The Discovery of a World in the Moone Part 6

_Adeo sumus superiores veteribus, ut quam illi carminis magici p.r.o.nunciatu de missam representa.s.se putantur nos non tantum innocenter demittamus, sed etiam familiari quodam intuitu ejus quasi conditionem intueamur._

"So much are wee above the ancients, that whereas they were faine by their magical charms to represent the Moones approach, wee cannot onely bring her lower with a greater innocence, but may also with a more familiar view behold her condition."

And because you shall have no occasion to question the truth of those experiments, which I shal afterwards urge from it; I will therefore set downe the testimony of an enemy, and such a witnesse hath alwaies beene accounted prevalent: you may see it in the abovenamed _Caesar la Galla_,[2] whose words are these:

_Mercurium caduceum gestantem, clestia nunciare, & mortuorum animas ab inferis revacare sapiens finxit antiquitas. Galilaeum ver novum Iovis interpretem Telescopio caducaeo instructum Sydera aperire, & veterum Philosophorum manes ad superos revocare solers nostra aetas videt & admiratur._

Wise antiquity fabled _Mercury_ carrying a rodde in his hand to relate newes from Heaven, and call backe the soules of the dead, but it hath beene the happinesse of our industrious age to see and admire _Galilaeus_ the new Emba.s.sadour of the G.o.ds furnished with his perspective to unfold the nature of the Starres, and awaken the ghosts of the ancient Philosophers. So worthily and highly did these men esteeme of this excellent invention.

[Sidenote 1: _De macula in sole obser._]

[Sidenote 2: _De phaenom. c. 1._]

Now if you would know what might be done by this gla.s.se, in the sight of such things as were neerer at hand, the same Authour will tell you,[1]

when hee sayes, that by it those things which could scarce at all bee discerned by the eye at the distance of a mile and a halfe, might plainely and distinctly bee perceived for 16 Italian miles, and that as they were really in themselves, without any transposition or falsifying at all. So that what the ancient Poets were faine to put in a fable, our more happy age hath found out in a truth, and we may discerne as farre with these eyes which _Galilaeus_ hath bestowed upon us, as _Lynceus_ could with those which the Poets attributed unto him. But if you yet doubt whether all these observations were true, the same Authour may confirme you,[2] when hee saies they were shewed,

_Non uni aut alteri, sed quamplurimis, neque gregariis hominibus, sed praecipuis atque disciplinis omnibus, necnon Mathematicis & opticis praeceptis, optime instructis sedula ac diligenti inspectione_.

"Not to one or two, but to very many, and those not ordinary men, but to those who were well vers'd in Mathematickes and Opticks, and that not with a meere glance but with a sedulous and diligent inspection."

And least any scruple might remaine unanswered, or you might thinke the men who beheld all this though they might be skilfull, yet they came with credulous minds, and so were more easie to be deluded. He addes that it was shewed,[3]

_vius qui ad experimenta haec contradicendi animo accesserant_.

"To such as were come with a great deale of prejudice, and an intent of contradiction."

Thus you may see the certainety of those experiments which were taken by this gla.s.se. I have spoken the more concerning it, because I shall borrow many things in my farther discourse, from those discoveries which were made by it.

[Sidenote 1: _ibid. c. 5._]

[Sidenote 2: _Cap. 1._]

[Sidenote 3: _Cap. 5._]

I have now cited such Authors both ancient and moderne, who have directly maintained the same opinion. I told you likewise in the proposition that it might probably be deduced from the tenent of others: such were _Aristarchus_, _Philolaus_ and _Copernicus_, with many other later writers who a.s.sented to their hypothesis, so _Ioach. Rlelicus_, _David Origa.n.u.s_, _Lansbergius_, _Guil. Gilbert_, and (if I may believe _Campanella_[1]) _Innumeri alii Angli & Galli_. Very many others both English and French, all who affirmed our Earth to be one of the Planets, and the Sunne to bee the Centre of all, about which the heavenly bodies did move, and how horrid soever this may seeme at the first, yet is it likely enough to be true, nor is there any maxime or observation in Opticks (saith _Pena_) that can disprove it.

[Sidenote 1: _Apologia pro Galilaeo._]

Now if our earth were one of the Planets (as it is according to them) then why may not another of the Planets be an earth?

Thus have I shewed you the truth of this proposition: Before I proceede farther, 'tis requisite that I informe the Reader, what method I shall follow in the proving of this chiefe a.s.sertion, that there is a World in the Moone.

The order by which I shall bee guided will be that which _Aristotle_[1]

uses in his booke _De mundo_ (if that booke were his.)

[Sidenote 1: _a 1. cap. ad 10m._]

First, pe?? t?? ?? a?t? of those chiefe parts which are in it; not the elementary and aethereall (as he doth there) since this doth not belong to the elementary controversie, but of the Sea and Land, &c. Secondly, pe?? a?t?? pa???, of those things which are extrinsecall to it, as the seasons, meteors and inhabitants.

Proposition 7.

_That those spots and brighter parts which by our sight may be distinguished in the Moone, doe shew the difference betwixt the Sea and Land in that other World._

For the cleare proofe of this proposition, I shall first reckon up and refute the opinions of others concerning the matter and forme of those spots, and then shew the greater probability of this present a.s.sertion, and how agreeable it is to that truth, which is most commonly received; as for the opinions of other concerning these, they have beene very many, I will only reckon up those which are common and remarkeable.

Some there are that thinke those spots doe not arise from any deformity of the parts, but a deceit of the eye, which cannot at such a distance discerne an equall light in that planet, but these do but onely say it, and shew not any reason for the proofe of their opinion: Others think[1]

that there be some bodies betwixt the Sunne and Moone, which keeping off the lights in some parts, doe by their shadow produce these spots which wee there discerne.

[Sidenote 1: So _Bede_ in _d. de Mund. const.i.t._]

Others would have them to be the figure of the mountaines here below represented there as in a looking-gla.s.se. But none of those fancies can bee true, because the spots are stil the same, & not varied according to the difference of places, and besides, _Cardan_ thinks it is impossible that any image should be conveyed so farre as there to be represented unto us at such a distance,[1] but tis commonly related of _Pythagoras_, that he by writing, what he pleased in a gla.s.se, by the reflexi of the same species, would make those letters to appeare in the circle of the Moone, where they should be legible by any other, who might at that time be some miles distant from him.[2]* _Agrippa_ affirmes this to be possible, and the way of performing it not unknowne to himselfe, with some others in his time. It may be that our Bishop did by the like meanes performe those strange conclusions which hee professes in his _Nuncius inanimatus_, where hee pretends that hee can informe his friends of what he pleases, though they be an hundred miles distant, _forte etiam, vel milliare millesimum_, they are his owne words, and, perhaps, a thousand, and all this in a minutes s.p.a.ce, or little more, quicker than the Sunne can move.

[Sidenote 1: _De subtil. lib. 3._]

[Sidenote 2*: _Occulta ad Philos. l. 1. cap. 6._]

Now, what conveyance there should be for so speedy a pa.s.sage, I cannot conceive, unlesse it be carried with the light, then which wee know not any thing quicker; but of this onely by the way; however, whether those images can be represented so or not, yet certaine it is, those spots are not such representations. Some thinke that when G.o.d had at first created too much earth to make a perfect globe, not knowing well where to bestow the rest, he placed it in the Moone, which ever since hath so darkened it in some parts, but the impiety of this is sufficient confutation, since it so much detracts from the divine power and wisedome.

The *[1]Stoicks held that planet to be mixed of fire and aire, and in their opinion, the variety of its composition, caused her spots: _Anaxagoras_ thought all the starres to be of an earthly nature, mixed with some fire, and as for the Sunne, hee affirmed it to be nothing else but a fiery stone; for which later opinion, the _Athenians_ sentenc'd him to death;[2] those zealous Idolaters counting it a great blasphemy, to make their G.o.d a stone, whereas not withstanding, they were so senslesse in their adoration of Idolls, as to make a stone their G.o.d, this _Anaxagoras_ affirmed the Moone to be more terrestriall then the other, but of a greater purity then any thing here below, and the spots hee thought were nothing else, but some cloudy parts, intermingled with the light which belonged to that Planet, but I have above destroyed the supposition on which this fancy is grounded: _Pliny_[3] thinkes they arise from some drossie stuffe, mixed with that moysture which the Moone attracts unto her selfe, but hee was of their opinion, who thought the starres were nourished by some earthly vapours, which you may commonly see refuted in the _Commentators_ on the bookes, _de Clo_.

[Sidenote 1*: _Plut. de placit. phil. l. 2. c. 25._]

[Sidenote 2: _Iosephus l. 2. con. App._ _August. de civit. Dei. l. 18. c. 41._]

[Sidenote 3: _Nat. Hist. lib. 2. c. 9._]

_Vitellio_ and _Reinoldus_[1] affirme the spots to be the thicker parts of the Moone, into which the Sunne cannot infuse much light, and this (say they) is the reason, why in the Sunnes eclipses, the spots and brighter parts are still in some measure distinguished, because the Sunne beames are not able so well to penetrate through those thicker, as they may through the thinner parts of the Planet. Of this opinion also was _Caesar la Galla_, whose words are these,[2]

"The Moone doth there appeare clearest, where shee is transpicuous, not onely through the superficies, but the substance also, and there she seemes spotted, where her body is most opacous."

The ground of this his a.s.sertion was, because hee thought the Moone did receive and bestow her light by illumination onely, and not at all by reflexion, but this, together with the supposed penetration of the Sunne beames, and the perspicuity of the Moones body I have above answered and refuted.

[Sidenote 1: _Opt. lib. 9._ _Comment. in Purb. pag. 164._]

[Sidenote 2: _Ex qua parte luna est transpicua non totum secundum superficiem, sed etiam secundum substantiam, eatenus clara, ex qua autem parte opaca est, eatenus obscura videtur._ _De Phaenom.

cap. 11._]

The more common and generall opinion[1] is, that the spots are the thinner parts of the Moone, which are lesse able to reflect the beames that they receive from the Sunne, and this is most agreeable to reason, for if the starres are therefore brightest, because they are thicker and more solid then their orbes, then it will follow, that those parts of the Moone which have lesse light, have also lesse thickenesse. It was the providence of nature (say some) that so contrived that planet to have these spots within it, for since that is neerest to those lower bodies which are so full of deformity, 'tis requisite that it should in some measure agree with them, and as in this inferiour world the higher bodies are the most compleat, so also in the heavens perfection is ascended unto by degrees, and the Moone being the lowest, must be the least pure, and therefore _Philo_ the Jew[2] interpreting _Iacobs_ dreame concerning the ladder, doth in an allegory shew, how that in the fabricke of the world, all things grow perfecter as they grow higher, and this is the reason (saith hee) why the Moone doth not consist of any pure simple matter, but is mixed with aire, which shewes so darkely within her body.

[Sidenote 1: _Albert. mag. de coaevis. Q. 4. Art. 21._ _Colleg. Con._]

[Sidenote 2: _De Somniis._]

But this cannot be a sufficient reason, for though it were true that nature did frame every thing perfecter as it was higher, yet is it as true, that nature frames every thing fully perfect for that office to which shee intends it. Now, had she intended the Moone meerly to reflect the Sunne beames and give light, the spots then had not so much argued her providence, as her unskilfulnesse and imperfection,[1] as if in the haste of her worke shee could not tell how to make that body exactly fit, for that office to which she appointed it.