Influence and/or Inhabitation: The Celestial Bodies Between Kepler and Newton

  • James E. Christie
Part of the International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées book series (ARCH, volume 228)


After the case studies of the previous chapters, this chapter presents a selected survey of seventeenth-century philosophers with an eye on the developing relationship between astrological and pluralist theories. It focuses first on the continuing persistence of astrological thinking within pluralist frameworks, arguing that a symbiosis of sorts arose between theories of celestial influence and celestial inhabitation. It then turns to the early mechanical philosophies of Kenelm Digby, Thomas White and Thomas Hobbes. While looking at the relevance of mechanical principles to questions of celestial influence and inhabitation, this section also turns to second argument of the book: the growing antagonism between astrology and pluralism in terms of celestial teleology.


Astrology Extraterrestrial life Copernican Cartesian Nicholas Hill Philippe van Lansberge Henry More Otto von Guericke Claude Gadroys Mechanical philosophy Kenelm Digby Thomas White Thomas Hobbes 


  1. Ashworth, William B., Jr. 1986. Catholicism and early modern science. In God and nature: Historical essays on the encounter between Christianity and science, ed. David C. Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers, 136–166. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bachrach, A.G.H. 1987. Luna mendax: Some reflections on moon-voyages in early seventeenth-century England. In Between dream and nature: Essays on utopia and dystopia, ed. Dominic Baker-Smith and C.C. Barfoot, 70–90. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  3. Borel, Pierre. 1657. Discours nouveau prouvant la pluralité des mondes. Geneva: s.n.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 1658. A new treatise, proving a multiplicity of worlds. Trans. D. Sashott. London: John Streater.Google Scholar
  5. Boulliau, Ismaël. 1645. Astronomia philolaica. Paris: Simeon Piget.Google Scholar
  6. Bowden, Mary Ellen. 1974. The scientific revolution in astrology: The English reformers, 1558–1686. PhD dissertation, Yale University.Google Scholar
  7. Boyle, Robert. 1999. The works of Robert Boyle, ed. Michael Hunter and Edward B. Davis, 14 vols. London: Pickering and Chatto.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell, Mary B. 1999. Wonder & science: Imagining worlds in early modern Europe. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Carré, Marie-Rose. 1974. A man between two worlds: Pierre Borel and his Discours nouveau prouvant la pluralité des mondes of 1657. Isis 65: 322–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chang, Ku-ming (Kevin). 2011. Alchemy as studies of life and matter: Reconsidering the place of vitalism in early modern chymistry. Isis 102: 322–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charleton, Walter. 1654. Physiologia Epicuro-Gassendo-Charltoniana, or, a fabrick of science natural, upon the hypothesis of atoms founded by Epicurus. London: Thomas Heath.Google Scholar
  12. Clericuzio, Antonio. 2000. Elements, principles, and corpuscles: A study of atomism and chemistry in the seventeenth century. Dordrecht/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clucas, Stephen. 1995. Thomas Harriot and the field of knowledge in the English renaissance. Oxford: Oriel College.Google Scholar
  14. ———. 1997. “The infinite variety of formes and magnitudes”: 16th- and 17th-century English corpuscular philosophy and Aristotelian theories of matter and form. Early Science and Medicine 2: 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ———. 2001. Corpuscular matter theory in the Northumberland circle. In Late medieval and early modern corpuscular matter theories, ed. Christoph Herbert Lüthy, John Emery Murdoch, and William Royall Newman, 181–207. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  16. Cressy, David. 2006. Early modern space travel and the English man in the moon. The American Historical Review 111: 961–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davidson, Nicholas S. 2005. “Le plus beau et le plus meschant esprit que ie aye cogneu”: Science and religion in the writings of Giulio Cesare Vanini, 1585–1619. In Heterodoxy in early modern science and religion, ed. John Hedley Brooke and Ian Maclean, 59–80. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dick, Steven J. 1982. Plurality of worlds: The origins of the extraterrestrial life debate from Democritus to Kant. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Digby, Kenelm. 1645 [1644]. Two treatises: In the one of which, the nature of bodies; in the other, the nature of mans soule, is looked into: In way of discovery of the immortality of reasonable soules ... London: John Williams.Google Scholar
  20. ———. 1658. A late discourse touching the cure of wounds by the powder of sympathy. Trans. Robert White. London: R. Lownes and T. Davies.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1661. A discourse concerning the vegetation of plants. London: John Dakins.Google Scholar
  22. Dobbs, Betty Jo. 1971. Studies in the natural philosophy of Sir Kenelm Digby. Ambix 18: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. ———. 1973. Studies in the natural philosophy of Sir Kenelm Digby part II. Digby and alchemy. Ambix 20: 143–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ———. 1974. Studies in the natural philosophy of Sir Kenelm Digby part III. Digby’s experimental alchemy – The book of secrets. Ambix 21: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ernst, Germana. 2015. Maculae Galilei me perplexum habent.’ Campanella, Sun-spots and Pythagorean temptations. In Authority, innovation and early modern epistemology: Essays in honour of Hilary Gatti, ed. Martin McLaughlin, Ingrid D. Rowland, and Elisabetta Tarantino, 170–185. Cambridge: Legenda.Google Scholar
  26. Farley, John. 1977. The spontaneous generation controversy from Descartes to Oparin. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Fisher, Saul. 2003. Gassendi’s atomist account of generation and heredity in plants and animals. Perspectives on Science 11: 484–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gadroys, Claude. 1674. Discours physique sur les influences des astres selon les principes de M. Descartes. Paris: Jean Coignard.Google Scholar
  29. Galilei, Galileo. 1890–1909. Opere, ed. Antonio Favaro, 20 vols. Florence: G. Barbèra.Google Scholar
  30. Gassendi, Pierre. 1659. The vanity of judiciary astrology. Or divination by the stars. Lately written in Latine, by that great schollar and mathematician the illustrious Petrus Gassendus; mathematical professor to the king of France. Translated into English by a person of quality. London: Giles Calvert.Google Scholar
  31. Gilbert, William. 1651. De mundo nostro sublunari philosophia nova. Amsterdam: Lodewijk Elzevir.Google Scholar
  32. Godwin, Francis. 1638. The man in the moone. London: John Norton.Google Scholar
  33. Grant, Edward. 1974. A source book in medieval science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Havers, G., trans. 1664. A general collection of discourses of the virtuosi of France. London: Thomas Dring and John Starkey.Google Scholar
  35. Henry, John. 1982. Atomism and eschatology: Catholicism and natural philosophy in the Interregnum. The British Journal for the History of Science 15: 211–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. ———. 1986. Occult qualities and the experimental philosophy: Active principles in pre-Newtonian matter theory. History of Science 24: 335–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. ———. 2008. The fragmentation of renaissance occultism and the decline of magic. History of Science 46: 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. ———. 2010. Sir Kenelm Digby, recusant philosopher. In Insiders and outsiders in seventeenth-century philosophy, ed. G.A.J. Rogers, Tom Sorell, and Jill Kraye, 43–75. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Hill, Nicholas. 1619 [1601]. Philosophia Epicurea, Democritiana, Theophrastica proposita simpliciter, non edocta, 2nd ed. Geneva: François Le Fèvre.Google Scholar
  40. Hobbes, Thomas. 1656. Elements of philosophy, the first section, concerning body. Anonymous translation. London: R. and W. Leybourn.Google Scholar
  41. ———. 1973. Critique du De mundo de Thomas White, ed. Jean Jacquot and Harold Whitmore Jones. Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
  42. ———. 1976. Thomas White’s De mundo examined. Trans. Harold Whitmore Jones. London: Bradford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Hutchison, Keith. 1982. What happened to occult qualities in the scientific revolution? Isis 73: 233–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hutton, Sarah, ed. 1990. Henry More (1614–1687) tercentenary studies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  45. ———. 2005. The man in the moone and the new astronomy: Godwin, Gilbert, Kepler. Etudes epistémè (7): 3–13.Google Scholar
  46. ———, ed. 2017. Cambridge Platonism. Special issue. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 25.5.Google Scholar
  47. Jacquot, Jean. 1974. Harriot, Hill, Warner and the new philosophy. In Thomas Harriot; Renaissance scientist, ed. John William Shirley, 107–128. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  48. Jaki, Stanley L. 1978. Planets and planetarians: A history of theories of the origin of planetary systems. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.Google Scholar
  49. Kargon, Robert Hugh. 1966. Atomism in England from Hariot to Newton. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  50. Knight, David. 1967. Uniformity and diversity of nature in seventeenth century treatises on plurality of worlds. Organon 4: 61–68.Google Scholar
  51. Knobloch, Eberhard. 2003. Otto von Guericke und die Kosmologie im 17 Jahrhundert. Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 26: 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Koyré, Alexandre. 1957. From the closed world to the infinite universe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  53. Le Grand, Antoine. 1694 [1671. An entire body of philosophy, according to the principles of the famous Renate Des Cartes, in three books. Translated by Richard Blome. London: Samuel Roycroft.Google Scholar
  54. Lobis, Seth. 2011. Sir Kenelm Digby and the power of sympathy. Huntington Library Quarterly 74: 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lovejoy, Arthur O. 1948 [1936]. The great chain of being: A study of the history of an idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Maclean, Ian. 2005. Heterodoxy in natural philosophy and medicine: Pietro Pomponazzi, Guglielmo Gratarolo, Girolamo Cardano. In Heterodoxy in early modern science and religion, ed. John Hedley Brooke and Ian Maclean, 1–30. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Martinich, A.P. 1999. Hobbes: A biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Massa, Daniel. 1977. Giordano Bruno’s ideas in seventeenth-century England. Journal of the History of Ideas 38: 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. McColley, Grant. 1939. Nicholas Hill and the Philosophia epicurea. Annals of Science 4: 390–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Millen, Ron. 1985. The manifestation of occult qualities in the scientific revolution. In Religion, science, and worldview: Essays in honor of Richard S. Westfall, ed. Margaret J. Osler and Paul Lawrence Farber, 185–216. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. More, Henry. 1646. Democritus Platonissans: Or, an essay upon the infinity of worlds out of Platonick principles. Cambridge: printed by Roger Daniel.Google Scholar
  62. Nicolson, Marjorie Hope. 1948. Voyages to the moon. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  63. Osler, Margaret J. 2001. Whose ends? Teleology in early modern natural philosophy. Osiris 16: 151–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Poole, William. 2005. The origins of Francis Godwin’s The man in the moone (1638). Philological Quarterly 84: 189–210.Google Scholar
  65. Principe, Lawrence M. 2013. Sir Kenelm Digby and his alchemical circle in 1650s Paris: Newly discovered manuscripts. Ambix 60: 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Renaudot, Théophraste. 1655. Recueil general des questions traittées és conferences du Bureau d’adresse és années 1633. 34. 35. jusques à present, sur toutes sortes de matieres, par les plus beaux esprits de ce temps. Tome Second. Paris: Guillaume Loyson.Google Scholar
  67. Roberts, Adam. 2006. The history of science fiction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Roger, Jacques. 1986. The mechanistic conception of life. In God and nature: Historical essays on the encounter between Christianity and science, ed. David C. Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers, 277–295. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  69. Romanowski, Sylvie. 1998. Cyrano de Bergerac’s epistemological bodies: “Pregnant with a thousand definitions.” Science Fiction Studies 25: 414–432.Google Scholar
  70. Roos, Anna Marie Eleanor. 2001. Luminaries in the natural world: The sun and the moon in England, 14001720. New York/Oxford: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  71. Rushworth, William, and Thomas White. 1654. Rushworth’s dialogues, or the judgement of common sence in the choice of religion. Corrected and inlarged by Thomas White Gentl. Paris: Jean Billaine.Google Scholar
  72. Rutkin, H. Darrel. 2006. Astrology. In The Cambridge history of science. Vol. 3, Early modern science, ed. Katharine Park and Lorraine Daston, 541–561. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schimank, Hans. 1967. Traits of ancient natural philosophy in Otto von Guericke’s world outlook. Organon 4: 27–37.Google Scholar
  74. Sherburne, Edward. 1675. The sphere of Marcus Manilius made an English poem: With annotations and an astronomical appendix. London: Nathaniel Brooke.Google Scholar
  75. Smith, Justin E.H., ed. 2006. The problem of animal generation in early modern philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Southgate, Beverley C. 1993. “Covetous of truth”: The life and work of Thomas White, 15931676; Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  77. Spink, Aaron. 2017. Cartesian method and experiment. PhD dissertation, University of South Florida.Google Scholar
  78. Thomas, Keith. 1971. Religion and the decline of magic: Studies in popular beliefs in sixteenth and seventeenth century England. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Google Scholar
  79. Thorndike, Lynn. 1923–1958. A history of magic and experimental science, 8 vols. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Trevor-Roper, H.R. 1989. Nicholas Hill the English atomist. In Catholics, Anglicans and puritans: Seventeenth-century essays, ed. H.R. Trevor-Roper, 1–39. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
  81. van Lansberge, Philippe. 1630. Commentationes in motum terrae diurnum, & annuum. Trans. Martinus Hortensius. Middleburg: Zacharias Roman.Google Scholar
  82. Vanini, Lucilio. 1616. De admirandis naturae reginae deaeque mortalium arcanis libri quatuor. Paris: Adrien Perier.Google Scholar
  83. Vermij, Rienk. 2002. The Calvinist Copernicans: The reception of the new astronomy in the Dutch Republic, 1575–1750. Chicago. London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  84. ———. 2016. Seventeenth-century Dutch natural philosophers on celestial influence. In Unifying heaven and earth: Essays in the history of early modern cosmology, ed. Miguel Á. Granada et al., 291–315. Barcelona: Edicions Universitat Barcelona.Google Scholar
  85. von Guericke, Otto. 1672. Experimenta nova (ut vocantur) Magdeburgica de vacuo spatio. Amsterdam: Johann Jansson.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. ———. 1994. The new (so-called) Magdeburg experiments of Otto von Guericke. Trans. Margaret Glover Foley Ames. Dordrecht/Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  87. White, Thomas. 1642. De mundo dialogi tres. Paris: Moreau.Google Scholar
  88. ———. 1654. A contemplation of heaven with an exercise of love, and a descant on the prayer in the garden. Paris: s.n.Google Scholar
  89. ———. 1656. Peripateticall institutions. In the way of that eminent person and excellent philosopher Sr. Kenelm Digby. The theoricall part. Also a theologicall appendix of the beginning of the world. London: R. D.Google Scholar
  90. Wilkins, John. 1638. The discovery of a world in the moone. London: Michael Sparke and Edward Forrest.Google Scholar
  91. Wittie, Robert. 1681. Ouranoskopia. Or, a survey of the heavens: A plain description of the admirable fabrick and motions of the heavenly bodies, as they are discovered to the eye by the telescope, and several eminent consequences illustrated thereby. London: J.M.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • James E. Christie
    • 1
  1. 1.SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations