Reconstructing Kepler’s Reasoning in the Astronomia Nova

The argument about the equant in chapter 4

Gerd Graßhoff

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · Deutsches Museum, München

2026-11-10

The passage

“DCE exterior aequet CBE, CEB interiores : ergo parte CEB ablata, residuus CBE vel DBE minor erit quam DCE”

Astronomia nova, Part I, ch. 4 — KGW 3, p. 73

“Totus ergo orbis solidus jam velox jam tardus est. Quod COPERNICVS ut absurdum rejicit.”

One figure, six points, about ten steps: compact enough to show how a reconstruction works.

The model, explicit

  • B centre of the eccentric
  • A the eye
  • C the equant point — about it the planet makes equal angles in equal times
  • D, F apogee and perigee
  • E the planet
  • what varies: the angle DCE, uniform in time

The model is Ptolemy’s, as Kepler presents it.

The argument

What the reconstruction shows

DBE < DCE holds in every position, with equality only at the apsides — not only at the right angle Kepler supposes.

The hypothesis BC = BA is stated and needed by no step.

Elements I.32 needs a triangle CBE: at the apsides there is none.

Coda: “Schema loquitur Geometrae”

In chapter 2 Kepler states the equivalence of eccentric and concentric with epicycle and leaves the proof to the figure: “Nec verbis opus est.”

What the figure says

How to reconstruct

  1. Fix the passage
  2. Write the model
  3. Separate hypotheses from geometry
  4. Write the steps, with premises and rule
  5. Run the checks
  6. Read the report as a finding about the text

Published by OpenScienceTechnology GmbH · Legal notice · Privacy