Defense of The Harmony of the World

...rearranged the place: this is indeed, to some extent, to embrace the same subject matter. For you profess to be a mirror for educating the eyes; I have used so many words that even with eyes closed, the ears might perceive what I intend. And what is it, I ask, to show the Harmonious Song and the three means The three "means" or medietates refer to the arithmetic, geometric, and harmonic proportions used in musical theory and geometry., derived from their effects through their causes in my sixteenth chapter: unless it is, to some extent (namely as far as the causes are concerned, which I believe were untried before me), to embrace them? Above all, spare yourself, lest you listen to Meursius? Johannes Meursius (1579–1639) was a Dutch classical scholar who wrote on ancient Greek music. Kepler is warning Fludd not to be misled by purely philological interpretations.. For what does it matter to be angry at the use of a little word? Do I alone arrogantly claim the title World Harmony for my own work? Or who is this philosopher, dressed in a general's cloak original: trabeatus, referring to the trabea, a ceremonial robe worn by high-ranking Roman officials; Kepler is mocking Fludd's self-importance., who, dreaming of political titles and dignities in the midst of philosophical disputes, sets himself on fire with rage so that he cannot restrain himself from insult? Read my third text, which he himself most truly called "sterile ground": if you find self-love in it, condemn the example and beware.

Add the remaining specific comparisons, which I have omitted, for your own readers if you wish: I place no importance on the number of words used as a point of difference. Regarding the division of the harmonic string the monochord, a single-stringed instrument used to demonstrate mathematical intervals, I used as great an abundance of words as I judged necessary to explain the foundations of Music. Furthermore, on the Harmonic means, I used as much brevity as I possibly could; because there was little weight in them for this philosophical type of contemplation, and the means followed naturally once the extremes were established—that is, the Harmonies themselves, composed among themselves, the origin of which I taught in Chapter 2. Yet I do not see how I can be said to have written "superficially" about the Harmonic means, I who both provide a definition according to the opinion of the ancients and tear it up from its very foundations, as it very frequently produces non-Harmonic numbers—a name without the reality. Therefore, our common reader must be warned further: let him see again and again whether Robert describes his own Harmonic means according to this ancient definition; for he says he has handed them down most abundantly, and indeed in more elegant words. If it is as I say (for his book is not at hand), then indeed Robert, with that abundance of words, will have wandered from the truth along with the ancients. Therefore, the reader must be careful not to agree with his statements before Robert has legitimately refuted my reasons opposed to the ancients. Regarding Robert’s other specific comparisons, let the observant reader judge what each of us has truly said about his own treatment. For if I provide my reader with anything regarding my own text, it is only fair that the same be allowed to Robert in his. And look at what Robert says: that I have dealt with the sections of the string in too many words; yet all this abundance was not enough for Robert to find any light regarding the discovery of the Octave original: Diapason, the Greek term for the interval of an eighth., about which, now led by regret, he says I have dealt only obscurely. But to myself, I seem to have produced the bisection of the string most clearly from the ratios of the diameter of a circle. Let the reader see if he can find any more light in Robert on this part; I will not be envious, for it is a pleasure to offer shared labors in educating readers. Therefore, regarding my ninth chapter, which you think is written in a rather confused way: I will gladly accept a better order from you than I was able to achieve, if the reader can recognize a better one in yours. But I will not deny him his own recommendation for the discovery of the keys musical clefs or "clavis" on account of any greater clarity than in my work; if indeed the association of the pentagon and hexagon (in my second chapter) is not sufficient for the reader—provided he confesses that he has found so much light in Robert.

Therefore, Robert, as for your lengthy excuse for your way of writing about Harmonic material without this "Analysis": I would like you to remember that it was never accused by me. I established a comparison, not an accusation, for the purpose of educating a student of philosophy, not to implore the office of a judge. I use a long discourse and many words, specifically so that I may teach; you contract things into brief forms, so that you may commit to memory what someone else taught before you. Your brevity does not follow unless there is a previous abundance from another; and unless another places the matter at length before the eyes (which I have undertaken to provide), you would not be able to fashion the figure or the Hieroglyphic Fludd used "Hieroglyphics" or complex symbolic diagrams to represent his cosmic theories. of the matter. One person heaps up simple things, you extract the essence and collect it. Nor is the "dreggy" substance rejected so much that we forget the plant itself, which Nature represents. Nor is it enough to place what is good in its own small vessel, but one must also notice from where it was collected. I have acted as a collector of suitable herbs; you are seen to be the one who, from which herbs and from which collector they were bought, has pressed out your liquors. Let the secret of science remain hidden as long as it requires a prolixity of words, and let nature not be manifested, unless