From the book
Heinrich Khunrath’s Magnesia Catholica Philosophorum
Heinrich Khunrath · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordThe rainbow's covenant-sign appears in a position Khunrath reports and rejects at pp. 72–732.
- In KhunrathThe surrounding argument concerns the insufficiency of colours.
- In this editionKeep the whole rainbow account in reported speech.
- A reading distinction“Colours are insufficient” does not mean that every colour elsewhere in the treatise is meaningless.
Meaning
The rainbow's covenant-sign appears in a position Khunrath reports and rejects at pp. 72–732. Certain otherwise good people imagine the Spirit of God giving its outward power fire-wise down through the air, with an earthy seed remaining upon water. They connect this with the peacock's tail and the sulphur of steel and identify it as the catholic matter. The marginal label is “Opinion.”
Use in the book
The surrounding argument concerns the insufficiency of colours. Various metallic preparations can display blackness and peacock-tail colours, including appearances upon the sides of glass vessels, without having been reduced through the universal first matter. Colour alone therefore cannot demonstrate the right natural road. The rainbow account is an example of a theological-looking inference that does not meet the necessary natural conditions.
This gives the passage an important place beside the Harmonia analogica. Khunrath does not accept a claim merely because it uses God, a biblical sign or a striking likeness. His answer is that the philosophers' universal matter and peacock's tail have another meaning than the one the proponents imagine; the margin directs them to the better ground supplied in this treatise. The disagreement is over the adequacy of the proposed subject and interpretation.
The report should also retain its charitable qualification. These are “otherwise good people,” unlike the deliberately fraudulent and malicious opponents elsewhere. Error can belong to a sincere reader who mistakes an impressive appearance for decisive proof. The account is not a modern distinction between religion and experiment; it is Khunrath's internal discrimination between a warranted symbolic-natural relation and an inadequate inference.
The lexicon cannot settle the material observation by supplying an unasked modern chemical identification. In particular, the edition's explanation of the sulphur-of-steel appearance is editorial. The primary passage says how the proponents use the image and how Khunrath rejects their conclusion.
Places to read
- 1599 p. 71Blackness and peacock-tail colours in preparations introduce the disputed signs
- 1599 p. 72Colours are insufficient and the rainbow theory is introduced as another party’s belief
- 1599 p. 72 · marginOpinio marks the following account as a reported position
- 1599 p. 73Khunrath denies the inference to the universal matter
- 1599 p. 73 · marginThe reader is redirected to a better ground within the treatise
Translation in this edition
Keep the whole rainbow account in reported speech. It is not Khunrath's own positive cosmology. The modern apparatus identifies Genesis 9:13; the source passage calls the rainbow a covenant-sign but does not print that verse reference in its margin.
Source note
“Colours are insufficient” does not mean that every colour elsewhere in the treatise is meaningless. The red diadem of the perfected Stone and the colours of other described products occupy different argumentative contexts.