The First Phases of the Theoricæ Planetarum Printed Tradition (1474–1535): The Evolution of a Genre Observed through its Images

The Sphæra was printed without diagrams, first in Ferrara, by Andreas Belfortis Gallus, in 1472 (ISTC ij00399600), then in Venice in the same year by Florentius de Argentina (ISTC ij00400000), again in Venice, by Filippo di Pietro, in about 1476 (ISTC ij00401000), and in Milan in 1478 (ij00401500). If we may rely on Thorndike's census of medieval texts, only a significant minority of the manuscripts of Sacrobosco's De sphæra or of its commentaries were illustrated. Thorndike has described twenty representative manuscripts of this text, seven of which incorporate diagrams. Nonetheless, it seems that a kind of iconographical tradition (essentially relating to the first and the last chapters) had been established as early as the second half of the thirteenth century. Thorndike L. , The Sphere of Sacrobosco and its commentators (Chicago, 1949). See also Müller K. , Visuelle Weltaneignung: Astronomische und kosmologische Diagramme in Handschriften des Mittelalters (Göttingen, 2008).

Gerardus Cremonensis (?), Theorica planetarum (Venice: Florentius de Argentina, 1472), printed with Sacrobosco's De sphæra; idem (Ferrara: Andrea Belfortis, 1472).

The next editions of the Theorica Gerardi, printed by Franciscus Renner (Venice, 1478), Adam de Rottweil (Venice, 10 Sept. 1478), and Fuscus (Bologna, 1480), had diagrams. See Sander M. , Le livre à figures italien depuis 1467 jusqu'à 1530 (Milan, 1942; hereafter Sander), n° 6659, 3085, 6660. From 1480, the Theorica Gerardi was completely replaced by Peuerbach's Theoricæ novæ. The disgrace of the old texbook was all the more complete because, in majority of the early editions, Peuerbach's text was accompanied by Regiomontanus's severe attack on the Theorica vetus: The Disputationes contra Cremonensia in planetarum theoricas deliramenta (see ref. 31). Thus, the Theorica vetus was no longer printed, except in very large collections gathering bodies of medieval and early Renaissance treatises on the Sphere and on the planetary theories, such as those which were prepared by Hieronymus de Nuciarellis (printed twice in Venice, in 1518, by the heirs of Ottaviano Scoto, then by Giunta), and by Luca Gaurico (printed in Venice, by Giunta, in March 1531, or rather 1532 n.s.). On the title-pages of the 1518 editions, the presence of the old treatise is thus justified: Theorica planetarum Joannis Cremonensis plurimum faciens ad disputationem Joannis de Monte Regio, quam in aliis impressis non reperies. On this first Theorica, see Pedersen O. , “The Theorica planetarum literature of the Middle Ages”, Classica et mediaevalia , xxiii (1962), 225–32; idem, “The origins of the Theorica planetarum”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xii (1981), 113–23.

This absence of printed editions is all the more remarkable in that Campanus's Theorica was widely diffused in the Middle Ages (more than sixty manuscripts still survive), and that it was sometimes referred to as late as the beginning of the seventeenth century. Kepler mentions it, for instance, in his Epitome astronomiæ Copernicanæ: Kepler J. , Gesammelte Werke , ed. by Caspar M. , vii (Munich, 1953), 309. See Benjamin Francis S. Toomer G. J. , Campanus of Novara and medieval planetary theory (Madison, 1971).

See Pantin I. , “The astronomical diagrams in Oronce Finé's Protomathesis (1532): Founding a French tradition?”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xli (2010), 287–310.

Giuntini had first added new notes to an edition of the Sphæra, printed in Antwerp by Johannes Bellerius, in 1573. He then published a full commentary on Sacrobosco (Lyons: Filippo Tinghi, 1577–78). This commentary was included in the second volume of the definitive edition of his Speculum astrologiæ (Lyons: Tinghi, 1581). Giuntini's La sfera del mondo (Lyons: Beraud, 1582), was quite a different text. The images used in these books were collated from different sources.

First edition: Rome: Victorius Helianus, 1570.

Peuerbach's treatise was still being printed in Wittenberg (with the commentary of Reinhold) in the middle of the seventeenth century — See Peuerbach , Dispositiones motuum coelestium quas theorias planetarum vocant ab E. Reinholdo olim pluribus figuris auctae et illustratae scholiis (Wittenberg: B. Mevi, 1653) — But its ‘active period’ ended with the sixteenth century.

Francesco De Franceschi Senese, an important bookseller and printer in Venice (who had published a momentous edition of Ariosto's Orlando Furioso in 1584), contracted with Aldrovandi to publish the latter's Ornithologia in 1594. The first volume was printed in Bologna in 1599.

The Tavole de animali, now in the library of the University of Bologna. See the website www.filosofia.unibo.it/Aldrovandi/.

Aldrovandi thus collected from 5000 to 6000 woodblocks. See Olmi G. , Ulisse Aldrovandi: Scienza e natura nel secondo cinquecento (Trent, 1976); idem, “Osservazione della natura e raffigurazione in Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522–1605)”, Annali dell'Istitudo Storico Italo-Germanico in Trento, iii (1977), 105–81, pp. 150–75; De Rosa S. , “La bottega artistica di Ulisse Aldrovandi in una lettera inedita di Cristoforo Coriolano da Norimberga”, Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Instituts in Florenz , xxv (1981), 391–8; Pinon L. , “Entre compilation et observation, l'écriture de l'Ornithologie d'Ulisse Aldrovandi”, Genesis , xx (2003), 53–70.

Peuerbach's treatise, coming at the end of a tradition of writing initiated by Ptolemy's Planetary hypothesis, proposed three-dimensional ‘physical’ models of the planetary orbs. The ‘total orb’ of each planet was concentric with the sphere of the universe, but divided into partial contiguous orbs (some of which were ‘deformed’ and eccentric) which were responsible for every component of the planet's complex movement. See Aiton E. J. , “Celestial spheres and circles”, History of science , xix (1981), 75–114; Lerner M.-P. , Le monde des sphères I: Genèse et triomphe d'une représentation cosmique (Paris, 1996), 115–26.

See infra, ref. 20.

Bacon Roger , De cœlestibus , in Opera hactenus inedita Rogeri Baconi , iv, ed. by Steele R. (Oxford, 1912), 438. This phrase also appears in the Opus tertium.

See Erasmus Reinhold's preface to his commentary on Peuerbach's Theoricæ (Wittenberg, 1549): “Duplex est docendi ratio. Alias enim tantum to hoti artis traditur, cum videlicet nuda ac brevia quædam præcepta, sive sententiæ aut regulæ proponuntur sine causis atque demonstrationibus…. Alias vero etiam dioti monstratur, hoc est, non recitantur nudæ sententiæ ac regulæ, sed accurate investigantur propriæ causæ, effectus ac demonstrationes colliguntur…” (Paris, 1553), 2v. Peuerbach then explains that he has chosen the first approach, and Ptolemy the second.

“… probationibus geometricis sic ommissis ut nude fidei ymaginationique tradantur: Quo celorum situs, motusque nec non et tabularum vocabula conspici possint”, De Prierio Sylvester , In spheram ac theoricas preclarissima commentaria , printed by Gottardo da Ponte (Milan, 1514), A1r. A digital reproduction of one copy is available at the website: Istituto e Museo di Storia della Scienza (Florence), Biblioteca digitale.

Regiomontanus's manuscript (Vienna, ONB, Ms 5245) had been copied from Peuerbach's original. Other manuscripts from the same family also have the same incipit, for instance Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibliothek, 302, 40r. See Grössing H. , Humanistische Naturwissenschaft: Zur Geschichte der Wiener mathematischen Schulen des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts (Baden-Baden, 1983), 101, 111, 331.

Reisch G. , Margarita philosophica (Freiburg, 1503), VII, 1^st part, chaps. 37–9, o1r–o3v. See also infra (ref. 22).

In some copies, there are manuscript inscriptions in the green parts: “deferentes augem equantis [in the more interior deformed orb]” and “deferentes augem equantis movent ad motum 8ae sphere [in the more interior deformed orb]”. Digital reproductions of two copies of Regiomontanus's edition are available at the websites: Münchener DigitalisierungZentrum, Digitale Bibliothek (BSB-Ink P-399GW M36634), and Institut für Astronomie, Universität Wien, Digitale Bibliothek.

In the early editions of Peuerbach's treatise, there is no clear typographical distinction between the titles of the main sections (e.g. “De passionibus planetarum diversis”), the titles of the subsections (e.g. “De Luna”), and the titles of the figures (e.g. “Theorica Solis”, “Theorica axium and polorum”). That confirms the equivalence between the figures and the accompanying text.

Aiton E. J. , “Peuerbach's Theoricæ novæ planetarum: A translation with commentary”, Osiris, 2nd ser., iii (1987), 5–44, p. 27.

See above, refs 17 and 18. On the astronomical terms used in the Theoricæ and in the astronomical tables, see Pedersen O. , “A fifteenth century glossary of astronomical terms”, Classica et mediaevalia: Dissertationes, ix (1973), 584–94.

They seem to differ slightly from the figures of the manuscript copied by Regiomontanus and used as a model (Wien, ONB, 5245), at least in the case of the first diagram (reproduced in H. Grössing, Humanistische Naturwissenschaft (ref. 17), 331, and in Lerner , Le monde des sphères I (ref. 12), 124, Fig. 16).

Venice: Ratdolt, 1482; Ratdolt, 1485; Anima Mia, 1491; Sessa J. B. , 1501; Melchior Sessa, 1513; Pentius for Sessa, 1519. In these editions, the Theoricæ novæ were always accompanied by Sacrobosco's Sphæra and Regiomontanus's Disputationes. I have not seen the (apparently) similar edition printed at Strassburg in 1490 by Martin Flack (ISTC: Ij00408500, one copy in London, Oratory).

In the Arsenal copy (Fol S 1260) of the 1515 Paris collection (ref. 37), the Theorica solis (3v) is hand-coloured to improve the appearance of what is essentially a simple geometrical diagram. Additionally, as the four deformed orbs of the Theorica Mercurii (32v, 83v) are all coloured in black (which reduces their clarity), a bicolour drawing has been added on a sheet in the front of the volume. See Lerner , Le monde des sphères I (ref. 12), 72, n. 70.

de Brudzewo Albertus , Commentaria … in theoricis planetarum (Milan: Uldericus Scinzenzeler, 30 March 1495). See also the edition of this work by Ludwik Antoni Birkenmajer (Cracow, 1900).

First edn, Venice, Simon Papiensis, surnamed Bevilaqua (August 1495), Sander, no. 6060. A partial digital reproduction of one copy is available at the website: Biblioteca universitaria di Sevilla, Fondos digitales.

Second edition with a collection of commentaries on the Sphæra: Joannis de Sacro Bosco Sphaera mundi, cum tribus commentis nuper editis, videlicet Cicchi Esculani, Francisci Capuani … et Jacobi Fabri Stapulensis. Theoricæ novæ planetarum Georgii Purbachii et in eas Francisci Capuani de Manfredonia expositio (Venice: Bevilaqua, 23 Oct. 1499 according to colophon, o6r); 3rd edn with Bartolomeo Vespucci's Oratio (Venice: I. and B. Rubeus, 1508); 4th edn with Sylvester de Prierio's commentary and Lefevre d'Etaples's Astronomicon (Paris: J. Petit, 1515); for the 5th, 6th and 7th edns with the Nuciarelli and Gaurico collections (Venice, 1518 and 1531), see ref. 3 above. All these editions were folios.

See ref. 16 above.

Epytoma Joannis de monte regio in Almagestum Ptolemei (Venice: Joannes Hamman, 1496). In this edition, the diagrams, printed in the margins, are small and often lacking in accuracy.

On the Disputationes contra Cremonensia in planetarum theoricas deliramenta, Regiomontanus's successful attack on the Theorica vetus, see Pedersen Olaf , “The decline and fall of the Theorica planetarum”, Studia copernicana , xvi (1978), 157–85; Kren Claudia , “Planetary latitudes, the Theorica Gerardi, and Regiomontanus”, Isis , lxviii (1977), 194–205, and, in this present issue, the article by Michael Shank.

Achillini Alessandro , professor in Bologna, had condemned the system of Ptolemy and advocated a return to homocentrism in his Quatuor libri de orbibus (1494), and Capuanus's commentary (notably in the first section of the chapter De sole) replied to some of his arguments. See Duhem P. , Sôzein ta phainomena: Essai sur la notion de théorie physique de Platon à Galilée (Paris, 1908), 53–5, 59–61; Lerner Le monde des sphères I (ref. 12), 129.

That had been a Scotist argument. See Duhem P. , Le système du monde , iii (Paris, 1915), 497; Grant E. , “Eccentrics and epicycles in medieval cosmology”, in Grant E. Murdoch J. E. (eds), Mathematics and its applications in science and natural philosophy in the Middle Ages: Essays in honour of Marshall Clagett (Cambridge, 1987), 189–214, p. 199 and n. 28.

“Sol igitur habet, id est habere creditur, tres orbes. Hoc enim non est demonstratum, sed excogitatum ad salvandum que in celestibus motibus apparent”, edn 1514 (ref. 17), 2r.

Ref. 17, 35r.

Ref. 17, 27r. See also, on Fig. 2, the slightly altered copy of this diagram in Finé's 1515 edn (ref. 37).

Theoricarum nouarum Textus Georgij Purbachij cum utili et preclarissima expositione Domini Francisci Capuani de Manfredonia. Item in easdem … Syluestri de Prierio perfamiliaris commentatio. Insuper Jacobi Fabri Stapulen. astronomicon. Omnia nuper summa diligentia emendata cum figuris accuratissimis longe castigatius insculptis quam prius suis in locis adjectis (Paris: Michel Lesclencher pour Jean Petit et R. Chaudière, 1515). A partial digital reproduction of one copy is available at the website: Biblioteca universitaria di Sevilla, Fondos digitales.

“Omnia nuper summa diligentia emendata cum figuris accuratissimis longe castigatius insculptis quam prius suis in locis adjectis”.

“Si petis hoc mendis quis terserit: Arte figuris / Hinc decorarit opus: Prima elementa dabunt”.

“vigilantissime emendatum Necnon figuris: Juxta scientie exigentiam: Accuratissime illustratum”.

Theoricæ novæ planetarum … Authore Georgio Purbachio … nuper summa diligentia Orontii Finei Delphinatis emendatæ, figuris item opportunissimis, et scholiis non aspernendis illustratæ, longeque castigatius quam antea, ipso curante impressæ (Paris: Regnault Chaudière and Pierre Vidoue, 1525), in-4°. A partial digital reproduction of one copy is available at the website: Biblioteca Universitaria di Sevilla, Fondos digitales. The 1525 edition was reprinted by Chaudière in 1534.

For the most part, these diagrams came from his 1515 edn of the Expositio of Sylvester de Prierio (ref. 37).

According to the definitions in Reisch's Margarita, the ‘true movement’ of a superior planet is the arc of the ecliptic between Aries and the intersection with the ‘line of the true movement’, that is, the line joining the centre of the world and the centre of the planet's body; and the ‘true centre’ of the planet is the arc of the ecliptic between the ‘line of the true movement’ and the ‘linea augis’ (the line passing by the centre of the world, the centre of the deferent circle, and the apogee and perigee of the deferent circle): “Linea … veri loci sive veri motus Planetæ est quæ a centro mundi per centrum corporis Planetæ ducitur … verus motus … ab ariete usque ad dicta<m> linea<m> eodem modo compu<tatur> sicut in Sole…. Centrum verum <planetæ> a linea augis ad lineam veri motus attenditur”, op. cit. (ref. 18), o2v.

See ref. 41.

Finé's 1525 edn (ref. 41), 23r and 26r. On the particular oval curve described by the centre of Mercury's epicycle in the tradition followed by Peurbach, see Hartner W. , “The Mercury horoscope of Marcantonio Michel of Venice: A study in the history of Renaissance astrology and astronomy”, Vistas in astronomy, i (1955), 84–138, pp. 128–31.

Novæ theoricæ planetarum G. Purbachii … a Pet. Apiano jam ad omnem veritatem redactae, et eruditis figuris illustratae (Ingolstadt: Apianus, 1528), in-8°; idem (Venice: Sessa, 1534 and 1537). See also the edition published in Venice by F. Rampazeto in 1562, and the Italian version: Le nuove teoriche de i pianeti … ridotte ad ogni termine di verità, et illustrate di dotte figure da Pietro Apiano … tradotte da Oratio Toscanella … et accresciute … di belle annotationi (Venice: Sessa, 1566), in-8°. A digital reproduction of one copy of the 1528 edition is available at the website: Münchener DigitalisierungZentrum, Digitale Bibliothek.

“… atque exemplar quod penes me erat innumeris pene locis mendis et erroribus scatens, emendavi et pristino suo nitori restitui. Præterea quo fierent clariora omnia, figuris multo quam ante expressioribus illustravi …”, Novæ theoricæ , 1528 (ref. 46), A1v. Apianus then affirms that he has supervised with the utmost care the printing of the book on his own presses.

No diagram in the Apianus edition is identical to any diagram in the Theoricæ edited by Finé . But one, at least, is quite similar, that of the orbs of Venus (compare Apianus, 1528, p. 35, and Finé 1515 (ref. 37), 32r, or Finé, 1525 (ref. 41), 20v), and a few others have significant analogies. Compare, for instance, Apianus, 1528, p. 17 (second diagram) and Finé, 1525, 10r.

See ref. 48.

Compare the diagram in Apianus , Novæ theoricæ , 1528 (ref. 46), p. 37, and the one in Finé's 1515 edition (ref. 37), 73v [our Fig. 2], first column. See also ref. 36.

This diagram corresponds to the 11th original 1474 diagram, “Theorica linearum et motuum [superiorum et Veneris]”, its basic design could be applied either to Venus or to the superior planets.

Theoricæ novæ planetarum Georgii Purbachii … cum praefatione Philippi Melanthonis (Wittenberg: J. Klug, 1535), E3r. A digital reproduction of one copy is available at the website: Münchener DigitalisierungZentrum, Digitale Bibliothek.

The dimensions of the page are, approximately, 10.5 × 16.5 cm, and the largest diagrams are 8 × 8 cm.

Compare, for instance, the diagrams of the movement of the lunar epicycle in Wittenberg, 1535 (ref. 52), c1v–c2r, and in Apianus 1528 (ref. 46), p. 17.

See, for instance, Wittenberg, 1535 (ref. 52), c5r (“Theorica motuum et linearum Lunæ”).

See, notably, the diagrams in B4r (cf. Finé 1525 (ref. 41), 5r), D1v (cf. Finé 1525, 15v), D5r (cf. Finé 1525, 18r), D5v (cf. Finé 1525, 18v), D6v (cf. Finé 1525, 19r), F5r, wrongly signed E5r (cf. Finé 1525, 27v). All these figures come from the Capuanus commentary.

Compare Wittenberg, 1535 (ref. 52), E6v, and Finé's 1525 edition (ref. 41), 23r.

Compare Wittenberg, 1535 (ref. 52), E2v, and Finé's 1525 edition (ref. 41), 26r.

On this project, see Kusukawa S. , The transformation of natural philosophy: The case of Philip Melanchthon (Cambridge, 1996).

Theoricæ novæ planetarum Georgii Purbachii … ab Erasmo Reinholdo … pluribus figuris auctae et illustratae scholiis (Wittenberg: Hans Lufft, 1542); rev. edn, Wittenberg, 1553.

Nonius Petrus , Annotationes in Planetarum Theoricas Georgii Purbachii, in Petrus Nonius, Opera (Basel: Henrichus Petri, 1566). Nonius does not reproduce Peuerbach's text, and his illustrations are purely geometrical.

Theoricæ novæ planetarum Georgii Purbachii, printed with other works, notably Christian Wurstisen (or Wursteisen), Quaestiones in theoricas planetarum (Basel: Henricpetri, 1568–69).

Eras. Oswaldi Schrecsenfuchsii Commentaria , in Novas Theoricas Planetarum Georgii Purbachii (Basel: Henricpetri, 1556).

Bassantin Jacques , Astronomique discours (Lyon: De Tournes, 1557).

Giuntini Francesco , Speculum astrologiae (Lyon: Beraud, 1581).

For instance, part of Reinhold's new diagrams are elaborated from geometrical ideas already present in Capuanus, and Giuntini's abundant illustration draws heavily on earlier models.

Schöner Johannes , Opera mathematica (Nuremberg: Montanus, 1551).