Defense of The Harmony of the World

...you have refrained from reproaches and slanders: Well done! You show yourself a Christian; continue in this way. You deny that you have used reckless speech. I declare you a great man if you have avoided this in every respect; it is a rare happiness of the tongue and the pen, deserving of every praise. And from this, you say that you have decided to reply to my "Comparison" referring to Kepler’s comparison of his and Fludd’s work in the appendix of his Harmonice Mundi with all bitterness set aside. With a good cause driving you and the form of your proposal being most attractive, I am full of hope. You notice that I have raised some points against you subtly original: subtiliter; this can mean "precisely" or "in a refined manner," but Kepler is playing on Fludd's potential sensitivity to the word, yet you acknowledge in them a certain "serene brow" an idiom meaning a calm or friendly expression. As I see it, this is not bad, nor do you hope for anything else from me, unless a most subtle complaint lies hidden in that word subtly.

My dear Robert, I have spoken to my readers as if from a pulpit, discussing Ptolemy Claudius Ptolemy, the 2nd-century astronomer whose work on music and harmony Kepler studied just as much as Robert [Fludd], insofar as I judged it helpful for educating the readers. I used that "subtlety" which was required to distinguish between our related writings, unaware that Robert himself would take an interest. Therefore, I wrote none of the things I said about his work as if they were an attack on the author. But because Robert himself has suddenly appeared out of the crowd, I certainly think it fair that he should speak for himself and for his book. If I have ascribed anything to his book contrary to the author's mind, let him wash it away and show the opposite. Let him be heard in this "Theater of the World." I will be the first to acknowledge and confess the errors of my judgment regarding his book, if he reveals them to me. You can twist my "serene brow" toward yourself, Robert; but you cannot strike back unless you strike someone who is hitting you.

TO THE FIRST ANALYSIS.

Page 4.

I seem to accuse you of ignorance, sharply, though secretly. This is so "secret," Robert, that you are entirely mistaken original: toto cœlo erres, literally "you err by the whole sky". I explain faithfully what the difference is between your "Harmonies" and mine, using no evasion. There is no difference between you and Ptolemy, except that you surpass him; he preceded us by fifteen centuries. On that account, I would have thought you should be spared, had I not been standing in the pulpit, caring more for the progress of the listeners than for you.

TO THE SECOND ANALYSIS.

You are within your rights to explain more broadly what I said truly but concisely (for I did not know more about your publications). I even allow this to be added to my comparisons: that I have spent more years on my work than you have spent weeks on yours. Yet I will claim no credit for the time spent to increase my glory, nor will I falsely accuse my own deserving text (at the end of folio 178). Indeed, in the year 1617, having set out for Tübingen on business, I had nothing ready except a very few pages containing the rough material for Book III, which I showed to friends. I explained my plan for writing: I recounted everything I had been meditating on for twenty years and what remained to be investigated.

But I am also grateful for the very true praise of my work. I confess that the material, especially of the third book, was revised again and again over twenty-two years. I confess that for Books IV and V, although in a shorter time, a great deal of "cementing" and "fermentation" was applied—indeed, you might rightly apply the terms "putrefaction," "calcination," "sublimation," and "reverberation" Kepler is using Fludd's own alchemical vocabulary to describe his grueling mathematical and editorial process. While Fludd used these terms for chemical/mystical experiments, Kepler applies them to his rigorous data analysis and refinement of his planetary laws. to their respective parts. But whether each part has been "refined" to that perfection which Robert suggests, I shall await the judgment of many learned men, and even my own. Regarding this matter, there exists a clear "Challenge" on folio 241 of my work.

TO THE THIRD ANALYSIS.

Page 5.

Forgive me, Robert, I had need of the wool; there was more of it in the tail than in the head a metaphorical way of saying the substance of the argument was found at the end of the text rather than the beginning. Furthermore, I depart from your shop now as a satisfied buyer; you may arrange your affairs as you wish, whether in the right order or backwards. Moreover, spare my words: if I had not used the word "In some measure" original: Quadamtenus, I was in danger of being accused by you of false boasting. For there are places where you disagree with me. What of the fact that you also accuse my second chapter of "prolixity" wordiness; you would never have done so unless you had been restricted within the narrowness of this word yourself? And further down, you compressed the force of my ninth chapter, confessing that those things which I delivered with much speech and many pages, you [returned] into a tiny...