8 . 2 .

Kepler and Neoplatonism

JOACHIM OTTO FLECKENSTEIN
Technische Universitdt Miinchen
Dedicated to the 80th birthday of Alexander Ostrowski
IN THE hi st ory of ideas t he "spi r i t of t he Renai ssance" has oft en been said t o be an
ideology based on Pl at o as opposed t o Aristotle. Thi s is t r ue for t he general t r end of
phi l osophy as such. Pl at o' s Phi l osophy of Nat ur e, however, as a part i cul ar br anch of
phi l osophy, embodi es t he t eachi ngs of Pyt hagoras, as demons t r at ed by Ti maeus . In
consequence, an unde r c ur r e nt of Pyt hagor eani sm has been pr esent all t hr ough t he
devel opment of Pl at oni sm since Ant i qui t y, an unde r c ur r e nt whi ch is responsi bl e for
t he fact t hat mat hemat i cal phi l osophy is Pl at oni c (Proclus), but t he mat hemat i cs of
Nat ur al Phi l osophy are Pyt hagor ean ( Theon) . Aft er late ant i qui t y t he t wo t r ends
devel op separately i n t he hi st ory of ideas as Neo- Pl at oni sm and Neo- Pyt hagor eani sm. *
Pyt hagor eani sm i t sel f as mat hemat i cal symbol i sm is onl y a part of t he old ori ent al
Gnost i ci sm. Tr aces of t hi s Gnost i ci sm, a way of t hought root ed in symbol i c myt hs
and analogies, cont i nue t o be visible in t he late Renai ssance in sciences like physi cs
and chemi st r y, t hen in t he f or ms of astrology and al chemy, i.e. sciences whi ch were
still i n t he magi c phase of h u ma n knowl edge.
No less a ma n t han Wol fgang Pauli 1 dr ew at t ent i on t o archet ypal magical ideas
i n Kepl er ' s writings. Indeed, Kepl er has always been consi der ed as the post -
Pyt hagor ean in moder n t i mes, and even t oday is an exampl e t o all specul at i ve
* A detailed study of "Neoplatonic astro-alchemy " i n Kepler' s Mysterium Cosmographicum was
the subject of Prof. Fleckenstein' s paper at the Leningrad Kepler symposium and forms part of its
published Proceedings.
1 For Notes see pp. 435-8.
427
Joachm Otto Fleckenstein
explorers who want t o st udy nat ural phi l osophy wi t h si mpl e mat hemat i cal met hods,
in t he manner of Kepl er and peopl e in Ant i qui t y. Pauli states t hat scientific know-
l edge is not onl y a mat t er of drawi ng logical concl usi ons f r om t he dat a of experience,
but rat her a process of mat chi ng exi st ent i nner images in t he huma n ps yc he - - whi c h
Kepl er also calls "ar chet ypes"Z- - wi t h cor r espondi ng out si de objects. But one shoul d
not forget t hat t he Pyt hagor eani sm of Ant i qui t y and of t he Renai ssance at t r i but ed
mat hemat i cal archet ypes of number s and figures t o nat ural phenomena in t oo naive
a way. In part i cul ar t he Pyt hagoreans never succeeded i n graspi ng mat hemat i cal l y
t he concept of change, whi ch is f undament al for Dynami cs. Thi s concept was con-
ceived not i n t he Platonic, but in t he Ari st ot el i an t radi t i on of t he Scholastic t heory of
subst ant i al f or ms - - t he forms as qualities not bei ng measurabl e in quant i t y, but t hei r
differences in qual i t y bei ng quantifiable. Galileo, Kepl er ' s cor r espondent and com-
pani on in t he fight for t he moder n idea of knowl edge of t he "Sci ent i a Nova", st ands
at t he end of t he devel opment of t hi s scholastic t heor y of forms, and at t he begi nni ng
of t he moder n concept of funct i ons as mat hemat i cal represent at i ons of t he processes
of Nat ur e. But Kepl er, by far superi or t o Galileo in geomet ri c and ar i t hmet i c
t hi nki ng, never advanced t o Galileo' s concept of force as change of velocity, and t hi s
is t he reason why he never under s t ood his ar ea- t heor em of t he move me nt of t he
pl anet s i n t he way Galileo di d : as t he planets falling by at t ract i on t owards t he Sun at
peri hel i on, and slowing down as t hey move away f r om it at aphel i on. 3 Galileo, on
t he ot her hand, disliked t he elliptic orbits of t he celestial bodies arrived at by t edi ous
numeri cal calculations; t he It al i an mat hemat i ci ans of t he Renai ssance di d not
generally accept t he appl i cat i on of t he " l ow" art of ar i t hmet i c t o geomet r y and
mechani cs. 4 In As t r onomy Galileo is a Neo- Pl at oni st adher i ng t o t he " nobl e "
circular orbits of t he celestial bodies, and Kepl er a Neo- Pyt hagor ean who lost his
way i n a Neo- Pyt hagor ean nat ur e- myst i ci sm while t r yi ng t o i nt er pr et t he at t ract i on
of t he Sun on t he planets. 5 But c ommon t o bot h is t he positivistic met hod of moder n
physi cs: t o Galileo as exper i ment er , t o Kepl er as calculator.
Nevert hel ess, Kepl er t ook over f r om t he Neo- Pl at oni st Procl us t he concept of t he
pr oduct i on of geomet ri cal forms by t he move me nt of t he cor r espondi ng indivisibles:
t hus a line is generat ed by t he movement of a poi nt , an area by t he movement of a
st rai ght line, a solid body by t he move me nt of a plane. But Kepl er di d not advance,
as di d Galileo' s Fl or ent i ne School (Cavalieri, Torri cel l i and others) t o t he concept of
dynami c "f l uxus", whi ch later led t he Cambr i dge School 6 (Barrow, Newt on and
others) t o t he concept of calculus. Kepl er conceives spatial format i ons statically as
aggregates of t he generat i ng el ement s: t he indivisibles are like at oms of t he bodies,
and t he advances he finally nevert hel ess made beyond t he anci ent i nt egrat i on-
met hod of Ar chi medes in his "St er eomet r i a No v a " - - a r e not i n t he "ar s de mon-
st r andi " but i n t he "ars i nveni endi ". 7
In spi t e of t hei r differences Kepl er and Galileo agree in t hei r mode r n idea of
knowl edge i n t he exact sci ences--as t he f or mul at i on accordi ng t o mat hemat i cal
428
Kepler and Neoplatonism
principles of t he results of methodical experiments. Kepler, however, disagrees
compl et el y with t he Neo-Pyt hagorean Fl udd 8 on t he question of Nat ural Philosophy.
Kepl er says at t he end of his Harmonices Mundi:
. . at mi hi uni t at es n a t u r a l e s . . , expressi a nat ur a i n certas suas quant i t at es s unt proposi t i i n
qui bus Ha r moni a m quaeram. Il l e i n t e ne br a r um et lucis gradi bus, quaeri t pr opor t i ones
Har moni cas, nul l o respect u al i cujus mot us : Ego Har moni as n o n ni si i n mot i bus quaero. Il l e
paucul as al i quas concor dant i as del i bat , easque ex s uar um Pyr a mi dum mi xt ur a, qua Mu n d u m
ipse pr i vat i m i n suo ani mo pi ct ur e ci rcumgest at , elicit, seu ab ilia repraesent ari pr obat : Ego
t ot um corpus Har moni cae cont emper at i oni s, c um omni bus par t i bus, i n ext remi s pl anet ar um
mot i bus propri i s s e c undum certas et ab Ast r onomi a demonst r at as mens ur as inesse de mon-
st ravi : Ipsi i t aque concept us s uus Mu n d i , mi hi Mu n d u s ipse, seu i n eo reales pl anet ar um
mot us, s unt s ubject um Har moni ae mundanae.
As Pauli points out, t he quarrel started on t he question of t he pri macy of t he
Platonic Tr i ni t y over t he Pyt hagorean Qvat erni t y. Her e t he astrologer Kepl er
defends t he Christian Tr i ni t y and t he alchemist Fl udd speaks for t he Pagan
Qvat erni t y. Jung 9 had demonst rat ed t hat Al chemy as a gnostic secret doctrine hesi-
tated bet ween t hree or four principles from t he t i me of t he tale of Ti maeus up to t he
scene of Kabires in Goet he' s Faust Part II. Jung f ur t her notes t hat t he Paracelsian
Dorn~ius 1 described this choice as one bet ween God' s Tr i ni t y and t he Devil' s
Quat erni t y of t he "Ser pens quadri cornut us".
Kepl er' s cosmological trinity, set out in a l et t er to M~stlin, n seems to Pauli to
be an anticipation of t he ideas later expressed in Field Theor y:
. . Sol i n medi o mobi l i um qui et us ipse et t amen fons mot os gerit i magi nem Dei pat ri s
creatoris. Na m quod est deo creatio, hoc est soli mot us. Movet aut em i n fiis, ut Pat er i n
Fi l i o creat. Fi xae eni m ni si l ocum pr aeber ent sua qui et e, ni hi l moveri p o s s e t ' . . . Di s per t i t ur
aut em Sol vi r t ut em mot us per me di um i n quo s unt mobi l i a, si cut Pat er per Spi r i t um vet
vi r t ut e Spi r i t us sui creat.
Kepl er and Fl udd not only wrangle about t he t hree of Plato' s dialectics or t he
four of Aristotle' s categories, but also t he essence of t he Anima. It is t he musical
nat ur e of t he Ani ma whi ch makes possible a mathematical cognition of Nat ure.
Van der Waer den lz came to t he conclusion that t he Pyt hagorean teachings on t he
soul are an essential prel i mi nary for Hellenistic horoscopy, not accessible to old
oriental omen-astrology. ~ The Pythagorean teachings say t hat t he soul leaves t he
stars and enters t he human body at t he moment of birth, whi ch makes t he position
of t he planets in t he Zodiac decisive for t he charact er and fate of t he human being.
Accordi ng to Kepl er it is a fundament al propert y of t he individual soul whi ch
he calls "vis f or mat r i x" or "mat r i x format i va", to react by means of t he "i nst i nct us"
to certain harmoni c proportions correspondi ng to particular subdivisions of t he
circle. Thi s spiritual capacity shows in music as t he sensation of har mony (con-
sonance) at certain musical intervals; t he soul is now supposed to have a similar
specific reactivity towards harmoni c proportions in t he angles formed by t he light
rays arriving at t he Ear t h after t hei r journey from celestial bodies. Accordi ng to
Kepl er astrology has to deal only with these angles. In Kepl er' s work t he relevant
429
Joachim Otto Fleckenstein
angles bet ween l i ght -rays are t hose whi ch are f ound at t he vortices of t he regul ar
pol ygons whi ch can be i nscri bed wi t hi n a circle and can f or m a tessellation on a pl ane
(Fig. 8.23). For t hese pol ygons Kepl er explains 14 t hat t her e is a reciprocal connect i on
bet ween a per i met er figure and a central figure when t he angle made bet ween
nei ghbour i ng faces of t he latter is equal to t he angle made at t he cent re by radii f r om
nei ghbour i ng poi nt s of t he former, and vice versa. For Kepl er t he Pyt hagor ean
symbol for t he soul is a circle i n whi ch t he external mani fest at i on of t he soul is
Fl6. 8.23. Kepler's "astrological polygons" (from the Harmonices Mundi).
r epr esent ed by t he per i pher y, and its i nt ernal one by t he centre. In t hi s Kepl er
f ounded an "Ast rol ogi a Nova", since for hi m it is not t he celestial bodi es as such
t hat exert t he influence, but t he souls t hemsel ves wi t h t hei r specific reactivity t o
certain proport i ons. Kepl er expressly denies any astrological i nfl uence f r om di rect i ons
defined geometrically in relation t o t he fixed stars, i f t hese di rect i ons do not coi nci de
wi t h light-rays, for i nst ance t he di rect i on f r om t he Ear t h t o t he poi nt of t he vernal
equi nox. 15
Thi s concept of astrology di d not gain gr ound; it i mmedi at el y met wi t h resistance
f r om t radi t i onal astrologers def endi ng a very archaic idea of t he Pyt hagorean
cor r espondence bet ween macr ocosm and mi crocosm. Fl udd as a r epr esent at i ve of
t radi t i onal Al chemy want ed t o ext end t he rel evance of this hi t her t o prevai l i ng i dea:
t he cosmos is di vi ded i nt o four spheres cor r espondi ng t o t he four el ement s (Fig. 8.24).
Th e hi ghest sphere is t he Empyr ean of t he World of t he souls, and bel ow it is t he
430
1 ' FIG. 8.24. Title-page of Robert F udd s Tractatus Secundas De Naturae Simia Seu Technica
macrocosmi historia, Oppenhaim, 1618. (Photo Deutsches Museum, Munich.)
431
Fi t . 8.25. The macrocosmic monochord, from A. R.
Fludd, Physica & Technica, 1617. (Photo Deutsches
Museum, Munich.)
Fi t . 8.26. Kepler' s polyhedral construction of tht
Universe.
432
Kepler and Neoplatonism
et hereal spher e l eadi ng down t o t he spheres of t he el ement s and of subl unar y t hi ngs;
at t he bot t om is t he Ear t h whi ch is also t he abode of t he devil ( God' s monkey16).
The r e ever yt hi ng finds its expl anat i on in t he " mys t e r i um t r ans mut at i oni s " of t he
al chemi cal processes. The s e processes liberate t he dor mant " ani ma mu n d i " in t he
"mat er i a pr i ma " by several chemical pr ocedur es: t he mat eri a is t r ans mut ed. Th e
hexagram r epr esent i ng t he uni t y of cont rari es (fire and water) is split open i n Fl udd' s
work:iT t he upper equilateral triangle represent s God; t o t hi s cor r esponds a second
reflected t ri angl e bel ow symbol i zi ng t he worl d. Th e t wo polar cont rari es of t he cos-
mos are t he " Fo r ma e " comi ng f r om t he l i ght above, and t he mat eri a comi ng f r om t he
Ear t h below. Th e mat eri al i t y increases like a pyr ami d f r om above t o below, and t he
mat eri al i t y of t he "f or mae l uci s" increases f r om below t o above. As in t he old
Pyt hagor ean ideas t he pr opor t i ons of t he part s of t hese pyr ami ds give rise t o t he
musi c of t he spheres whi ch, in Fl udd' s t heory, is expressed in si mpl e musi cal
intervals (Fig. 8.25). In t hi s Fl udd, wri t i ng mor e t han a mi l l enni um later, again uses
t he seven- cor ded lyre as a symbol of t he cosmos, as di d t he Neo- Pyt hagor ean Th e o n
of Smyr na in his famous di dact i c p o e m? 8
Thi s is t he old f undament al Pyt hagor ean pr obl em of t he law of pl anet ary di st ance
- - a pr obl em not yet solved by cosmogony. Unl i ke Fl udd, Kepl er in his yout h put
forward a new Pyt hagor ean expl anat i on of t hi s di st ance law, mor e i n t he manner of
Plato.
It is well known t hat Kepl er ' s Mysterium Cosmographicum--published in 1 59 6 -
i mpr essed Tyc ho Brahe so muc h t hat he called Kepl er t o Prague. Tyc ho consi dered
al chemy as "ast r onomi a t er r est r i s"; he installed a chemi cal l aborat ory i n t he base-
me nt of his observat ory at Ur ani abor g on t he island of Hven, and it may be t hat
Tyc ho' s qualifications as an al chemi st r at her t han his qualifications as an ast rol oger
pr ompt e d Empe r or Rudol ph II t o i nvi t e hi m to Pr ague; after all, his famous
"El i xi r " had been dedi cat ed t o t he Emper or . 19 Indeed, Kepl er i nt r oduced a new
syst em of ast ro-al chemy by expl ai ni ng t he spheres of t he pl anet s as t he i nscri bed and
ci r cumscr i bed spheres of t he five regul ar (Platonic) pol yhedr a; ast ro-al chemy had so
far onl y been expl ai ned i n t er ms of t he seven metals, as handed down in Th e o n ' s
neo- Pyt hagor ean di dact i c poem. 2
A necessary al t hough not sufficient basis for t he pri nci pl es of al chemy is
Ari st ot l e' s idea of t he four el ement s. Thi s was basic t o an under s t andi ng of t he
physical and chemi cal processes i n t he mi cr o- and macrocosms. Met al s were mani -
fest at i ons of cosmi c forces, emanat i ng f r om t he planets. Th e y became t he domi nat i ng
component s of t he medi cal chemi st r y of Paracelsus. Tyc ho Brahe adher ed t o t hi s
Paracelsian t radi t i on. Th e four el ement s, and aet her (qui nt a essentia) as a fifth,
were symbol i zed by t he five regul ar pol yhedr a i n Pyt hagor ean Pl at oni sm. Conse-
quent l y Kepl er ' s const r uct i on (Fig. 8.26) at t r i but ed t he propert i es of t he five el ement s
t o t he five spaces bet ween t he six pl anet s; t hi s is i n addi t i on t o t he t radi t i onal
propert i es of t he seven metals, and of t hei r colours.
433
Joachim Otto Fleckenstein
Kepl er' s astro-alchemical system is, however, not as happy as his geometrical
construction, whi ch gives t he distances bet ween t he planets with more t han 90%
accuracy. The law of these planetary distances was supposed to demonst rat e t he
Pyt hagorean myst ery of t he st ruct ure of t he Cosmos. How deeply such " a priori
const ruct i ons" have taken root in t he cosmogonies of astronomers up to t he present
day is evi dent in t he Ti t i us- Bode series, which, by t he way, gives planetary distances
about as accurate as those of Kepl er' s Polyhedra. Academician O. J. Schmi dt seems
to be t he first of have formul at ed a "Non- Pyt hagor ean" law of distances; he started
from t he statistical principle t hat t he angular moment a of t he primeval particles were
evenly distributed. Even Poincar6 looked for an explanation of t he Ti t i us- Bode
series by means of an exponential law for t he planets whi ch condensed from t he
rotating Laplace nebula at regular intervals of time. Von Weizs~cker even went back
to a "neo-cart esi an" t heory of vortices to find an explanation for this series. 2a Of all
t he Pythagoreans it was Kepl er who found by far t he best law of distances. He not
only enlarged Neo-Pyt hagorean astro-alchemy, but also ext ended ant i que Astrology
by i nt roduci ng t he sextile constellations ~ into t he teachings of t he aspects of horos-
copy, to which Pt ol emy hardl y pays any attention in his Tetrabiblos. If one considers
t hat no mathematical tools beyond those used in t he geomet ry of Ant i qui t y are needed
for Kepl er' s geometrical construction, it is rat her strange t hat this construction was
never carried out in Ant i qui t y: it is not even necessary to use a heliocentric system
since t here will always be five spaces between six planets. The i mport ant t hi ng in
ancient mat hemat i cs was t he discovery t hat t here can be only five regular pol yhedra
in space, but an unl i mi t ed number of regular polygons in a plane. 2s Naturally, t he
moon as satellite of t he Ear t h had first to be eliminated from t he class of pl anet s - - but
nobody in Ant i qui t y or in t he Mi ddl e Ages dared to degrade this celestial body in t he
world of "Sun, Moon and Stars". 24
In his yout h, Kepler, in t rue Renaissance spirit, perfect ed t he ant i que Neo-
Pyt hagoreani sm in his Mysterium Cosmographicum. Thi s cont ri but i on alone would
have sufficed to make hi m i mmort al in t he history of science.
But Kepl er was not only a Pythagorean, he was also a positivistic empiricist who
did not object to using mathematical models in astronomy. The first two laws in his
Astronomia Nova state t hat orbits have t he form of conic sections and obey t he law
of areas; but t he latter law did not lead Kepl er to t he concept of t he central force of
t he physics of Galileo and Newt on. In spite of this, it is Kepl er who made t he step
which led from an ant i qui t y-ori ent ed Renaissance to t he Moder n Age. Th e met ri c
properties of t he conic sections, t he only ones needed in celestial mechanics, were
known to Apollonius in Ant i qui t y; Kepler, however, was t he first to realize t hat t he
Platonic circle is a special case of an ellipse (having eccentricity zero). Perhaps it was
Pythagoreanism, mixed with a specific numeri cal empiricism, whi ch prevent ed
Kepl er from underst andi ng t he pure Neoplatonism of Galileo: as I have stated
earlier, Kepl er in his t heor em of areas did not deduce t he existence of a force as a
434
Kepler and Neoplatonism
c aus e for t he c hange o f vel oci t y. Gal i l e o, o n t he ot her ha nd, as a Pl at oni s t di sl i kes t he
i nt r oduc t i on o f ari t hmet i c i nt o ge ome t r y and doe s not accept t he el l i pt i c f orm o f
pl anetary orbi t s.
As is k n o wn , Ke pl e r ' s t hi rd l aw i n Harmonices Mundi ( 1619) f ul f i l l ed t he P y t h a -
gorean dream o f e x pl a i ni ng t he l aw o f di s t ances , s i nc e he f o u n d t he powe r s to wh i c h
t he peri ods and di s t ances s h o u l d be raised b y Pyt hagorean s pe c ul at i on and nume r i c al
cal cul at i ons . T h i s l aw l ed N e w t o n to pos t ul at e a uni vers al c ons t ant o f gravi tati on. 25
T h e i nvers e s quare l aw o f gravi ty can al so be de duc e d f rom Ke pl e r ' s first t wo l aws.
N e w t o n , i n fact, was t he first to not i c e t hat t he c ons t ant o f gravi tati on is uni vers al .
I t may have be e n t he fact t hat t he c ons t ant o f gravi ty was i n d e p e n d e n t o f t he par-
t i cul ar nat ure o f t he mas s es i nv o l v e d t hat i n d u c e d Kepl er to try to unde r s t and t he
secret s o f matter no t t hr o ug h phy s i c s but t hr o ug h al c he my. I nde e d, N e w t o n is t he
first to u n i f y Ke pl e r i an and Gal i l e an c onc e pt s i n a c o mpl e t e s y nt he s i s o f N e o -
Py t ha g o r e a ni s m and Ne o - Pl a t o n i s m. I t s h o u l d never be f orgot t en t hat i t was P y -
t hagorean s pe c ul at i on wh i c h l ed Ke pl e r to t he Th i r d La w o f hi s Mysterium Cosmo-
graphicum, t he very l aw wh i c h i ns pi r e d N e w t o n to f ormul at e hi s i dea o f a central
l a w o f gravi tati on, t h u s pr ovi di ng t he basi s o f cl assi cal cel esti al me c hani c s i n t he age
o f Posi ti vi sm. 36
N o t e s
1. W. Pauli, Der Einfluss archetypischer Vorstellungen auf die Bildung naturwissenschaftlicher
Theorien bei Kepler. St udi en aus dem C. G. Jung- Inst i t ut , Ziirich, Bd. IV, pp. 109-94, t952.
2. Harmonices Mundi, Li b. IV: " . . . Nam agnoscere est, ext ernum sensibile cum ideis internis
conferre eisque congruum judicare. O,_uod pul cher expri mi t Proclus vocabulo suscitandi, vel ut e
somno. " (Works, vl, p. 226, 1940.)
De stella nova Serpentarii, Cap. IX: " . . . geometriae vestigia in mundo expressa, sic ut geo-
met ri a sit qui dam quasi mundi archet ypus". (Works, I, p. 192, 1938.)
Let t er to Chri st oph Heydon (Prague, Oct ober 1605): " . . . Nobi s constat, creat um mundum et
quant um factum geometricae vero figurae (h.e. quantitativae) sunt entia rationis. Rat i o aeterna.
Ergo figurae geometricae sunt aeternae, nempe ab aeterno verum erat in ment e Dei , lateris
tetragonici quadr at um e.gr. esse di mi di um de quadrato diametri. Ergo quanta sunt mundi
archet ypus. " (Works, xv, p. 231 sq., 1951.)
3. The area-t heorem of Kepl er which would now be expressed in t he form r~(t)d$ = c. dt is a
generalization of t he Pt ol emy- Coper ni cus axiom rd$ = c' . dt. The uni form movement of pl anet s
i n ancient ast ronomy is a special case of Kepl eri an mot i on for r = const., i.e. circular orbit.
4. E. Cassirer, Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit, Bd: l ,
Berlin, 1922 (3rd ed.).
5. The question here is not t he often discussed probl em whether Kepl er di d in any way anticipate
the modern not i on of force. One has to differentiate between identifying t he origin of t he force
and inventing t he not i on of force itself, t he force bei ng measured by t he change of velocity with
time. Galileo, by keeping velocity as "forma mot us" in t he scholastic t radi t i on, was able to form a
clear concept of the change of velocity and to quant i fy i t thanks to t he "difference of t he forms".
Kepl er , however, speculated only on t he origin of t he force.
6. J. O. Fleckenstein, " De s indivisibles aux diff6rentiels", Travaux de l'Acaddmie Internationale
d'Histoire des Sciences, No. XI, pp. 19-28. (Symposi um Pisa-Vinci, 1958.)
435
J o a c h i m Ot t o Fl eckens t ei n
7. Kepl er expanded t he integration methods of Ant i qui t y by det ermi ni ng t he volume of barrels, as
well as of bodies i n the shape of apples or lemons. He does, however, not prove his resul t s by t he
st ri ct antique "met hod of exhaustion".
8. Robert us Fl udd, Utriusque Costal Maioris scilicet Minoris Metaphysica, Physica atque technica
Historia. Oppenhei mi , 1617.
9. C. G. Jung, Synchronizitdt aIs ein Prinzip akausaler Zusammenhdnge, St udi en aus dem C. G.
Jung- Ins t i t ut Zfirich, Bd. IV, pp. 99 sq.
10. De tenebris contra naturam, Theatrum chemicum, Vol. I, pp. 540 sq., 1602.
11. Epistola ad Maestlinum (3. X. 1595, Graz). (Works, x m, p. 35, 1945.)
12. B. L. van der Waerden, Erwachende Wissenschaft, Bd. II: Di e Anfiinge der Astronomie, Gr oni n-
gen (2nd ed. Basle), 1968.
13. The earliest horoscope discovered so far dates from 432 B. c. - - Van der Waer den gave conclusive
pr oof t hat t he zodiac necessary for horoscopy could hardl y have been invented before t he t i me of
Berossos, and t here are no real ephemerides i n Babylonian texts before t he Seleucid period.
14. Harmonices Mundi, lib. IV, Cap. V: De configurationibus Harmonicis. (Works, vI, 239 sq. 1940.)
15. Cosmic directions like t he equinoctial line, and thus its precession, are decisive factors in cosmic
astrology. The same applies to t he t heory of peri ods in the repet i t i ons of t ri pl i ci t i es and quadra-
tures, etc., of t he planets. Ke pl e r ' s position in astrology is a peculiar one, because he is hostile
not only to t he old i ndi vi dual horoscopy, but also to a universal astrology. Thi s at t i t ude is t he
reason why he has often been considered an opponent of astrology.
16. In Fl udd' s famous representation of "Dame Nat ur e" chained between Heaven and Eart h, t he
devil sits on t he Eart h as God' s monkey. Thi s pi ct ure is pr i nt ed as an appendi x paper to t he
frontispiece of note 8: Int egrae nat urae speculum artisque imago.
17. Loc. cit., Tomus pr i mus: De macrocosmi historia, Cap. I: De nat ura infinita rerumque omni um
opifice, p. 21.
18. Theonis Smyrnaei Philosophi Platonici expositio rerum mathematicarum ad legendum Platonem
utilium (ed. E. Hi l l er, Lei pzi g, 1878).
yctict I~V o6v 6n(xzq ~e fJo~pe'(o~ ze IleOG68t vcdet"
dt~,ctv~cov 6k o~p~p~ ot)vq~l~vq ~Ee z o VYl~"
~t~OOllV 8' fi~Xtog ~kctyKzC)v O~(~tv ~aZ~O~v fic~p0)v"
zo~ 8" ~m6 8fi ~uXp6g p~v ~Zet 8tdt x ~ p e t KGK~Og"
~e[vou 6" fip~zovov ~0a[vcov ~vi ~ot %aXaoO~ig,
zo~ 6~ z6oov ~0~8c0v 6troy 613pt~tog'" Apeog ~tozfip"
~ t o g 6" 6~6 zoi ot z6vov zep~ila[3pozog ~oZet,
a[y~.qg 6' fieXioto ~pt ~t [ovov KuOkpeta"
fipi~ovov 6' ~3r~6 x0 oz[~.~c0v q~pe8" 'Ep~teiao,
6ooov 6~ Xp~0o0eioa ~06otv noLuK~p~g~ ~tfivq.
K~VZ0OV 6" fieMoto 8kOtV 6t~ (n~VZ') ~.a%e %8d~v"
ct6zq r~ewd~0~voq ~tn" fi~pog ~i,g ~;,oy6ev g~p
Gtpo0 3' fi~.~,oOev 6.;%~oG 6nkp'repov ~X~,0~Ze ~6K~.ov.
flyxo~d~q likV 6i a oe*~va[rl nep[ ya~av,
6~6zepo~ ~6 Gz[XBcov %~a)o~Oou ' Ep ~[ ~o ,
x0 6" grit tptootpOpog ~;o~i, tpagtv6xct~og Ko0epe[rlg,
gxpazog c(~)x6g 6n~pOev (;n" ~lkLtog (p~p~8" ~.nnotg,
nkpnxog 6" ct6 nupbetg tpoviou Op~ltnOq "' Apqog,
~xog 6' ct6 ~ c ~ o v At6g dtyL~t6q io'x~tx~tt 8taxflp,
gl~folaog(c(6) (pcdvcov KpOvou dty%68t zg~.~.gxctt (iGxpcov.
ndweg 6" ~n~ctv6voto LOpqg (p00Tyotot o'ovq)Stbv
dp~tov[qv npoz~ovot 8t~tt~'~doet t~.%og ~t" ~LE~,.
6ppooSei6" 6KXiC~t xlgp6q ~:pt)~:p~G[ xs n6%v0ttg
obpavoO ~dxovov x6vov ~oZeOe "t6v 6td n~o6~v.
zo[rlv "~ot ~etp~lv~ At6q ~ctig i~pl.tOt~ev 'Epl.tf'lg,
~xd~ovov n[Sctptv, 8eOp~lO~Opog e[r6vct ~6OlaOt).
4 3 6
Kepl er and Neopl at oni sm
19. K. Figala, Tycho Brahe's Elixier, Annals of Science, 28, No. 2, 139-78 (1972).
20.
Planet Symbol Metal Period
Sat urn
Jupiter
Mars
Sun
Venus
Mercury
Moon
b
2~
8

q
Lead
Ti n
Iron
Gold
Copper
Mercury
Silver
29.46 years
11.86
1.88
1.00
0.62
0.24
0.07
21. In his vortex-theory of the creation of the planets, C. F. von Weizs/icker finally came to the con-
clusion that the regular currents i n the cosmic primary cloud group themselves into globular
groups of integral numbers; but it remains the "Pythagorean" mystery that i n every cosmogoni-
cal ring, where the vortices are produced, the number of globules is always five.
22. Ptolemy i n his Tetrabiblos treats of the triplicity and quadrature of the planets. There are four
different triplicities and three different quadratures i n the dodecamerous zodiac, but only two
different sextile constellations. Possibly the prevalence of the magic numbers 4 and 3 was such as
to overshadow the duality of the sextile constellations.
23. The last of the thirteen books of Euclid demonstrates the fact that there are only five regular
polyhedra. Thi s is the culminating point of ancient mathematics. It was forgotten later that i n
his twelve previous books Euclid applies his "ars demonstrandi" to state that this theorem can be
proved. "Geometrical play" with these five polyhedra was t hen the only way to do mathematical
physics, by explaining nature as a mixture of the elements.
24. Wi t h this Kepler destroys antique astrology, for which the seven numbers of the planets (7 week-
days i n chronology !) is a necessary basis.
25. Huygens (1673) found the formula v~:r for the central force. If one inserts v = 2zrr: T for the
velocity and r3: T ~ = constant using Kepler' s third law (1619), it t hen follows that the central
force is const. : r 2, as was found independently of Newton by Hooke, Halley and others.
26. An ironic accident of history happened when the last of the great thinkers from the "Tfi bi nger
Stiff" began his scientific career with a dissertation about Kepler, the first of these "platonic"
philosophers (i.e. Oetinger, Schelling, Novalis). In his work Dissertatio philosophica de orb#is
planetarum (1801) Hegel shows triumphantly that by the discovery of Herschel's Uranus (1781)
the missing seventh planet was restored (Table 1). Kepler destroyed the traditional number of.
TABLE 1
Bode's Law r = 0.4 + 0.3.2"
(Weizs/icker) r, = r0 (1.9)"
Kepler' s polyhedral
construction
Modern Value
Schmidt' s Law ~/r, = a + bn
Modern Value
q 8 d' - - 2~ l~ Ura- Nep-
nus t une
0.4 0.7 1.0 1.6 2.8 5.2 10. 0 19. 6 38. 8
0. 43 0.76 1.0 1. 44 5. 26 9.16
0.39 0.72 1.0 1. 52 5. 20 9 . 55 1 9. 1 9 30.07
0.62 0.82 1.0 1. 22 2. 28 3.38 4.28 5. 23
0.62 0. 85 1.0 1.23 2.28 3.09 4.38 5. 48
Pluto
77.2
39.5
6.28
6.29
437
Joachim Otto Fleckenstein
seven planets in his Mysterium Cosmographicum. At the end of his work Hegel tries t o find a law
for the distances between the satellites of planets according to the Titius-Bode series. Remark-
ably enough, in modern cosmogonies only O. J. Schmidt has extended his law t o the satellites o f
planets. The numerical procedures for the distances of satellites developed by the Russian school
(Petrow, and others) are characterized by Hegel' s "art of calculus".
438