Alternate Name
BornLübeck, Germany, 22 October 1587
DiedHamburg, Germany, 23 September 1657
Joachim Jungius’ astronomical contributions included some early observations of sunspots and also of the variable star Mira.
A talented German polymath, Joachim Jungius left a large legacy that included logic, mathematics, medicine, educational reform, and scientific organization as well as notable contributions to botany, natural history, and particularly “corpuscular chemistry.” Much of Jungius’s completed work has been lost. Although he had prepared a number of works for publication, some 50,000 manuscript pages were reportedly destroyed by fire in 1691. In retrospect, Jungius had more talent than luck. Known throughout his homeland, his local legacy took the form of disciples, some 40 unpublished disputations, several posthumous compilations, and a rich correspondence that remain largely unknown. Although evidence remains incomplete, Jungius’s letters show how little-known communities engaged with the larger Republic of Letters.
The remarkable range of Jungius’s activities is evident from his education and professional positions. Born in Lübeck to Brigitte Holdmann and Nicolaus Junge, professor at the Saint Katharinen, Jungius eventually attended that same gymnasium where his father (tragically murdered in 1589) and stepfather were professors. Thereafter, Jungius studied at the University of Rostock (May 1606), later taking his degree at Giessen (1608) where he was appointed professor of mathematics (1609–1614). It was here that Jungius became interested in educational reform (1614–1615) in collaboration with colleagues Christoph Helvich (1581–1617) and Wolfgang Ratke (1517–1635). The following year Jungius returned to Rostock to study medicine (1616), finally taking his medical degree at the University of Padua (1619). The following years were even more tumultuous. Jungius practiced medicine at Lübeck (1619–1623), Brunswick (1625), and Wolfenbuettel (1625) before becoming professor of mathematics at the University of Rostock (1626–1628). He finally achieved a measure of tranquility and spent his final years in Hamburg at the Akademisches Gymnasium as rector and professor of natural science (1629–1657).
An itinerant scholar with ecumenical interests, Jungius was the proverbial “Renaissance Man” – well rounded but not without a cutting edge. His analytic and synthetic skills drew praise not only from his correspondent John Pell (1611–1685) but from later luminaries, not least Gottfried Leibnitz and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832). Committed to organizing and systematizing knowledge, Jungius saw mathematics as a model while insisting that all knowledge stems from sensible experience. His youthful interest in mathematics guided much of his later work, which he applied across the disciplines. Jungius was also an acute observer, which is most evident in his chemical philosophy. Here he offered a corpuscular model and a new concept of element. Eclectic but attuned, Jungius observed sunspots early in his career, which added his voice to those of Galileo Galilei, Christoph Scheiner, and Johann Fabricius.
Although Jungius was interested in astronomy, he published little. But as several of his letters suggest, Jungius was keenly involved with the variable star Mira (Omicron) Ceti. To be sure, Mira represents a minor episode in the larger drama. But importantly, it opens a window on a new kind of community that was emerging in the Republic of Letters. Mira represents a single episode.
First sighted by David Fabricius in 1596 and 1609, Omicron Ceti underwent a critical identity crisis until the mid-1660s. Recent research has rewritten the traditional “discovery” story of Mira Ceti. As the record shows, any meaningful reference to the New Star had to await the work of Johannes Hevelius and Ismaël Boulliau, not only the most noted astronomers of their day but also fast friends and continuing collaborators. From the first sightings in 1596, confused reports exchanged between Fabricius and Johannes Kepler, and later with Tycho Brahe , undermined confidence in the identity of the New Star, and indeed, little had changed a generation later when Johannes Holwarda failed to identify his “New Phenomenon” with sightings from Fabricius. Despite several opportunities, Holwarda failed to identify “Fabricius’s Star” (1596 and 1609) with his own “Holwarda’s Star” (1638 and 1639) and indeed, with the star Johann Bayer had unwittingly charted as Omicron Ceti. Historians have overlooked the deep confusion.
Two pivotal publications brought the variable star to public attention. Arguably, if Hevelius’s Historiola (1661) gave Mira Ceti a history and an identity, Boulliau’s Ad Astronomos (1667) gave it a future and an audience. The foremost observer of the day, Hevelius showed that the New Star visible in 1661 was indeed the same phenomenon sighted by Holwarda and, further, that Fabricius’ Star was indeed one and the same. In support of his claim, Hevelius enlisted earlier sightings (1641, 1642, 1644) from Bernard Fullenius (1602–1657), professor at Franeker, Christian Otter (1598–1660), and importantly, more dependable sightings from Jungius (1645–1647) sent to him (3 November 1647) by his friend, Laurentius Eichstadius . Similar exchanges continued to cut across the Republic of Letters nourished by the larger networks of Boulliau, Hevelius, Henry Oldenburg (1619–1677), Prince Leopoldo (1617–1675), and others. Astronomy was changing epistolary practices. Jungius, who exchanged letters with Caspar Westermann of Helmstadt (notably 5 February 1648), was later joined by other members of the Jungius Circle, among them Johann Adolph Tassius (1585–1654), Heinrich Syvers (1629–1691), and Balthasar Mentzer (1651–1727).
The letters exchanged by Jungius and his disciples proved influential. The initial observations of Jungius (1647, 1648) likely prompted Hevelius to make his first observation in January 1648. Unfortunately, Hevelius did not resume for a decade (1659), prompted this time by his assistant, Michael Kretzschmer (died 1659). But the German tradition continued. Syvers, also introduced to Mira by the Jungius Circle, wrote an informative letter (23 September 1665) to Stanislaus Lubienietzki , which contained observations of Mira (1647–1667) soon published in Theatrum Cometicum (1666–1668). Years later, Syvers sent additional observations of Mira (1668–1672) to Oldenburg (23 June 1673), which the secretary chose not to publish in the Philosophical Transactions.
Known for his keen mind and broad interests, Jungius was a central figure in a small and isolated community. Although most of his formal work in astronomy is now lost, Jungius and his colleagues left important documents. But the Jungius Circle is also useful as a measure of change in the Republic of Letters. Smitten by the Celestial Dance, Learned Europe was increasingly attuned to the deep resonance that linked the Celestial Sphere and the Republic of Letters. Arguably, the natural order helped shape new social practices. Driven by the Celestial Clock – and sustained by the ordinary letter – astronomers were increasingly engaged in common cause by a shared vision and a coherent agenda. Arguably, they created a new kind of community.
Selected References
Boulliau, Ismaël (1667). Ad Astronomos monita duo. Paris.
C. B. Avẹ-Lallement, Robert (1863). Des Dr. Joachim Jungius aus Lübeck Briefwechsel mit seinen Schülern und Freunden, Lübeck.
Guhrauer, G. E. (1850). Joachim Jungius und sein Zeitalter, Stuttgart-Tübingen.
Hatch, Robert Alan (2010). “Discovering Mira Ceti: Celestial Change & Cosmic Continuity” in Change and Continuity in Early Modern Cosmology, Patrick J. Boner, Editor. Archimedes 27, Springer, pp. 153–176.
Hatch, Robert Alan (forthcoming). “Hevelius’s Europe: Astronomy, Community & the Republic of Letters.”
Hatch, Robert Alan (2009). “The Republic of Letters: Boulliau, Leopoldo & the Accademia del Cimento” in The Accademia del Cimento and its European Context, Edited by Marco Beretta, Antonio Clericuzio, and Lawrence M. Principe, Science History Publications, pp. 165–180.
Hatch, Robert Alan (forthcoming). “The History of Variable Stars: A Fresh Look.”
Hevelius, Johannes (1662). Historiola, Mirae Stellae (146–171), published with Mercurius in Sole visus, Danzig.
Jungius, Joachim (2005). Der Briefwechsel des Joachim Jungius, ed. Martin Rothkegel, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Kangro, Hans (1968). Joachim Jungius’ Experimente und Gedanken zur Begründung der Chemie als Wissenschaft, ein Beitrag zur Geistesgeschichte des 17. Jahrhunderts, Wiesbaden.
Lubienietzki, Stanislaus (1666–1668). Theatrum Cometicum. Amsterdam.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this entry
Cite this entry
Hatch, R.A. (2014). Jungius, Joachim. In: Hockey, T., et al. Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9917-7_9309
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9917-7_9309
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-9916-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-9917-7
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyReference Module Physical and Materials ScienceReference Module Chemistry, Materials and Physics