士多德评论家和占星家都认为这段话是占星术与自然哲学融合的权威。然而，乔瓦尼·皮科·德拉·米兰多拉（Giovanni Pico della Mirandola）批评了这一观点，认为亚里斯多德从未使用过星星科学来解释气象现象。尽管一些意大利评论员，例如彼得罗·蓬庞拉齐（Pietro Pomponazzi）驳斥了笔克的论点，但到16世纪中叶，许多人重新评估了中世纪的融合。这项重新评估的结果是切萨雷·克雷莫尼尼（Cesare Cremonini）