Comments on: Ulinka Rublack’s The Astronomer and the Witch Review

By: Michelle Curtis

Michelle Curtis — Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:44:13 +0000

Kevin, I enjoyed your review of The Astronomer and The Witch almost as much as I enjoyed the book itself. Rublack’s analysis of women’s roles in post-Reformation Germany was a highlight for me. Her explanation of the role of older women, especially widows in the community, and Katrinia’s nonconformity to these ideals leading suspicions against her. The way Rublack refutes common myths about accusations of witchcraft in German communities. She explained that accusations were not used as a form of scapegoating in struggling rural communities; instead, they were concentrated in bigger towns. I also appreciated how Rublack described how Kepler’s religious convictions affected his academic life. I agree that The Astronomer and The Witch is almost too broad for a micro-history, but I feel the additional information allowed the author to give deeper context for her main subject. My one critique would be that her timeline jumped around a lot, and I referred to the timeline in the front of the book more than I would have liked to keep things straight. Nevertheless, like you, I found Rublack’s work a well-written, informative, and enthralling read.

By: Kerry Reed

Kerry Reed — Wed, 15 Feb 2023 04:58:10 +0000

Great review, Kevin. I appreciate your focus on Kepler’s expertise serving him in other scholarly avenues besides astronomy and mathematics. I was impressed at the stubbornness of Kepler and Katharina, and how their relation to German Lutheranism innately defined their character and responses to the trial. I agree with you that this is a microhistory, though I disagree that it is too large in scope. My understanding of microhistory as a method entails a thorough archival examination about a singular event, and through this fervent examination, connections to phenomena occurring over a short span of time are connected. This is in contrast to a history which aims to identify causality. If we apply the keyhole metaphor to Rublack’s work, I think it meets the criteria for a true microhistory, though I agree with you that the organization of the work could be a bit clearer (The Dream chapter seemed a bit out of place).

I admit, that while reading the book I was far more concerned with Kepler’s thought processes than I was with the trial and the cultural belief in witches. Though this work is less about the “scientific revolution” than the previous few we read, I think it has remarkable implications for this class. On page 287, Rublack asserts that Kepler combined various knowledge making methods to reach his conclusions: mathematical certainty, speculative imagination, and logically causal explanations. In short, there was a faith-based component to Kepler’s calculations, faith in god and faith in his capacity to reason. We see these dual fates in his legal defense of his mother. This method is the inverse of the Aristotelian style, Kepler proceeds from specific mathematical certainties to general comments about the nature of the planets, and natural philosophy. While this is inductive reasoning as opposed to the deductive reasoning of the Aristotelian school, the general processes of knowledge making follow the same principles, albeit reversed.

Again, great review, looking forward to the discussion!

By: Katie Kania

Katie Kania — Tue, 14 Feb 2023 21:12:55 +0000

I enjoyed reading your review of Ulinka Rublack’s “The Astronomer and the Witch.” It was not only a well-written and informative review, but also highlighted what I thought was the main issue with the book, its organization. You summed it up nicely by stating that the author struggled with “breadth vs. depth,” which resulted in chapters that at times could be confusing because it followed more than one thematic line. This was a result of the author attempting to write a microhistory for a broad audience who may be unfamiliar with the Kepler family or the history of the period. That said, I agree with you that the author does a great job tying so much information together in a relatively short book, and her writing/scholarly skills do make the book more accessible to a wider audience. At some points in the book, I felt that her arguments weren’t as clear; and that may be because of the amount of background information that was being presented alongside the narrower story of Katharina’s trial, but I would be interested to discuss this more in depth during class. Nice book review!