adversaries Sundry of which objections to speak as the truth is do beare in them a great shew of probabilitie and such too as it seemes was very efficacious since Aristotle and Ptolomy c. men of excellent parts and deep judgements did ground upon them as being of infallible and necessarie consequence I shall reckon them up severally and set downe such answers unto each as may yeeld some satisfaction to every indifferent seeker of truth 1 First then 't is objected from our sences If the Earth did move we should perceive it The Westerne mountaines would then appeare to ascend towards the Starres rather than the Stars to descend below them I answer The sight judges of motion according as any thing do's desert the plane whereon it selfe is seated which plane every where keeping the same scituation and distance in respect of the eye do's therefore seem immovable unto it and the motion will appeare in those Starres and parts of the Heaven through which the verticall Line do's passe The reason of such deceit may be this Motion being not a proper object of the sight nor belonging to any other peculiar sence must therefore be judged of by the sensus communis which is liable to mistake in this respect because it apprehends the eye it self to rest immovable whilest it do's not feel any effects of this motion in the body As it is when a man is carried in a Ship so that sence it but an ill judge of naturall secrets 'T is a good rule of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Philosopher must not bee carried away by the bare appearance of things to sight but must examine them by reason If this were a good consequence The Earth do's not move because it do's not appeare so to us we might then as well argue that it do's move when we goe upon the water according to the verse Provehimur portu terraeque verbesque recedunt Or if such Arguments would hold it were an easie matter to prove the Sunne and Moone not so big as a Hat or the fixed stars as a Candle Yea but if the motions of the Heavens bee onely apparant and not reall then the motion of the clouds will be so too since the eye may bee as well deceived in the one as the other I answer 'T is all one as if he should inferre that the sence was mistaken in every thing because it was so in one thing and this would be an excellent Argument to prove that opinion of Anaxagoras that the Snow was blacke The reason why that motion which is caused by the Earth do's appeare as if it were in the Heavens is because the sensus communis in judging of it do's conceive the eye to be it selfe immovable as was said before there being no sence that do's discerne the effects of any motion in the body and therefore it do's conclude every thing to move which it do's perceive to change it's distance from it So that the clouds do not seem to move sometimes when as notwithstanding they are every where carried about with our Earth by such a swift revolution yet this can be no hinderance at all why wee may not judge aright of their other particular motions for which there is not the same reason Though to a man in a Ship the Trees and Bankes may seeme to move yet it would be but a weak Argument to conclude from hence that therefore such a one could not tell whether his friend do's really stirre whom he sees to walke up and downe in the Ship or that hee might as well bee deceived in judging the Oares to move when they doe not 'T is againe replyed by the same Objector That it is not credible the eve should bee mistaken in judging of the Starres and Heavens because those being light bodies are the primarie and proper Objects of that sence I answer The deceit here is not concerning the light or colour of those bodies but concerning their motion which is neither the primarie nor proper Object of the Eye but reckoned amongst the Objecta Communia 2 Another common Argument against this motion is taken from the danger that would thence arise unto all high buildings which by this would quickely bee ruinated and scattered abroad I answer This motion is supposed to be naturall and those things which are according to nature have contrary effects to other matters which are by force and violence Now it belongs unto things of this later kind to be inconstant and hurtfull whereas those of the first kinde must be regular and tending to conservation The motion of the Earth is alwaies equall and like it selfe not by starts and fits If a glasse of Beere may stand firmely enough in a Shippe when it moves swiftly upon a smooth streame much lesse then will the motion of the Earth which is more naturall and so consequently more equall cause any danger unto those buildings that are erected upon it And therefore to suspect any such event would bee like the feare of Lactantius who would not acknowledge the being of any Antipodes lest then he might bee forced to grant that they should fall downe unto the Heavens We have equall reason to be afraid of high buildings if the whole World above us were whirled about with such a mad celeritie as our adversaries suppose for then there would be but small hopes that this little point of Earth should escape from the rest But supposing saith Rosse that this motion were naturall to the Earth yet it is not naturall to Townes and Buildings for these are artificiall To which I answer Ha ha he 3 Another Argument to this purpose is taken from the rest and quietnes of the aire about us which could not be if there were any such swift motion of the Earth If a man riding upon a fleet horse doe perceive the aire to beat against his face as if there were a winde what a vehement tempest should wee continually feele from the East if the Earth were turned about with such a swift revolution as is supposed Vnto this 't is usually answered That the aire also is carried along with the same motion of the Earth For if the concavitie of the Moones Orbe which is of so smooth and glabrous a superficies may according to our adversaries drive along with it the greatest part of this Elementarie World all the regions of Fire and all the vast upper regions of Aire and as some will have it the two lower Regions together with the Sea likewise for from hence saith Alex. Rosse lib. 1. sect 1. cap. 3. is it that betwixt the Tropicks there is a constant Easterne wind and a continuall flowing of the Sea Westward I say if the motion of the Heavens which are smooth bodies may bee able to carry with it so great a part of the elementarie World or if the rugged parts of the Moons Body be able to carry with it so great a part of the aire as
approbata quae coelum pluribus realibus atque imperviis orbibus citra rem replevit That this opinion comes neerer to the truth than that common one of Aristotle which hath to no purpose filled the Heavens with such reall and impervious Orbs. 2. There is no element of fire which must be held with this opinion here delivered for if wee suppose a world in the Moone then it will follow that the sphere of fire either is not there where 't is usually placed in the concavity of his Orbe or else that there is no such thing at all which is most probable since there are not any such solid Orbs that by their swift motion might heat and enkindle the adjoyning ayre which is imagined to be the reason of that element The arguments that are commonly urged to this purpose are these 1 That which was before alledged concerning the refractions which will be caused by a different medium For if the matter of the heavens be of one thicknesse and the element of fire another and the upper Region of ayre distinct from both these and the lower Region severall from all the rest there will then be such a multiplicity of refractions as must necessarily destroy the certainty of all Astronomicall observations All which inconveniences might be avoyded by supposing as wee doe that there is onely one Orbe of vaporous ayre which encompasses our earth all the rest being Aethereall and of the same perspicuity 2 The situation of this element does no way agree with Aristotles own principles or that common providence of nature which wee may discerne in ordinary matters For if the heavens be without all elementary qualities as is usually supposed then it would be a very incongruous thing for the element of fire to be placed immediatly next unto it Since the heat of this is the most powerfull and vigorous quality that is amongst all the rest And Nature in her other works does not joyne extreames but by something of a middle disposition So in the very frame of our bodies the bones which are of a hard substance and the flesh of a soft are not joyned together but by the intercession of membranes and grissels such as being of a middle nature may fitly come betwixt 3 'T is not conceiveable for what use or benefit there should be any such element in that place and certaine it is that Nature does not doe any thing in vaine 4 Betwixt two extreams there can be but one Medium and therefore betweene those two opposite elements of earth and water it may seeme more convenient to place onely the ayre which shall partake of middle qualities different from both 5 Fire does not seeme so properly and directly to be opposed to any thing as Ice and if the one be not an element why should the other If you object that the fire which we commonly use does alwayes tend upwards I answer This cannot prove that there is a naturall place for such an element since our adversaries themselves doe grant that culinary and elementary fire are of different kinds The one does burne shine and corrupt its subject the other disagrees from it in all these respects And therefore from the ascent of the one wee cannot properly inferre the being or situation of the other But for your farther satisfaction herein you may peruse Cardan Iohannes Pena that learned Frenchman the noble Tycho with divers others who have purposely handled this proposition 3. I might adde a third viz. that there is no Musick of the spheares for if they be not solid how can their motion cause any such sound as is conceived I doe the rather meddle with this because Plutarch speakes as if a man might very conveniently heare that harmony if he were an inhabitant in the Moone But I guesse that hee said this out of incogitancy and did not well consider those necessary consequences which depended upon his opinion However the world would have no great losse in being deprived of this Musick unlesse at somtimes we had the priviledge to heare it Then indeed Philo the Jew thinks it would save us the charges of dyet and wee might live at an easie rate by feeding at the eare only and receiving no other nourishment and for this very reason sayes he was Moses enabled to tarry forty dayes and forty nights in the Mount without eating any thing because hee there heard the melody of the Heavens Risum teneatis I know this Musick hath had great Patrons both sacred prophane Authors such as Ambrose Bede Boetius Anselme Plato Cicero and others but because it is not now I think affirmed by any I shall not therefore bestow either paines or time in arguing against it It may suffice that I have onely named these three last and for the two more necessary have referred the Reader to others for satisfaction I shall in the next place proceed to the nature of the Moones body to know whether that be capable of any such conditions as may make it possible to be inhabited and what those qualities are wherein it more neerely agrees with our earth Proposition 4. That the Moone is a solid compacted opacous body I Shall not need to stand long in the proofe of this Proposition since it is a truth already agreed on by the generall consent of the most and the best Philosophers 1 It is solid in opposition to fluid as is the ayre for how otherwise could it beat back the light which it receives from the Sunne But here it may be questioned whether or no the Moone bestow her light upon us by the reflection of the Sun-beames from the superficies of her body or else by her owne illumination Some there are who affirme this latter part So Averroes Caelius Rhodiginus Iulius Caesar c. And their reason is because this light is discerned in many places whereas those bodies which give light by reflexion can there only be perceived where the angle of reflexion is equall to the angle of incidence and this is only in one place as in a looking-glasse those beams which are reflected from it cannot be perceived in every place where you may see the glasse but onely there where your eye is placed on the same line whereon the beames are reflected But to this I answer That the argument will not hold of such bodies whose superficies is full of unequall parts and gibbosities as the Moone is Wherfore it is as wel the more probable as the more common opinion that her light proceeds frō both these causes from reflexion illumination nor doth it herein differ from our earth since that also hath some light by illumination for how otherwise would the parts about us in a Sunne-shine day appeare so bright when as the rayes of reflexion cannot enter into our eye For the better illustration of this we may consider the several wayes wherby divers bodies are enlightned Either as water by admitting the beams into its
for it but when a new and an unheard of truth shall come before it though it have good grounds and reasons yet the understanding is afraid of it as a stranger and dares not admit it into his beleefe without a great deale of reluctancie and triall And besides things that are not manifested to the senses are not assented unto without some labour of minde some travaile and discourse of the understanding and many lazie soules had rather quietly repose themselves in an easie errour than take paines to search out the truth The strangenesse then of this opinion which I now deliver will be a great hinderance to its beliefe but this is not to be respected by reason it cannot be helped I have stood the longer in the Preface because that prejudice which the meere title of the booke may beget cannot easily be removed without a great deale of preparation and I could not tell otherwise how to rectifie the thoughts of the Reader for an impartiall survey of the following discourse I must needs confesse though I had often thought with my selfe that it was possible there might be a world in the Moone yet it seemed such an uncouth opinion that I never durst discover it for feare of being counted singular and ridiculous but afterward having read Plutarch Galileus Keplar with some others and finding many of mine owne thoughts confirmed by such strong authority I then concluded that it was not onely possible there might be but probable that there was another habitable world in that Planet In the prosecuting of this assertion I shall first endeavour to cleare the way from such doubts as may hinder the speed or ease of farther progresse and because the suppositions imply'd in this opinion may seeme to contradict the principles of reason or faith it will be requisite that I first remove this scruple shewing the conformity of them to both these and proving those truths that may make way for the rest which I shall labour to performe in the second third fourth and fifth Chapters and then proceede to confirme such Propositions which doe more directly belong to the maine point in hand Proposition 2. That a plurality of worlds doth not contradict any principle of reason or faith T Is reported of Aristotle that when he saw the Books of Moses hee commended them for such a majestick stile as might become a God but withall hee censured that manner of writing to be very unfitting for a Philosopher because there was nothing proved in them but matters were delivered as if they would rather command than perswade beliefe And 't is observed that hee sets downe nothing himselfe but hee confirmes it by the strongest reasons that may be found there being scarce an argument of force for any subject in Philosophy which may not be picked out of his Writings and therefore 't is likely if there were in reason a necessity of one onely world that hee would have found out some such necessary proofe as might confirme it Especially since hee labours for it so much in two whole Chapters But now all the arguments which hee himselfe urges in this subject are very weake and farre enough from having in them any convincing power Therefore 't is likely that a plurality of worlds doth not contradict any principle of reason However I will set downe the two chiefe of his arguments from his owne works and from them you may guesse the force of the other The first is this since every heavie body doth naturally tend downwards and every light body upwards what a hudling and confusion must there be if there were two places for gravity and two places for lightnesse for it is probable that the earth of that other world would fall down to this Center and so mutually the ayre and fire here ascend to those Regions in the other which must needs much derogate from the providence of nature and cause a great disorder in his works But ratio haec est minimè firma saith Zanchy And if you well consider the nature of gravity you will plainely see there is no ground to feare any such confusion for heavinesse is nothing else but such a quality as causes a propension in its subject to tend downwards towards its owne Center so that for some of that earth to come hither would not be said a fall but an ascension since it moved from its own place and this would be impossible saith Ruvio because against nature and therefore no more to be feared than the falling of the Heavens If you reply that then according to this there must be more Centers of gravity than one I answer 'T is very probable there are nor can we well conceive what any piece of the Moon would doe being severed from the rest in the free and open ayre but only returne unto it againe Another argument hee had from his Master Plato that there is but one world because there is but one first mover God Infirma etiam est haec ratio saith Zanchy and we may justly deny the consequence since a plurality of worlds doth not take away the unity of the first mover Vt enim forma substantialis sic primum efficiens apparentem solummodo multiplicitatem induìt per signatam materiam saith a Country-man of ours As the substantiall forme so the efficient cause hath only an appearing multiplicity from its particular matter You may see this point more largely handled and these Arguments more fully answered by Plutarch in his booke why Oracles are silent and Iacob Carpentarius in his comment on Alcinous But our opposites the Interpreters themselves who too often doe jurare in verba magistri will grant that there is not any strength in these consequences and certainly then such weake arguments could not covince that wise Philosopher who in his other opinions was wont to be swayed by the strength and power of reason wherefore I should rather think that he had some by-respect which made him first assent to this opinion and afterwards strive to prove it Perhaps it was because hee feared to displease his scholler Alexander of whom 't is related that he wept to heare a disputation of another world since he had not then attained the Monarchy of this his restlesse wide heart would have esteemed this Globe of Earth not big enough for him if there had beene another which made the Satyrist say of him Aestuat infoelix angusto limite mundi That he did vex himselfe and sweat in his desires as being pend up in a narrow roome when hee was confin'd but to one world Before he thought to seat himselfe next the Gods but now when hee had done his best hee must be content with some equall or perhaps superiour Kings It may be that Aristotle was moved to this opinion that hee might thereby take from Alexander the occasion of this feare and discontent or else perhaps Aristotle himselfe was as loth to hold the
possibility of a world which he could not discover as Alexander was to heare of one which he could not conquer 'T is likely that some such by-respect moved him to this opinion since the arguments hee urges for it are confest by his zealous followers and commentators to be very fleight and frivolous and they themselves grant what I am now to prove that there is not any evidence in the light of naturall reason which can sufficiently manifest that there is but one world But however some may object would it not be inconvenient and dangerous to admit of such opinions that doe destroy those principles of Aristotle which all the world hath so long followed This question is much controverted by some of the Romish Divines Campanella hath writ a Treatise in defence of it in whom you may see many things worth the reading and notice To it I answer that this position in Philosophy doth not bring any inconvenience to the rest since 't is not Aristotle but truth that should be the rule of our opinions and if they be not both found together we may say to him as hee said to his Master Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though Plato were his friend yet hee would rather adhere to truth than him I must needs grant that wee are all much beholden to the industry of the ancient Philosophers and more especially to Aristotle for the greater part of our learning but yet 't is not ingratitude to speak against him when hee opposeth truth for then many of the Fathers would be very guilty especially Iustin who hath writ a Treatise purposely against him But suppose this opinion were false yet 't is not against the faith and so it may serve for the better confirmation of that which is true the sparks of errour being forc'd out by opposition as the sparks of fire by the striking of the flint and steele But suppose too that it were hereticall and against the faith yet may it be admitted with the same priviledge as Aristotle from whom many more dangerous opinions have proceeded as that the world is eternall that God cannot have while to looke after these inferiour things that after death there is no reward or punishment and such like blasphemies which strike directly at the fundamentals of our Religion So that it is justly to be wondred why some should be so superstitious in these dayes as to stick closer unto him than unto Scripture as if his Philosophy were the onely foundation of all divine truths Vpon these grounds both St. Vincentius and Serafinus de firmo as I have seene them quoted think that Aristotle was the violl of Gods wrath which was powred out upon the waters of wisedom by the third Angel But for my part I think the world is much beholden to him for all its sciences But yet 't were a shame for these later ages to rest our selves meerely upon the labours of our Fore-fathers as if they had informed us of all things to be knowne and when we are set upon their shoulders not to see further than they themselves did 'T were a superstitious a lazie opinion to think Aristotles works the bounds and limits of all humane invention beyond which there could be no possibility of reaching Certainly there are yet many things left to discovery and it cannot be any inconvenience for us to maintaine a new truth or rectifie an ancient errour But the position say some is directly against Scripture for 1. Moses tels us but of one world and his History of the Creation had been very imperfect if God had made another 2. Saint Iohn speaking of Gods works says hee made the world in the singular number and therefore there is but one 't is the argument of Aquinas and he thinks that none will oppose it but such who with Democritus esteeme some blinde chance and not any wise providence to be the framer of all things 3. The opinion of more worlds has in ancient times beene accounted a heresie and Baronius affirmes that for this very reason Virgilius was cast out of his Bishoprick and excommunicated from the Church 4. A fourth argument there is urged by Aquinas if there be more worlds than one then they must either be of the same or of a diverse nature but they are not of the same kinde for this were needlesse and would argue an improvidence since one would have no more perfection than the other not of divers kindes for then one of them could not be called the world or universe since it did not containe universall perfection I have cited this argument because it is so much stood upon by Iulius Caesar la Galla one that has purposely writ a Treatise against this opinion which I now deliver but the Dilemma is so blunt that it cannot cut on either side and the consequences so weake that I dare trust them without an answer And by the way you may see this later Author in that place where hee endeavours to prove a necessity of one world doth leave the chiefe matter in hand and take much needlesse paines to dispute against Democritus who thought that the world was made by the casuall concourse of atoms in a great vacuum It should seeme that either his cause or his skill was weake or else he would have ventured upon a stronger adversary These arguments which I have set downe are the chiefest which I have met with against this subject and yet the best of these hath not force enough to endanger the truth that I have delivered Vnto the two first it may be answered that the negative authority of Scripture is not prevalent in those things which are not the fundamentals of Religion But you 'le reply though it doe not necessarily conclude yet 't is probable if there had beene another world wee should have had some notice of it in Scripture I answer 't is as probable that the Scripture should have informed us of the planets they being very remarkable parts of the Creation and yet neither Moses nor Iob nor the Psalmes the places most frequent in Astronomicall observations nor any other Scripture mention any of them but the Sunne and Moone Because the difference betwixt them and the other starres was knowne onely to those who were learned men and had skill in Astronomie As for that expression in Iob 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the starres of the morning it is in the plurall number and therefore cannot properly be applied to Venus And for that in Isaiah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 't is confessed to be a word of obscure interpretation and therefore is but by guesse translated in that sence It being a true and common rule that Hebraei reisideralis minime curiosi coelestium nominum penuriâ laborant The Jewes being but little skilled in Astronomie their language dos want proper expressions for the heavenly bodies and therefore they are faine sometimes to attribute the same
Vnto these agreed Pythagoras who thought that our earth was but one of the Planets which moved round about the Sun as Aristotle relates it of him and the Pythagoreans in generall did affirme that the Moone also was terrestriall that she was inhabited as this lower world That those living creatures and plants which are in her exceed any of the like kind with us in the same proportion as their dayes are longer than ours viz. by 15 times This Pythagoras was esteemed by all of a most divine wit as appeares especially by his valuation amongst the Romans who being commanded by the Oracle to erect a statue to the wisest Graecian the Senate determined Pythagoras to be meant preferring him in their judgements before the divine Socrates whom their Gods pronounc'd the wisest Some think him a Iew by birth but most agree that hee was much conversant amongst the learneder sort and Priests of that Nation by whom hee was informed of many secrets and perhaps this opinion which he vented afterwards in Greece where he was much opposed by Aristotle in some worded disputations but never confuted by any solid reason To this opinion of Pythagoras did Plato also assent when he considered that there was the like eclipse made by the earth and this that it had no light of its owne that it was so full of spots And therefore wee may often reade in him and his followers of an aetherea terra and lunares populi An aethereall earth inhabiters in the Moon but afterwards this was mixed with many ridiculous fancies For some of them considering the mysteries implied in the number 3 concluded that there must necessarily be a Trinity of worlds whereof the first is this of ours the second in the Moon whose element of water is represented by the spheare of Mercury the ayre by Venus and the fire by the Sunne And that the whole Vniverse might the better end in earth as it began they have contrived it that Mars shall be a spheare of the fire Iupiter of ayre Saturne of water and above all these the Elysian fields spacious and pleasant places appointed for the habitation of those unspotted soules that either never were imprisoned in or else now have freed themselves from any commerce with the body Scaliger speaking of this Platonick fancy quae in tres trientes mundum quasi assem divisit thinks 't is confutation enough to say 't is Plato's However for the first part of this assertion it was assented unto by many others and by reason of the grosnesse and inequality of this planet 't was frequently called quasi terra coelestis as being esteemed the sediment and more imperfect part of those purer bodies you may see this proved by Plutarch in that delightfull work which he properly made for the confirmation of this particular With him agreed Alcinous and Plotinus later Writers Thus Lucian also in his discourse of a journey to the Moon where though hee does speake many things out of mirth in a jesting manner yet in the beginning of it he does intimate that it did contain some serious truths concerning the real frame of the Vniverse The Cardinall Cusanus and Iornandus Brunus held a particular world in every Starre and therefore one of them defining our earth he sayes it is stella quaedam nobilis quae lunam calorem influentiam habet aliam diversam ab omnibus aliis stellis A noble Starre having a distinct light heat influence frō all the rest Vnto this Nichol. Hill a Country man of ours was enclined whē he said Astrea terrae natura probabilis est That 't is probable the earth hath a starry nature But the opinion which I have here delivered was more directly proved by Maeslin Keplar and Galilaeus each of them late Writers and famous men for their singular skill in Astronomy Keplar calls this World by the name of Levania from the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies the Moon and our earth by the name of Volva à volvendo because it does by reason of its diurnall revolution appeare unto them constantly to turne round and therefore hee stiles those who live in that Hemisphere which is towards us by the title of Subvolvani because they enjoy the sight of this earth and the others Privolvani quia sunt privati conspectu volvae because they are deprived of this priviledge But Iulius Caesar whom I have above quoted speaking of their testimony whom I cite for this opinion viz. Keplar and Galilaeus affirmes that to his knowledge they did but jest in those things which they write concerning this and as for any such world he assuredly knowes they never so much as dreamt of it But I had rather beleeve their owne words than his pretended knowledge 'T is true indeed in some things they doe but trifle but for the maine scope of those discourses 't is as manifest they seriously meant it as any indifferent Reader may easily discerne As for Galilaeus 't is evident that hee did set downe his owne judgement and opinion in these things otherwise sure Campanella a man as well acquainted with his opinion and perhaps his person as Caesar was would never have writ an Apologie for him And besides 't is very likely if it had beene but a jest Galilaeus would never have suffered so much for it as report saith afterwards he did And as for Keplar I will onely referre the Reader to his owne words as they are set downe in the Preface to the fourth book of his Epitome where his purpose is to make an Apologie for the strangenesse of those truths that he was there to deliver amongst which there are divers things to this purpose concerning the nature of the Moone Hee professes that he did not publish them either out of a humor of contradiction or a desire of vaine-glory or in a jesting way to make himselfe or others merry but after a considerate and solemne manner for the discovery of the truth Now as for the knowledge which Caesar pretends to the contrary you may guesse what it was by his strange confidence in other assertions and his boldnesse in them may well derogate from his credit in this For speaking of Ptolome's Hypothesis hee pronounces this verdict Impossibile est excentricorum epicyclorum positio nec aliquis est ex Mathematicis adeo stultus qui veram illam existimet The position of Excentrickes and Epicycles is altogether impossible nor is there any Mathematician such a foole as to think it true I should guesse hee could not have knowledge enough to maintaine any other Hypothesis who was so ignorant in Mathematicks as to deny that any good Author held this For I would faine know whether there were never any that thought the Heavens to be solid bodies and that there were such kindes of motion as is by those fained
it We may conceive that in every rough body there are as it were innumerable superficies disposed unto an innumerable diversitie of inclinations Ita ut nullus sit locus ad quem non pertingant plurimi radii reflexi a plurimis superficieculis per omnem corporis scabri radiis luminosis percussi superficiem dispersis So that there is not any place unto which there are not some beams reflected from these diverse superficies in the severall parts of such a rugged body But yet as I said before the earth dos receive a great part of its light by illumination as wel as by reflexion So that notwithstanding those doubts yet this proposition may remaine true that the spots may be the Sea and the brighter parts the Land Of this opinion was Plutarch unto him assented Keplar and Galilaeus whose words are these Si quis veterum Pythagoreorum sententiam exuscitare velit lunam scilicet esse quasi tellurem alteram ejus pars lucidior terrenam superficiem obscurior verò aqueam magis congruè repraesentet Mihi autem dubium fuit nunquam terrestris globi à longè conspecti atque a radiis solaribus perfusi terream superficiem clariorem obscuriorem vero aqueam sese in conspectum daturam If any man have a mind to renue the opinion of the Phythagoreans that the Moone is another earth then her brighter parts may fitly represent the earths superficies and the darker part the water and for my part I never doubted but that our earthly globe being shined upon by the Sunne and beheld at a great distance the Land would appeare brightest and the Sea more obscurely The reasons may be 1. That which I urged about the foregoing chapter because the water is the thinner part and therefore must give lesse light Since the Starres and Planets by reason of their brightnesse are usually concluded to bee the thicker parts of their orbe 2. Water is in it selfe of a blacker colour saith Aristotle and therefore more remote from light than the earth Any parts of the ground being moistned with raine dos looke much more darkely than when it is dry 3. 'T is observed that the secondary light of the Moone which afterwards is proved to proceede from our earth is sensibly brighter unto us for two or three dayes before the conjunjunction in the morning when she appeares Eastward than about the same time after the conjunction when shee is seene in the West The reason of which must be this because that part of the earth which is opposite to the Moone in the East has more land in it than Sea Whereas on the contrary the Moone when she is in the West is shined upon by that part of our earth where there is more Sea than Land from whence it will follow with good probabilitie that the earth dos cast a greater light than the water 4. Because observation tels us that the spotted parts are alwayes smooth and equall having every where an equality of light when once they are enlightned by the Sunne whereas the brighter parts are full of rugged gibbosities and mountaines having many shades in them as I shall shew more at large afterwards That in this Planet there must bee Seas Campanella indeavours to prove out of Scripture interpreting the waters above the Firmament spoken in Genesis to bee meant of the Sea in this world For saith he 't is not likely that there are any such waters above the Orbes to moderate that heate which they receive from their swift motion as some of the Fathers think Nor did Moses meane the Angels which may be called spirituall waters as Origen and Austin would have it for both these are rejected by the generall consent Nor could he meane any waters in the second region as most Commentators interpret it For first there is nothing but vapours which though they are afterwards turned into water yet while they remayne there they are onely the matter of that element which may as well bee fire or earth or ayre 2 Those vapours are not above the expansum but in it So that hee thinkes there is no other way to salve all but by making the Planets severall worlds with Sea and Land with such Rivers Springs as we have here below Especially since Esdras speakes of the springs above the Firmament But I cannot agree with him in this nor doe I thinke that any such thing can bee proved out of Scripture Before I proceede to the next position I shall first answer some doubts which might be made against the generalitie of this truth whereby it may seeme impossible that there should be either Sea or Land in the Moone for since she moves so swiftly as Astronomers observe why then does there nothing fall from her or why doth she not shake something out by the celerity of her revolution I answer you must know that the inclination of every heavy body to its proper Center doth sufficiently tie it unto its place so that suppose any thing were separated yet must it necessarily returne againe And there is no more danger of their falling into our world than there is feare of our falling into the Moone But yet there are many fabulous relations of such things as have dropped thence There is a tale of the Nemean Lyon that Hercules slew which first rushing among the heards out of his unknowne den in the Mountaine of Cytheron in Boeotia the credulous people thought hee was sent from their Goddesse the Moone And if a whirlewinde did chance to snatch any thing up and afterwards raine it downe againe the ignorant multitude were apt to believe that it dropt from Heaven Thus Avicenna relates the story of a Calfe which fell downe in a storme the beholders thinking it a Moone-calfe and that it fell thence So Cardan travelling upon the Apennine Moūtaines a sudden blast tooke off his hat which if it had been carryed farre he thinks the peasants who had perceived it to fall would have sworne it had rained hats After some such manner many of our prodigies come to passe and the people are willing to believe any thing which they may relate to others as a very strange and wonderfull event I doubt not but the Trojan Palladium the Romane Minerva and our Ladies Church at Loretto with many sacred reliques preserved by the Papists might drop from the Moone as well as any of these But it may be againe objected suppose there were a bullet shot up in that world would not the Moone runne away from it before it could fall downe since the motion of her body being every day round our earth is farre swifter than the other and so the bullet must be left behind and at length fall downe to us To this I answer 1. If a bullet could bee shot so far till it came to the circumference of those things which belong to our center then it would fall downe to us 2. Though there
was so utterly pusled that hee is faine afterwards to humble himselfe in this acknowledgement I have uttered that I understood not things too wonderfull for me which I knew not wherefore I abhorre my selfe and repent in dust and ashes So that 't is likely these holy Men had not these humane Arts by any speciall inspiration but by instruction and study and other ordinary meanes and therefore Moses his skill in this kinde is called the Learning of the Egyptians Now because in those times all Sciences were taughr onely in a rude and imperfect manner therefore 't is likely that they also had but a darke and confuse apprehension of things and were liable to the common errours And for this reason is it why Tostatus speaking of Iosuahs bidding the Moone stand still as well as the Sun sayes Quod forte er at imperitus circa Astrorum doctrinam sentiens ut vulgares sentiunt That perhaps hee was unskilfull in Astronomy having the same grosse conceit of the Heavens as the vulgar had From all which it may be inferred that the ignorance of such good Men and great Schollers concerning these Philosophical points can bee no sufficient reason why after examination we should deny them or doubt of their Truth 'T is considerable that in the rudiments and first beginnings of Astronomy and so in severall Ages after this opinion hath sound many Patrons and those too Men of eminent note and learning Such was more especially Pythagoras who was generally and highly esteemed for his divine wit and rare inventions under whose mysterious sayings there be many excellent Truths to bee discovered But against his testimony it is againe objected If Pythagoras were of this opinion yet his Authority should not be of any credit because he was the author of many other monstrous absurdities To this I answer If a mans errour in some particulars should take away his credit for every thing else this would abolish the force of all humane Authority for humanum est errane Secondly 't is probable that many of Pythagora's sayings which seeme so absurd are not to be understood according to their letter but in a mysticall sense 2 But he objects again that Pythagoras was not of this opinion and that for two reasons First because no antient author that he had read ascribes it unto him Secondly it is contradictory to his other opinions concerning the Harmony that was made by the motion of the Heavens which could not consist with this other of the Earth's motion To the first I answer The Objector could not chuse but know that this assertion is by many antient authors ascribed to that sect whereof Pythagoras was the chief He might have seene it expresly in Aristotle himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which the Philosopher do's compendiously reckon up the three chiefe particulars implyed in the opinion of the Pythagorians First the Suns being in the centre of the World Secondly the earth 's annuall motion about it as being one of the planets thirdly it 's diurnal revolution wherby it caused day night To his second reason I answer First that Pythagoras thought the Earth to be one of the Planets as appeares by Aristotles testimony concerning him and to move amongst them the rest So that his opinion concerning the motion of the heavens is not inconsistent with that of the earth Secondly but as for the coelestiall harmony he might perhaps under this mysticall expression according to his usuall custome shadow forth unto us that mutuall proportion harmonical consent which he did conceive in the severall bignes distance motions of the orbs So that notwithstanding these objections it is evident that Pythagoras was of this opinion and that his Authority may adde somwhat for the confirmation of it Vnto him assented Aristarchus Samius who flourished about 280 yeares before the Birth of our Saviour and was by reason of this opinion arraigned for prophanes and sacriledge by the Ariopagites because he had blasphemed the deity of Vesta affirming the earth to move To them agreed Philaus Heraclides Pontius Nicetas Syracusanus Ecphantus Lucippus and Plato himself as some think So likewise Numa Pompilius as Plutarch relates it in his life who in reference to this opinion built the temple of Vesta round like the universe in the middle of it was placed the perpetuall vest all fire by which he did represent the Sunne in the centre of the world All these men were in their severall times of speciall Note as well for their extraordinarie learning as for this opinion 'T is considerable that since this Science of Astronomy hath bin raised to any perfection there have been many of the best skill in it that have assented unto that assertion which is here defended Amongst whom was the Cardinall Cusanus but more especially Copernicus who was a man very exact and diligent in these studies for above 30 yeres together from the yeare 1500 to 1530 and upwards and since him most of the best Astronomers have been of this side So that now there is scarce any of note and skil who are not Copernicus his followers and if we should goe to most voices this opinion would carry it from any other It would be too tedious to reckon up the names of those that may be cited for it I wil only mention some of the chief Such were Ioachinus Rheticus an elegant writer Christopherus Rothman Mestilin a man very eminent for his singular skill in this Science who though at the first he were a follower of Ptolomy yet upon his second and more exact thoughts he concluded Copernicus to be in the right that the usual Hypothesis praescriptione potiùs quà m ratione valet do's prevaile more by prescription then reason So likewise Erasmus Reinholdus who was the man that calculated the Pratenicall Tables from Copernicus his observations and did intend to write a Commentarie upon his other Works but that he was taken out of this life before hee could finish those resolutions Vnto these also I might adde the Names of Gilbert Keplar Gallilaeus with sundry others who have much beautified and confirmed this Hypothesis with their new inventions Nay I may safely affirme that amongst the varietie of those opinions that are in Astronomy there are more of those which have skill in it that are of this opinion not only than any other side but than all the rest put together So that now it is a greater Argument of Singularitie to oppose it 'T is probable that many other of the Antients would have assented unto this opinion if they had been acquainted with those experiments which later times have found out for the confirmation of it And therefore Rheticus and Keplar doe so oten wish that Aristotle were now alive againe Questionlesse he was so rational ingenious a man not halfe so obstinate as many of his followers that upon such probabilities as these he
heavinesse a man may carry it up and downe with him as a Snaile do's his House and so whether hee follow the enemy or fly from him hee ha's still this advantage that he may take his castle and defence along with him But then againe there are on the other side as many inconveniences For 1 It's perspicuitie would make it so open that a man should not bee able to retire himselfe into any private part of it And then 2 Being so extremely sollid as wel as invisible a man should be stil in danger of knocking his head against every Wall and Pillar unlesse it were also intangible as some of the Peripatetickes affirme 3 It 's being without all gravitie would bring this inconvenience that every little puffe of wind would blow it up and downe since some of the same sect are not ashamed to say that the Heavens are so utterly devoid of heavinesse that if but a little Fly should justle against the vast frame of the Coelestiall Sphaeres hee would move them out of their places A strong fancy that could bee at leisure might might make excellent sport with this Astronomicall fiction So that this first evasion of our Adversaries will not shelter them from the force of that Argument which is taken from the incredible swiftnes of the Heavens 2 Whereas they tell us in the second place that a bigger Body as a Milstone will naturally descend swifter than a lesse as a Pibble I answer This is not because such a great Body is in it selfe more easily movable but because the bigger any thing is which is out of it 's owne place the stronger will bee it 's naturall desire of returning thither and so consequently the quicker it's motion But now those Bodies that move circularly are alwayes in their proper scituations and so the same reason is not applyable unto them And then whereas 't is said that Magnitude do's alwayes adde to the swiftnesse of a violent motion as Winde will move a great Shippe sooner than a little Stone Wee answer This is not because a Shippe is more easily movable in it selfe than a little Stone For I suppose the Objector will not thinke hee can throw the one as farre as the other but because these little Bodies are not so liable to that kinde of violence from whence their motion do's proceed As for those instances which are cited to illustrate the possibilitie of this swiftnesse in the Heavens wee answer The passage of a sound is but very slow in comparison to the motion of the Heavens And then besides the swiftnesse of the Species of sound or sight which are accidents are not fit to infer the like celeritie in a materiall substance and so likewise for the Light which Aristotle himselfe and with him the generalitie of Philosophers doe for this very reason prove not to bee a Body because it moves with such swiftnesse of which it seemes they thought a Body to bee incapable Nay the Objector himselfe in another place speaking of Light in reference to a substance do's say Lumen est accidens sic species rei visae alia est ratio substantiarum alia accidentium To that of a Bullet wee answer Hee might as well have illustrated the swiftnes of a bullet which wil passe 4 or 5 miles in 2 minutes by the motion of a hand in a Watch which passes 2 or 3 inches in 12 houres there being a greater disproportion betwixt the motion of the heavens and the swiftnes of a Bullet than there is 'twixt the swiftnes of a bullet and the motion of a hand in a watch Another Argument to this purpose may be taken from the chiefe end of the Diurnall and Annuall motions which is to distinguish betwixt Night and Day Winter and Summer and so consequently to serve for the commodities and seasons of the habitable World Wherfore it may seeme more agreeable to the Wisedome of Providence for to make the Earth as well the efficient as the finall cause of this motion Especially since nature in her other operations do's never use any tedious difficult means to performe that which may as well bee accomplished by shorter and easier wayes But now the appearances would be the same in respect of us if only this little point of Earth were made the subject of these motions as if the vast Frame of the World with all those Stars of such number and bignes were moved about it 'T is a common Maxime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nature do's nothing in vaine but in all her courses do's take the most compendious way 'T is not therefore I say likely that the whole Fabricke of the Heavens which do so much exceed our Earth in magnitude and perfection should bee put to undergoe so great and constant a Worke in the service of our Earth which might more easily save all that labour by the circumvolution of it's owne Body especially since the Heavens doe not by this motion attaine any farther perfection for themselves but are made thus serviceable to this little Ball of Earth So that in this case it may seeme to argue as much improvidence in nature to imploy them in this motion as it would in a Mother who in warming her Childe would rather turne the fire about that than that about the sire Or in a Cook who would not rost his Meat by turning it about to the fire but rather by turning the fire about it Or in a man who ascending some high Tower to save the labour of stirring his head should rather desire that all the Regions might successively bee turned before his eye that so hee might easily take a view of them Wee allow every Watch-maker so much wisdome as not to put any motion in his Instrument which is superfluous or may bee supplied an easier way and shall wee not thinke that Nature ha's as much providence as every ordinary Mechanicke Or can wee imagine that She should appoint those numerous and vast Bodies the Stars to compasse us with such a swift and restlesse motion so full of confusion and uncertainties when as all this might as well be done by the revolution of this little Ball of Earth Amongst the severall parts of the World there are six Planets which are generally granted to move As for the Sun and the Earth and the fixed Starres it is yet in question which of them are naturally indowed with the same condition Now common reason will dictate unto us that motion which is most agreeable to that which in kind and properties is most neer to those Bodies that undoubtedly are moved But now there is one eminent qualification wherin the Earth do's agree with the Planets wheras the Sun together with the fixed stars do in the same respect differ from them and that is Light which all the Planets and so too the Earth are fain to borrow elswhere whilest the Sun and the Stars have it of their owne From whence it may