Koyré's Kepler/Kepler's Koyré

Koyré Alexandre , From the closed world to the infinite universe (Baltimore, MD, 1957; hereafter cited as CWIU), 5–6.

Koyré Alexandre , The astronomical revolution: Copernicus — Kepler — Borelli [1961], transl. by Maddison R. E. W. (London, 1973; hereafter cited as AR), 120.

Koyré Alexandre , Études d'histoire de la pensée scientifique (Paris, 1966; hereafter cited as EHPS), 399. Cf. Kepler , Astronomia nova , ch. 49; Caspar M. von Dyck W. (eds), Johannes Kepler, gesammelte Werke (Munich, 1937– hereafter cited as GW), iii, 314–15.

EHPS, 12.

AR, 120; Koyré surveys the literature at AR, 376–7.

Birkenmajer L. A. , Mikolaj Kopernik (Cracow, 1900).

Westman R. S. , “Continuities in Kepler scholarship: The European Kepler symposia in historiographical perspective”, in Beer A. Beer P. (eds), Johannes Kepler (Vistas in astronomy, xv (1975)), 57–70.

To the technical tradition we can also assign Robert Small's An account of the astronomical discoveries of Kepler: Including an historical review of the systems which had successively prevailed before his time (London, 1804). This remarkable work, which appears to have been written without reference to the historians of mathematics of the Académie, offers a careful reconstruction of the development of planetary models up to Kepler's time and a close and accurate reconstruction of the trials and errors by which Kepler reached his laws of planetary motion.

For a recent appreciation of the technical tradition in the historiography of the sciences, see Swerdlow N. M. , “Montucla's legacy: The history of the exact sciences”, Journal of the history of ideas, liv (1993), 299–328.

Delambre J.-B. J. , Histoire de l'astronomie moderne (1821; facsimile reprint, New York, 1962), 314–615.

Delambre , op. cit., p. li.

Ibid., 322, 451.

Ibid., 317ff, 354ff.

Ibid., pp. xxi, 394ff, 438ff.

See, e.g., ibid., 506ff and 559ff, on Kepler and logarithms.

On Kepler's “divine genius” see Schelling F. W. J. , On university studies [1803], transl. by Morgan E. S. (Athens, Ohio, 1966), 126.

Steffens Henrik , Zur Geschichte der heutigen Physik, Polemische Blätter zur Beförderung der spekulativen Physik, i (Breslau, 1829).

Whewell William , Philosophy of the inductive sciences (1847; facsimile reprint, London, 1966), i, 264–5; ii, 221–3.

Whewell William , History of the inductive sciences ([1837], 3rd edn, 1857; facsimile reprint, London, 1967), i, 317ff.

Apelt E. F. , Die Reformation der Sternkunde (Jena, 1852), pp. x–xi.

Apelt , Reformation der Sternkunde, 226; Johann Keplers astronomische Weltansicht (Leipzig, 1849), 4–5.

Apelt , Reformation der Sternkunde, p. xi.

Ibid., pp. xii–xiv.

On Apelt's life and works see the entry in Allgemeine deutsche Biographie (Leipzig, 1875–), i, 502–4; also Glasmacher T. , Fries — Apelt — Schleiden: Verzeichnis der Primär- und Sekundärliteratur 1798–1988 (Cologne, 1989).

Apelt , Johann Keplers astronomische Weltansicht, 7.

Koyré , “La pensée moderne”, EHPS, 16–23.

Appended by Apelt to Reformation der Sternkunde.

Frisch C. (ed.), Johannes Kepler, opera omnia (Frankfurt and Erlangen, 1858–); GW (ref. 3).

Frisch C. , “Vita Kepleri”, Johannes Kepler, opera omnia, viii/2 (Frankfurt, 1891); Caspar Max , Kepler (1948; transl. by Hellman C. D. [1959], ed. and annotated by Gingerich O. Segonds A. , New York, 1993).

Koyré , AR, 376, refers to the “very valuable introductions and notes” in Caspar's edition, which often provides “translations of Kepler's arguments in modern mathematical notation”.

Cassirer E. , Das Erkenntṅisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit , i (Berlin, 1906); Mahnke D. , Unendliche Sphäre und Allmittelpunkte (1937; facsimile reprint, Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt, 1966).

Cassirer , Erkenntnisproblem, 330ff.

Mahnke , Unendliche Sphäre, 129–44.

Dreyer J. L. E. , History of the planetary systems from Thales to Kepler (Cambridge, 1906; republished as A history of astronomy from Thales to Kepler , New York, 1953); Holton G. , “Kepler's universe: Its physics and metaphysics”, American journal of physics, xiv (1956), 340–51.

Koestler A. , The sleepwalkers (London, 1959); Koyré , AR, 377.

Koestler , The sleepwalkers, part 4, ch. 2.

See, e.g., AR, 120; EHPS, 287.

CWIU, p. vii; cf. EHPS, 96, AR, 119.

EHPS, 97.

AR, 38.

Koyré Alexandre , Etudes d'histoire de la pensée philosophique (Paris, 1950), 305ff, 341ff.

EHPS, 56.

EHPS, 12.

Koyré Alexandre , “Philosophie de l'histoire”, Europe, Sept. 1946, 107–17.

See for example Koyré's critical essay-review of A. C. Crombie's The origins of experimental science: “The origins of modern science: A new interpretation”, Diogenes, xvi (1956), 1–22.

As cited in Jorland G. , La science de la philosophie: Les recherches épistemologiques d'Alexandre Koyré (Paris, 1981), 84–85; unfortunately, as often, Jorland does not cite the source, and I have not so far re-found it.

Koyré's hermeneutics is interestingly discussed in Jorland , op. cit., 73ff.

AR, 121.

GW, i, 9–10.

In the second edn of Mysterium cosmographicum ( GW , viii, 28) Kepler refers, in connection with his Trinitarian analogy, to his account of the principal parts of the world in his Epitome astronomiae copernicanae; however, he there invokes the distinction between mobilia and quiescentia only in passing and in rather different terms: GW, vii, 258ff.

CWIU, 76–87.

CWIU, 58–72.

See, for example, Wilson C. , “Kepler's derivation of the elliptical path”, Isis, lix (1968), 5–25; Whiteside D. T. , “Kepler's planetary eggs, laid and unlaid, 1600–1605”, Journal for the history of astronomy, v (1974), 1–21.

See, for example, Mittelstraß J. , “Methodological elements of Keplerian astronomy”, Studies in history and philosophy of science, iii (1972), 203–32; Westman R. S. , “Kepler's theory of hypothesis and the ‘realist dilemma’”, Studies in history and philosophy of science, iii (1972), 233–64; Aiton E. , “Johannes Kepler and the astronomy without hypotheses”, Japanese studies in the history of science, xiv (1975), 49–70; Jardine N. , The birth of history and philosophy of science: Kepler's “A defence of Tycho against Ursus” with essays on its provenance and significance , revised edn (Cambridge, 1988); Martens R. , Kepler's philosophy and the new astronomy (Princeton, in press).

See AR, 451, where Koyré sets aside this task.

Walker D. P. , “Kepler's ‘celestial music’”, in his Studies in musical science in the late Renaissance (Leiden, 1978), 34–62; Field J. V. , Kepler's geometrical cosmology (London, 1988); Stephenson B. , The music of the spheres: Kepler's harmonic astronomy (Princeton, 1994).

Simon G. , Kepler astronome astrologue (Paris, 1979).

Reiss T. , “Kepler, his Dream, and the analysis and pattern of thought”, in The discourse of modernity (Ithaca, NY, 1982), 140–67.

Hallyn F. , The poetic structure of the world: Copernicus and Kepler (1987; transl. anon., New York, 1990); Hallyn's poetic reading of Kepler is well explicated in W. Clark's essay review “Poetics for scientists”, Studies in history and philosophy of science, xxiii (1992), 181–92. Jardine N. Segonds A. , “Kepler as reader and translator of Aristotle”, in Kusukawa S. Blackwell C. (eds), Philosophy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: Conversations with Aristotle (Aldershot, 2000), 205–32.

Jardine Segonds , op. cit., 227.

Jorland , op. cit. (ref. 45); Schuhmann K. , “Koyré et les phénoménologues allemands”, History and technology, iv (1987), 149–67.

Zambelli P. , “Alexandre Koyré versus Lucien Lévy-Bruhl: From collective representations to paradigms of scientific thought”, Science in context, viii (1995), 531–55.

Hallyn , op. cit. (ref. 58), 21ff, 54ff.

Panofsky E. , Galileo as a critic of the arts (The Hague, 1954). Koyré A. , “Attitude esthétique et pensée scientifique”, Critique , c–ci (1955), 835–47; EHPS, 275–88.

Evans R. J. W. , “Prague mannerism and the magic universe”, in Rudolf II and his work (Oxford, 1973), 243–74.

Westman R. S. , “The astronomer's role in the sixteenth century: A preliminary study”, History of science, xxviii (1980), 105–47.

Jardine N. , “The places of astronomy in early modern culture”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xxix (1998), 49–68.

Kepler J. , “De historia hypothesium”, in Apologia pro Tychone contra Ursum, written around Christmas 1600, but unpublished in his lifetime: See Jardine , Kepler's “A defence of Tycho against Ursus” (ref. 53), 101–19, 158–85.