Simon Marius as a Calendar Writer

Matthäus, Klaus

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-92621-6_10

Klaus Matthäus¹⁴

Part of the book series: Historical & Cultural Astronomy ((HCA))

307 Accesses

Abstract

The reason for printing yearly calendars, the type of which we are still using today, was to provide a sound health guide. Printed annual calendars were intended primarily to provide dependable information on when, on which days, and on where, on which body part, bloodletting might most conveniently be performed. Since antiquity bleeding had been one of the most common treatments for health care and hygiene, the practice continued through the Middle Ages and into the nineteenth century. Correct application had to take the position of the moon into consideration in accordance with the instructions of astrologia medica, iatromathematics. Favorable days for phlebotomy were first to be found in a so-called Lasstafeln (bloodletting tables), also called an almanac (Fig. 10.1).

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)

eBook: USD 109.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 139.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
For the following explanations, see Matthäus (1969), col. 981–1006.
2.
The resourceful printer was probably Hans Guldenmund in Nuremberg. See footnote 6.
3.
Kein Buch unter der Sonnen ist, dessen soviel Exemplaria verkaufft und alle Jahre wieder erneuert werden, als eben die Calendaria und Prognostica eines beschreyeten Astrologi. Kepler (2004), p. 45.
4.
See Matthäus (1969), col. 1007–1069 and Matthäus (2010).
5.
See Matthäus (1969), col. 1086.
6.
The calendars, like their single-sheet counterparts, bore the title “almanach.” Both were printed by Hans Guldenmund in Nuremberg. The masthead for 1545 lists Hans Guldenmund (the Elder) as the printer. For Guldenmund, see Reske (2007), p. 670 ff. The calendars/almanacs for the years 1544/1545 are both preserved in the Ratsschulblibliothek Zwickau.
7.
See Capp (1979), p. 379, for Seyfried, and also see Pültz (1973), p. 179 (B 318).
8.
Compare Matthäus (1969), col. 1087–1092, and also Dieter Kempkins’ chapter (Chap. 4).
9.
Matthäus (1969), col. 1087 and 1091 footnote 756.
10.
Compare Schuhmann (1980), pp. 101–118.
11.
The additional salary of 25 fl. can be viewed as a generous honorarium for the yearly dedicated calendars. Caesius did not call himself appointed astronomus, which by such a post would not normally be omitted. The title woodblocks of his calendars display a certain level of officialdom with the Brandenburger coat of arms. Karl Heinrich Lang noted 1811 (p. 354): “was the margrave’s personal astrologer.” The vita on p. 351 is however inaccurate.
12.
On Schulin compare Matthäus (1969), col. 1093–1096. Schulin also studied in Wittenberg. See also Heischmann (1974), col. 1684–1688 and 1833f. Schulin owned Marius’ Tabulae Directionum Novae (1599) as well as Kepler’s earlier text Prodromus Dissertationum cosmographicarum (1596). Compare Hamel (1998), p. 4f., no. 6.
13.
See Matthäus (1969), col. 1096–1099. Regarding Marius I was able to use the substantial preliminary efforts by Ernst Zinner (1942), whose intentions are now being resumed on the Marius-Portal, edited by Pierre Leich. For biographical notes on Simon Marius please consult the chapter by Hans Gaab (Chap. 3). I am very grateful to Hans Gaab for the many amicable conversations regarding Marius. I would also like to express my gratitude to Klaus-Dieter Herbst and Richard L. Kremer for their notes on astronomical matters. Richard Gugel assisted in translating passages from Latin.
14.
Marius (1599), title page
15.
See Lang (1811), p. 349, who noted to the curriculum for IV highest grade “the sudden break in the classical studies […] the complete disregard of mathematics and history.”
16.
Prog. 1607, sig. A2^r–v, Prog. 1619, sig. A3^r, [4.2].
17.
Marius (1596), sig. A4^v.
18.
Marius (1596), sig. A1^v, dedication (in verse) Ad ingeniosum juvenem Simonem Marium.
19.
Prog. 1602, sig. A4^r; [4.2], p. 101.
20.
Büttner (1813), pp. 70–82.
21.
Eyb (1984), p. 216f.
22.
Schumann (1980), pp. 105–124.
23.
Prog. 1601, dedication preface dated Heilsbronn June 29 1600.
24.
See Reske (2007), p. 711ff. In 1584 Lauer married one of the daughters of Michael Endter, bookseller.
25.
See Matthäus (1969), col. 1132ff. For Wagenmann, see Reske (2007), p. 700f.; for Lochner, see p. 698ff. Paul Böheim of Ansbach printed the Prognosticon auf 1613, probably due to the conflict with the Nuremberg printers (Reske 2007, p. 217ff.). The statement that he had been printing the Ansbach calendars by Marius since 1606 remains to be corrected.
26.
See Büttner (1813), p. 81f. Letter of recommendation to Tycho Brahe by the Margrave, 12 May 1601.
27.
See below, Sect. 2.2.1.
28.
Prog. 1602, Dedicatory preface to the margraves, dated 21st September 1601 without location.
29.
The calendar for the year 1604 has not survived.
30.
See Schuhmann (1980), pp. 127–142. Schuman writes that Marius ranked highly in the margrave favors.
31.
Margrave Christian moved his residence from Kulmbach to Bayreuth.
32.
Prog. auf 1606, dedication, dated 12 September 1605, Gunzenhausen (sig. 4^v).
33.
Compare the chapter by Gaab (Chap. 3).
34.
Prog. 1607. Dedication dated Ansbach July 17 1606 (sig. 4^v).The assumption that he must have become a successor to either Caesisus or Schulin cannot be sustained in this context. At least there is no contemporary statement affording proof. Likewise there is no historical statement naming Marius as a consulting astrologer to the margraves. According to a statement in Schumann (Annotation 30), this seems to have been the case with Margrave Joachim Ernst von Ansbach.
35.
See Volker Bialas, follow-up report, in Kepler 11,2 (1993), p. 448.
36.
Editions from 1608 onward were usually compiled 2 years in advance. The dedications were usually dated from the first half of the preceding year because the printing had to be finished for the autumn fairs. The years, 1626–1628, were compiled in 1623; the year 1629 was compiled in 1624. See Zinner (1942), p. 34. Perhaps Marius, already in poor health, wanted to provide for his family. The calendars for the years 1626–1629, published after his death, lack the usual dedicatory preamble. The dedication on the title page of the prognostica now cites Sophia, neé Countess of Solms-Laubach, widow of Margrave Joachim Ernst and her brother Count Friedrich of Solms who served as regents for Prince Friedrich, the heir.
37.
See Diefenbacher for a list for 1603–1611, Fischer-Pache (2003), p. 437f.
38.
Compare Matthäus (1969), col. 1099–1102.
39.
See Bialas for follow-up report in Kepler 11,2 (1993), p. 448 (calendar and prognostica for 1599). The print run for 1618 was about 800 copies. See Caspar (1968), p. 63. Polymath Leonhardt Thurneysser (1513–1596), who also acted as a calendar maker; the number of copies is cited at around 2000, without further evidence. As he occasionally published two calendars simultaneously, further evidence will be forthcoming once his correspondence, of more than 4000 letters, has been evaluated. See Herbst (1750), Biographical Handbook (I am indebted to Klaus-Dieter Herbst for this information).
40.
See Koppitz (2008), p. 312, no. 58.
41.
See Matthäus (1969), col. 1175–1178.
42.
This copy is missing its title page. This edition—the single surviving copy of its kind—was apparently intended for distribution in the Austrian counties. The second half of the calendar, starting with the month of July, however, was compiled by Caesius’s pupil, Georg Halbmeyer (see Matthäus 1969, col. 1099–1102).
43.
The central position is held by Ptolemy, flanked by Timocharis (c. 320–260 bc) and Callippus (fourth century bc). To the left are portraits of Menton and Almeon, meant are obviously the Greek astronomer Meton (fifth century bc) and the Arabic astronomer Almansur (eighth century). To the right stand Hipparch (c. 190–125 bc) and presumably Eratosthenes (thirrd century bc). Below are the Greek mathematicians Pythagoras and Euclid, the Arabic astronomers Messahala (ca. 800 ad), and Albategnius (around 900 ad) as well as later astronomers like King Alfonso X. (1221–1284) and Georg von Peuerbach (1423–1461). Bringing up the rear is Archimedes, in the center, bottom row.
44.
By the gods of the planets, the sun god Apollo is placed in the center, with his corresponding star sign Leo. To is right are Venus, Mercury, and Luna and to the left Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn.
45.
On the upper left is the coat of arms of Prussia. Progressing clockwise is the coats of arms of the Margraves of Brandenburg and the Burggraves of Nuremberg and Rügen. The “Blutfann” (blood banner) signifies the Blutgerichtsbarkeit the highest penal authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Furthermore the coats of arms of Zollern, Jägerndorf, Silesia, Pomerania, Stettin, Wenden, and Cassuben.
46.
Matthäus (1969), n. 1168–1175. The portal first appears on a calendar by David Herlicius (1557–1636) for 1613. It is signed by the Nuremberg artist Johann Hauer (1586–1660). Similarly, a title copperplate designed by Hauer: Caspar Uttenhofer: Pes mechanicus. Nuremberg, 1615. See Matthäus (1969), n. 1172, and note 1260 for Hauer; see Grieb 2 (2007), p. 588.
47.
Marius here uses explicitly the term Almanach for the Kalendarium, as it was already common practice in the bloodletting tables.
48.
Krentzheim (1577), p. 1: “We set the creation of the world 3970 years before Christ our Saviour’s birth.” Krentzheim, who was born in Iphofen, was a clergyman in Liegnitz for many years; he lost his office as an alleged Calvinist, in 1593.
49.
Grafton (1993), p. 262: “Like most of his predecessors.” A later calendar writer, Johann Meyer (1607–1665), in his Quedlinburg writing calendar for 1644, notes a list with 24 different calculations (sig. A2^r—friendly note from Klaus-Dieter Herbst). However, Meyer confuses the dates Scaliger puts the creation of the world with the date he defined for the beginning of the Julian period. For Johann Meyer, see Herbst, Bibliobiographical Handbook.
50.
See Kepler (1606). Marius gives in the Prognosticon auf 1612 a detailed explanation for “diligent but privati Mathematici” (sig C6^v–C7^v); see furthermore, Bialas (2013), pp. 138–143: 4. Aspektenlehre.
51.
Cal. 1615, November.
52.
Compare footnote 42.
53.
Hieronymus Lauterbach first expanded his Neuen Historien und Schreibkalender for 1572 with a history column. Compare Matthäus 1969, col. 1192 footnote 1338.
54.
12.00 o’clock midday civil time calculation,corresponds to 0.00 o’clock astronomical time calculation. The column moon trajectory in the calendar also references midday.
55.
Cal. 1602, sig. B6^v, End.
56.
This could be the manuscript calendar, cited on the Marius-Portal (Brandenburgischer Historischer Calender im Concept beym Brandenburgischen Archiv), the full title cited by Zinner (1942), p. 27.
57.
Under the header Fragmentum. Ex Chronologie Astronomica Authoris(!) Magnoque ejus Prognostico de Periodo fatali Regni Turcici. Marius frequently used the prognostica to pose the question whether the constellations pointed toward the decline of Turkish power (see below, Sect. 2.2.2).
58.
See also Matthäus (1969), col. 1191–1195: The inclusion of histories in the writing calendars.
59.
Matthäus (1969), col. 1179–1185.
60.
Matthäus (1969), col. 1185–1191.
61.
Matthäus (1969), col. 1196–1198.
62.
Prince Christian was the leader of the Protestant Union of 1608 and became commander of the troops of Friedrich V. of the Palatine after he had been elected King of Bohemia.
63.
Marius uses both terms synonymously. The prognosticon was printed on plain paper, since it was not intended to be written on.
64.
For practica and prognostica, see Matthäus (1969), col. 1001–1006 and col. 1199–1234 also B. Bauer (1994), pp. 167–173: Die Normalform einer Jahresprognostik.—From the first Brandenburg calendar writer, Georg Seyfridt, no Praktik has survived.
65.
Prog. 1601, sig. A6^r–v.
66.
Brahe had issued a first private print run of letters, Uraniborg, 1596. A reprint was published in 1601 in Nuremberg. See. also: Kepler 14 (1949), pp. 16–21: Letter from Herwart von Hohenburg to Kepler 20 July 1599; here p. 20f.: Herwart refers to the type of calculation Brahe applied (Klaus-Dieter Herbst alerted me to this letter).
67.
See Prog. 1602, sig. D2^v: Marius stated the following year (1601) that Jöstels ‘restitution in motu lunae’ did not quite apply but had been corrected by Brahe and his staff. For Jöstels publication, see Zinner (1964), p. 320, no. 3817. In the Prognosticon auf 1603 (sig. D1^r), Marius again points to “neue restitutio curriculi Solaris & Lunaris,” helping him to correctly place the lunar eclipse of December14/24 1601 and proved by sighting in Padua. See Zinner (1942), p. 48; see Thoren (1972), Swerdlow (2004).
68.
Prog. 1607, sig. B4: “Ich bleibe bey der restitution Tychonis, dessen instrumenta ich nit allein gesehen, sondern selbst gebrauchet.” See also Prog. 1606, sig. A3^r: 1604 in Padua Marius had Instrumenta Astronomica constructed like those he had seen in Prague in 1601 “nach der Form und weiß […] wie ich sie anno 1601 zu Prag gesehen.”
69.
Prog. 1601, sig. A4^r. Prog. 1610, sig. E2^v: “der Edle und vere Magnus Astronomus Tycho Brahe, cuius celebre nomen merito cum mundo coaevum erit.”
70.
Marius had brought several of Brahe’s true distances for fixed stars with him to Italy “etlicher Fixstern veras distantias von Tychone auß Prag mit in Italiam gebracht” (Prog. 1618, sig. A2^v).
71.
Prog. 1605, sig. B1^r und D3^r–v and Supputatio D4^v–E1^r and Prog. 1606, sig. E1^r. However, Kremer (this volume) has found that Marius himself often relied on ephemerides.
72.
Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 93.—Marius owned a copy of the Progymnasmata; see Prog. 1621, sig. B3^r.
73.
Prog. 1612, sig. C4^v.
74.
Prog. 1619, sig. A4^r.
75.
Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 192 (Prognosticum auf 1620). Kepler obviously sees his calendar work in connection with the production of the Tabulae Rudolphinae. This demonstrates a special function, for writing calendars by especially qualified writers, which lasted well into the mid eighteenth century, See Herbst (2012), p. 17 for additional literature.
76.
Prog. 1616, sig. E3^v. They were based on the Tabulae Prutenicae of Erasmus Reinhold (1511–1553). Ephemerides were, as Kepler (11, 2 (1993), p. 192) puts it, the mother of the calendar. It has to be mentioned that Origanus calculated his calendars emphatically according to the latest discoveries in astronomy, i.e., incorporating the works of Brahe. (Writing calendar for 1604 Stadtarchiv Frankfurt (Oder)—friendly communication from Klaus-Dieter Herbst).
77.
Prog. 1611, sig. B2^r.
78.
Prog. 1616, sig. B1^r: “dessen ich denn billich ehrlich und danckbarlich wegen grosser auffgewendten Unkosten, mühe und arbeit gedencke.”
79.
Prog. 1612, sig. B1^v, B4^r and C4^v.
80.
Prog. 1607, sig. B1^r and Prog. 1608, sig. D4^v: “Die Practicanten oder Calenderschreiber werden diß 1608 Jahrs in beschreibung der Finsternußen nit allerding ubereintreffen” (because they only used the ephemerides of Everard or Origanus or Erasmus Reinhold’s Tabulae Prutenicae (1511–1553).
81.
Prog. 1605, sig. D3^v.
82.
Caesius’s prognostica in the hands of the theologians, who were carried by the conviction that the Day of Judgment was due, became more or less astrological penitential sermons.
83.
See Zinner (1942), p. 40.
84.
Prog. 1618, sig. A3.
85.
Prog. 1610, sig. E2^v.
86.
As formulated by Herbst (2010a), p. 45 (here in conjunction with the solar eclipse of 1654).
87.
This aspect of calendar writing has been emphatically pointed out by Klaus-Dieter Herbst. See Herbst (2009a). However, Kepler’s teacher Michael Mästlin (1550–1631) had reservations about making the discourse between scholars public in calendars. See Bialas in Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 449f.
88.
Herbst (2009a), pp. 199–204: Gelehrte Kommunikation bei Johannes Krabbe. For Krabbe, see Herbst, Biobibliographisches Handbuch.
89.
See Herbst (2010b); pp. 160–162 early examples of calendars as discussion forum with examples from Marius and Krabbe quoted here. See also Herbst (2008, 2009c), here pp. 116–122 examples from the 2nd half of the seventeenth century. For the first half of the seventeenth century, calendar makers Peter Crüger (1580–1639), David Frölich (1595–1648), and Lorenz Eichstädt (1596–1660) are named.
90.
Prog. 1608, sig. B4^r (ETH-Bibliothek Zürich: Rar. 1379: 2). The edition does not conform to the one quoted by Zinner (1942), pp. 53–55, held in the Staatsarchivs Nürnberg.
91.
Compare Zinner (1942), p. 34; Herbst (2009b), p. 538ff: 5. Simon Marius’ discovery in a calendar of 1612; Pellengahr (2012). In the preamble of the Prognosticon auf 1612, Marius reports his observations on the phases of Venus and in the one for 1613, he concluded that Mercury and Venus were orbiting the sun. See Leich (2012), p. 180, pp. 186–188.
92.
Prog. 1618, sig. A2^r. Compare also Gaab and Leich (2014).
93.
Prog. 1623, sig. A2^v: The distinguished “professor philosophiae” was probably Galilei. Galilei spoke of Marius in 1607 as “mio antico avversario, invido inimico non sol de me, ma di tutto ‘l genero umano” (Galileo 1607, p. 519).
94.
NDB 4 (1959), p. 731f. Kepler awarded Fabricius first rank among observing astronomers after Brahe’s death.
95.
Kepler was by all means a critical reader of Marius. He commented on the calendar (not surviving) of 1617 in his prognosticon (Kepler 11, 1 (1983), p. 21, 560).
96.
Prog. 1610, sig. C4^v.
97.
Prog. 1616, sig. C4^v.
98.
Prog. 1610, sig. C4^v and C6^r; Prog. 1612, sig. C7^r; Prog. 1616, sig. B3^v and C4^v; Prog. 1619, sig. B4^v.
99.
Fabricius corresponded with Marius about the reappearance in 1609 of the variable star in the constellation Cetus, which Fabricius had already observed in 1596; sig. B1: Marius on the discovery of the moons of Jupiter; see also Prog. 1616, sig. C2; Prog. 1618, sig. A2: reference to a letter from Fabricius as well as sig. A3; Prog. 1620, sig. B5.
100.
Kepler 17 (1955, Letters 1612–1620), p. 192, no. 746 und p. 481. The calendars and prognostica were published by Johann Lauer, Nuremberg and not, as previously, in Hamburg, a move surely orchestrated by Marius, Lauer’s son-in-law. Compare Matthäus (1969), colp. 1131.
101.
Prog. 1621, sig. C1. On the tragic death of Fabricius—he was bludgeoned to death by a member of the congregation—Marius noted: “Also pflegt Gott bißweilen solche Ingenia sampt jhren Inventis und laboribus der Welt widerumb zunehmen, dieweil sie von der Welt nicht geacht, sondern nur verlacht unnd veracht werden.” On the evaluation of Fabricius’s calculations see also: Prog. 1610, sig. C4^v; Prog. 1616, sig. C4^v; Prog. 1618, sig. A3^v; Prog. 1619, sig. B4^v; Prog. 1620, sig. B5^v; Prog. 1621, sig. C1^r.
102.
See chapter by Gaab (Chap. 3).
103.
Kepler 14 (1949), p. 131 (Letter to Herwart von Hohenburg 12th July 1600).
104.
Prog. 1610, sig. E2^v, compiled 1608. Kepler’s “optica” mentioned here: his Ad Vitellionem Paralipomena, quibus Astronomiae Pars Optica traditur. Frankfurt a.M. 1604). See also Prog. 1611, sig. B4^v: On Brahe’s und Kepler’s observations of Mars. He was waiting for Astronomia Nova, which was being printed in Heidelberg (1609); see also Prog. 1620, sig. B5^v.
105.
Prog. 1612, sig. C6^v–C7^v.
106.
Compare Kepler 4 (1941, Kleinere Schriften 1602/1611, Dioptrice), p. 353; Annotation p. 516. The estimation that Marius had shown himself to be pathologically sensitive did not appear again after Zinner’s essay in the letters edition from 1942.
107.
Kepler 17 (1955, Briefe 1612–1620), pp. 33–37, no. 604 (Kepler); pp. 72–74 (Marius). Marius pointed out that this had been a private letter not intended for a wider audience, at least in this form.
108.
Marius (1614), sig. B2^v and Prog. 1615, sig. C1^v.
109.
Prog. 1618, sig. A3^v; Prog. 1619, sig. B2^r; Prog. 1620, sig. B5^v.
110.
First in Marius 1619, sig. B2^v.
111.
Kepler, Calendaria (see Ann. 35), p. 198, 202 and 205 (Prognosticum f. 1620). Marius claimed that the moon was the light emitting in his Prognosticon auf 1620 (sig. C6^v). See also the remarks below.
112.
Prog. 1622, sig. A2^v–A3 ^v. Kepler regretted that inclement weather had prevented beautiful astronomical discourse about the latest solar eclipse. Letters do not survive.
113.
Prog. 1625, sig. C2^v; as well as Prog. 1626, sig. C1^v and D2^r.
114.
Prog. 1627, sig. B4^r and Prog. 1628, sig. A4^v.
115.
Prog. 1602, sig. A3 ^v.
116.
Marius was hoping for new ephemerides from either of them (Prog. 1613, sig. C1^r).
117.
The essay volumes listed on the Marius-Portal on prognostications regarding the war taken from the prognostications made by known calendar writers for the years 1627 and 1628 name the usual suspects. They roughly correspond to Ernst Zinner’s bibliography (1964).
118.
Compare Herbst, Biobibliographisches Handbuch, Entry: David Frölich.
119.
Prognosticon astrologo-physicum für 1634, sig. A2^v–A3^v, A4^v–B1^r. Copy in the Nationalbibliothek Széchényi Budapest, RMK III 1499. Frölich list all presently visible celestial phenomena. I owe the reference mentioning Marius to Ilona Pavercsik, Budapest.
120.
For Horky compare Matthäus (1969), col. 1146f.
121.
Matthäus (1969), col. 1155; for Marcus Freund see Herbst: Biobibliographisches Handbuch.
122.
Prog. 1607, sig. A3^v.
123.
Prog. 1615, sig. A2^r.
124.
Prog. 1605, sig. A3^v.
125.
Prog. 1607, sig. A3^v, A4^r.
126.
Prog. 1605, sig. A3^v.
127.
Prog. 1603, sig. A4 ^v and later repeatedly. Prog. 1612, sig. C5^r: He prognosticates “Astrologice doch Christlich wohlmeynent.”
128.
Prog. 1601, sig. B6^r. Marius hardly references the Arabic authorities. He quotes only Messhalla occasionly (Prog. 1620, sig. C7^r, Prog. 1621, sig. C5^r). When he refers to other astrologers “anderer Astrologen lehr,” no names are given (Prog. 1611, sig. A4^v). He admits there are good things to be found among the Arabian, Indian, and Chaldean authors (Prog. 1610, sig. A4^r).
129.
Prog. 1612, sig. C2^r. As he did not expect a lot of gratitude, he was inclined to postpone affairs. See also Prog. 1603, sig. D3^v: false Latin Version; and Prog. 1624, sig. E2^v (Cardanus also comments erroneously); Prog. 1625, sig. B2^v: Critical thoughts on the Greek Ptolemaic text.
130.
Prog. 1610, sig. A3^v.
131.
Statement by Christoph Meinel, Regensburg, on the state of the natural sciences in 17. Jahrhundert. In: Gaab (2011), p. 14.
132.
Prog. 1601, sig. A3^r.
133.
Prog. 1611, sig. E1^v.
134.
Die Origin of this ‘dictum’ is unknown. See Bauer (1994), p. 173, 179.
135.
Prog. 1602, sig. A2^r–v.
136.
Prog. 1607, sig. A4r and Prog. 1616, sig. E1^r: “will von einem in dieser Kunst unerfahrnen ungereformirt seyn.”
137.
Prog. 1620, sig. B4^r.
138.
Prog. 1602, sig. A2^v.
139.
Kepler 11, 2 (1993), pp. 103–113 (Prog. 1605, Dedication). Anhand der Witterung des vergangenen Jahres der versuchte Nachweis, “das die verenderung des gewitters gewißlichen sich von tag zu tag nach den aspecten und stationibus Planetarum richte” (On the basis of the actual weather of the previous year the attempt to establish that the change in the weather had day by day conscientiously complied with the aspects and the stations of the planets).
140.
Compare here also Bialas in Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 458.
141.
See: Herbst (2010a), pp. 214–232: Neues Material – Berichte zu Naturbeobachtungen (p. 215f. for Marius). Calendar writers worked quasi on a weather statistics on an astrological basis. Compare also Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 104 (Prog. 1605): Kepler gratefully registered that Caesius recounted his weather prognosis with the actual weather and pleaded with other practitioners to follow suit.
142.
Prog. 1607, sig. B4^r (Johann Stöffler, 1452–1531. His ephemerides were published from 1499 till 1551 in 13 editions).
143.
Prog. 1616, sig. C3^v.
144.
Prog. 1618, sig. A4^v; for Vogtherr see Vogtherr (1908), pp. 52–55.
145.
Prog. 1612, sig. B4^v.
146.
Prog. 1612, sig. B2^r. Kepler, too (1993), p. 104, 11,2), appreciated these weather observations (Prog. 1605).
147.
Prog. 1610, sig. A3^v.
148.
Prog. 1616, sig. E2^v.
149.
Prog. 1626, sig. C1^v. Here Marius refers to Keplers Discurs von der Grossen Conjunction […] uber dass 1623. Jahr. In: Kepler 11, 2 (1993), pp. 230–244.
150.
Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 157 (Prog. 1618). For Marius compare footnote 76.
151.
Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 158; Marius: Prog. 1611, sig. A4^v–B1^r; Prog. 1616, sig. E2^v–E3^r; Prog. 1621, sig. B3^r: “Non omnes tempestates simpliciter a stellis excitantur […].” From the Kepler’s prognostica he can gather that Kepler shares this opinion.
152.
Prog. 1628, sig. B4^r.
153.
Prog. 1606, sig. E2^v.
154.
Prog. 1602, sig. E2^r.
155.
Prog. 1620, sig. C3^r. The predictions for the wine harvest were noted. In the Prognosticon auf 1623, the announcement of a good vintage has been underlined by the reader (copy of the Staatsarchiv Nürnberg, sig. C3^r).
156.
Prog. 1606, sig. E1^r.
157.
Prog. 1601, sig. B3^r.
158.
Prog. 1602, sig. D2^r; a table with useful explanations was included (sig. D4^r–E1^v).
159.
B. Bauer (1994), p. 173. This “dictum” is not explicitly quoted by Marius, as with the one noted in footnote 134; it is however analogously always present.
160.
Prog. 1609, sig. D4^r (StAN 287).
161.
Prog. 1603, sig. D1^v.
162.
Prog. 1608, sig. D6^r.
163.
Prog. 1602, sig. D3^v, sig. A4^v: “[…] damit hohen ingenijs solchen sachen besser und eygentlicher nach zudencken, hab ursach geben wollen.” “[…] so that higher intelligences consider such things better and more realistically, wanting to give them a cause.”
164.
Prog. 1620, sig. B4^v–B5^r; In the Prognosticon auf 1621 (sig. C4^r) he gives the clue: “Wer wissen will, welche land und Personen ich hiermit meine, der schlag dz Täffelein der 12 Himlischen Häuser auff,” das den Prognostiken angehängte “Register der Städt” (Those who wish to know, which country and which people I mean here should open the table of the 12 celestial houses, and the register of the town appended to the Prognostica). See also: Prog. 1625, sig. A2^v: “meine einfältige und keineswegs ärgerliche oder ehrnrührige meinung […] meistentheils Parabolischer weiß angezeigt” (my simple and by no means annoying or dishonourable opinion […] mostly expressed parabolically).
165.
Prog. 1615, sig. A4^r [= B4^r]: He did not want (in published writings) to make predictions about (recognisable) persons, as this only brings great danger.
166.
Prog. 1619, sig. A4^v–B1^r.
167.
See footnote 34.
168.
Kepler 17 (1955), p. 376 (no. 850, from Linz 31.08.1619).
169.
Compare B. Bauer (1989), p. 103f., pp. 110–112.
170.
Kepler 11, 2 (1993), p. 198, 202 (Prognosticum auf 1620): It had never been his opinion, that “irdische Handlangen,” (earthly acts), statement about people “nach ihren Umbständen im Gestirn praedestinirt” (were predestined through celestial constellations). The preamble is dated November 10th 1619. He had had ample time to digest in depth Marius’ Prognostik for 1620.
171.
Prog. 1622, sig. B5^r. He had already explained in the Prognosticon auf 1615, he did not want “öffentlichen schrifften” (in public and in writing) to make predictions about (recognisable) persons, as this brought great dangers. (sig. A4^r [= B4^r]).
172.
Prog. 1622, sig. A3^r.
173.
Prog. 1622, sig. A4^r; Prog. 1623, sig. C4^r.
174.
Prog. 1624, sig. B1^v, D2^r.
175.
Prog. 1629, sig. B2^r.
176.
See Seethaler (2000), p. 244; Matthäus (1969), col. 1223–1225.
177.
Prog. 1610, sig. A3^v.
178.
Prog. 1616, sig. A4^v. Already more reserved in the Prognosticon auf 1611, sig. E2^r: “Darzu so lesset es jetzt etlich Jahr am gewitter und anderm ansehen, das entweder die frequentia stellarum novarum und Cometarum eine Jrrung in die Astrologiam machen, oder welches denn glaublicher, das Gott selbsten einmal zum Regiment recht greifft, und besihet wie alle und jede ständ bißhero haußgehalten haben.” (In addition now several years of storms and other let it appear that either the frequent new stars and comets cause an error in the astrology or with believers that God himself has really grasped command and inundates everything and everybody who has till now kept house.)
179.
Prog. 1620, sig. A3^v–A4^r.
180.
Names to be mentioned here are Peter Crüger (1580–1639), mathematicus of the city of Danzig, whose essays excerpted from his writing calendars were republished under the title Cupediae Astrosophicae Crügerianae (Breslau 1631). David Frölich (compare footnote 115) included profound essays on diverse topics to his prognostica. For Crüger compare also Kremer (2014).
181.
Prog. 1606, sig. A2^r.
182.
Prog. 1622, sig. A2^r–v.
183.
Prog. 1619, sig. A2^r–v. Das seien auch die Grenzen der von ihm auf Wunsch erstellten Nativitäten (limits of the nativities).
184.
Prog. 1621, sig. A2^r.
185.
Matthäus (1969), col. 1098 must accordingly be corrected. Marius wanted to treat the topic in a separate publication “weittleufftiger von der Dispostion der gantzen Natur […] handeln” (extensively according to disposition of the whole of nature). But ill health and the complexity of the material prevented him from addressing the subject satisfactorily (Prog. 1609, sig. A3^r).
186.
Prog. 1621, sig. A3^r.
187.
This discourse was probably initiated not least by Marius’ translation of Euclid, which the highest official of the Ansbach government, Johann Philipp Fuchs von Bimbach (ca. 1568–1626), had requested from him. Marius referred to Fuchs’s preface in his preamble for 1611 (sig. A3^r).
188.
Prog. 1616, Preamble.
189.
Prog. 1614, Preamble.
190.
In a brief justification, Marius refers to the Augsburg Confession but not to the Formula of Concord of 1577, to which the Ansbach scholars and clergy had to pledge. As an astrologer Marius probably had more affinity to Melanchthon than to Lutheran orthodoxy.
191.
Prog. 1622, sig. A3^r–v.
192.
Prog. 1603, Preamble, sig. A3^r–A4^v, sig. D3^v.
193.
Compare Bauer (1994), p. 183; Ernst (1986); Hamel (2012), pp. 396–398 (Konjunktion, große) and 641f. (Triangel, Trigon).
194.
Prog. 1612, sig. A2^v; Prog. 1620, sig. A3^v–A4^r.
195.
Prog. 1612, sig. A2^r.
196.
Prog. 1603, sig. A2^r–A4^v, here sig. A3^r–v.
197.
Prog. 1625, sig. A2^v.
198.
Prog. 1612, sig. A2^r.
199.
Prog. 1623, sig. A3^v; Prog. 1625, sig. A2^v–A3^r.
200.
Prog. 1609, sig. C4^r. Paracelsus in Chap. 8 of his book de rebus naturalibus.
201.
Prog. 1609, sig. C4^r: “Haec Theophrastus; quae de eversione ordinum & statuum politicorum scribit, mihi non probantur, anabaptisticum enim quoddam sapiunt; reliqua vero maxime.” Brahe at the end of part 1 of his Progymnasmata had also written extensively about such a great change. See Prog. 1612, sig. A2^v–A4^r.
202.
Prog. 1623, Preamble sig. A2^r–A4^r. This topic had already been announced in the prognostic for 1622 (sig. A3^r–v).
203.
Prog. 1628, sig. B4^v.
204.
Prog. 1611 sig. E1^v–E2^r: “[…] mein bißhero gethanes progosticirn, welches ich noch also als eine Astrologische mutmassung nicht aller dings will auffgehoben, sondern an seinem werth bleiben lassen.” – falls Gott anders entscheidet. (the predictions that I have made up till now, which I still want not as an astrological conjecture cancelled by the way but rather left standing on their merits).
205.
Prog. 1626, sig. D4^r. Prog. 1611, sig. E1^v–E2^r.
206.
Prog. 1629, sig. D3. Until 1612 Marius had ended his prognostica with verses from the Bible “Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.” (Jeremiah 10,2) “Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass.” (Psalm 37,5).
207.
Kepler (2004), p. 56ff.: VII. Der Fürwitz in Astrologia lehret und ernehret die Astronomiam. Marius did not want to throw out the baby with the bathwater either. Already in the Prog. 1611 (sig. A4^r) he likewise used this particular phrasing. He seems to have received a copy of the Tertius Interveniens, published in 1610, quite quickly.
208.
See Grössing (2005), p. 182.
209.
Graubard (1958), see also Herbst (2010a), pp. 140–144: Die Erosion des astrologischen Glaubens; Gaab (2011), pp. 339–341: Thesen zum Niedergang der Astrologie im 17. Jahrhundert.
210.
I have adopted the term “mood” from Kürnberger (1874), p. 339 “The belief in witchcraft did not submit to evidence, but to the mood. This would have to be the briefest formula.”

References

Bauer, Barbara (1994): Sprüche in Prognostiken des 16. Jahrhunderts. In: Haug, Walter and Wachinger, Burghart (eds.): Kleinstformen der Literatur (= Fortuna vitrea; 14). Tübingen: Niemeyer 1994, pp. 164–204
Google Scholar
Bauer, Barbara (1989): Die Rolle des Hofastrologen und Hofmathematicus als fürstlicher Berater. In: Buck, August (ed.): Höfischer Humanismus (= Mitteilung XVI der Kommission für Humanismusforschung). Weinheim: VCH, Acta Humaniora 1989, pp. 93–117
Google Scholar
Bialas, Volker (2013): Johannes Kepler, Astronom und Naturphilosoph (= Schriftenreihe Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik; 25). Linz: Trauner 2013
Google Scholar
Büttner, Heinrich-Christoph (1813): Aktenstücke den Simon Marius, seinen Aufenthalt zu Kloster Hailsbronn und seine Empfelung(!) an Tycho Brahe betr. In: Franconia. Beiträge zur Geschichte, Topographie und Litteratur von Franken. Vol. 2, Ansbach: Gassert 1813, pp. 70–82
Google Scholar
Capp, Bernard (1979): Astrology & Popular Press. English Almanacs 1500–1800. London: Faber & Faber 1979
Google Scholar
Caspar, Max (ed.) (1968): Bibliographia Kepleriana. 2. Edition produced by Martha List. München: Beck 1968
Google Scholar
Diefenbacher, Michael; Fischer-Pache, Wiltrud (eds.) (2003): Das Nürnberger Buchgewerbe. Buch- und Zeitungsdrucker, Verleger und Druckhändler vom 16. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert. Edited by Manfred H. Grieb. With a contribution by Peter Fleischmann. Compiled form archives by Lore Sporhan-Krempel and Theodor Wohnhaas (= Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte und Kultur der Stadt Nürnberg; 31). Nürnberg: Selbstverlag des Stadtarchivs Nürnberg 2003
Google Scholar
Ernst, Germana (1986): From the watery Trigon to the fiery Trigon: Celestial Signs, Prophecies and History. In: Zambelli, Paola (ed.): „Astrologi hallucinati“. Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time. Berlin: De Gruyter 1986, pp. 265–280
Google Scholar
Eyb, Eberhard Freiherr von (1984): Das reichsritterschaftliche Geschlecht der Freiherrn von Eyb (= Veröffentlichungen der Gesellschaft für Fränkische Geschichte; IX, 29). Neustadt a.d. Aisch: Degener 1984
Google Scholar
Gaab, Hans (2011): Der Altdorfer Mathematik- und Physikdozent Abdias Trew (1597–1669). Astronom, Astrologe, Kalendermacher und Theologe (= Acta Historica Astronomiae; 42). Frankfurt a. M.: Harri Deutsch 2011
Google Scholar
Gaab, Hans; Leich, Pierre (2014): Marius’ Replik auf Scheiner. Der Anhang zum Mundus Iovialis von Simon Marius. In: Globulus. Beiträge der Natur- und kulturwissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Ingolstadt; 18 (2014), pp. 11–14
Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo (1607): Difesa di Galileo Galilei […] contro alle callunnie & imposture di Baldessar Capra. Venedig 1607. In: Galilei, Galileo: Le Opere. Vol. II, Florenz: Barbèra 1891
Google Scholar
Grafton, Anthony (1993): Joseph Scaliger. A Study in the History of Classical Scholarship. Vol. 2: Historical Chronology. Oxford: Claredon Press 1993
Google Scholar
Graubard, Mark (1958): Astrology’s Demise and its Bearing on the Decline and Death of Beliefs. In: Osiris 13 (1958), pp. 210–261
Article Google Scholar
Grieb, Manfred (ed.) (2007): Nürnberger Künstlerlexikon. Bildende Künstler, Kunsthandwerker, Gelehrte, Sammler, Kulturschaffende und Mäzene vom 12. bis zur Mitte des 20. Jahrhunderts, 4 Vol. München: Saur 2007
Google Scholar
Grössing, Helmuth (2005): Gedanken zu Keplers Astrologie. In Miscellanea Kepleriana. Festschrift für Volker Bialas (= Algorismus; 47). Augsburg: Rauner 2005, pp. 175–182
Google Scholar
Hamel, Jürgen; Caspar, Max (eds.) (1998): Bibliographia Kepleriana. Supplementary Volume München: Beck 1998
Google Scholar
Hamel, Jürgen; Caspar, Max (eds.) (2012): Begriffe der Astrologie. Von Abendstern bis Zwillingsproblem. Frankfurt a.M.: Harri Deutsch 2012
Google Scholar
Heischmann, Günther (1974): Die Bibliotheken der Freien Reichsstadt Rothenburg ob der Tauber. Archiv für Geschichte des Buchwesens 14 (1974), col. 1589–1878
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2008): Das Neueste im Jahresrhythmus. Zur Professionalisierung des Kalenderwesens im 17. Jahrhundert. In: Blome, Astrid; Böning, Holger (eds.): Presse und Geschichte. Leistungen und Perspektiven der historischen Presseforschung (= Presse und Geschichte – Neue Beiträge; 36). Bremen: edition lumière 2008, pp. 97–124
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2009a): Die Jahreskalender – Ein Medium für gelehrte Kommunikation. In: Herbst, Klaus-Dieter; Kratochwil, Stefan (ed.): Kommunikation in der Frühen Neuzeit. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang 2009, pp. 189–223
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2009b): Galilei’s astronomical discoveries using the telescope and their evaluation found in a writing-calendar from 1611. In: Astronomical Notes/Astronomische Nachrichten 330 (2009), pp. 536–539
Article ADS Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2009c): Der Schreibkalender der Frühen Neuzeit – eine noch wenig genutzte Quelle für die Astronomiegeschichtsschreibung. In: Hamel, Jürgen (ed.): 400 Jahre Kepler, Galilei, das Fernrohr und die neue Astronomie (= Sitzungsberichte der Leibniz-Sozietät der Wissenschaften; 103). Berlin: Trafo-Verlag 2009, pp. 31–48
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2010a): Die Schreibkalender im Kontext der Frühaufklärung (= Acta Calendariographica – Forschungsberichte; 2). Jena: Verlag Historische Kalenderdrucke 2010
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2010b): Die erstmalige Benutzung von Keplers Rudolphinischen Tafeln für die Herstellung eines Schreibkalenders. In: Gaulke, Karsten; Hamel, Jürgen (eds.), Kepler, Galilei, das Fernrohr und die Folgen (= Acta Historica Astronomiae; 40). Frankfurt a. M.: Harri Deutsch 2010, pp. 160–169
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2012): Von Astronomie bis Volksaufklärung. Neue Forschungen und Perspektiven. In: Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (ed.): Astronomie – Literatur – Volksaufklärung. Der Schreibkalender der Frühen Neuzeit mit seinen Text- und Bildbeigaben. Bremen, Jena: Verlag Historische Kalenderdruck 2012, pp. 15–44
Google Scholar
Herbst, Klaus-Dieter: Biobibliographisches Handbuch der Kalendermacher von 1550 bis 1750. Noch im Erscheinen. Online einsehbar unter: http://www.presseforschung.uni-bremen.de/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=Startseite
Kepler, Johannes (1606): De Stella Nova In Pede Serpentarii, Et Qui Sub Ejus Exortum De Novo Iniit, Trigono Igneo: Libellus Astronomicis, Physicis, Metaphysicis, Meteorologicis & Astrologicis Disputationibus endoxois & paradoxois plenus. Accesserunt I. De Stella Incognita Cygni: Narratio Astronomica. II. De Jesv Christi Servatoris Vero Anno Natalitio, consideratio novissimae sententiae Lavrentii Svslygae Poloni, quatuor annos in usitata Epocha desiderantis. Prag: Sessius 1606
Google Scholar
Kepler, Johannes (1938–2009): Gesammelte Werke. 21 vol. München: Beck 1938–2009
Google Scholar
Kepler, Johannes (2004): Tertius Interveniens. Ed. by Jürgen Hamel (= Ostwalds Klassiker der Exakten Wissenschaften; 295). Frankfurt a. M.: Harri Deutsch 2004
Google Scholar
Koppitz, Hans Joachim (2008): Die kaiserlichen Druckprivilegien im Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv Wien (= Buchwissenschaftliche Beiträge aus dem Deutschen Bucharchiv München; 75). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2008
Google Scholar
Kremer, Richard L. (2014): Galileo in Danzig, as Portrayed in Peter Crüger’s Schreibcalender. In: Albrecht, Andrea; Cordibella, Giovanna; Remmert, Volker R. (ed.): Tintenfass und Teleskop. Galileo Galilei im Schnittpunkt wissenschaftlicher, literarischer und visueller Kulturen im europäischen 17. Jahrhundert (= Spectrum Literaturwissenschaft; 46). Berlin: De Gruyter 2014, pp. 101–124
Google Scholar
Krentzheim, Leonhard (1577): Chronologia, Das ist, Gründliche vnd Fleissige JahrRechnung / Sammpt verzeichnung der fürnemsten Geschichten / Verenderungen vnd Zufell / so sich beyde in Kirchen vnd WeltRegimenten zugetragen haben / zu jeder Zeit / Von anfang der Welt / biß auff vnsere, Teil 1. Görlitz: Ambrosius Fritsch 1577
Google Scholar
Kürnberger, Ferdinand (1874): Siegelringe. Eine ausgewählte Sammlung politischer und kirchlicher Feuilletons. Hamburg: Meißner 1874
Google Scholar
Lang, Karl Heinrich von [Ritter von Lang] (1811): Neuere Geschichte des Fürstenthums Baireuth. Band 3, welcher die Regierungszeit des Markgrafen Georg Friedrich von 1557 bis 1603 begreift. Göttingen: Schneider 1811
Google Scholar
Leich, Pierre (2012): Die Copernicanische Wende bei Galilei und Kepler und welche Rolle Marius dazu einnimmt. In: Wolfschmidt 2012, pp. 162–193
Google Scholar
Lerch, Andreas (2015): Scientia astrologiae. Der Diskurs über die Wissenschaftlichkeit der Astrologie und die lateinischen Lehrbücher 1470–1610 (= Acta Historica Astronomiae; 56). Leipzig: AVA – Akademische Verlagsanstalt 2015
Google Scholar
Marius, Simon (1596): Kurtze und eigentliche Beschreibung des Cometen oder Wundersterns / So sich in disem jetzt lauffenden Jar Christi unsers Heilands / 1596. in dem Monat Julio / bey den Füssen deß grossen Beerens / im Mitnächtischen Himmel hat sehen lassen. Nürnberg: Paul Kauffmann 1596
Google Scholar
Marius, Simon (1614): Mundus Iovialis. Nürnberg: Johann Lauer 1614
Google Scholar
Marius, Simon (1614/1916/2019): The World of Jupiter, translated by A.O. Prickard and Albert van Helden, in Simon Marius and his Research, Hans Gaab and Pierre Leich (eds.), Cham: Springer 2019
Google Scholar
Marius, Simon (1619): Astronomische vnd Astrologische beschreibung deß Cometen so im November vnd December vorigen 1618. Jahrs ist gesehen worden. Nürnberg: Lauer 1619
Google Scholar
Matthäus, Klaus (1969): Zur Geschichte des Nürnberger Kalenderwesens. Die Entwicklung der in Nürnberg gedruckten Jahreskalender in Buchform. In: Archiv für Geschichte des Buchwesens 9 (1969), col. 965–1396
Google Scholar
Matthäus, Klaus (2010): Die offiziellen Nürnberger Kalenderschreiber. In: Wolfschmidt, Gudrun (ed.): Astronomie in Nürnberg (= Nuncius Hamburgensis; 3). Hamburg: tredition 2010, pp. 184–195.
Google Scholar
NDB: Neue Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 1–25. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot 1953–2013
Google Scholar
Pellengahr, Hans-Georg (2012): Simon Marius – die Erforschung der Welt des Jupiter mit dem Perspicillum 1609–1614. In: Wolfschmidt 2012, pp. 72–141
Google Scholar
Pültz, Otto (1973): Die deutschen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen. Ed. by Armin Dietzel and Günther Bauer (= Katalog der Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen, Neubearbeitung, vol. 4). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 1973
Google Scholar
Reske, Christoph (2007): Die Buchdrucker des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts im deutschen Sprachgebiet (= Beiträge zum Buch- und Bibliothekswesen 51). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2007
Google Scholar
Schuhmann, Günther (1980): Die Markgrafen von Brandenburg-Ansbach. Eine Bilddokumentation zur Geschichte der Hohenzollern in Franken (= Jahrbuch des Historischen Vereins für Mittelfranken; 90). Ansbach: Selbstverlag des Historischen Vereins 1980
Google Scholar
Seethaler, Josef (2000): Kalender und Prophezeiungen. In: Petschar, Hans (ed.): Alpha & Omega. Geschichten vom Ende und Anfang der Welt. Wien: Springer 2000, pp. 242–255
Google Scholar
Swerdlow, Noel (2004): Tycho Brahe’s early lunar theory and the lunar eclipse of 31 January 1599. Centaurus 46 (2004), pp. 1–40
Article ADS MathSciNet Google Scholar
Thoren, Victor (1972): An ‘unpublished’ version of Tycho Brahe’s lunar theory. Centaurus 16 (1972), pp. 203–230
Article ADS MathSciNet Google Scholar
Vogtherr, Friedrich (1908): Geschichte der Familie Vogtherr im Lichte des Kulturlebens. 2. ed. Ansbach: Seybold 1908
Google Scholar
Wolfschmidt, Gudrun (ed.) (2012): Simon Marius, der fränkische Galilei, und die Entwicklung des astronomischen Weltbildes (= Nuncius Hamburgensis. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften 16). Hamburg: tredition 2012
Google Scholar
Zinner, Ernst (1942): Zur Ehrenrettung des Simon Marius. Vierteljahrsschrift der Astronomischen Gesellschaft 77/1 (1942), pp. 23–75
Google Scholar
Zinner, Ernst (1964): Geschichte und Bibliographie der astronomischen Literatur in Deutschland zur Zeit der Renaissance. 2^nd ed. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann 1964
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Simon Marius Society, Erlangen, Germany
Klaus Matthäus

Authors

Klaus Matthäus
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Simon Marius Society, Fürth, Germany
Hans Gaab
Simon Marius Society, Nürnberg, Germany
Pierre Leich

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Matthäus, K. (2018). Simon Marius as a Calendar Writer. In: Gaab, H., Leich, P. (eds) Simon Marius and His Research. Historical & Cultural Astronomy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92621-6_10

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92621-6_10
Published: 20 June 2019
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-92620-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-92621-6
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics