GüntherSiegmund, “Der bayerische Staatskanzler Herwart von Hohenburg als Freund und Beförderer der exacten Wissenschaften”, Jahrbuch für Münchener Geschichte, iii (1889), 183–219, 202.
2.
von EisenhartAugust Ritter, “Hoerwarth, Hans Georg H. (auch Herwarth) v. Hohenburg”, in Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, xiii, ed. by HolsteinJesup (Leipzig, 1881), 169–75, 172.
3.
Letter to ScaligerJoseph, 14/24 October 1599, TBOO, viii, ed. by DreyerJ. L. E. (Amsterdam, 1972), 189.15.
4.
Kepler first wrote to Herwart in September 1597. His last known exchange with Herwart occurred in April 1611, when he received a letter from Herwart that he later published (in part) in his Eclogae chronicae (Frankfurt, 1615).
5.
CasparMax, Kepler, trans. and ed. by HellmanDoris C. (New York, 1993), 90.
6.
AlbrechtDieter, “Hans Georg Hörwarth (Herwart) v. Hohenburg”, in Neue Deutsche Biographic, viii, ed. by the KommissionHistorische, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin, 1969), 722–3, 722.
7.
JardineNicholas, The birth of history and philosophy of science: Kepler's A defence of Tycho against Ursus with essays on its provenance and significance (Cambridge, 1988), 280.
8.
Letter to Michael Mästlin, 19/29 August 1599, JKGW, xiv, ed. by CasparMax (Munich, 1949), no. 132, 11. 121–6.
9.
Cf. BonerPatrick J., “Kepler's Copernican campaign and the new star of 1604”, in Change and continuity in early modern cosmology, ed. by BonerPatrick J. (Dordrecht, 2011), 93–114.
10.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, September 1603, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 270, 11. 70–71.
11.
On the role of Herwart as a book agent and the responses he received from other scholars, see VoelkelJames R., The composition of Kepler's Astronomia nova (Princeton, 2001), 77–91.
12.
Letter to Kepler, 25 July 1600, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 169, 11. 12–13.
13.
Letter to Johannes Barwitz, 23 February 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 207, 11. 36–38.
14.
von EisenhartRitter, “Hoerwarth, Hans Georg H. (auch Herwarth) v. Hohenburg” (ref. 2), 173; Hermann Wiesflecker, Maximilian I (Munich, 1991), 240.
15.
Günther, “Der bayerische Staatskanzler Herwart von Hohenburg” (ref. 1), 184.
16.
For a brief account of the historical origins of the Bavarian Landschaft, see CarstenFrancis L., Princes and parliaments in Germany (Oxford, 1971), 353.
17.
On the history of the Bavarian Estates and their broadly ranging sphere of influence, see DoeberlMichael, Entwickelungsgeschickte Bayerns, i (Munich, 1916).
18.
Albrecht, “Hans Georg Hörwarth (Herwart) v. Hohenburg” (ref. 6), 722.
19.
SutterBerthold, Johannes Kepler in Graz (Graz, 1975), 189.
20.
SpindlerMax, ed., Handbuch der bayerischen Geschichte, iii, 2 (Munich, 1979), 511.
21.
Ibid., 512.
22.
Carsten, Princes and parliaments in Germany (ref. 16), 392.
23.
KrausAndreas, Das Gymnasium der Jesuiten zu München (1559–1773): Staatspolitische, sozialgeschichtliche, behördengeschichtliche und kulturgeschichtliche Bedeutung (Munich, 2001), 34.
24.
Günther, “Der bayerische Staatskanzler Herwart von Hohenburg” (ref. 1), 185.
25.
Carsten, Princes and parliaments in Germany (ref. 16), 392.
26.
Kraus, Das Gymnasium der Jesuiten zu München (ref. 23), 34.
27.
Günther, “Der bayerische Staatskanzler Herwart von Hohenburg” (ref. 1), 185.
28.
Letter to Tycho Brahe, 7/17 September 1599, TBOO, viii, ed. by DreyerJ. L. E. (Amsterdam, 1972), 174.42–175.2.
29.
von HohenburgHerwart Johann Georg, Catalogus graecorum manuscriptorum codicum (Ingolstadt, 1602), i.
30.
Ibid., pp. ii–iii.
31.
Ibid., pp. ii–iii.
32.
Letter to Tycho Brahe, 7/17 September 1599, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 175.2–5. In a letter of August 1600, Tycho recalled a pleasant dinner experience with the Bavarian Legate in Prague. “I was received with great civility and eloquence, and we referred to you with one and the same frequency and sense of honour”. See Tycho's letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 18/28 August 1600, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 352.31–33.
33.
On Tycho's journey to Prague and the mass of belongings he left behind in Magdeburg, see ChristiansonRobert John, On Tycho's island: Tycho Brahe and his assistants, 1570–1601 (Cambridge, 2000), 227–9.
34.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 21/31 August 1599, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 159.38–160.1: “Concessus … est benignissime habitationi meae locus hie in arce Benachia 5 miliaribus Praga distante, ubi commodius et tranquillius quam in urbe, consuetis meis exercitiis astronomicis et spagyricis vacare licebit…”.
35.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 6/16 November 1599, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 202.17–19.
36.
Ibid., 202.21.
37.
On the significance and substance of Kepler's calendars, see BonerPatrick J., “Kepler's early astrological calendars: Matter, methodology and multidisciplinarity”, Centaurus, 1 (2008), 324–8.
38.
Jardine, The birth of history and philosophy of science (ref. 7), 60.
39.
On the role of Ptolemy's text in Kepler's attempt to relate astrology and music, see FieldJudith V., “Kepler's rejection of numerology”, in Occult and scientific mentalities in the Renaissance, ed. by VickersBrian (Cambridge, 1984), 273–96, pp. 280–1.
40.
Letter to Kepler, 15/25 July 1600, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 169, 11. 35–39.
41.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 4/14 December 1599, xiv (ref. 8), no. 148, 11. 11–19.
42.
Letter to Kepler, 15/25 July 1600, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 169, 11. 41–43.
43.
Letter to Matthias Bernegger, 4/14 February 1615, JKGW, xvii, ed. by CasparMax (Munich, 1955), no. 709, 11. 18–20.
44.
Caspar, Kepler (ref. 5), 89.
45.
von EisenhartRitter, “Hoerwarth, Hans Georg H. (auch Herwarth) v. Hohenburg” (ref. 2), 172.
46.
von HohenburgJohann Georg Herwart, Tabulae arithmeticae universales (Munich, 1610).
47.
Letter to Kepler, 3/13 September 1608, JKGW, xvi, ed. by CasparMax (Munich, 1954), no. 502, 11. 18–20.
48.
Ibid., 11. 20–24.
49.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 8/18 October 1608, JKGW, xvi (ref. 47), no. 505, 11. 33–38.
50.
For a diagrammatic representation of Herwart's place in the astronomical community of the late sixteenth century, see MosleyAdam, Bearing the heavens: Tycho Brake and the astronomical community of the late sixteenth century (Cambridge, 2007), 36. Herwart certainly acquired a degree of “status enhancement” from his circle of scholars; see Mario Biagioli, Galileo, courtier: The practice of science in the culture of absolutism (Chicago, 1993), 55.
51.
GranadaAngel Miguel, “Helisaeus Roeslin contre Raymarus Ursus après la publication du De astronomicis hypothesibus: Ses lettres à Herwart von Hohenburg de 1597”, in Omnia in uno: Hommage à Alain-Philippe Segonds, ed. by NoirotCarolineOrdineNuccio (Paris, 2013), 425–51.
52.
GraftonAnthony, Worlds made by words: Scholarship and community in the modern West (Cambridge, MA, 2009), 128.
53.
Letter to Tycho, 7/17 September 1599, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 174.8–11. On the role of eclipses as “the best tool for fixing the absolute dates of events in ancient and medieval history”, see GraftonAnthony, “Some uses of eclipses in early modern chronology”, Journal of the history of ideas, lxiv (2003), 213–29, p. 215.
54.
Letter to Tycho, 1/11 September 1600, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 354.27–29.
55.
Letter to Tycho, 17/27 November 1600, TBOO, viii (ref. 28), 393.13–15.
56.
Ibid., 393.15–17.
57.
Caspar, Kepler (ref. 5), 81.
58.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 2/12 September 1597, JKGW, xiii, ed. by CasparMax (Munich, 1945), no. 74, 11. 21–24.
59.
Lucan, De hello civili, 1.639–672.
60.
Herwart's query is found in a manuscript preserved along with many of his other papers in the Universitätsbibliothek München, 2° Cod. ms. 692, ff. 120–2; cf. JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), 391–4, p. 392.
61.
Ibid., 393.
62.
Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 120.
63.
Letter to Kepler, 12/22 April 1599, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 119, 11. 218–24.
64.
Letter to Kepler, 14/24 October 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 78, 11. 83–84.
65.
Ibid., 11. 81–82.
66.
Sutter, Johannes Kepler in Graz (ref. 19), 191.
67.
68.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 12 September 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 74, 11. 5–10: “Quo lubentius desiderio tuo, quod literis ad D. Grienpergerum datis testatus es, satisfacere contendi, propositae quaestionis explicatione scripta: non quidem, quod id a nemine, quam a me rectius fieri posse sperarem: sed quia occasionem demerendi mihi tanti viri, cuius mihi spem faciunt illae ipsae literae, mirifice deosculatus sum.”.
69.
Ibid., 11.11–12. On Kepler's effort to accommodate his audience in the Astronomia nova (1609) “by playing down the mathematical aspect of the treatise”, see Voelkel, The composition of Kepler's Astronomia nova (ref. 11), 223–4.
70.
JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), 393. Cf. RosenEdward, Three Imperial mathematicians: Kepler trapped between Tycho Brake and Ursus (New York, 1986), 95.
71.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 20 August 1597, Universitätsbibliothek München, 2° Cod. ms. 692, 362–3, f. 362, 11. 13–14: “Verum ego omnino existimo hoc tempus Lucani vel Figuli in annum ante Christum 69”.
72.
Ibid., 11. 19–25.
73.
Ibid., 1. 30.
74.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 1 September 1597, Universitätsbibliothek München, 2° Cod. ms. 692, 364–7, f. 365, 11. 33–35.
75.
Ibid., 11. 35–38.
76.
Letter to Mästlin, 19/29 August 1599, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 132, 1. 123.
77.
Ibid., 11. 124–6. Cf. Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 120.
78.
AnschützC., Ungedruckte Wissenschaftliche Korrespondenz zwischen Johann Kepler und Herwart von Hohenburg (Prague, 1886), 4.
79.
Letter to Mästlin, 19/29 August 1599, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 132, 11. 91–92.
80.
See, for example, Günther, “Der bayerische Staatskanzler Herwart von Hohenburg” (ref. 1), 34.
81.
On Kepler's conversation with Herwart over an analogy involving the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church, see RothmanAviva, “From cosmos to confession: Kepler and the connection between astronomical and religious truth”, in Change and continuity in early modern cosmology, ed. by BonerPatrick J. (Dordrecht, 2011), 115–34.
82.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 12 September 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), 11. 21–24.
83.
On the role of the mathematical community in Kepler's early plan to promote the heliocentric hypothesis, see RothmanAviva, “Forms of persuasion: Kepler, Galileo, and the dissemination of Copernicanism”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xl (2009), 403–20.
Letter to Kepler, 4 November 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 79, 11. 1–10.
86.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 12 September 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 74, 11. 19–21; cf. Voelkel, The composition of Kepler's Astronomia nova (ref. 11), 66.
87.
Ibid., 77–78.
88.
On the place of Wilhelm IV's observatory in the history of astronomy, see GranadaAngel Miguel, “Christoph Rothmann und die Auflösung der himmlischen Sphären”, Acta historica astronomiae, v (1999), 34–57.
89.
On the substance of these two works and their significance in Roeslin's ensuing polemic with Kepler, see GranadaAngel Miguel, “Kepler v. Roeslin on the interpretation of Kepler's nova, (1): 1604–1606”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xxxvi (2005), 299–319; ibid., “After the nova of 1604: Roeslin and Kepler's discussion on the significance of the celestial novelties (1607–1613)”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xiii (2011), 353–90.
90.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 23 April 1598, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 95, 1. 15.
91.
Ibid., 1. 14.
92.
93.
Ibid., 11. 5–9.
94.
For a full analysis of the opinions expressed by Praetorius and Röslin, see Voelkel, The composition of Kepler's Astronomia nova (ref. 11), 66–91.
95.
GraftonAnthony, Commerce with the classics: Ancient books and Renaissance readers (Ann Arbor, 1997), 198.
96.
GraftonAnthony, Defenders of the text: The traditions of scholarship in an age of science, 1450–1800 (Cambridge, MA, 1991), 187.
97.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 24 December 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 83, 11. 148–9.
98.
Ibid., 11. 152–3.
99.
Ibid., 11. 182–3.
100.
Ibid., 11. 150–3.
101.
Grafton, Defenders of the text (ref. 96), 191: “… it seems not only a pity but an injustice that [the works of Kepler] have not earned him a place in modern histories of classical scholarship.”.
102.
JKGW, vol. 19, ed. by ListMartha (Munich, 1975), 328.
103.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 12 September 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 83, 1. 38.
104.
Ibid., 11. 81–91.
105.
Ibid., 11. 81–82.
106.
Ibid., 11. 120–3.
107.
Ibid., 11. 129–30.
108.
Ibid., 135–6.
109.
Ibid., 140–1.
110.
Ibid., 11. 142–3.
111.
Ibid., 11. 143–6.
112.
Ibid., 11. 276–7.
113.
Ibid., 11. 270–2.
114.
Ibid., 11. 274–5.
115.
Ibid., 11. 278–80.
116.
Ibid., 1. 279.
117.
Ibid., 11. 322–3.
118.
JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), 393.
119.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 12 September 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 74, 11. 325–6.
120.
Ibid., 11. 327–8.
121.
Ibid., 1. 332.
122.
Letter to Kepler, 24 October 1597, JKGW, xiii (ref. 58), no. 78, 1. 27.
123.
Ibid., 11. 30–34.
124.
Ibid., 11. 37–39.
125.
Ibid., 11. 55–58.
126.
Burke-GaffneyM. W., S.J., Kepler and the Jesuits (Milwaukee, 1944), 26.
127.
Letter to Kepler, 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 205, 11. 3–4.
128.
Letter to Johannes Barwitz, 23 February 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 207, 11. 39–42.
129.
Letter to Kepler, 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 205, 11. 22–24.
130.
Ibid., 1. 66.
131.
Grafton, “Some uses of eclipses” (ref. 53), 215. After waiting two months for Kepler to reply, Herwart reminded his client that he was still expecting a response. “I have anxiously awaited your expert advice regarding my recent letter about lunar eclipses”, Herwart wrote, “and nothing worthy of writing has come to mind since then”. Letter to Kepler, 23 April 1602, xiv (ref. 8), no. 212, 11. 4–6.
132.
von HohenburgJohann Georg Herwart, Novae, verae et exacte ad calculum astronomicum revocatae chronologiae (Munich, 1612), 1.7–8.
133.
Ibid., 1.11–16.
134.
Ibid., 2.23–27.
135.
Ibid., 3.10.
136.
Ibid., 3.4–8.
137.
Ibid., 3.18–20.
138.
Ibid., 5.11–16.
139.
Ibid., 7.2–3.
140.
Ibid., 7.5–8.
141.
Letter to Kepler, 28 April 1613, JKGW, xvii (ref. 43), no. 651, 11. 57–58; cf. Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 121.
142.
Letter to Kepler, 28 April 1613, JKGW, xvii (ref. 43), no. 651, 1. 77.
143.
Ibid., 11. 84–85.
144.
Ibid., 11. 60–62.
145.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 16.23–27.
146.
Ibid., 16.29–30.
147.
Letter to Kepler, 28 April 1613, JKGW, xvii (ref. 43), no. 651, 11. 69–70.
148.
Ibid., 11. 77–81; cf. Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 121.
149.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 168.10–12.
150.
Ibid., 168.12–14.
151.
KeplerJohannes, De Jesu Christi Servatoris nostri vera anno natalitio (Frankfurt, 1606), 3.17–18.
152.
Ibid., 6.4–7.
153.
Ibid., 22.35–36.
154.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 168.31–169.1. Cf. Burke-Gaffney, Kepler and the Jesuits (ref. 126), 34.
155.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 169.1–4.
156.
Ibid., 169.9–10.
157.
Ibid., 162.24–26.
158.
Letter to Kepler, 28 April 1613, JKGW, xvii (ref. 43), no. 651, 11. 58–59.
159.
Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 126. In a future study, I will tie the work of Herwart to the string of ‘chronology workshops’ that sprang up in Munich and other sites of the Counter Reformation to reverse the tide of Scaliger's teaching.
160.
Letter to Kepler, 28 April 1613, JKGW, xvii (ref. 43), no. 651, 1. 76.
161.
JKGW, v, ed. by HammerFranz (Munich, 1953), 360.10–11.
162.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 279.7–8.
163.
Ibid., 279.5–12.
164.
Ibid., 279.18–21.
165.
Ibid., 281.9–10.
166.
Ibid., 283.12–14.
167.
Ibid., 283.15.
168.
On the interplay of “traditional forms of scholarship” and “modern forms of science” in the work of Kepler, see GraftonAnthony, “Kepler as a reader”, Journal of the history of ideas, liii (1992), 561–72.
169.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 12 September 1597 (ref. 58), no. 74, 11. 337–8.
170.
Letter to Kepler, 24 September 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 225, 11.100–101.
171.
Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg, 7 October 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 228, 11. 252–263; cf. Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 126.
172.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 90.4–6.
173.
JKGW, v (ref. 161), 368.10–13. Cf. Burke-Gaffney, Kepler and the Jesuits (ref. 126), 56.
174.
On the role of Leopoldo de‘ Medici (1617–1675) as a “practicing prince” in the Accademia del Cimento, see Biagioli, Galileo, courtier (ref. 50), 358–62.
175.
Grafton, Worlds made by words (ref. 52), 133.
176.
Letter to Johannes Barwitz, 23 February 1602, JKGW, xiv (ref. 8), no. 207, 11. 10–11.
177.
von HohenburgHerwart, Chronologiae (ref. 132), 109.5–8.
