Part 5 (2/2)

[Sidenote 4: _De Clo. l. 2. cap. 13._]

[Sidenote 5: _Plut. ibid. cap. 30._]

[Sidenote 6: _Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 34. cap. 6._]

To this opinion of _Pythagoras_ did _Plato_ also a.s.sent, when hee 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,[1] of an _aetherea terra_, and _lunares populi_, an aethereall earth, and inhabiters in the Moone; 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 bee a Trinity of worlds, whereof the first is this of ours, the second in the Moone whose element of water is represented by the spheare of _Mercury_, the aire by _Uenus_, and the fire by the Sunne. And that the whole Universe might the better end in earth as it began, they have contrived it, that _Mars_ shall be a spheare of the fire, _Iupiter_ of aire, _Saturne_ of water; and above all these, the Elysian fields, s.p.a.cious 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_[2] speaking of this _Platonicke_ fancie, _quae in tres trientes mundum quasi a.s.sem divisit_, thinks 'tis confutation enough, to say, 'tis _Plato's_. However for the first part of this a.s.sertion, it was a.s.sented unto by many others, and by reason of the grossnesse and inequality of this planet, 'twas frequently called _quasi terra clestis_, as being esteemed the sediment and more imperfect part of those purer bodies, you may see this proved by _Plutarch_,[3] in that delightfull work which he properly made for the confirmition of this particular. With him agreed _Alcinous_[4] and _Plotinus_, later Writers. Unto these I might also adde the imperfect testimony of _Mahomet_, whose authority of grant can adde but little credit to this opinion, because hee was an ignorant imposter, but yet consider that originall, from whence hee derived most of his knowledge, and then, perhaps, his witnesse may carry with it some probablity. He is commonly thought by birth to be an Ismaelite, being instructed by the Jewes in the secrets of their Philosophy,[5] and perhaps, learned this from those Rabbies, for in his _Alcaron_, hee talkes much of mountaines, pleasant fields, and cleare rivers in the heavens, but because he was for the maine very unlearned, he was not able to deliver any thing so distinctly as he was informed.[6] The Cardinall _Cusa.n.u.s_ and _Iornandus Bunus_, held a particular world in every Starre, and therefore one of them defining our earth, he saies, it is

_stella quaedam n.o.bilis, quae lunam & calorem & influentiam habet aliam, & diversam ab omnibus aliis stellis_;

a ”n.o.ble starre having a distinct light, heat and influence from all the rest.” Unto this _Nichol. Hill_, a country man of ours was inclined, when he said _Astrea terrae natura probabilis est_: ”That 'tis probable the earth hath a starry nature.”[7]

[Sidenote 1: _Plat. de conviviis._ _Macrob. Somn. Scip. lib. 1. ca. 11._]

[Sidenote 2: _Exercit. 62._]

[Sidenote 3: _De facie Lunae._]

[Sidenote 4: _Inst.i.t. ad discip._ Plat. _Cael. Rhodig. l. 1. c. 4._]

[Sidenote 5: _Azoara. 57. & 65._]

[Sidenote 6: _Cusa. de doct. ign. l. 2. cap. 12._]

[Sidenote 7: _Philos. epicur. part. 434._]

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.[1] As for those workes of _Maeslin_ and _Keplar_ wherein they doe more expresly treate of this opinion, I have not yet had the happinesse to see them. However their opinions appeare plaine enough from their owne writings, and the testimony of others concerning them. But _Iulius Caesar_, whom I have above quoted, speaking of their testimony whom I now cite for this opinion,[2] _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 a.s.suredly knowes they never so much as dreamt of it. But I had rather believe their owne words, then his pretended knowledge.

[Sidenote 1: _In Thesibus_ _dissertatio c.u.m Nic. Hill._ _Nuncius Sydereus._]

[Sidenote 2: _De phaenom. lunae. c. 4._]

'Tis true indeed, in many things they doe but trifle, but for the maine scope of those discourses, 'tis as manifest they seriously meant it, as any indifferent Reader may easily discerne; 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 'tis very likely if it had beene but a jest, _Galilaeus_ would never have suffered so much for it as afterwards he did. But as for the knowledge which hee pretends, you may guesse what it was by his confidence (I say not presumption) in other a.s.sertions, and his boldnesse[1] in them may well derogate from his credit in this. For speaking of _Ptolome's_ _Hypothesis_ he p.r.o.nounces this verdict,

_Impossibile est excentricorum & epicyclorum positio, nec aliquis est ex Mathematicis adeo stultus qui veram illam existimet._

”The position of _Excentricks_ and _Epicycles_ is altogether impossible, nor is there any Mathematician such a foole as to thinke 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 Authour 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 feined Orbes supplyed; if so, then _Caesar la Galla_ was much mistaken. I thinke his a.s.sertions are equally true, that _Galilaeus_ and _Keplar_ did not hold this, and that there were none which ever held that other.

[Sidenote 1: _Cap. 7._]

But in my following discourse I shall most insist on the observation of _Galilaeus_, the inventour of that famous perspective, whereby we may discerne the heavens hard by us, whereby those things which others have formerly guest at are manifested to the eye, and plainely discovered beyond exception or doubt, of which admirable invention, these latter ages of the world may justly boast, and for this expect to be celebrated by posterity. 'Tis related of _Eudoxus_, that hee wished himselfe burnt with _Phaeton_, so he might stand over the Sunne to contemplate its nature; had hee lived in these daies, he might have enjoyed his wish at an easie rate, and scaling the heavens by this gla.s.se, might plainely have discerned what hee so much desired. _Keplar_ considering those strange discoveries which this perspective had made, could not choose but cry out in a p??s?p?pe?a and rapture of admiration.

_O multiscium & quovis sceptro pretiosius perspicillum! an qui te dextra tenet, ille non dominus const.i.tuatur operum Dei?_

And _Johannes Fabricius_[1] an elegant writer, speaking of the same gla.s.se, and for this invention preferring our age before those former times of greater ignorance, saies thus;

<script>