My talk will pick up and follow a suggestion we can find offered to philosophers in a text by René Thom, a mathematician and physicist, on Aristotle’s notion of place. Thom’s proposal is to relate a certain mechanics to this difficult notion, which for Aristotle unfolds from a motion whose continuity is neither absolute nor does it follow by law; it occurs "according to place". The subject matter at the heart of my study is how to think of the distinction between manifold and multiplicity (the Leibniz’ian notion of Mannigfaltigkeit in relation to Vielfalt, Vielzahl, Fülle in German) - two words which are largely used as equivalents today in philosophical discourses. Thom’s suggestion of rigorously reading Aristotle as a topologist avant la lettre shows a way how to explore precisely this distinction, that between manifold and multiplicity, as a "holding" activity that is constitutive of "place". We find marked here an other symbolic order of human activity (one of motherhood, as I will argue) that finds its place in constellation with that symbolic order often deemed "phallogocentric". It is with regard to this that René Thom’s proposal is so promising: The place-bound motion of continuity which Aristotle had reserved for "place" follows a mechanics of the Greek -phora (as we find it in ana-phora, meta-phora, am-phora), where we have a directional/positional prefix + -pherein, for "to carry, bear," a verb which relates the discretionary act of moving something to the continuous motion of "bearing" which we find reserved for motherhood (from PIE root *bher- (1) "to carry," also "to bear children", cf. etymonline.com). How to think of such "continuity"? René Thom approaches it through a theorem in recent mathematics, the so-called fundamental theorem for curls also called the Stokes Theorem. Drawing on the idea of an écriture féminine I will consider the mechanics of such place-making through the lens of natural philosophy, as well as in tune with feminist discourses, by regarding it as of a kind of "writing" that is as irreducibly intellectual as it is embodied. I suggest to speak of anthropographic and architectonic writing, welling from an a-semantic (and poetic) domain (as the écriture féminine does) – a domain, as I will argue, that is specifically marked as "mathematical" in the pre-modern sense (i.e. from Greek mathemata for "all that can be learnt", and mathematics, for "all that pertains to learning"). Following Thom’s suggestion to explore the theorem of curls further in relation to "topos" thinking, I want to consider a kind of mediacy in writing that is tuned and spirited by notation and "keys" or "scores" of "doing" mathematics compositionally. At stake is a kind of writing that invents how to accommodate the projective and summational "all" which, according to its philological roots, mathematics alone knows how to scaffold and set-up for a kind of "study" that is not only "close", initiatory and privative, but also impersonal, universal and public (methodical, intersubjective).