Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Magi from the North: Instruments of Fire and Light in the Early Seventeenth Century

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Optics of Giambattista Della Porta (ca. 1535–1615): A Reassessment

Part of the book series: Archimedes ((ARIM,volume 44))

  • 274 Accesses

Abstract

The telescope emerged from a setting of natural magic, in the first place Della Porta’s writings on light and lenses. This paper aims a reconsidering the nature and meaning of the telescope as an optical instrument by taking this context seriously. It broadens the term ‘optics’ beyond the usual dioptrics, to a more general sense of controlling and manipulating light, sight and perception. In addition to historicizing the concept of optical instrument, it reflects upon the epistemic features of natural magic. Della Porta explained the properties of lenses in terms of the effects of artefacts on the images as they are perceived. This paper juxtaposes this ‘thinking with objects’ with practices of natural magic in the Low Countries. The central figure is Cornelis Drebbel, a resourceful inventor of optical instruments and in many ways comparable to Della Porta. In the course of this paper the reception of Della Porta in the Low Countries is also discussed. There was a prominent tradition natural magic in the North in which the work of Della Porta also found a modest place.

Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ γεννηθέντος ἐν Βηθλέεμ τῆς Ἰουδαίας ἐν ἡμέραις Ἡρῴδου τοῦ βασιλέως, ἰδοὺ μάγοι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν παρεγένοντο εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα (Matthew 2:1)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Ronchi 1954, 56 and 34. “They know nothing of perspective.”

  2. 2.

    Dijksterhuis 2004, 33–35.

  3. 3.

    Borrelli 2014. See also Dupré 2005, 2006.

  4. 4.

    Burggrav 1611.

  5. 5.

    Burggrav 1610.

  6. 6.

    Keller 2008, 111 footnote 271.

  7. 7.

    Burggrav 1611, 53–54. Transcription and translation Dijkstra 2012, 145. ‘Sed ecce tibi alterum huic concivem! Iacobus Metius est (frater Adriani Metij, Viri ob singularem in Scientijs Mathematicis praestantiam Clarissimi) qui Perspicillum invenit, quo turrim vel corpus aliud quodlibet tribus milliaribus Hollandicis dissitum, velut pede collato, & ad oculum dimetitur exactis simè, & Angliam è littore suo clarè prospicit, & alia de Lunaeglobo; de Galaxia; de Stellis, quas Nebulosas hactenus dixerunt Astronomi; de alijs circa Iovem erraticis prodit inaudita veterum aevo novitate. ‘Quam penè, τάς μηχανάς μετά τον πόλεμον mi Galilee, [Galileus Galileus Matheseos in illustri Patavina Professor] & perspicillum illud tuum cum Observationibus? Et Sidereus Nuncius tuus Callipides erat, nisi inter caesa & porrecta, quod aiunt, nescio quid additum fuisset operae homini Batavo, & adhuc imberbi, qui citiùs Instrumentum tale invenerit, quàm ejus à se reperti famam sparserit, adeo ut rumore de hoc divulgato, ad consimilis Organi inventionem te devenisse confitearis ipsemet, cujus beneficio Observationes εκ τών υπερβερεταίον illas prodidisti in Lunae facie; fixis innumeris; lacteo circulo; stellis nebulosis; & quatuor Planetis, eorundemque circa Iovem periodis. Age verò, dum alteram tibi muralem cedimùs, ne Isthmum Sinapi bibas.’

  8. 8.

    Zuidervaart 2010, 15–16.

  9. 9.

    Dijkstra 2012, 142–143.

  10. 10.

    Dijkstra 2012, 89–95.

  11. 11.

    Dijkstra 2012, 146.

  12. 12.

    Dijkstra 2012, 152.

  13. 13.

    Keller 2008, 153–154; 390–392; Keller 2010, 51–52.

  14. 14.

    Usually regarded as having been the first university chair in alchemy – although this is a rather presentist term. See for example Salloch 2006, 31–39.

  15. 15.

    Dijksterhuis 2004, 42–46. See also: McKeon 1986; Winkler & Van Helden 1993.

  16. 16.

    Reeves 2008.

  17. 17.

    Zuidervaart 2010, 11 footnote 11. ‘seekere conste … daer mede men seer verre alle dingen can sien al oft die naer bij waeren bij middel van gesichten van glasen, …’

  18. 18.

    Worp 1897, 119–120. ‘Ab eiusdem non manu solâ sed prodigioso ingenio est perspicillum, ut sic dicam, statarium duobus vitris instructum, quorum convexum utrumque, alterum, quod inferius et obiecto proximum est, amplitudine auricularis digiti medium unguem vix adaequat. Hoc mirabili tubulo, ut nihil omni vitâ aliud praestitisset, nominis immortalitatem Drebbelius non dubie promeruit. Corpora nempe, quorum inter atomos hactenus aestimatio fuit, omnem humanam aciem longe fugientia, inspectanti oculo tam distincte obiecit, ut, cum maxime vident imperiti, quae nunquam videre, nihil se videre questi primo, mox incredibilia oculis usurpare clamitent.’ My translation is based on the Dutch translation in Huygens 1987.

  19. 19.

    Constantijn phrases it quite general, but Peiresc around the same time literally viewed cheesemites through it, see below.

  20. 20.

    Worp, 1897, 120. ‘Revera enim istud novo in theatro naturae, alio in terrarum orbe versari est et, si Geinio patri diuturnior vitae usus obtigisset, aggressurum fuisse credo, quo impellere hominem non invitum coeperam, minutissima quaeque rerum et insectorum delicatiore penicillo exprimere compilatisque in libellum, cuius aeri exemplaria incidi potuissent, Novi Orbis vocabulum imponere.’

  21. 21.

    Worp 1897, 120. ‘Infinitam Creatoris Dei sapientiam ac potentiam venerari nullâ re magis adigamur, quam si, satiati obviis cuique hactenus naturae miraculis, quorum, ut fit, frequenti usu ac familiaritate stupor intepuit, in alterum hunc naturae thesaurum immissi, in minimis quibusque ac despectissimis eandem opificis industriam, parem ubique et ineffabilem maiestatem offendamus.’ Huygens added in the margin a citation from Aristotle, De partibus animalium 1, 5.

  22. 22.

    Worp 1897, 120–121.

  23. 23.

    Worp 1897, 121. ‘Cum Drebbelio frequenter, quoties Londini essem, ad me visente, memini hac de re praestantissimos sermones fuisse, …’

  24. 24.

    Huygens 1911, 76 (letter 120, January 1622). ‘J’ay parlé van de brillen mesmes avec Drebbel; il se rit de quoy on s’imagine qu’en Angleterre se fassent les meilleures, …’

  25. 25.

    Worp 1897, 112. ‘Veterum, quae dixi, inanium notionum, theorematum, axiomatum censores praestantissimos duos aetate meâ suspexi, Franciscum Baconium, Angliae non ita pridem cancellarium, et disparis loci, non ingenii, Cornelium Drebbelium Batavum.’

  26. 26.

    Worp 1897, 116. ‘De Drebbelio, quem cum Baconio copulavi, parcior sermo exit; apposita nempe hac soil luna in physicam praecipue attendebam, qua hunc de plebe Batavum borealem, Alcmariae civem, minim in modem valuisse oculatus testis assero, multa familiaritate hominem perspeetum habens eidemque perspectus.’

  27. 27.

    Worp 1897, 116. ‘Cavillati aliqui cum Jacobo Rege sunt, vix operae quicquam edidisse perpetuum inventorem, cuius utilitate impensa rependeretur’.

  28. 28.

    Jorink, 2010, 181–184.

  29. 29.

    Borel 1655, 36. This, however, is not an entirely reliable source as it is also contained the infamous but persistent claim that Sacharias Jansen had invented the telescope. Boreel was also in London in 1622.

  30. 30.

    Huygens 1911, 91 (letter 141, March 1622). “La lunette de Drebbel en a mangé quarante”.

  31. 31.

    Peiresc. Ruestow 1996 7–11.

  32. 32.

    Humbert 1951 has made a full transcription. He says that the manuscript is in Peiresc’s hand. Jaeger 1922, 133–135 made a full transcription but did not publish the observations.

  33. 33.

    Beeckman 1939–1953, 439–442 (appendix II). Jaeger denies this similarity but gives no further arguments. Jaeger 1922, 134 footnote 1.

  34. 34.

    Borel introduced the claim that Sacharias Jansen invented the telescope and the microscope (Borel 1655). Within a few decades Christiaan Huygens had refuted the claim (see below); Zuidervaart 2010 shows how it persisted until the present day. Ruestow 1996, 7 repeats the claim that Drebbel obtained one from Jansen. Harting in his historical exposition also denied Drebbel’s authorship: Harting 1850, 24–28.

  35. 35.

    Beeckman 1939–1953, 440.

  36. 36.

    Letter to IJsbrandt van Rietwijck in Alkmaar, around 1608–1609. Transcription Jaeger 1922, 110. ‘UE. heeft mij voor desen geswegen ‘t verre sien gevonden bij den zoon van Mr. Adriaen Thonissen. lck bidde laat mij weten wat daerin gedaen heeft. lck hebbe oock vele excellente dingen daerin gevonden, soo ongelooflijke schijnen ende als tooverij geestimeert werden, waervan UE. hier een weinich wil gedencken.’ The ‘son’ is often mistaken for Adriaan, including Keller 2008, 124; but in 390 footnote 397 Jacob is referred.

  37. 37.

    Jaeger 1922, 111 calls the instrument in the 1609 letter a magic lantern or camera lucida but this interpretation is very problematic for several reasons: the description is evidently camera obscura like and no ‘slides’ are projected on an outer screen; it is chronologically implausible.

  38. 38.

    Worp 1897, 119. ‘…; levis operae instrumentum, quo quae foris obiiciuntur, sole valido illustrata, in cubiculum exquisite occlusum speciem sui intromittunt. Aperto tenui foramine maiores utebantur; primum Drebbelium applicasse fenestellam vitream orbicularem creditum fuit, sed et hanc superiorum industriae debet, nisi nescium veteris inventi dicas per se, quasi iam recentis, autorem extitisse, quod accidere non raro sciunt, qui, quo candore decet, omnium saeculorum laudes ex aequo librant. Illud constat, candidae tabellae cum pariete παραλληλισμόν, motum item et accessum et recessum et in omnem plagam facilem obversionem solius Drebbelii esse; perfectâ nunc iucundissimi longe atque utilissimi spectaculi machinâ, si, quas decussatis specierum radiis inversas imagines dat, erigat tandem Drebbelius meus et contractum diu nomen aliquando solvat.’

  39. 39.

    Worp 1897, 83–84.

  40. 40.

    Keller 2008, 39–40.

  41. 41.

    Humbert 1955, 155. ‘de multiplier la lumière d’une estoille en sorte qu’elle puisse faire lisre une lettre de nuict’

  42. 42.

    Jaeger 1922, 132.

  43. 43.

    Drebbel 1621 (in particular the first three chapters; see also Keller’s translation, Keller 2008, 508–524); Keller 2008, 44–46; 377–388.

  44. 44.

    Drebbel described these as early as 1613: Jaeger 1922, 100–101; 110; 125–126.

  45. 45.

    Keller 2010, 41–43.

  46. 46.

    Worp 1897, 116–117.

  47. 47.

    Borrelli 2008; Keller 2013.

  48. 48.

    Drebbel 1607, n.p. laudatory epistle: ‘Maer desen Alckmaersche Philosooph can ‘t selfde niet alleen met reden / maer oock met levendige lnstrumenten bewijsen.’ Compare the translation in Keller 2008, 499.

  49. 49.

    Drebbel 1607, n.p.: ‘also oock maeck allerley Instrumenten / die eeuwelijck spelen op haer tijdt/ en in summa wat voor een tijdt ghemaeckt kan werden / door dalent gewicht / of door springh-veeren / door loopende wateren / door wint / oft door vier / dat kan ghemaeckt worden door dese kennis voor eeuwelijck’. Compare the translation in Keller 2008, 502.

  50. 50.

    Keller 2008, 166

  51. 51.

    Bertoloni Meli, 2006, 1–17. Borrelli 2014, 41–46.

  52. 52.

    For a detailed discussion of Drebbel’s natural philosophy, as well as his ambitions and influence as natural philosopher, see Keller 2008.

  53. 53.

    Borrelli 2008, 78–85.

  54. 54.

    The Herborn scholar Alstedt adopted his ideas and the Kufflers became prominent members of the Hartlib circles in Northern Europe. Keller 2008, 429–461; Young, 2006.

  55. 55.

    Keller 2008, 214; 406.

  56. 56.

    Keller 2008, 391.

  57. 57.

    Keller 2008, 111 footnote 271.

  58. 58.

    Tierie 1932, 31–36; see also Jaeger 1921 and Keller 2008.

  59. 59.

    Borrelli 2008, 111–113 cites a description of the experiment as a mathematical marvel and Drebbel as a smart mathematician.

  60. 60.

    Keller 2013, 244–245.

  61. 61.

    Schneider 1998, 1–26; Keller 2008, 214; 325.

  62. 62.

    Stevin 1608, 9–16 (in ‘Bepaling 6’ of ‘Vant Eertclootschrift’ in ‘Vant Weereltschrift’).

  63. 63.

    Keller 2008, 25 footnote 78. Stevin hardly figures in Keller’s account, instead she presents Coornhert as a possible model.

  64. 64.

    Keller 2008, 135.

  65. 65.

    Drebbel 1607, n.p.: laudatory epistle by Gerrit van Schagen.

  66. 66.

    In Franeker the chymistry of Burgrav and Hartmann seems to have faded somewhat in the background after the 1620s. Adriaan Metius appears to have lost part of his interest after the death of Sternsee (and the disappearance of a substantial part of his funds). This is at least the suggestion that his funeral orator Winsemius makes: alchemy had temporary fascination of Metius. Winsemius, by the way, resided in the Franeker castle but took no interest in the chymical laboratory of its previous owner. The further history of chymistry in the Low Countries need not occupy us here, but is well worth being told – including the vital uses of light.

  67. 67.

    For an overview see Gemert, 2008.

  68. 68.

    Beeckman 1939–1953, I, 346; II, 25; 44; 122. His father kept him up to date on developments and the book may also have been among their Middelburg circles: Berkel 2013, 30–31; 49–51. See also Keller 2008, 58. 1607.

  69. 69.

    Beeckman 1939–1953, III, 302.

  70. 70.

    Beeckman 1939–1953, II, 34–35.

  71. 71.

    Dijksterhuis 2016.

  72. 72.

    Dijksterhuis 2010.

  73. 73.

    Huygens 1911, 94 (Letter 143, to his parents April 1622).

  74. 74.

    Dijksterhuis 2011, 100–103; Dijksterhuis 2007, 65–67.

  75. 75.

    Dijksterhuis 2004, 53–63; 214–216.

  76. 76.

    Huygens 1888–1950, IV, 102 (letter 1001; to his brother Lodewijk, 5 April 1662). ‘Voila encore une autre commission que mon Pere me donne, de luy ajuster une lanterne avec 2 ou 3 diverses peintures dont elle face la representation.’

  77. 77.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XXII, 196–197; 521–523.

  78. 78.

    The phantasmagorical projecting of colors and objects on a screen by Drebbel is interesting. It suggests a continuity from Drebbel to Christiaan Huygens, Walgenstein and Kircher. The editors of the Oeuvres Complètes de Christiaan Huygens refer to Constantijn’s interest but do not discuss it further: Huygens 1888–1950, XXII, 521–523. Wagenaar’s substantive history of the camera from 1979 does not mention it; Hankins 1995 (chapter 2: ‘The Magic Lantern and the Art of Demonstration’) 43–48 mentions it but does not pursue the suggestion. Neither does Steadman, who apparently has not inspected the details of Constantijn’s description; his suggestion that the camera depicted by Kircher is akin to Drebbel’s is significant. Steadman 2001, 17–19. Keller merely mentions the camera, without considering the details of the set-up. Keller 2008, 233 footnote 540; 471 calling it magic lantern; on p. 471 explicitly. Keller 2008, 21 footnote 64 raises the question whether it was an arrangement of mirrors rather than a lantern, but does not elaborate on it.

  79. 79.

    Huygens 1888–1950, IV, 109–110 (letter 1004; to his brother Lodewijk, 12 April 1662).

  80. 80.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XIX, 553; 575–581; 591–603.

  81. 81.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XIII, 437; 588–590; 740–750.

  82. 82.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XIII, 826–844.

  83. 83.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XIII, 436–437; 591–593.

  84. 84.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XIII, 436–437.

  85. 85.

    Huygens 1888–1950, XIII, 738–741. ‘B. Porta est le premier qui a commencè’. Huygens added that reading of Della Porta may have assisted the Dutch achievement: ‘Progres en Hollande peut estre par la lecture de Porta.’ On the dating of these manuscript notes see Dijksterhuis 2004, 92 and 140.

References

  • Beeckman, Isaac. 1939–1953. Journal tenu par Isaac Beeckman de 1604 à 1634, ed. C. de Waard. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkel, Klaas van. 2013. Isaac Beeckman on matter and motion: Mechanical philosophy in the making. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertoloni Meli, Domenico. 2006. Thinking with objects: The transformation of mechanics in the seventeenth century. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borel, Pierre. 1655. De vero telescopii inventore. cum brevi omnium conspiciliorum historia; ubi de eorum confectione, ac usu, seu de effectibus agitur, novaque quaedam circa ea proponuntur, accessit etiam centuria observationum microcospicarum. The Hague: Adriaan Vlacq.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrelli, Arianna. 2008. The weatherglass and its observers in the early seventeenth century. In Philosophies of technology: Francis Bacon and its contemporaries (Intersections 11/1), ed. Claus Zittel, Gisela Engel, Nicole C. Karafyllis and Romano Nanni, 67–130. Leiden: Brill

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Thinking with optical objects: glass spheres, lenses and refraction in Giovan Battista Della Porta’s optical writings. Journal of Early Modern Studies 3: 39–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burggrav, Johann Ernst. 1610. Lampas Vitae et Mortis omniumque graviorum in Homine pathoon. Leiden: Hendrik Haestens.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1611. Biolychnivm seu Lvcerna : Cum vita ejus, cui accensa est MysticeÌ, vivens jugiter, cum morte ejusdem expirans, omnesq[ue] affectus graviores prodens. Franeker: Uldricus Balck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijksterhuis, Fokko Jan. 2004. Lenses and waves. Christiaan Huygens and the mathematical science of optics in the seventeenth century. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Constructive thinking. A case for dioptrics. In The mindful hand: Inquiry and invention from the late Renaissance to early industrialisation, ed. Lissa Roberts et al., 59–82. Amsterdam: Edita.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Labour on lenses. Isaac Beeckman’s notes on lens making. In The origins of the telescope, ed. Albert van Helden, Sven Dupré, Rob van Gent, and Huib Zuidervaart, 257–270. Amsterdam: KNAW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Moving around the Ellipse. Conic sections in Leiden, 1620–1660. In Silent messengers: The circulation of material objects of knowledge in the early modern low countries, ed. Sven Dupré and Christoph Lüthy, 89–124. Berlin: Lit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijksterhuis, Fokko Jan. 2016. Varieties of theories in the color worlds of the early seventeenth century. In Early modern color worlds, ed. Tawrin Baker, Sven Dupré, Sachiko Kusukawa, and Karin Leonhard, 227–247. Leiden: Brill.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, Arjen. 2012. Between Academics and Idiots. A Cultural History of Mathematics In The Dutch Province Of Friesland (1600–1700). Dissertation University of Twente

    Google Scholar 

  • Drebbel, Cornelis. 1607. Wonder-Vondt van de Eeuwighe Bewegingh. Alkmaar: Jacob de Meester.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1621. Een Kort Tractaet van de Natuere Der Elementen. Haarlem: Vincent Casteleyn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupré, Sven. 2005. Ausonio’s mirrors and Galileo’s lenses: The telescope and sixteenth-century practical optical knowledge. Galilaeana: Journal of Galilean Studies 2: 145–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Visualization in Renaissance optics: The function of geometrical diagrams and pictures in the transmission of practical knowledge. In Transmitting knowledge: Words, images and instruments in early modern europe, ed. Sachiko Kusukawa and Ian Maclean, 11–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gemert, Guillaume van. 2008. Giovan Battista Della Porta in den Niederlanden. Ansätze zu einer Rezeptionsgeschichte. Morgen-Glantz 18: 29–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hankins, Thomas, and Robert Silverman. 1995. Instruments and the imagination. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harting, Pieter. 1850. Het Mikroskoop, deszelfs gebruik, geschiedenis en tegenwoordige toestand. Utrecht: Van Paddenburg & Comp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humbert, Pierre. 1951. Peiresc et le Microscope. Revue d’histoire des sciences et de leurs applications 4–2: 154–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huygens, Christiaan. 1888–1950. Oeuvres complètes de Christiaan Huygens. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huygens, Constantijn. 1911. In Briefwisseling. Deel 1: 1608–1634, ed. J.A. Worp. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987. Mijn jeugd (trans., ed. C.L. Heesakkers). Amsterdam: Querido.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, F.M. 1922. Cornelis Drebbel en zijne tijdgenooten. Groningen: Noordhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorink, Eric. 2010. Reading the book of nature in the Dutch golden age, 1575–1715. Leiden: Brill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Vera. 2008. Cornelis Drebbel (1572–1633): Fame and the making of modernity. Dissertation Princeton University.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Drebbel’s living instruments, Hartmann’s Microcosm, and Libavius’s Thelesmos: Epistemic machines before Descartes. History of Science 48-1: 39–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Re-entangling the Thermometer: Cornelis Drebbel’s description of his self- regulating oven, the regiment of fire, and the early history of temperature. Nuncius 28: 243–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeon, Robert M. 1986. Le renouvellement de l’astronomie de précision de Tycho Brahe a Jean Picard. In Picard et les debuts de l’astronomie de précision au XVIIe siècle, ed. Guy Picolet, 119–131. Paris: CNRS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, Eileen. 2008. Galileo’s glassworks. The telescope and the mirror. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ronchi, Vasco. 1954. Du ‘De Refractione’ au ‘De Telescopio’ de G.B. Della Porta. Revue d’Histoire des Sciences 7: 34–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruestow, Edward. 1996. The microscope and the Dutch Republic. The shaping of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salloch, Sabine. 2006. Das hessische Medizinalwesen unter den Landgrafen Wilhelm IV. und Moritz dem Gelehrten. Rolle und Wirken der fürstlichen Leibärzte. Dissertation Philipps-Universität Marburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, Ivo. 1998. Johannes Faulhaber 1580–1635. Rechenmeister in einer Welt des Umbruchs. Basel: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, Philip. 2001. Vermeer’s camera: Uncovering the truth behind the masterpieces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevin, Simon. 1608. Wisconstige Gedachtenissen, vol. 1. Leiden: Jan Bouwensz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierie, Gerrit. 1932. Cornelis Drebbel (1572–1633). Paris: Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar, Willem. 1979. The true inventor of the magic lantern: Kircher, Walgenstein or Huygens? Janus: archives internationales pour l’histoire de la médecine et pour la géographie médicale 66: 193–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, Mary G., and Albert Van Helden. 1993. Johannes Hevelius and the visual language of astronomy. In Renaissance and revolution: Humanists, scholars, craftsmen and natural philosophers in early modern Europe, ed. J.V. Field and Frank A.J.L. James, 97–116. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worp, Jacob Adolf. 1897. Fragment eener autobiographie van Constantijn Huygens. Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 18: 1–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, John T. 2006. Faith, medical alchemy, and natural philosophy: Johann Moriaen, Reformed intelligencer, and the Hartlib circle. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuidervaart, Huib. 2010. The ‘true inventor’ of the telescope. A survey of 400 years of debate. In The origins of the telescope, ed. Albert van Helden, Sven Dupré, Rob van Gent, and Huib Zuidervaart, 9–44. Amsterdam: KNAW Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands

    Fokko Jan Dijksterhuis

Authors
  1. Fokko Jan Dijksterhuis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fokko Jan Dijksterhuis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. History of Science, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Arianna Borrelli

  2. Department of Philosophy, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Giora Hon

  3. Department of Philosophy, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Yaakov Zik

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dijksterhuis, F.J. (2017). Magi from the North: Instruments of Fire and Light in the Early Seventeenth Century. In: Borrelli, A., Hon, G., Zik, Y. (eds) The Optics of Giambattista Della Porta (ca. 1535–1615): A Reassessment. Archimedes, vol 44. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50215-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50215-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50214-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50215-1

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation