diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-16 14:23:23 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-16 14:23:23 -0800 |
| commit | 32ce3ac58f8809eac4c36158b14d228010fc4058 (patch) | |
| tree | d308a9d73b67af88b26f561e9059751d00e0f2ec /75391-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '75391-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 75391-h/75391-h.htm | 3821 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 75391-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 342898 bytes |
2 files changed, 3821 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/75391-h/75391-h.htm b/75391-h/75391-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d746d38 --- /dev/null +++ b/75391-h/75391-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,3821 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html> +<html lang="en"> +<head> + <meta charset="UTF-8"> + <title> + Ocellus Lucanus on the nature of the universe, &c. | Project Gutenberg + </title> + <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> + <style> + +a { + text-decoration: none; +} + +body { + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; +} + +h1,h2,h3,h4 { + text-align: center; + clear: both; +} + +h2.nobreak { + page-break-before: avoid; +} + +hr.chap { + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + clear: both; + width: 65%; + margin-left: 17.5%; + margin-right: 17.5%; +} + +div.chapter { + page-break-before: always; +} + +p { + margin-top: 0.5em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: 0.5em; + text-indent: 1em; +} + +table { + margin: 1em auto 1em auto; + max-width: 40em; + border-collapse: collapse; +} + +td { + padding-left: 2.25em; + padding-right: 0.25em; + vertical-align: top; + text-indent: -2em; +} + +.tdr { + text-align: right; +} + +.blockquote { + margin: 1.5em 10%; +} + +.center { + text-align: center; + text-indent: 0em; +} + +.footnotes { + margin-top: 1em; + border: dashed 1px; +} + +.footnote { + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + font-size: 0.9em; +} + +.footnote .label { + position: absolute; + right: 84%; + text-align: right; +} + +.fnanchor { + vertical-align: super; + font-size: .8em; + text-decoration: none; +} + +.larger { + font-size: 125%; +} + +.noindent { + text-indent: 0em; +} + +.nw { + white-space: nowrap; +} + +.pagenum { + position: absolute; + right: 4%; + font-size: smaller; + text-align: right; + font-style: normal; +} + +.poetry-container { + text-align: center; +} + +.poetry { + display: inline-block; + text-align: left; +} + +.poetry .stanza { + margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em; +} + +.poetry .verse { + padding-left: 3em; +} + +.poetry .indent0 { + text-indent: -3em; +} + +.poetry .indent12 { + text-indent: 3em; +} + +.right { + text-align: right; +} + +.smaller { + font-size: 80%; +} + +h2 .smaller { + font-size: 60%; +} + +.smcap { + font-variant: small-caps; + font-style: normal; +} + +.allsmcap { + font-variant: small-caps; + font-style: normal; + text-transform: lowercase; +} + +.titlepage { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 3em; + text-indent: 0em; +} + +.x-ebookmaker .poetry { + display: block; + margin-left: 1.5em; +} + +.x-ebookmaker .blockquote { + margin: 1.5em 5%; +} + + </style> + </head> +<body> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75391 ***</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_i"></a>[i]</span></p> + +<h1>OCELLUS LUCANUS<br> +<span class="smaller">ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE;<br> +<span class="smaller"><i>&c. &c. &c.</i></span></span></h1> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_ii"></a>[ii]</span></p> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_iii"></a>[iii]</span></p> + +<p class="titlepage"><span class="larger">OCELLUS LUCANUS</span><br> +ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE.</p> + +<p class="center"><span class="larger">TAURUS, THE PLATONIC PHILOSOPHER,</span><br> +ON THE ETERNITY OF THE WORLD.</p> + +<p class="center"><span class="larger">JULIUS FIRMICUS MATERNUS</span><br> +OF THE THEMA MUNDI;<br> +<span class="smaller">IN WHICH THE POSITIONS OF THE STARS AT THE<br> +COMMENCEMENT OF THE SEVERAL MUNDANE<br> +PERIODS IS GIVEN.</span></p> + +<p class="center"><span class="larger">SELECT THEOREMS</span><br> +ON THE PERPETUITY OF TIME, BY PROCLUS.</p> + +<p class="titlepage"><span class="smaller">TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINALS BY</span><br> +<span class="larger">THOMAS TAYLOR.</span></p> + +<div class="blockquote" style="margin-top: 3em;"> + +<p>Αρχα και αιτια και κανων εντι τας ανθρωπινας ευδαιμοσυνας α τω +θειων και τιμιωτατων επιγνωσις.</p> + +<p><i>i. e.</i> The knowledge of divine and the most honourable things, +is the principle and cause and rule of human felicity.—<span class="smcap">Archytas.</span></p> + +</div> + +<p class="titlepage">LONDON:<br> +<span class="smaller">PRINTED FOR THE TRANSLATOR; AND SOLD BY JOHN BOHN,<br> +HENRIETTA-STREET; HENRY BOHN, YORK-STREET;<br> +AND THOMAS RODD, GREAT NEWPORT-STREET.<br> +MDCCCXXXI.</span></p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_iv"></a>[iv]</span></p> + +<p class="titlepage smaller">PRINTED BY RICHARD TAYLOR,<br> +RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.</p> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_v"></a>[v]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="INTRODUCTION">INTRODUCTION.</h2> + +</div> + +<p>The Tracts contained in this small volume will, +I trust, be perused with considerable interest by +every English reader who is a lover of ancient +lore; and whatever innovations may have been +made in the philosophical theories of the ancients +by the accumulated experiments of the moderns, +yet the scientific deductions of the former will, I +am persuaded, ultimately predominate over the +futile and ever-varying conclusions of the latter. +For science, truly so called, is, as Aristotle accurately +defines it to be, the knowledge of things +eternal, and which have a necessary existence. +Hence it has for its basis <i>universals</i>, and not <i>particulars</i>; +since the former are <i>definite</i>, <i>immutable</i>, +and <i>real</i>; but the latter are <i>indefinite</i>, are so incessantly +changing, that they are not for a moment +the same, and are so destitute of reality, that, in +the language of the great Plotinus, they may be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_vi"></a>[vi]</span> +said to be “shadows falling upon shadow<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a>, like +images in water, or in a mirror, or a dream.”</p> + +<p>With respect to Ocellus Lucanus, the author +of the first of these Tracts, though it is unknown +at what <i>precise</i> period he lived, yet as Archytas, +in his epistle to Plato (apud Diog. Laert. viii. 80.), +says “that he conversed with the descendants of +Ocellus, and received from them the treatises of +this philosopher On Laws, On Government, Piety, +and the Generation of the Universe<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a>,” “we cannot +be a great way off the truth,” as my worthy +and very intelligent friend Mr. J. J. Welsh, in a +letter to me, observes, “if we say that he lived +about the time Pythagoras first opened his school +in Italy, B.C. 500; which would give him for +contemporaries in the <i>political</i> world, Phalaris, +Pisistratus, Crœsus, Polycrates, and Tarquin the +Proud; and in the <i>philosophical</i> world, the seven +sages of Greece, Heraclitus of Ephesus, Democritus +of Abdera, &c. &c.”</p> + +<p>All that is extant of his works is the treatise +On the Universe<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a>, and a Fragment preserved by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_vii"></a>[vii]</span> +Stobæus of his treatise On Laws. And in such +estimation was the former of these works held by +Plato and Aristotle, that the latter, as Syrianus +observes (in Aristot. Metaphys.), “has nearly +taken the whole of his two books on Generation +and Corruption from this work;” and that the +former anxiously desired to see it, is evident from +his Epistle to Archytas, of which the following is +a translation:</p> + +<div class="blockquote"> + +<p>“Plato to Archytas the Tarentine, prosperity.</p> + +<p>“It is wonderful with what pleasure we received +the Commentaries which came from you, and how +very much we were delighted with the genius of +their author. To us, indeed, he appeared to be +a man worthy of his ancient progenitors. For +these men are said to have been <i>ten thousand</i><a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> in +number; and, according to report, were the +best of all those Trojans that migrated under +Laomedon.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_viii"></a>[viii]</span></p> + +<p>“With respect to the Commentaries by me +about which you write, they are not yet finished. +However, such as they are, I have sent them to +you. As to guardianship, we both accord in our +sentiments, so that in this particular there is no +need of exhortation.”</p> + +<p>“In the Preface to the Marquis d’Argens’ +French translation of this Tract, he says: ‘I have +often thought that it would be much more advantageous +to read what some of the Greek authors +have said of the philosophy of the ancients, in +order to obtain a knowledge of it, than to consult +modern writers, who, though they may perhaps +write well, are in general too prolix<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>.’</p> + +<p>“In 1762 the Marquis d’Argens published +Ocellus Lucanus, and afterwards Timæus Locrus, +both writers, who according to Chalmers’ Biography +had been neglected by universal consent. +To show, however, the glaring absurdity and outrageous +injustice of what Chalmers says of this +Tract of Ocellus, it is necessary to observe, that +independently of the approbation of this work by +those two great luminaries of philosophy, Plato +and Aristotle, an enumeration of the various<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_ix"></a>[ix]</span> +editions of it will be sufficient. Ocellus was first +printed in Greek at Paris 1539, and afterwards +with a Latin version by Chretien 1541; by Bosch +1554 and 1556; by Nogarola, Ven. 1559; by +Commelin 1596; at Heidelberg 1598; Bologna, +1646, and revised by Vizanius 1661; and lastly, +by Gale, Cambridge, 1671. Here are ten editions, +the last of which is only 49 years prior to the year +1700; so that the universal consent had not yet +been given to neglect this work. Let us see when +it could have taken place afterwards. D’Argens’ +translation appeared in 1762. A new French +translation by the Abbé Batteux was printed in +1768; and he made it without knowing of the +other. D’Argens’ version was reprinted in 1794; +and an amended Greek and Latin text by Rudolph +was printed at Leipsic in 1801; so that there are +in all fourteen known editions, of which Gale’s is +the best. This book has certainly been read in +Greek, Latin, and French, and it most certainly +will be read in English, if any competent translator +will favour us with a good version.</p> + +<p>“In addition to the testimonies of Plato and +Aristotle in favour of this work, Philo, the platonizing +Jew, says: ‘Some are of opinion, that it was +not Aristotle, but certain Pythagoreans, who first +maintained the eternity of the world; but I have +seen a treatise of Ocellus, in which he says, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_x"></a>[x]</span> +world was not generated, and is imperishable, and +indeed he proves it by most exquisite reasoning. +Censorinus also, De Die natali, cap. ii. says, ‘that +the opinion that the human race is perpetual, has +for its authors Pythagoras the Samian, Ocellus +Lucanus, and Archytas of Tarentum.’ He is +likewise mentioned by Jamblichus in his Life of +Pythagoras; by Syrianus in Aristot. Metaphys.; by +Proclus in his Commentary on the Timæus of +Plato, who, as we have shown in the Notes on +Ocellus, demonstrates that he was wrong in ascribing +two powers only instead of three to each +of the elements; and in the last place, this Tract +is cited by Stobæus in Ecl. Phys. lib. i. c. 24: all +which testimonies clearly prove that Chalmers is a +man who cannot say with Socrates (in Plat. Gorg.) +that he has bid farewell to the honours of the +multitude, and has his eye solely directed to +truth<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a>.”</p> +</div> + +<p>To the treatise of Ocellus I have subjoined a +translation of a Fragment of Taurus, a Platonic +philosopher, On the Eternity of the World<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a>;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_xi"></a>[xi]</span> +and also a translation of the Mundi Thema, or +<i>Geniture of the World</i>, from the celebrated astrological +work of Julius Firmicus Maternus, because +it not only admits with Ocellus the perpetuity of +the universe, but unfolds the position of the stars +at the commencement of each of the periods comprehended +in the greater mundane apocatastasis, +which consists of 300,000 years; the first period +after a deluge and conflagration, being, as it were, +a reproduction of the world.</p> + +<p>I have likewise annexed a translation of select +theorems from the 2nd Book of Proclus on Motion, +in which the perpetuity of time, and of the +bodies which are naturally moved with a circular +motion, is incontrovertibly proved, and is demonstrated +by what Plato calls “<i>geometrical necessities</i>” +(γεωμετρικαις αναγκαις).</p> + +<p>In the last place, I have added copious Notes to +these treatises, in order that nothing might be +wanting to render the meaning of them perspicuous +to the unprejudiced and intelligent reader.</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> viz. falling on <i>matter</i>, or the general receptacle of all sensible +forms. See my Translation of the admirable treatise of Plotinus +“On the Impassivity of Incorporeal Natures.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> Περι νομου, περι βασιλειας και ὁσιοτητος, και της του παντος +γενεσεως.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> It is rightly observed by Fabricius, “that this work of Ocellus +was originally written in the Doric dialect, but was afterwards +translated by some grammarian into the common dialect, in order +that it might be more easily understood by the reader.”—Vid. +Biblioth. Græc. tom. i. p. 510.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> In all the editions of Plato, μυριοι, conformably to the above +translation; but from Diogenes Laertius, who, in his Life of Archytas, +gives this epistle of Plato, it appears that the true reading +is Μυραιοι, i. e. Myrenees, so called from Myra, a city of Lycia +in Asia Minor, (see Pliny, v. 27. Strabo xiv. 666.) This 12th +epistle of Plato, though ascribed by Thrasyllus and Diogenes +Laertius to Plato, yet is marked in the Greek manuscripts of it as +spurious.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> Of the Philosophy of Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle, very +few of the moderns have any accurate knowledge, and therefore +on this subject they may be prolix, but they cannot write well. +See this largely and incontrovertibly proved in the Third and +Fourth Books of my Dissertation on the Philosophy of Aristotle.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> For nearly the whole of what is contained in the above three +paragraphs, I am indebted to my excellent friend Mr. J. B. Inglis, +who has also read Ocellus with great attention, and made Notes +upon it; another proof that the work is not neglected.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> This Taurus flourished under Marcus Antoninus, and the +original of the above-mentioned Fragment is only to be found in +the treatise of Philoponus against Proclus, “On the Eternity of +the World.”</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_1"></a>[1]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="OCELLUS_LUCANUS"><span class="smaller">OCELLUS LUCANUS</span><br> +ON THE UNIVERSE.</h2> + +</div> + +<h3>CHAP. I.</h3> + +<p>Ocellus Lucanus has written what follows concerning +the Nature of the Universe; having learnt +some things through clear arguments from Nature +herself, <i>but others from opinion, in conjunction with +reason</i><a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a>, it being his intention [in this work] to derive +what is probable from intellectual perception.</p> + +<p>It appears, therefore, to me, that the Universe +is indestructible and unbegotten, since it always +was, and always will be; for if it had a temporal +beginning, it would not have always existed: thus, +therefore, the universe is unbegotten and indestructible; +for if some one should opine that it was +once generated, he would not be able to find anything +into which it can be corrupted and dissolved, +since that from which it was generated would be +the first part of the universe; and again, that into<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_2"></a>[2]</span> +which it would be dissolved would be the last part +of it.</p> + +<p>But if the universe was generated, it was generated +together with all things; and if it should be +corrupted, it would be corrupted together with all +things. This, however, is impossible<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>. The universe, +therefore, is without a beginning, and without +an end; nor is it possible that it can have any +other mode of subsistence.</p> + +<p>To which may be added, that everything which +has received a beginning of generation, and which +ought also to participate of dissolution, receives +two mutations; one of which, indeed, proceeds +from the less to the greater, and from the worse to +the better; and that from which it begins to change +is denominated generation, but that at which it at +length arrives, is called acme. The other mutation, +however, proceeds from the greater to the less, and +from the better to the worse: but the termination +of this mutation is denominated corruption +and dissolution.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_3"></a>[3]</span></p> + +<p>If, therefore, the whole and the universe were +generated, and are corruptible, they must, when +generated, have been changed from the less to the +greater, and from the worse to the better; but +when corrupted, they must be changed from the +greater to the less, and from the better to the +worse. Hence, if the world was generated, it +would receive increase, and would arrive at its +acme; and again, it would afterwards receive decrease +and an end. For every nature which has a +progression, possesses three boundaries and two +intervals. The three boundaries, therefore, are +generation, acme, and end; but the intervals are, +the progression from generation to acme, and from +acme to the end.</p> + +<p>The whole, however, and the universe, affords, +as from itself, no indication of a thing of this kind; +for neither do we perceive it rising into existence, +or becoming to be, nor changing to the better and +the greater, nor becoming at a certain time worse +or less; but it always continues to subsist in the +same and a similar manner, and is itself perpetually +equal and similar to itself.</p> + +<p>Of the truth of this, the orders of things, their +symmetry, figurations, positions, intervals, powers, +swiftness and slowness with respect to each other; +and, besides these, their numbers and temporal +periods, are clear signs and indications. For all<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_4"></a>[4]</span> +such things as these receive mutation and diminution, +conformably to the course of a generated nature: +for things that are greater and better acquire +acme through power, but those that are less and +worse are corrupted through imbecility of nature.</p> + +<p>I denominate, however, the whole and the universe, +the whole world; for, in consequence of being +adorned with all things, it has obtained this appellation; +since it is from itself a consummate and perfect +system of the nature of all things; for there is nothing +external to the universe, since whatever exists +is contained in the universe, and the universe subsists +together with this, comprehending in itself all +things, some as parts, but others as supervenient.</p> + +<p>Those things, therefore, which are comprehended +in the world, have a congruity with the +world; but the world has no concinnity with anything +else, but is itself co-harmonized with itself. +For all other things have not a consummate or +self-perfect subsistence, but require congruity with +things external to themselves. Thus animals require +a conjunction with air for the purpose of +respiration, but sight with light, in order to see; +and the other senses with something else, in order +to perceive their peculiar sensible object. A conjunction +with the earth also is necessary to the germination +of plants. The sun and moon, the planets, +and the fixed stars, have likewise a coalescence with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_5"></a>[5]</span> +the world, as being parts of its common arrangement. +The world, however, has not a conjunction +with anything else than itself.</p> + +<p>Further still<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a>, what has been said will be easily +known to be true from the following considerations. +Fire, which imparts heat to another thing, is itself +from itself hot; and honey, which is sweet to the +taste, is itself from itself sweet. The principles +likewise of demonstrations, which are indicative of +things unapparent, are themselves from themselves +manifest and known. Thus, also, that which becomes +to other things the cause of self-perfection, +is itself from itself perfect; and that which becomes<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_6"></a>[6]</span> +to other things the cause of preservation and permanency, +is itself from itself preserved and permanent. +That, likewise, which becomes to other +things the cause of concinnity, is itself from itself +co-harmonized; but the world is to other things +the cause of their existence, preservation, and self-perfection. +The world, therefore, is from itself +perpetual and self-perfect, has an everlasting duration, +and on this very account becomes the cause +of the permanency of the whole of things.</p> + +<p>In short, if the universe should be dissolved, it +would either be dissolved into that which has an +existence, or into nonentity. But it is impossible +that it should be dissolved into that which exists, +for there will not be a corruption of the universe +if it should be dissolved into that which has a +being; for being is either the universe, or a certain +part of the universe. Nor can it be dissolved +into nonentity, since it is impossible for being +either to be produced from non-beings, or to be +dissolved into nonentity. The universe, therefore, +is incorruptible, and can never be destroyed.</p> + +<p>If, nevertheless, some one should think that it +may be corrupted, it must either be corrupted +from something external to, or contained in the +universe, but it cannot be corrupted by anything +external to it; for there is not anything external +to the universe, since all other things are comprehended<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_7"></a>[7]</span> +in the universe, and the world is <i>the whole</i> +and <i>the all</i>. Nor can it be corrupted by the things +which it contains, for in this case it will be requisite +that these should be greater and more powerful than +the universe. This, however, is not true<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a>, +for all things are led and governed by the universe, +and conformably to this are preserved and +co-adapted, and possess life and soul. But if the +universe can neither be corrupted by anything +external to it, nor by anything contained within it, +the world must therefore be incorruptible and indestructible; +for we consider the world to be the +same with the universe<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a>.</p> + +<p>Further still, the whole of nature surveyed +through the whole of itself, will be found to derive +continuity from the first and most honourable of +bodies, attenuating this continuity proportionally, +introducing it to everything mortal, and receiving +the progression of its peculiar subsistence; for the +first [and most honourable] bodies in the universe, +revolve according to the same, and after a similar +manner. The progression, however, of the whole +of nature, is not successive and continued, nor yet +local, but subsists according to mutation.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_8"></a>[8]</span></p> + +<p>Fire, indeed, when it is congregated into one +thing, generates air, but air generates water, and +water earth. From earth, also, there is the same +circuit of mutation, as far as to fire, from whence it +began to be changed. But fruits, and most plants +that derive their origin from a root, receive the +beginning of their generation from seeds. When, +however, they bear fruit and arrive at maturity, +again they are resolved into seed, nature producing +a complete circulation from the same to the same.</p> + +<p>But men and other animals, in a subordinate degree, +change the universal boundary of nature; for +in these there is no periodical return to the first +age, nor is there an antiperistasis of mutation into +each other, as there is in fire and air, water and +earth; but the mutations of their ages being accomplished +in a four-fold circle<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a>, they are dissolved, +and again return to existence; these, therefore, +are the signs and indications that the universe, +which comprehends [all things], will always +endure and be preserved, but that its parts, and +such things in it as are supervenient, are corrupted +and dissolved.</p> + +<p>Further still, it is credible that the universe is +without a beginning, and without an end, from its<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_9"></a>[9]</span> +figure, from motion, from time, and its essence; +and, therefore, it may be concluded that the world +is unbegotten and incorruptible: for the form of +its figure is circular; but a circle is on all sides +similar and equal, and is therefore without a beginning, +and without an end. The motion also +of the universe is circular, but this motion is stable +and without transition. Time, likewise, in which +motion exists is infinite, for this neither had a beginning, +nor will have an end of its circulation. +The essence, too, of the universe, is without egression +[into any other place], and is immutable, because +it is not naturally adapted to be changed, +either from the worse to the better, or from the +better to the worse. From all these arguments, +therefore, it is obviously credible, that the world is +unbegotten and incorruptible. And thus much +concerning the whole and the universe.</p> + +<h3>CHAP. II.</h3> + +<p>Since, however, in the universe, one thing is generation, +but another the cause of generation; and +generation indeed takes place where there is a +mutation and an egression from things which rank<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_10"></a>[10]</span> +as subjects; but the cause of generation then subsists +where the subject matter remains the same: +this being the case, it is evident that the cause of +generation possesses both an effective and motive +power, but that the recipient of generation is +adapted to passivity, and to be moved.</p> + +<p>But the Fates themselves distinguish and separate +the impassive part of the world from that which +is perpetually moved [or mutuable]<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a>. For the +course of the moon is the isthmus of immortality +and generation. The region, indeed, above the +moon, and also that which the moon occupies, contain +the genus of the gods; but the place beneath +the moon is the abode of strife and nature; for in +this place there is a mutation of things that are +generated, and a regeneration of things which have +perished.</p> + +<p>In that part of the world, however, in which +nature and generation predominate, it is necessary<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_11"></a>[11]</span> +that the three following things<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> should be present. +In the first place, the body which yields to the +touch, and which is the subject of all generated +natures. But this will be an universal recipient, +and a signature of generation itself, having the +same <i>relation</i> to the things that are generated from +it, as water to taste, <i>silence to sound</i><a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a>, darkness +to light, and the matter of artificial forms to the +forms themselves. For water is tasteless and devoid +of quality, yet is capable of receiving the sweet +and the bitter, the sharp and the salt. Air, also, +which is formless with respect to sound, is the recipient +of words and melody. And darkness, which +is without colour, and without form, becomes the +recipient of splendour, and of the yellow colour +and the white; but whiteness pertains to the statuary’s +art; and to the art which fashions figures +from wax. Matter, however, has a relation in a +different manner to the statuary’s art; for in matter +all things prior to generation are in capacity, but<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_12"></a>[12]</span> +they exist in perfection when they are generated +and receive their proper nature. Hence matter +[or a universal recipient] is necessary to the existence +of generation.</p> + +<p>The second thing which is necessary, is the existence +of contrarieties, in order that mutations and +changes in quality may be effected, matter for this +purpose receiving passive qualities, and an aptitude +to the participation of forms. Contrariety is also +necessary, in order that powers, which are naturally +mutually repugnant, may not finally vanquish, +or be vanquished by, each other. But these powers +are the hot and the cold, the dry and the moist.</p> + +<p>Essences rank in the third place; and these are +fire and water, air and earth, of which the hot and +the cold, the dry and the moist, are powers. But +essences differ from powers; for essences are locally +corrupted by each other, but powers are neither +corrupted nor generated, for the reasons [or forms] +of them are incorporeal.</p> + +<p>Of these four powers, however, the hot and the +cold subsist as causes and things of an effective +nature, but the dry and the moist rank as matter +and things that are passive<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a>; but matter is the first<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_13"></a>[13]</span> +recipient of all things, for it is that which is in +common spread under all things. Hence, the +body, which is the object of sense in capacity, +and ranks as a principle, is the first thing; but +contrarieties, such as heat and cold, moisture and +dryness, form the second thing; and fire and water, +earth and air, have an arrangement in the third +place. For these change into each other; but +things of a contrary nature are without change.</p> + +<p>But the differences of bodies are two: for some +of them indeed are primary, but others originate +from these: for the hot and the cold, the moist +and the dry, rank as primary differences; but the +heavy and the light, the dense and the rare, have +the relation of things which are produced from the +primary differences. All of them, however, are +in number sixteen, viz. the hot and the cold, the +moist and the dry, the heavy and the light, the +rare and the dense, the smooth and the rough, the +hard and the soft, the thin and the thick, the acute +and the obtuse. But of all these, the touch has a +knowledge, and forms a judgement; hence, also, +the first body in which these differences exist in +capacity, may be sensibly apprehended by the +touch.</p> + +<p>The hot and the dry, therefore, the rare and +the sharp, are the powers of fire; but those of +water are, the cold and the moist, the dense and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_14"></a>[14]</span> +the obtuse; those of air are, the soft, the smooth, +the light, and the attenuated; and those of earth +are, the hard and the rough, the heavy and the +thick.</p> + +<p>Of these four bodies, however, fire and earth are +the transcendencies and summits [or extremities] +of contraries. Fire, therefore, is the transcendency +of heat, in the same manner as ice is of cold: +hence, if ice is a concretion of moisture and frigidity, +fire will be the fervour of dryness and heat. +On which account, nothing is generated from ice, +nor from fire<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a>.</p> + +<p>Fire and earth, therefore, are the extremities +of the elements, but water and air are the media, +for they have a mixed corporeal nature. Nor is it +possible that there could be only one of the extremes, +but it is necessary that there should be a +contrary to it. Nor could there be two only, for +it is necessary that there should be a medium, +since media are opposite to the extremes.</p> + +<p>Fire, therefore, is hot and dry, but air is hot and +moist; water is moist and cold, but earth is cold +and dry. Hence, heat is common to air and fire; +cold is common to water and earth; dryness to +earth and fire; and moisture to water and air.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_15"></a>[15]</span> +But with respect to the peculiarities of each, heat +is the peculiarity of fire, dryness of earth, moisture +of air, and frigidity of water. The essences, therefore, +of these remain permanent, through the possession +of common properties; but they change +through such as are peculiar, when one contrary +vanquishes another.</p> + +<p>Hence, when the moisture in air vanquishes the +dryness in fire, but the frigidity in water, the heat +in air, and the dryness in earth, the moisture in +water, and vice versâ, when the moisture in water +vanquishes the dryness in earth, the heat in air, the +coldness in water, and the dryness in fire, the +moisture in air, then the mutations and generations +of the elements from each other into each +other are effected.</p> + +<p>The body, however, which is the subject and +recipient of mutations, is a universal receptacle, +and is in capacity the first tangible substance.</p> + +<p>But the mutations of the elements are effected, +either from a change of earth into fire, or from fire +into air, or from air into water, or from water into +earth. Mutation is also effected in the third place, +when that which is contrary in each element is +corrupted, but that which is of a kindred nature, +and connascent, is preserved. Generation, therefore, +is effected, when one contrariety is corrupted. +For fire, indeed, is hot and dry, but air is hot and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_16"></a>[16]</span> +moist, and heat is common to both; but the peculiarity +of fire is dryness, and of air moisture. +Hence, when the moisture in air vanquishes the +dryness in fire, then fire is changed into air.</p> + +<p>Again, since water is moist and cold, but air is +moist and hot, moisture is common to both. The +peculiarity however of water is coldness, but of +air heat. When, therefore, the coldness in water +vanquishes the heat in air, the mutation from air +into water is effected.</p> + +<p>Further still, earth is cold and dry, but water +is cold and moist, and coldness is common to +both; but the peculiarity of earth is dryness, and +of water moisture. When, therefore, the dryness +in earth vanquishes the moisture in water, a mutation +takes place from water into earth.</p> + +<p>The mutation, however, from earth, in an ascending +progression, is performed in a contrary way; but +an alternate mutation is effected when one whole +vanquishes another, and two contrary powers are +corrupted, nothing at the same time being common +to them. For since fire is hot and dry, but +water is cold and moist; when the moisture in water +vanquishes the dryness in fire, and the coldness in +water the heat in fire, then a mutation is effected +from fire into water.</p> + +<p>Again, earth is cold and dry, but air is hot and +moist. When, therefore, the coldness in earth<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17"></a>[17]</span> +vanquishes the heat in air, and the dryness in +earth, the moisture in air, then a mutation from air +into earth is effected.</p> + +<p>But when the moisture of air corrupts the heat +of fire, from both of them fire will be generated; +for the heat of air and the dryness of fire will still +remain. And fire is hot and dry.</p> + +<p>When, however, the coldness of earth is corrupted, +and the moisture of water, from both of +them earth will be generated. For the dryness of +earth, indeed, will be left, and the coldness of water. +And earth is cold and dry.</p> + +<p>But when the heat of air, and the heat of fire +are corrupted, no element will be generated; for +the contraries in both these will remain, viz. the +moisture of air and the dryness of fire. Moisture, +however, is contrary to dryness.</p> + +<p>And again, when the coldness of earth, and in a +similar manner of water, are corrupted, neither +thus will there be any generation; for the dryness +of earth and the moisture of water will remain. +But dryness is contrary to moisture. And thus, we +have briefly discussed the generation of the first +bodies, and have shown how and from what subjects +it is effected.</p> + +<p>Since, however, the world is indestructible and +unbegotten, and neither received a beginning of +generation, nor will ever have an end, it is necessary<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18"></a>[18]</span> +that the nature which produces generation in +another thing, and also that which generates in itself, +should be present with each other. And that, +indeed, which produces generation in another +thing, is the whole of the region above the moon; +but the more proximate cause is the sun, who, by +his accessions and recessions, continually changes +the air, so as to cause it to be at one time cold, and +at another hot; the consequence of which is, that +the earth is changed, and everything which the +earth contains.</p> + +<p>The obliquity of the zodiac, also, is well posited +with respect to the motion of the sun, for it likewise +is the cause of generation. And universally +this is accomplished by the proper order of the +universe; so that one thing in it is that which +makes, but another that which is passive. Hence, +that which generates in another thing, exists above +the moon; but that which generates in itself, has +a subsistence beneath the moon; and that which +consists of both these, viz. of an ever-running +divine body, and of an ever-mutable generated +nature, is the world.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19"></a>[19]</span></p> + +<h3>CHAP. III.</h3> + +<p>The origin, however, of the generation of man +was not derived from the earth, nor that of other +animals, nor of plants; but the proper order of +the world being perpetual, it is also necessary that +the natures which exist in it, and are aptly arranged, +should, together with it, have a never-failing +subsistence. For the world primarily always +existing, it is necessary that its parts should +be co-existent with it: but I mean by its parts, the +heavens, the earth, and that which subsists between +these; which is placed on high, and is denominated +aerial; for the world does not exist +without, but together with, and from these.</p> + +<p>The parts of the world, however, being consubsistent, +it is also necessary that the natures, comprehended +in these parts, should be co-existent +with them; with the heavens, indeed, the sun and +moon, the fixed stars, and the planets; but with +the earth, animals and plants, gold and silver; with +the place on high, and the aerial region, pneumatic +substances and wind, a mutation to that which is +more hot, and a mutation to that which is more +cold; for it is the property of the heavens to +subsist in conjunction with the natures which it +comprehends; of the earth to support the plants<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20"></a>[20]</span> +and animals which originate from it; and of the +place on high, and the aerial region, to be consubsistent +with all the natures that are generated in it.</p> + +<p>Since, therefore, in each division of the world, +a certain genus of animals is arranged, which surpasses +the rest contained in that division; in the +heavens, indeed, the genus of the gods, but in the +earth men, and in the region on high demons;—this +being the case, it is necessary that the race of +men should be perpetual, since reason truly induces +us to believe, that not only the [great] parts +of the world are consubsistent with the world, but +also the natures comprehended in these parts.</p> + +<p>Violent corruptions, however, and mutations, +take place in the parts of the earth; at one time, +indeed, the sea overflowing into another part of the +earth; but at another, the earth itself becoming +dilated and divulsed, through wind or water +latently entering into it. But an entire corruption +of the arrangement of the whole earth never did +happen, nor ever will.</p> + +<p>Hence the assertion, that the Grecian history +derived its beginning from the Argive Inachus, +must not be admitted as if it commenced from a +certain first principle, but that it originated from +some mutation which happened in Greece; for +Greece has frequently been, and will again be, +barbarous, not only from the migration of foreigners<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21"></a>[21]</span> +into it, but from nature herself, which, though +she does not become greater or less, yet is always +younger, and with reference to us, receives a +beginning.</p> + +<p>And thus much has been sufficiently said by me +respecting <i>the whole</i> and <i>the universe</i>; and further +still, concerning the generation and corruption of +the natures which are generated in it, and the manner +in which they subsist, and will for ever subsist; +one part of the universe consisting of a nature +which is perpetually moved, but another part of a +nature which is always passive; and the former of +these always governing, but the latter being always +governed.</p> + +<h3>CHAP. IV.</h3> + +<p>Concerning the generation of men, however, +from each other, after what manner, and from what +particulars, it may be most properly effected, law, +and temperance and piety at the same time co-operating, +will be, I think, as follows. In the first +place, indeed, this must be admitted,—that we +should not be connected with women for the sake +of pleasure, but for the sake of begetting children.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22"></a>[22]</span></p> + +<p>For those powers and instruments, and appetites, +which are subservient to copulation, were imparted +to men by Divinity, not for the sake of +voluptuousness, but for the sake of the perpetual +duration of the human race. For since it was impossible +that man, who is born mortal, should participate +of a divine life, if the immortality of his +genus was corrupted; Divinity gave completion to +this immortality through individuals, and made +this generation of mankind to be unceasing and +continued. This, therefore, is one of the first +things which it is necessary to survey,—that copulation +should not be undertaken for the sake of +voluptuous delight.</p> + +<p>In the next place, the co-ordination itself of +man should be considered with reference to the +whole, viz. that he is a part of a house and a city, +and (which is the greatest thing of all) that each +of the progeny of the human species ought to give +completion to the world<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a>, if it does not intend to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23"></a>[23]</span> +be a deserter either of the domestic, or political, or +divine Vestal hearth.</p> + +<p>For those who are not entirely connected with +each other for the sake of begetting children, injure +the most honourable system of convention. +But if persons of this description procreate with +libidinous insolence and intemperance, their offspring +will be miserable and flagitious, and will be +execrated by gods and demons, and by men, and +families, and cities.</p> + +<p>Those, therefore, who deliberately consider +these things, ought not, in a way similar to irrational +animals, to engage in venereal connections, +but should think copulation to be a necessary +good. For it is the opinion of worthy men, that +it is necessary and beautiful, not only to fill houses +with large families, and also the greater part of +the earth<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a>, (for man is the most mild and the best +of all animals,) but, as a thing of the greatest consequence,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24"></a>[24]</span> +to cause them to abound with the most +excellent men.</p> + +<p>For on this account men inhabit cities governed +by the best laws, rightly manage their domestic +affairs, and [if they are able] impart to their friends +such political employments as are conformable to +the polities in which they live, since they not only +provide for the multitude at large, but [especially] +for worthy men.</p> + +<p>Hence, many err, who enter into the connubial +state without regarding the magnitude of [the +power of] fortune, or public utility, but direct +their attention to wealth, or dignity of birth. For +in consequence of this, instead of uniting with +females who are young and in the flower of their +age, they become connected with extremely old +women; and instead of having wives with a disposition +according with, and most similar to their +own, they marry those who are of an illustrious +family, or are extremely rich. On this account, +they procure for themselves discord instead of concord; +and instead of unanimity, dissention; contending +with each other for the mastery. For the +wife who surpasses her husband in wealth, in +birth, and in friends, is desirous of ruling over +him, contrary to the law of nature. But the husband +justly resisting this desire of superiority in his +wife, and wishing not to be the second, but the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25"></a>[25]</span> +first in domestic sway, is unable, in the management +of his family, to take the lead.</p> + +<p>This being the case, it happens that not only +families, but cities, become miserable. For families +are parts of cities, but the composition of the whole +and the universe derives its subsistence from parts<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a>. +It is reasonable, therefore, to admit, that such as +are the parts, such likewise will be the whole and +the all which consists of things of this kind.</p> + +<p>And as in fabrics of a primary nature the first +structures co-operate greatly to the good or bad +completion of the whole work; as, for instance, +the manner in which the foundation is laid in +building a house, the structure of the keel in building +a ship, and in musical modulation the extension +and remission of the voice; so the concordant +condition of families greatly contributes to the +well or ill establishment of a polity.</p> + +<p>Those, therefore, who direct their attention to +the propagation of the human species, ought to +guard against everything which is dissimilar and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26"></a>[26]</span> +imperfect; for neither plants nor animals, when +imperfect, are prolific, but to their fructification a +certain portion of time is necessary, in order that +when the bodies are strong and perfect, they may +produce seeds and fruits.</p> + +<p>Hence, it is necessary that boys, and girls also +while they are virgins, should be trained up in exercises +and proper endurance, and that they should +be nourished with that kind of food, which is +adapted to a laborious, temperate, and patient +life.</p> + +<p>Moreover, there are many things in human life +of such a kind, that it is better for the knowledge +of them to be deferred for a certain time. Hence, +it is requisite that a boy should be so tutored, as +not to seek after venereal pleasures before he is +twenty years of age, and then should rarely engage +in them. This, however, will take place, if +he conceives that a good habit of body, and continence, +are beautiful and honourable.</p> + +<p>It is likewise requisite that such legal institutes +as the following should be taught in Grecian cities, +viz. that connection with a mother, or a daughter, +or a sister, should not be permitted either in temples, +or in a public place; for it is beautiful and +advantageous that numerous impediments to this +energy should be employed.</p> + +<p>And universally, it is requisite that all preternatural<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27"></a>[27]</span> +generations should be prevented, and those +which are attended with wanton insolence. But +such as are conformable to nature should be admitted, +and which are effected with temperance, +for the purpose of producing a temperate and legitimate +offspring.</p> + +<p>Again, it is necessary that those who intend to +beget children, should providentially attend to the +welfare of their future offspring. A temperate and +salutary diet, therefore, is the first and greatest +thing which should be attended to by him who +wishes to beget children; so that he should neither +be filled with unseasonable food, nor become intoxicated, +nor subject himself to any other perturbation, +from which the habits of the body may become +worse. But, above all things, it is requisite +to be careful that the mind, in the act of copulation, +should be in a tranquil state: for, from depraved, +discordant, and turbulent habits, bad seed +is produced.</p> + +<p>It is requisite, therefore, to endeavour, with all +possible earnestness and attention, that children +may be born elegant and graceful, and that when +born, they should be well educated. For neither +is it just that those who rear horses, or birds, or +dogs, should, with the utmost diligence, endeavour +that the breed may be such as is proper, and from<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28"></a>[28]</span> +such things as are proper, and when it is proper<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a>; +and likewise consider how they ought to be disposed +when they copulate with each other, in order +that the offspring may not be a casual production;—but +that men should pay no attention to their +progeny, but should beget them casually; and when +begotten, should neglect both their nutriment and +their education: for these being disregarded, the +causes of all vice and depravity are produced, +since those that are thus born will resemble cattle, +and will be ignoble and vile.</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> See Additional Notes, <a id="FNanchor_a" href="#Footnote_a" class="fnanchor">[a]</a>.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> The universe could not be generated together with all things, +for the principle of it must be unbegotten; since everything that +is generated, is generated from a cause; and if this cause was +also generated, there must be a progression of causes ad infinitum, +unless the unbegotten is admitted to be the principle of the universe. +Neither, therefore, can the universe be corrupted together +with all things; for the principle of it being unbegotten is also +incorruptible; that only being corruptible, which was once generated.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> Critolaus, the Peripatetic, employs nearly the same arguments +as those contained in this paragraph, in proof of the perpetuity of +the world, as is evident from the following passage, preserved by +Philo, in his Treatise Περι Αφθαρσιας Κοσμου, “On the Incorruptibility +of the World”: το αιτιον αυτῳ του υγιαινειν, ανοσον εστι· αλλα +και το αιτιον αυτῳ του αγρυπνειν, αγρυπνον εστιν. ει δε τουτο, και το +αιτιον αυτῳ του υπαρχειν, αϊδιον εστιν. αιτιος δε ο κοσμος αυτῳ του +υπαρχειν, ειγε και τοις αλλοις απασιν. αϊδιος ο κοσμος εστιν. i. e. “That +which is the cause to itself of good health, is without disease. But, +also, that which is the cause to itself of a vigilant energy, is sleepless. +But if this be the case, that also which is the cause to itself +of existence, is perpetual. The world, however, is the cause to +itself of existence, since it is the cause of existence to all other +things. The world, therefore, is perpetual.” Everything divine, +according to the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, being a self-perfect +essence, begins its own energy from itself, and is therefore +primarily the cause to itself of that which it imparts to others. +Hence, since the world, being a divine and self-subsistent essence, +imparts to itself existence, it must be without non-existence, and +therefore must be perpetual.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> i. e. It is not true that the universe can contain anything +greater and more powerful than itself.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> Philo Judæus, in his before-mentioned Treatise Περι Αφθαρσιας +Κοσμου, has adopted the arguments of Ocellus in this paragraph, +but not with the conciseness of his original.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> This four-fold mutation of ages in the human race, consists +of the infant, the lad, the man, and the old man, as is well observed +by Theo of Smyrna. See my Theoretic Arithmetic, p. 189.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> In the original, το τε απαθες μερος του κοσμου και το ακινητον, +which is obviously erroneous. Nogarola, in his note on this passage, +says, “Melius arbitror si legatur το τε αειπαθες μερος, και +αεικινητον, ut sit sensus, semper patibilem, et semper mobilem partem +distinguunt ac separant.” But though he is right in reading +αεικινητον for ακινητον, he is wrong in substituting αειπαθες for +απαθες; for Ocellus is here speaking of the distinction between +the celestial and sublunary region, the former of which is <i>impassive</i>, +because not subject to generation and corruption, but the +latter being subject to both these is <i>perpetually mutable</i>.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> Aristotle, in his treatise on Generation and Corruption, has +borrowed what Ocellus here says about the three things necessary +to generation. See my translation of that work.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> In the original, και ψοφος προς σιγην, instead of which it is +necessary to read και σιγη προς ψοφον, conformably to the above +translation. See the Notes to my translation of the First Book of +Aristotle’s Physics, p. 73, &c., in which the reader will find a +treasury of information from Simplicius concerning matter. But +as matter is devoid of all quality, and is a privation of all form, +the necessity of the above emendation is immediately obvious.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Thus also Aristotle, in his Treatise on Generation and Corruption, +θερμον δε και ψυχρον, και ὑγρον, τα μεν τῳ ποιητικα ειναι, τα +δε τῳ παθητικα λερεται, i. e. “With respect to heat and cold, dryness +and moisture, the two former of these are said to be effective, +but the two latter passive powers.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> The substance of nearly the whole of what Ocellus here says, +and also of the two following paragraphs, is given by Aristotle, in +his Treatise on Generation and Corruption.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> In the original, επειτα δε και την αυτην τῳ ανθρωπῳ συνταξιν +προς το ὁλον, ὁτι μερος ὑπαρχων οικου τε και πολεως, και το μεγιστον +κοσμου, συμπληρουν οφειλει το απογενομενον τουτων ἑκαστον, κ. τ. λ. +Here, for και το μεγιστον κοσμου, συμπληρουν, κ. τ. λ., it is requisite +to read, conformably to the above translation, και το μεγιστον, κοσμου +συμπληρουν, κ. τ. λ. Nogarola, in his version, from not perceiving +the necessity of this emendation, has made Ocellus say that man +is the greatest part of the universe; for his translation is as follows: +“Mox eandem hominis constitutionem ad universam referendam, +quippe qui non solum domûs et civitatis, verum etiam +mundi maxima habetur pars,” &c.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> This observation applies only to well regulated cities, but in +London and other large cities, where the population is not restricted +to a definite number, this abundant propagation of the +species is, to the greater part of the community, attended with extreme +misery and want. Plato and Aristotle, who rank among +the wisest men that ever lived, were decidedly of opinion, that the +population of a city should be limited. Hence, the former of these +philosophers says, “that in a city where the inhabitants do not +know each other, there is no light, but profound darkness;” and +the latter, “that as 10,000 inhabitants are too few for a city, so +100,000 are too many.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> For <i>whole</i>, according to the philosophy of Pythagoras and +Plato, has a triple subsistence; since it is either prior to parts, or +consists of parts, or exists in each of the parts of a thing. But a +<i>whole</i>, prior to parts, contains in itself parts causally. The universe +is a whole of wholes, the wholes which it comprehends in itself +(viz. the inerratic sphere, and the spheres of the planets and elements) +being its parts. And in the whole which is in each part of a +thing, every part according to participation becomes a whole, i. e. +a partial whole.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> In the original, ὡς δει, και εξ ὡν δει, και ὁτε δει, a mode of diction +which frequently occurs in Aristotle, and from him in Platonic +writers.</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="OCELLUS_LUCANUS_ON_LAWS">OCELLUS LUCANUS ON LAWS.<br> +<span class="smaller">A FRAGMENT PRESERVED BY STOBÆUS, ECLOG. PHYS. +LIB. I. CAP. 16.</span></h2> + +</div> + +<p>Life, connectedly—contains in itself bodies; but +of this, soul is the cause. Harmony comprehends, +connectedly, the world; but of this, God is the +cause. Concord binds together families and cities; +and of this, law is the cause. Hence, there is a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29"></a>[29]</span> +certain cause and nature which perpetually adapts +the parts of the world to each other, and never +suffers them to be disorderly and without connection. +Cities, however, and families, continue only +for a short time; the progeny of which, and the +mortal nature of the matter of which they consist, +contain in themselves the cause of dissolution; for +they derive their subsistence from a mutable and +perpetually passive nature. For the destruction<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> +of things which are generated, is the salvation of +the matter from which they are generated. That +nature, however, which is perpetually moved<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> +governs, but that which is always passive<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> is +governed; and the one is in capacity prior, but +the other posterior. The one also is divine, and +possesses reason and intellect, but the other is +generated, and is irrational and mutable.</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> In the original, απογενεσις; but the true reading is doubtless +απωλεια, and Vizzanus has in his version <i>interitus</i>. What is here +said by Ocellus is in perfect conformity with the following beautiful +lines of our admirable philosophic poet, Pope, in his Essay +on Man:</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">“All forms that perish other forms supply;</div> + <div class="verse indent0">By turns they catch the vital breath and die;</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Like bubbles on the sea of matter born,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">They rise, they break, and to that sea return.”</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> i. e. The celestial region.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> i. e. The sublunary region.</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30"></a>[30]</span></p> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="ADDITIONAL_NOTES_1">ADDITIONAL NOTES.</h2> + +</div> + +<p><a id="Footnote_a" href="#FNanchor_a" class="label">[a]</a> Page 1.—“<i>But others from opinion in conjunction with +reason</i>;”—which in the original is, τα δε και δοξῃ, μετα +λογου. But Ocellus is not accurate in what he here asserts, +as is evident from what Plato says in his Timæus. For the +divine philosopher having, in the former part of this dialogue, +proposed to consider “what that is which is always being, +but is without generation, and what that is which is generated +[or consists in becoming to be], but is never [really] being,” +adds: “The former of these, indeed, is comprehended +by <i>intelligence in conjunction with reason</i>, since it +always subsists with invariable sameness; but the latter is +perceived <i>by opinion in conjunction with irrational sense</i>, +since it is generated and corrupted, and never truly is.” Τι το ον +μεν αει, γενεσιν δε ουκ εχον· και τι το γιγνομενον μεν, ον +δε ουδεποτε· το μεν δη, νοησει μετα λογου περιληπτον, +αει κατα ταυτα ον· το δ’αυ δοξῃ μετ’ αισθησεως αλογου, +δοξαστον, γιγνομενον και απολλυμενον, οντως δε ουδεποτε +ον. Plato, as is evident from what is said in the Introduction +to this work, had seen this tract of Ocellus, and corrects +him in what he here says, as he also did the opinions +of other philosophers anterior to, or contemporary with him. +For if Ocellus had spoken accurately, he should have said, +“that he had learnt some things through clear arguments +from nature herself, but others from opinion in conjunction +with irrational sense.” For, as Proclus admirably demonstrates +in his Commentary on the above passage from the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31"></a>[31]</span> +Timæus of Plato, truly existing being is only to be apprehended +by us through illuminations from an intellect +superior to the human, in conjunction with the energy of +<i>the summit of our reasoning power</i>; for such is the accurate +meaning of λογος in this place. But opinion is a knowledge +of sensibles conformable to reason, yet without being able to +assign the cause of what it knows; and sense is an irrational +knowledge of the objects to which it is passive, and the instrument +of sense is passion only. See the first volume +of my translation of the Commentaries of Proclus on the +Timæus of Plato, p. 202, &c.</p> + +<p>Ocellus adds, “that it is his intention [in this treatise On +the Universe] to derive what is <i>probable</i> from intellectual +perception.” For in physiological discussions we must be +satisfied with probability and an approximation to the truth. +Hence, Proclus, in his Commentary on that part of the +Timæus in which Plato says, “What essence is to generation, +that truth is to faith,” admirably observes as follows: +“The faith of which Plato now speaks is rational, but is +mingled with irrational knowledge, as it employs sense and +conjecture; hence, it is filled with much of the unstable. +For receiving from sense or conjecture the ὁτι, <i>or that a +thing is</i>, it thus explains causes. But these kinds of knowledge +have much of the confused and unstable. Hence, +Socrates, in the Phædo, reprehends sense in many respects, +because we neither hear nor see anything accurately.</p> + +<p>“How, therefore, can the knowledge which originates +from sense possess the accurate and the irreprehensible? +For the powers which use science alone, comprehend the +whole of the thing known with accuracy; but those that +energise with sense, are deceived, and deviate from accuracy, +on account of sense, and because the object of knowledge is +unstable. For, with respect to that which is material, what<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32"></a>[32]</span> +can any one say of it? since it is always changing and flowing, +and is not naturally adapted to abide for a moment. +But that which is celestial, in consequence of being remote +from us, is not easily known, nor can it be apprehended by +science, but we must be satisfied in the theory of it with +an approximation to the truth, and with probability [instead +of certainty]. For everything which is in place requires +the being situated there, in order to a perfect knowledge of +its nature. The intelligible, however, is not a thing of this +kind, since it is not apprehended by us in place; for, wherever +any one establishes his reasoning energy, there, truth +being everywhere present, he comes into contact with it. +But if it is possible to assert anything firm and stable about +that which is celestial, this also is possible, so far as it participates +of being, and so far as it can be apprehended by +intelligence. For, if anything necessary can be collected +concerning it, it is alone through geometrical demonstrations +which are universal. But so far as it is sensible, it is +difficult to be apprehended, and difficult to be surveyed.”—See +the first volume of my translation of Proclus on the +Timæus of Plato, p. 291.</p> + +<p>In p. 293, he also observes, “that perfectly accurate arguments, +and such as are truly scientific, are not to be expected +in physical discussions, but such as are assimilated to +them. It is besides this requisite to know, that as the world +is mingled from physical powers, and an intellectual and +divine essence; for “physical works, as the [Chaldean] Oracle +says, co-subsist with the intellectual light of the father;” +thus, also, the discussion of the world makes a commixture +of faith and truth. For things which are assumed from +sense participate largely of conjectural discussion; but +things which commence from intelligibles, possess that +which is irreprehensible, and cannot be confuted.” And,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33"></a>[33]</span> +lastly, in p. 296, he adds, “that the want of accuracy in +the theory of the images of being, arises from our imbecility; +for, to the knowledge of them we require imagination, +sense, and many other organs. But the Gods contractedly +contain these in their unity and divine intellection; +for, in sublunary natures, we are satisfied in apprehending +that which, for the most part, takes place on account of the +instability of their subject matter. But again, in celestial +natures, we are filled with much of the conjectural, through +employing sense and material instruments. On this account +we must be satisfied with proximity in the apprehension, of +them, since we dwell remotely at the bottom, as it is said, of +the universe. This also is evident from those that are conversant +with them, who collect the same things respecting +them from different hypotheses; some things, indeed, +through eccentrics, others through epicycles, and others +through evolvents, [in all these] preserving the phænomena.”</p> + +<p>Shuttleworth, in his Astronomy, has demonstrated that +the celestial phænomena may be solved by the hypotheses +of Ptolemy and Tycho Brahe, equally as well as by those +of Copernicus. But astronomers of the present day, from +not being skilled in the logic of Aristotle, are not aware that +true conclusions may be deduced from false premises; and +hence, because their theory solves the phænomena, they +immediately conclude that it is true. Aristotle, in his Posterior +Analytics, has incontrovertibly shown, that the +things from which demonstrative science consists, must be +necessarily true, the causes of, more known than, and prior +to the conclusion. But where the premises of a syllogism +are false, the conclusion is not <i>scientifically</i>, i. e. <i>necessarily</i>, +true. Thus in the syllogism, Every stone is an animal;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34"></a>[34]</span> +every man is a stone; therefore every man is an animal,—the +conclusion is true, but not <i>scientific</i>.</p> + +<p><i>Note to p. 14.</i>—Ocellus is wrong in ascribing two powers +only to each of the elements, instead of three, as is clearly +shown by Proclus, in the following extract from his admirable +Commentary on the Timæus of Plato. “There are +some physiologists (says he) who ascribe one power to each +of the elements; to fire indeed heat, to air frigidity, to +water moisture, and to earth dryness; in so doing, entirely +wandering from the truth. In the first place, because they +subvert the world and order. For it is impossible for things +to be co-adapted to each other, when they possess the most +contrary powers, unless they have something in common. In +the next place, they make the most contrary natures allied +to each other, viz. the hot to the cold, and the moist to the +dry<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a>. It is necessary, however, to make things which are +hostile more remote than things which are less foreign. +For such is the nature of contraries. In the third place, +therefore, the first two powers will have no sympathy whatever +with the rest, but will be divulsed<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> from each other. +For it is impossible to say what is common to humidity and +frigidity. And in addition to all these things, as the elements +are solids, they will not be conjoined to each other by +any medium. It has however been shown that it is not possible +for solids to be conjoined through one medium. Nor +can they be conjoined without a medium. For this is alone +the province of things that are perfectly without interval.</p> + +<p>“But some others, as Ocellus, who was the precursor of +Timæus, attribute two powers to each of the elements; to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35"></a>[35]</span> +fire indeed heat and dryness; to air, heat and moisture; to +water, moisture and coldness; and to earth, coldness and +dryness. And these things are written by this man in his +treatise On Nature. In what, therefore, do these err who +thus speak? In the first place, indeed, wishing to discover +the common powers in the elements, in order that +they may preserve the co-arrangement of them with each +other, they no more assign communion than separation to +them, but equally honour their hostility and their harmony. +What kind of world, therefore, will subsist from these; what +order will there be of things which are without arrangement +and most foreign, and of things which are most allied and +co-arranged? For things which in an equal degree are hostile +and peaceful, will in an equal mode dissolve and constitute +communion. But this communion being similarly dissolved, +and similarly implanted, the universe will no more +exist than not exist. In the second place, they do not assign +the greatest contrariety to the extremes, but to things most +remote from the extremes; though we everywhere see, that +of homogeneous natures, those which are most distant have +the nature of contraries, and not those which are less distant. +How likewise did nature arrange them, since they are +most remote in their situation from each other? Was it not +by perceiving their contrariety, and that the third was more +allied than the last to the first? How, also, did she arrange +the motions of them, since fire is most light and tends upward, +but earth is most heavy and tends downward? But +whence were the motions of them which are most contrary +derived, if not from nature? If, therefore, nature distributed +to them most contrary motions, it is evident that they are +themselves most contrary. For as the motions of simple +beings are simple, and those things are simple of which the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36"></a>[36]</span> +motions are simple, thus also those things are most contrary +of which the motions are most contrary. And this may +occasion some one to wonder at Aristotle, who, in what he +says about motion, places earth as most contrary to fire; +but in what he says about powers, he makes the most remote +of similar natures to be more friendly than those +that are proximate, when they are moved with most contrary +motions. For, as the elements have contrary places +in their positions, as they have contrary motions in lations, +as they have contrary powers, gravity and levity, through +which motions subsist in their forms, thus also they have +contrary passive qualities. Aristotle himself likewise manifests +that earth is contrary to fire. For wishing to show +that it is necessary there should be more bodies than one, he +says: “Moreover, if earth exists, it is also necessary that fire +should exist. For in things, one of the contraries of which +naturally is, the other likewise has a natural subsistence.” +So that neither was he able after any other manner to show +that there are more elements than one, than by asserting +that fire is contrary to earth.</p> + +<p>“Further still, as the elements are solids, how can they be +bound together through one medium? For this is impossible +in solids, as we have before observed. Hence those who +assert these things, neither speak mathematically nor physically, +but unavoidably err in both these respects. For physical +are derived from mathematical entities. <i>Timæus therefore +alone, or any other who rightly follows him, neither attributes +one or two powers alone to the elements, but triple powers; +to fire indeed tenuity of parts, acuteness, and facility of motion; +to air, tenuity of parts, obtuseness, and facility of motion; to +water, grossness of parts, obtuseness, and facility of motion; and +to earth, grossness of parts, obtuseness, and difficulty of motion.</i><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37"></a>[37]</span> +But this is in order that each of the elements may have two +powers, each<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> of which is common to the element placed +next to it, and one power which is different, in the same +manner as it was demonstrated in mathematical numbers +and figures; this different power being assumed from one +of the extremes; and also in order that earth, according to +all the powers, may subsist oppositely to fire; and that the +extremes may have two media, and the continued quantities +two; the latter having solids for the media, but the former, +common powers. For let fire indeed be attenuated in its parts, +acute, and easily moved. For it has an attenuated essence, +and is acute, as having a figure of this kind [i. e. a pyramidal +figure], and on this account is incisive and fugitive<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a>, and +permeates through all the other elements. It is also moved +with facility<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a>, as being most near to the celestial bodies, and +existing in them. For the celestial fire itself is moved with +celerity, as is likewise sublunary fire, which is perpetually +moved in conjunction with it, and according to one circle, +and one impulse. Since, therefore, earth is contrary to fire, +it has contrary powers, viz. grossness, obtuseness, and difficulty +of motion, all which we see are present with it. But +these being thus hostile, and being solids, are also similar +solids. For their sides and their powers are analogous. For +as the gross is to the attenuated, so is the obtuse to the +acute, and that which is moved with difficulty, to that which +is moved with facility. But those are similar solids of +which the sides that constitute the bodies are analogous. +<i>For the sides are the powers of which bodies consist.</i> Hence, as +fire and earth are similar bodies, and similar solids, two analogous<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38"></a>[38]</span> +media fall between them; and each of the media will +have two sides of the extremes situated next to it, and the +remaining side from the other extreme. Hence, since fire +has for its three physical sides the triple powers, tenuity, +acuteness, and facility of motion, by taking away the middle +power, acuteness, and introducing instead of it obtuseness, +we shall produce air, which has two sides of fire, but one of +earth, or two powers of fire, but one of earth; as it is fit +that what is near should rather communicate with it, than +what is separated in the third rank from it.</p> + +<p>“Again, since earth has three physical powers, contrary to +the powers of fire, viz. grossness of parts, obtuseness, and +difficulty of motion; by taking away difficulty of motion, +and introducing facility of motion, we shall produce water, +which consists of gross parts, is obtuse, and is easily moved; +and which has indeed two sides or powers common with +earth, but receives one from fire. And thus these media +will be spontaneously conjoined with each other; communicating +indeed in twofold powers, but differing in similitude +by one power; and the extremes will be bound together by +two media. Each element also will thus be in a greater degree +conjoined to, than separated from, the element which +is near to it; and one world will be perfectly effected +through all of them, and one harmonious order, through +the predominance of analogy. Thus also, of the two cubes +8 and 27, the medium 12 being placed next to 8, will have +two sides of this, but one side of 27. For 12 is produced +by 2 × 2 × 3. But it is vice versâ with 18. For this is +produced by 3 × 3 × 2. And the side of 27 is 3, in the same +manner as 2 is the side of 8. The physical dogmas, therefore, +of Plato, about the elements of the universe, accord +with mathematical speculations.”</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39"></a>[39]</span></p> + +<p>In the Introduction to my Translation of the Timæus of +Plato, I have added the following numbers, for the purpose +of representing this beautiful distribution of the elements, +by Proclus, arithmetically.</p> + +<p>Let the number 60 represent fire, and 480 earth; and the +media between these, viz. 120 and 240, will correspond to +air and water. For, as 60 : 120 :: 240 : 480. But 60 = +3 × 5 × 4, 120 = 3 × 10 × 4, 240 = 6 × 10 × 4, and +480 = 6 × 10 × 8. So that these numbers will correspond +to the properties of the elements as follows:</p> + +<table> + +<tr> + +<td><p class="center">Fire.<br> +3 × 5 × 4<br> +Subtle, acute, moveable.</p></td> + +<td><p class="center">Air.<br> +3 × 10 × 4 ::<br> +Subtle, blunt, moveable.</p></td> + +</tr> + +<tr> + +<td><p class="center">Water.<br> +6 × 10 × 4 :<br> +Dense, blunt, moveable.</p></td> + +<td><p class="center">Earth.<br> +6 × 10 × 8.<br> +Dense, blunt, immoveable.</p></td> + +</tr> + +</table> + +<p>“Hence,” Proclus adds, “these things being thus determined, +let us physically adapt them to the words of Plato. +We call a [physical] plane or superficies, therefore, that +which has two powers only, but a [physical] solid that which +has three powers. And we say, that if we fashion bodies from +two powers, one medium would conjoin the elements to each +other. But since, as we assert, bodies possess triple powers, +they are bound together by two media. For there are two +common powers of the adjacent media, and one power which +is different. And the extremes themselves, if they consisted of +two powers, would be conjoined through one medium. For +let fire, if you will, be alone attenuated and easily moved; +but earth, on the contrary, have alone grossness of parts +and immobility. One medium, therefore, will be sufficient +for these. For grossness of parts and facility of motion, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40"></a>[40]</span> +tenuity of parts and difficulty of motion, are all that is requisite +to the colligation of both. Since, however, each of the +elements is triple, the extremes require two media, and the +things themselves that are adjacent are bound together +through two powers. For solids, and these are things that +have triple contrary powers, are never co-adapted by one +medium.”</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> For το εναντιωτατα here, read τα εναντιωτατα, and for τῳ +θερμον τῳ ψυχρῳ, read το θερμον, κ. τ. λ.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> For απηρτημενα in this place, I read διῃρημενα.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> For μιαν here, it is obviously necessary to read ἑκατεραν.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> For ὑπατικον in this place, read ὑπακτικον.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> Instead of ακινητον here, it is necessary to read ευκινητον.</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41"></a>[41]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="FRAGMENTS_OF_TAURUS">FRAGMENTS OF TAURUS,<br> +<span class="smaller">A PLATONIC PHILOSOPHER,</span><br> +ON THE ETERNITY OF THE WORLD.<br> +<span class="smaller">EXTRACTED FROM PHILOPONUS AGAINST PROCLUS.</span></h2> + +</div> + +<p>Taurus, in his Commentaries on the Timæus of +Plato, says: “In the investigation, whether according +to Plato the world is unbegotten, philosophers +differ in their opinions. For Aristotle +asserts that Timæus says the world was generated<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a>. +And Theophrastus also, in his treatise +On Physical Opinions, says that, according to +Plato, the world was generated, and therefore +writes in opposition to him. At the same time, +however, he asserts that Timæus perhaps supposed +the world to be generated, for the sake of +perspicuity. Certain other persons also infer, that,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42"></a>[42]</span> +according to Plato, the world was generated. +But, again, others contend that Plato believed the +world to be unbegotten. Since, however, those +who assert that the world was generated, cite +many other words of Plato, and likewise the passage +in which Plato<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> says, ‘the world was generated, +for it is visible and tangible;’ this being the +case, it is requisite to direct our attention to the +different ways in which a thing is said to be generated, +and thus we shall know that Plato asserts +the world to be generated, not according to the +signification in which we affirm this of things +which derive their subsistence from a certain temporal +beginning. For this it is which deceives +the multitude, when they conceive the word <i>generated</i> +to imply a temporal origin. A thing, therefore, +is said to be generated, which never indeed +had a beginning in time, but yet is in the same +genus with generated natures. Thus we call a +thing visible, which is not seen, nor has been seen, +nor will be seen, but yet is in the same genus with +things of a visible nature. And this will take place +with a body which may exist about the centre of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43"></a>[43]</span> +the earth. That also is said to be generated, +which, in mental conception, subsists as a composite, +though it never has been a composite. Thus, +in music, the middle chord is said to be composed +of the lowest and highest chord. For though it is +not thus composed, yet there is perceived in it the +power of the one with reference to the other. The +like also takes place in flowers and animals. In +the world, therefore, composition and mixture are +perceived; according to which, we are able to +withdraw and separate qualities from it, and resolve +it into a first subject. The world also is said +to be generated, because it always subsists in becoming +to be, like Proteus changing into all-various +forms; hence, with respect to the world, the earth, +and the natures, as far as to the moon, are continually +changed into each other. But the natures +above the moon are as to their subject nearly the +same, sustaining only a small mutation. They +change, however, according to figure; just as a +dancer being one and the same according to subject, +is changed into various forms by a certain +gesture and motion of the hands. The celestial +bodies, therefore, are thus changed, and different +habitudes of them take place, between the motions +of the planets with reference to the fixed stars, and +of the fixed stars with respect to the planets.</p> + +<p>“The world, likewise, may be said to be generated,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44"></a>[44]</span> +because it derives its existence from something +different from itself, viz. from God, by whom +it is adorned. Thus, also, with those who directly +admit that the world is perpetual, the moon possesses +a generated light from the sun, though there +never was a time when the former was not illuminated +by the latter. If, therefore, some one asserts +that the world is generated according to +Plato, conformably to these significations of the +word, what he says may be admitted. But so far as +the term ‘generated’ signifies a certain time, and +that the world, formerly not existing, was afterwards +generated, this signification, when applied +to the world, must by no means be granted. Plato +himself, indeed, indicates how what he asserts +is to be understood, when he says, ‘It must be +investigated, whether the universe always was, having +no principle whatever of generation, or whether +it was generated, commencing its generation from +a certain cause.’ For the words, ‘no principle +whatever,’ and ‘from a certain cause,’ manifest he +does not intend that a temporal principle should +be assumed; but that what he says, is to be understood +in the same way, as when we say that the +history of the Ephori commenced in the descendants +of Hercules. Others say, that the world had +a beginning from the Demiurgus. For the Demiurgus +is a principle, and so likewise is the paradigm<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45"></a>[45]</span> +of the universe, and matter. But matter +cannot be properly said to be a principle. Again, +Plato does not say that the world is a body, but +that it has a body; indicating by this, that so far as +it possesses a corporeal nature, the very being of +which consists in <i>becoming to be</i>, it may be said to +be generated.”</p> + +<p>Again, Taurus, in the same Commentaries on +the Timæus, having cited the following passage +from that dialogue, viz. “We who are about to +speak concerning the universe, whether it is generated, +or without generation,” observes: “Plato +says this, though the world is unbegotten. And +the poet,</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">‘Though in their race posterior found,’</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + +<p class="noindent">Plato, however, for the sake of discipline, speaks +of the world which is unbegotten, as if it was generated.” +Shortly after this, Taurus says, “What, +therefore, are the causes through which the world +being unbegotten, is supposed to be generated?” +Both these inquiries<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a>, indeed, deserve to be philosophically +investigated. For one of them excites +to piety, but the other is assumed for the sake of +elucidation. For Plato, knowing that the multitude +apprehend that alone to be a cause which has a +precedency in time, and not conceiving it to be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46"></a>[46]</span> +possible for anything otherwise to be a cause, and +also inferring, that, from this opinion, they might +be led to disbelieve in the existence of Providence; +wishing likewise to inculcate this dogma, that the +world is governed by Providence, he tacitly manifests +it to those who are abundantly able to understand +that the world is unbegotten according to +time; but to those who are not able to understand +this, he indicates that it is generated. He is also +anxious that they may believe this, in order that +at the same time they may be persuaded in the +existence of Providence. But the second cause +which induced Plato thus to write, is this,—that +assertions are then more clear, when we meet with +them as with things which actually take place. +Thus geometricians compose diagrams as if they +were generated, though they are not composites. +And Euclid defines a circle, as being more simple, +to be a plane figure, comprehended under one +line, to which all lines falling from one point +within the figure are equal to each other. But +wishing to explain a sphere, he defines it, as if it +was among the number of things generated, to be +formed by the revolution of a semicircle about the +diameter, until it returns to the same point from +which it began to be moved. If, however, he had +intended to explain the sphere which already existed, +he would have defined it to be a solid figure,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47"></a>[47]</span> +comprehended under one superficies, to which all +right lines falling from one point within the figure, +are equal to each other. But it was usual with +Plato, for the sake of discipline, to unfold things +which are without generation<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a>, as if they were +generated. Thus, in the Republic, he introduces +the city as being made, in order that in the formation +of it, the generation of justice might become +more manifest. When, however, Theophrastus +says, that perhaps Plato speaks of the world as +generated for the sake of elucidation, just as we +consider geometrical diagrams to be generated, +perhaps generation does not subsist similarly in +diagrams. Aristotle also asserts the same thing; +for he says, that in diagrams it is not proper in +the beginning to suppose contraries, but this is to +be admitted in the generation of the world; just as +if some one should suppose motion and rest, order +and disorder. Neither, therefore, do all things +require invariable paradigms; but the examples +show that it is not more obvious to assert that the +world is generated, than that it is unbegotten. +But how is it possible to suppose contraries in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48"></a>[48]</span> +diagrams? For can it be supposed that a triangle +is at one and the same time stationary and moved? +Hence, the world is, according to itself, unbegotten. +Nor should any one fatigue himself in +endeavouring to prove from the Atlanticus and +Politicus of Plato, that the world is generated. +For we have shown after what manner the world +is unbegotten, and how it is said by Plato to be +generated. So far, therefore, as it is supposed to +be generated, it will be incorruptible through the +will of God; but so far as it is unbegotten, it will +be incorruptible from its own nature. And this +Plato knew. For everything else that is unbegotten, +is incorruptible.”</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> Timæus, in the Dialogue which bears his name, is represented +by Plato as saying this; for, speaking of the world, he says +γεγονεναι, <i>it was generated</i>.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> See my Translation of the Commentaries of Proclus on the +Timæus, vol. i. from p. 237 to p. 251. And also the Commentary +of the same incomparable man on the words of Plato, in the +same Dialogue, “But we say that whatever is generated, is necessarily +generated by a certain cause.”—Vol. i. of my Translation, +p. 249, &c.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> viz. Whether the world is unbegotten, or generated.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> The sentence in the original is: εθος δε Πλατωνι διδασκαλιας +χαριν, ὡς γινομενα παραδιδοναι. But immediately after χαριν, it is +obviously necessary to add αγενητα. Mahotius also, who published +a Latin translation of this work of Philoponus, has, “Mos est +autem Platoni, doctrinæ gratia, <i>quæ ortu carent</i>, perinde atque +ea, quæ oriuntur, explicare.”</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49"></a>[49]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="MUNDI_THEMA">MUNDI THEMA,<br> +<span class="smaller">OR</span><br> +THE GENITURE OF THE WORLD.<br> +<span class="smaller">TRANSLATED FROM THE THIRD BOOK OF THE MATHESIS +OF JULIUS FIRMICUS MATERNUS.</span></h2> + +</div> + +<p>“O Lollianus, the glory and ornament of our +country, it is requisite to know, in the first place, +that the God, who is the fabricator of man, +produced his form, his condition, and his whole +essence, in the image and similitude of the world, +nature pointing out the way<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a>. For he composed +the body of man, as well as of the world, from the +mixture of the four elements, viz. of fire, water, +air, and earth, in order that the conjunction of all +these, when they were mingled in due proportion,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50"></a>[50]</span> +might adorn an animal in the form of a divine +imitation. And thus the Demiurgus exhibited +man by the artifice of a divine fabrication, in such +a way, that in a small body he might bestow the +power and essence of all the elements, nature, for +this purpose, bringing them together; and also, so +that from the divine spirit, which descended from +a celestial intellect, to the support of the mortal +body, he might prepare an abode for man, which, +though fragile, might be similar to the world. On +this account, the five stars<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a>, and also the sun and +moon, sustain man by a fiery and eternal agitation, +as if he were a minor world<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a>; so that the +animal which was made in imitation of the world +might be governed by an essence similarly divine. +Hence those divine men Petosiris and Necepso<a id="FNanchor_b" href="#Footnote_b" class="fnanchor">[b]</a>, +who deserve all possible admiration, and whose +wisdom approached to the very penetralia of Deity, +scientifically delivered to us the geniture of the +world, that they might demonstrate and show that +man was fashioned conformably to the nature and +similitude of the world, and that he is under the +dominion of the same principles by which the +world itself is governed and contained, and is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51"></a>[51]</span> +perennially supported by the companions of perpetuity<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a>.</p> + +<p>“According to Æsculapius, therefore, and Anubius<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a>, +to whom especially the divinity Mercury +committed the secrets of the astrological science, +the geniture of the world is as follows: They constituted +the Sun in the 15th part of Leo, the Moon +in the 15th part of Cancer, Saturn in the 15th part +of Capricorn, Jupiter in the 15th part of Sagittary, +Mars in the 15th part of Scorpio, Venus in the +15th part of Libra, Mercury in the 15th part of +Virgo, and the Horoscope in the 15th part of +Cancer. Conformably to this geniture, therefore, +to these conditions of the stars, and the testimonies +which they adduce in confirmation of this +geniture, they are of opinion that the destinies of +men, also, are disposed in accordance with the +above arrangement, as may be learnt from that +book of Æsculapius which is called Μυριογενεσις, +(i. e. Ten Thousand, or an innumerable multitude of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52"></a>[52]</span> +Genitures,) in order that nothing in the several +genitures of men may be found to be discordant +with the above-mentioned geniture of the world.</p> + +<p>“We may see, therefore, how far or after what +manner a star accommodates the testimony of its +radiation to the luminaries. For the luminaries +are the Sun and Moon. But Saturn first conjoins +himself with the Moon: for he follows the +condition of the Moon. He does this, however, +because, being constituted in a feminine<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> sign, he +diametrically receives the rays of the Moon, which +is also constituted in a feminine sign. But when +the same Saturn, in that geniture, makes a transition +to the sign Aquarius, he again conjoins himself +to the Sun by a similar radiation, and is again +disposed in the same condition as that of the Sun. +For being constituted in a masculine sign, he associates +himself by an equal testimony of radiation, +since he diametrically looks towards the Sun, with +a radiation similar to that with which he regards +the Moon. After this manner also Jupiter is constituted +in Sagittary, and through a trigon affording +a testimony to the Sun, first conjoins himself +to his condition, and on this account being constituted +in a masculine sign, and associating with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53"></a>[53]</span> +the Sun, who is constituted in a sign of the same +kind, first follows the power of it; but when he +has made a transition to Pisces, he again conjoins +himself in a like condition to the Moon. For +he, in a similar manner, being posited through a +trigon in a feminine sign, looks towards the Moon, +who is constituted in a sign of the same kind, with +an equal radiation of condition.</p> + +<p>“In like manner also the planet Mars, being +constituted in Scorpio, because he is in a feminine +sign, through a trigon, affords a testimony to the +Moon; but when he comes to Aries, he affords a +testimony to the Sun, and making a transition, +being placed in a masculine sign, he conjoins himself +by a trigonic radiation with the Sun. This +mode, however, is changeable; for Mars being +constituted in Libra, which is a masculine sign, +yet he affords a testimony to the Moon through a +square aspect; but when he has made a transition +to Taurus, being constituted in a feminine sign, +and looking towards the Sun by a square radiation, +he again affords a testimony to it. These +[divine] men, however, were of opinion that the +planet Mercury is common in the above-mentioned +geniture, this star affording no testimony +either to the Sun or Moon by a square, or a +trigon, or a diameter; nor does it conjoin itself +by radiation either with the Sun or Moon. But<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54"></a>[54]</span> +if Mercury is a morning star, he is delighted by +day with the Sun, but if an evening star, by night +with the Moon. All that we have here said, these +men were of opinion ought to be observed in the +genitures of men<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a>, and thought that they could +not discover the destiny of man, except those +radiations were collected by a sagacious investigation.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55"></a>[55]</span> +Lest, however, the fabulous device<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> of these +men should deceive you, and lest some one should +think that this geniture of the world was contrived +by these most wise men, without a cause, it is requisite +that we should explain all things particularly, +in order that the great sagacity displayed in +this device, may, by the most diligent expositions, +be intimated to all men.</p> + +<p>“The world had not a certain day of its origin, +nor was there any time in which the world was +formed by the counsel of a divine intellect, and providential +Deity; nor has the eager desire of human +fragility been able to extend itself so far as to conceive +or explain the origin of the world, especially +since the greater apocatastasis of it, which is effected +by a conflagration or a deluge<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a>, consists of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56"></a>[56]</span> +300,000 years<a id="FNanchor_c" href="#Footnote_c" class="fnanchor">[c]</a>. For the mundane apocatastasis +is accustomed to be accomplished by these two +events; since a deluge follows a conflagration, because +substances which are burnt can no otherwise +be renovated and restored to their pristine +appearance and form, than by the admixtions and +the concrete dust of the ashes, which are a collection<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57"></a>[57]</span> +of generative seeds becoming prolific. Divine +men, therefore, following the example of mathematicians +in the genitures of men, have prudently +devised this, as if it were the geniture of the world. +Hence I deem it expedient to explain the contrivance +of that divine composition, in order that +the admirable reason of the conjectural scheme +may be unfolded according to the rules of art.</p> + +<p>“These divine men, therefore, wished so to constitute +the Moon [in the geniture of the world], +that it might conjoin itself with Saturn, and might +deliver the dominion of periodical revolutions. +Nor was this improperly devised. For because the +first origin of the world<a id="FNanchor_d" href="#Footnote_d" class="fnanchor">[d]</a> [i. e. the beginning +of the first mundane period] was uncultivated and +rude, and savage through rustic association, and +also because barbarous men, having entered on +the first vestiges of light, and which were unknown +to them, were destitute of reason, in consequence +of having abandoned humanity<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a>, these divine men +were of opinion, that this rustic and barbarous +time was Saturnian, that, in imitation of this star, +the beginning of life might be characterized by +barbaric and inhuman ferocity. After Saturn, +Jupiter received periodical power. For to this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58"></a>[58]</span> +planet the Moon was conjoined in the second +place, in order that pristine and squalid rusticity +being deserted, and the ferocity of rude association +being laid aside, human life might be cultivated +through the purification of the manners. In the +third place, the Moon conjoining herself with +Mars, delivered to him the power of periodical +revolution; so that mortality having entered into +the right path of life, and inhumanity being subdued +by a certain moderation, all the ornaments +of arts and fabrications might originate from this +conjunction. After Mars, Venus received predominating +power, in order that, human disciplines +gradually increasing, prudence and wisdom +might adorn mankind. Hence they were of opinion +that this time, in which the manners of men +were cultivated by learning, and naturally formed +to rectitude by the several disciplines, was under +the dominion of Venus; so that being protected by +the majesty of this joyful and salutary divinity, +they might govern their erroneous actions by the +ruling power of Providence. But [these divine +men] conceived the last period to be under the +dominion of Mercury, to whom the Moon in the +last place conjoins herself. What can be found +more subtle than this arrangement? For mankind +being purified from rude and savage pursuits, arts +also having been invented, and disciplines disposed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59"></a>[59]</span> +in an orderly manner, the human race +sharpened its inventive power. And because the +noble genius in man could not preserve [uniformly] +one course of life, the improbity of evil increased +from various institutes, and confused manners and +the crimes of a life of wickedness prevailed: hence +the human race in this period both invented and +delivered to others more enormous machinations. +On this account these wise men thought that this +last period should be assigned to Mercury<a id="FNanchor_e" href="#Footnote_e" class="fnanchor">[e]</a>, so +that, in imitation of that star, the human race +might give birth to inventions replete with evil<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a>.</p> + +<p>“That nothing, however, may be omitted by us +requisite to the elucidation of this subject, all +things are to be explained, which prove that man +was formed in the imitation and similitude of the +world<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a>. And that the mundane apocatastasis is +effected through a conflagration and a deluge, we +also have asserted, and is confirmed by all men. +The substance likewise of the human body, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60"></a>[60]</span> +course of life having received its completion, is, +after a similar manner, dissolved. For as often +as, through the natural ardour of heat, the human +body is too much relaxed, it evaporates in consequence +of the inundations of humours; and thus +it always suffers a decoction from a fiery ardour, +or is dissolved by excessive desudation. Nor do +the wisest interpreters of the medical art assert, +that the substance of the human race is dissolved +by a natural termination in any other way, than by +either moisture dissolving fire, or again heat predominating, +fire being inwardly and deeply extinguished, +is left without moisture. Thus the artificer, +Nature, constituted man in an all-various +imitation of the world, so that whatever dissolves, +or forms the essence of the world, this also should +be the cause of the formation and dissolution of +man.”</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> Nature may be said to point out the way, because its forerunning +energy is employed by Divinity in the formation of +bodies. By <i>the fabricator</i>, in the above sentence, Firmicus means +Jupiter, who is called the <i>Demiurgus</i> by Plato, in the Timæus.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> i. e. Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a></p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent12">—— Quid mirum noscere mundum</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Si possent homines, quibus est et mundus in ipsis;</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Exemplumque Dei quisque est in imagine parva?</div> + </div> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse right"><span class="smcap">Manilius.</span></div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> By <i>the companions of perpetuity</i>, Firmicus means the stars, +whose nature, and motions, and influences are perpetual. Hence, +in the Orphic Hymn to the Stars, they are invoked as</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent12">—— αει γενετηρες απαντων,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">“Th’ <i>eternal</i> fathers of whate’er exists.”</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> Of the astrological Æsculapius, I have not been able to obtain +any information; and of Anubius nothing more is to be learnt +than that he was a most ancient poet, and wrote an elegy de Horoscopo. +Vid. Salmas. de Annis Climactericis, pp. 87, 602, &c.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> The feminine signs are, Taurus, Cancer, Virgo, Scorpio, +Capricornus, and Pisces; but the masculine signs are, Aries, +Gemini, Leo, Libra, Sagittarius, and Aquarius.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> It may not be altogether foreign to the purpose to adduce in +this place, what is said by Hermes in his Treatise de Revolut. +Nativit. lib. i. p. 215. A Latin translation only is extant of +this work, and it is uncertain whether the author of it was the +celebrated Hermes Trismegistus, or a Hermes of more modern +times. This author says, that “the dominion of the planets over +the ages of man is as follows: The Moon governs the first age, +which consists of four years. Mercury governs the second, which +consists of ten years. Venus the third, and this extends to eight +years. The Sun the fourth, and this age consists of nineteen +years. Mars the fifth, and this consists of fifteen years. Jupiter, +the sixth, consists of twelve years: and Saturn governs the seventh +age, and this extends to the remaining years of human life.”</p> + +<p>Proclus, also, in his admirable Commentary on the First Alcibiades +of Plato, observes, that the different ages of our life on the +earth, correspond to the order of the universe. “For our first +age (says he) partakes in an eminent degree of the Lunar energies, +as we then live according to a nutritive and physical power. But +our second age participates of Mercurial prerogatives, because we +then apply ourselves to letters, music, and wrestling. The third +age is governed by Venus, because then we begin to produce seed, +and the generative powers of nature are put in motion. The fourth +age is Solar, for then our youth is in its vigour and full perfection, +subsisting as a medium between generation and decay; for such is +the order which vigour is allotted. But the fifth age is governed +by Mars, in which we principally aspire after power and superiority +over others. The sixth age is governed by Jupiter, for in this we +give ourselves up to prudence, and pursue an active and political +life. And the seventh age is Saturnian, in which it is natural to +separate ourselves from generation, and transfer ourselves to an +incorporeal life. And thus much we have discussed, in order to +procure belief that letters, and the whole education of youth, are +suspended from the Mercurial series.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> Firmicus calls the geniture of the world a <i>fabulous</i> device, +because it supposes the mundane periods to have had a temporal +beginning, though they are in reality eternal. For in a fable, the +<i>inward</i> is different from the <i>outward</i> meaning.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> In the greater apocatastasis of the world, which is effected by +a deluge or a conflagration, the continent becomes sea, and the +sea continent: “This, however,” says Olympiodorus, (in his Scholia +on the first book of Aristotle’s Treatise on Meteors,) “happens in +consequence of what is called <i>the great winter</i>, and <i>the great summer</i>. +But <i>the great winter</i> is when all the planets become situated +in a wintry sign, viz. either in Aquarius or in Pisces. And <i>the +great summer</i> is when all of them are situated in a summer sign, +viz. either in Leo or in Cancer. For as the Sun alone, when he is +in Leo, causes summer, but when he is in Capricorn winter, and +thus the year is formed, which is so denominated, because the Sun +tends to one and the same point (ενιαυτος), for his restitution is +from the same to the same,—in like manner there is an arrangement +of all the planets effected in long periods of time, which produces +the great year. For if all the planets becoming vertical, heat +in the same manner as the sun, but departing from this vertical +position refrigerate, it is not unreasonable to suppose, that when +they become vertical, they produce <i>a great summer</i>, but when they +have departed from this position, <i>a great winter</i>. In <i>the great winter</i>, +therefore, the continent becomes sea, but in <i>the great summer</i> +the contrary happens, in consequence of the burning heat, and +there being great dryness where there was moisture.” At the end +too of this first book of Aristotle on Meteors, Olympiodorus observes, +“that when <i>the great winter</i> happens, a part of the earth +being deluged, a change then takes place to a more dry condition, +till <i>the great summer</i> succeeds, which however does not cause the +corruption of all the earth. For neither was the deluge of Deucalion +mundane, since this happened principally in Greece.” See +the volume of my Aristotle containing this Treatise on Meteors, +p. 478, &c. Firmicus, therefore, is mistaken in asserting that a +deluge follows a conflagration; since the contrary is true. For +it is obviously necessary that places which have been inundated +should afterwards become dry, or they would no longer be +habitable.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> In the original, “positæ humanitatis ratio deserebat;” but +for <i>positæ humanitatis</i>, it appears to me to be requisite to read, conformably +to the above translation, <i>positâ humanitate</i>.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> Is not what is here said about the last period verified in the +present age?</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> Man, says Proclus, is a microcosm, and all such things subsist +in him partially, as the world contains divinely and totally. For +there is an intellect in us which is in energy, and a rational soul +proceeding from the same father, and the same vivific goddess, +as the soul of the universe; also an ethereal vehicle analogous to +the heavens, and a terrestrial body derived from the four elements, +and with which likewise it is co-ordinate. See my Translation of +Proclus on the Timæus, vol. i, p. 4.</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<h3>ADDITIONAL NOTES.</h3> + +<p><a id="Footnote_b" href="#FNanchor_b" class="label">[b]</a> <a href="#Page_50"><i>Page 50.</i></a>—Petosiris and Necepso were two of the +most ancient writers of Egyptian astrology, which, in many +respects, differs from that of the Chaldeans. The former of +these celebrated men is greatly applauded by Manetho, +who, in his Apotelesmatica, professes to be his follower, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61"></a>[61]</span> +calls him πολυφιλτατον ανδρα. Petosiris, however, was +much prior to Manetho, as is evident from Athenæus, iii. +p. 114, who says he is mentioned by Aristophanes. He is +also noticed by Ptolemy (in Tetrabiblo) under the appellation +‘of an ancient writer’ (του παλαιου or του αρχαιου). +According to Suidas, he wrote, among other things which +are unfortunately lost, Περι των παρ’ Αιγυπτιοις μυστηριων, +<i>Concerning the Mysteries of the Egyptians</i>, the loss of which +work must be deeply regretted by every lover of ancient +lore. He is also mentioned by Juvenal, vi. 580.</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">“Aptior hora cibo nisi quam dederit Petosiris.”</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + +<p class="noindent">And in a Greek epigram (in Anthol. lib. ii. cap. 6.) on a +certain person who had predicted his death from the stars, +and, in order that the prediction might not be falsified, hung +himself, it is said: αισχυνθεις Πετοσιριν απηγξατο και +μετεωρος θνησκει, &c. i. e.</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">“Lest Petosiris should incur disgrace,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Himself he strangled from a lofty place.”</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + +<p class="noindent">Thus, too, it is related of Cardan, the celebrated physician +and astrologer, that having predicted the year and day of +his death, when the time drew near, he suffered himself to +perish through hunger, to preserve his reputation. My +worthy and most intelligent friend Mr. J. J. Welsh has furnished +me with the following additional information concerning +the death of Cardan, and other astrologers: “Respecting +Cardan’s abstaining from food, in order to verify his +prediction, Thuanus says: ‘Cum tribus diebus minus septuagesimum +quintum annum implevisset, eodem quo prædixerat +anno et die, videlicet <span class="allsmcap">XI.</span> Kalend. Octobris defecit, +ob id, ne falleret, mortem suâ inediâ accelerasse creditus.’<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62"></a>[62]</span> +lib. lxii. p. 155. The same historian also relates, that Cardan +brought astrology into repute by the success he had in +calculating nativities. ‘Judiciaria quam vocant fidem apud +multos adstruxit, dum certiora per eam quam ex arte possint +plerumque promere.’ <i>Id. ib.</i> Cardan was not the only +astrologer who foretold the time of his own death; for Martin +Hortensius, Professor of Mathematics in Amsterdam, +not only predicted the time of his own death, but that of +two young men who were with him, and the result proved +the truth of his prophecy. The fact is admitted by Descartes, +while he ridicules the science and underrates the abilities of +Hortensius. See the 35th of his Letters to Father Mersenne, +in the second volume of that collection.</p> + +<p>“When Ann of Austria, the wife of Louis XIII., was delivered +of the Dauphin, afterwards Louis XIV., a famous +German astrologer was in attendance to draw his nativity, +but refused to say more than these three words, which give +a true character of Louis the Fourteenth’s reign; <i>Diu, durè, +feliciter</i>. See Limier’s Hist. du Règne de Louis XIV.</p> + +<p>“I omitted to mention above, a curious circumstance related +of Cardan in Lavrey’s Hist. of England, vol. i. p. 711, viz. +that having cured the Archbishop of St. Andrew’s of a disorder +which had baffled the most skilful physicians, he took +his leave of the Primate in these words: ‘I have been able +to cure you of your sickness, but cannot change your destiny, +nor prevent you from being hanged.’ Eighteen years +after, this Prelate was hung by order of the Commissioners +appointed by Mary Queen Regent of Scotland.</p> + +<p>“By the way, I am much surprised that Cardan’s autobiography +has never been translated; for it is, without a single +exception, the most extraordinary book of the kind ever +published.”</p> + +<p>We are informed by Fabricius, that Marsham, in Canone<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63"></a>[63]</span> +Chron. p. 477, has eruditely collected many things pertaining +to Petosiris, and Necepso king of Egypt, from the most +ancient writers on judicial astrology. We likewise learn +from Fabricius, that Necepso, to whom Petosiris wrote, as +being coeval with him, is believed to have flourished about +the year 800 of the Attic æra, i. e. about the beginning of +the Olympiads. He is praised by Pliny, by Galen, ix. p. 2. +De Facultat. Simplicium Medicament., and from him by +Aetius.</p> + +<p><a id="Footnote_c" href="#FNanchor_c" class="label">[c]</a> <a href="#Page_56"><i>Page 56.</i></a>—Proclus in Tim. lib. iv. p. 277, informs us, +that the Chaldeans had observations of the stars, which +embraced whole mundane periods. What Proclus likewise +asserts of the Chaldeans is confirmed by Cicero in his first +book on Divination, who says that they had records of +the stars for the space of 370,000 years; and by Diodorus +Siculus, Bibl. lib. xi. p. 113, who says, that their observations +comprehended the space of 473,000 years.</p> + +<p>Plato, in the Timæus, speaking of this greater apocatastasis, +says: “At the same time, however, it is no less possible +to conceive, that the perfect number of time will then +accomplish a perfect year, when the celerities of all the +eight periods being terminated with reference to each other, +shall have a summit, as they are measured by the circle, of +that which subsists according to the same and the similar +[i. e. according to the sphere of the fixed stars].”</p> + +<p>On this passage, Proclus, in his Commentary, observes as +follows: “The whole mundane time measures the one life +of the universe, according to which all the celerities are terminated +of the celestial and sublunary circles. For in these +also there are periods, which have for the summit of their +apocatastasis the lation of the circle of <i>the same</i> [i. e. of the +sphere of the fixed stars]. For they are referred to this as +to their principle, because it is the most simple of all, since<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64"></a>[64]</span> +the apocatastases are surveyed with reference to the points +of it. Thus, for instance, all of them make their apocatastasis +about the equinoctial point<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a>, or about the summer +tropic; or though the joint apocatastasis should not be considered +to be according to the same point, but with reference +to the same, when, for instance, rising or culminating, +yet all of them will have with reference to it a figure of +such a kind. For now the present order is entirely a certain +apocatastasis of all the heavenly bodies, yet the configuration +is not seen about the same, but with reference to +the same point. Once, however, it was about the same, and +according to one certain point, at which if it should again +take place, the whole of time will have an end. One certain +apocatastasis likewise seems to have been mentioned; +hence it is said that Cancer is the horoscope of the world, +and this year is called Cynic, or pertaining to the Dog, because, +among the constellations, the splendid star of the +Dog rises together with Cancer. If therefore the planets +should again meet in the same point of Cancer, this concurrence +will be one period of the universe. If, however, +the apocatastasis takes places in Cancer about the equinoctial +point, that also which is from the summer tropic will +be directed towards the summer tropic, and the number of +the one will be equal to the number of the other, and the +time of the one to the time of the other. For each of them +is one period, and is defined by quantity, on account of the +order of the bodies that are moved. In addition, however, +to what has been said, it must be observed, that this perfect +number differs from that mentioned in the Republic, which<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_65"></a>[65]</span> +comprehends the period of every divinely generated nature<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a>, +since it is more partial, and is apocatastatic of the eight +periods alone. For the other perfect number comprehends +the peculiar motions of the fixed stars, and, in short, of all +the divine genera that are moved in the heavens, whether +visibly or invisibly, and also of the celestial genera posterior +to the Gods, and of the longer or shorter periods of sublunary +natures, together with the periods of fertility and +sterility. Hence, likewise, it is the lord of the period of the +human race.”</p> + +<p>“The year (says Macrobius) which is called mundane, +is <i>truly</i> revolving, because it is effected by a full convolution +of the universe, and is evolved in the most extended periods +of time, the reason of which is as follows: All the planets +and the stars which are seen fixed in the heavens, the peculiar +motion of the latter of which though the human sight +has never been able to perceive or apprehend, are yet moved, +and, besides the revolution of the heavens by which they are +always drawn along, have an advancing motion of their +own. This motion, however, is completed in such a length +of time, that the life of man is not sufficiently extended to +discover, by continual observation, their mutation to the place +in which they were first seen. The end, therefore, of the +mundane year is, when all the planets and all the fixed +stars have returned from a certain place to the same place, +so that no star in the heavens may be situated in a place +different from that in which it was before, since all the other +stars, when moved from that place to which they return, +give a termination to their year; so that the luminaries<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_66"></a>[66]</span> +[i. e. the sun and moon] also, together with the five wandering +stars, may be in the same places and parts in +which they were situated when the mundane year began. +This, however, according to the decision of physiologists, +will take place at the expiration of 15,000 years; hence, as +the lunar year is a month, and the solar year consists of +twelve months, and the years of the other planets are those +which we have before mentioned, so the mundane year consists +of 15,000 of such years as we now compute. This year, +therefore, is called the <i>truly revolving year</i>, which is not +measured by the retrogression of the sun, i. e. of one planet, +but is terminated by the return of all the planets to the +same place, under the same description of the whole heavens; +from whence also it is called mundane, because the world +is properly called heaven. Hence, as we not only denominate +the progression of the sun from the kalends of +January to the same kalends, the solar year, but also its +progression from the day after the kalends to the same +day, and its return from any day of any month to the same +day, a year; thus, also, the beginning of this mundane year +may be fixed by any one at any time he pleases. Thus, for +instance, Cicero now, from an eclipse of the sun, which happened +at the time of the death of Romulus, supposes the +beginning of the mundane year to commence. And though +frequently afterwards an eclipse of the sun may have happened, +yet a repeated eclipse of this luminary is not said to +give completion to the mundane year; but then this completion +takes place when the sun, during its eclipse, will be in +the same places and parts, and likewise all the planets and +fixed stars, in which they were at the time of the death of +Romulus. Hence, as physiologists assert, 15,000 years after +the death of Romulus the sun will again be so eclipsed, that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67"></a>[67]</span> +it will be in the same sign, and in the same part of the +heavens, as it was at that time; all the stars likewise returning +to the same place.”—<i>Macrob. in Somn. Scip.</i> lib. ii.</p> + +<p>Hence, as the greater mundane apocatastasis consists of +300,000 years, and 15,000 years make a mundane year, the +greater apocatastasis will consist of 20,000 mundane years.</p> + +<p>This greater apocatastasis is also alluded to by Synesius +in his treatise On Providence, and likewise in the Asclepian +Dialogue ascribed to Hermes Trismegistus. The extract +from Synesius, who informs us that his treatise is an Egyptian +narration relative to Osiris and Typhos, is as follows:</p> + +<p>“Some time after this, Typhos obtained the kingdom by +fraud and force, and Osiris was banished: but during the +evils arising from the tyrannical government of Typhos, +some God manifestly appeared to a certain philosopher who +was a stranger in Egypt, and who had received great benefits +from Osiris, and ordered him to endure the present calamities, +because they were months only, and not years, in which +the Fates had destined that the Egyptian sceptres should +raise the nails of the wild beasts<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a>, and depress the heads of +the sacred birds<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a>. But this is an arcane symbol. And the +philosophic stranger above mentioned knew that a representation +of this was engraved in obelisks and in the sacred +recesses of the temples. The divinity also unfolded to him +the meaning of the sacred sculpture, and gave him a sign of +the time in which it would be verified. <i>For when those</i>, said +he, <i>who are now in power, shall endeavour to make an innovation +in our religion, then in a short time after expect that the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68"></a>[68]</span> +<span class="smcap">giants</span></i> (meaning by these, men of another nation) <i>shall be +entirely expelled, being agitated by their own avenging furies</i>. If, +however, some remains of the sedition should still exist, and +the whole should not be at once extinguished, but Typhos +should still remain in the seat of government, nevertheless +do not despair of the Gods. The following also is another +symbol for you. <i>When we shall purify the air which surrounds +the earth, and which is defiled with the breath of the impious, +with fire and water, then the punishment of the rest will +also follow, and then immediately expect a better order of things, +Typhos being removed. For we expel such-like prodigies by the +devastation of fire and thunder.</i> In consequence of this, the +stranger considered that to be a felicitous circumstance, +which had before appeared to him to be dreadful, and no +longer bore with molestation a necessary continuance in +life, through which he would be an eye-witness of the advent +of the Gods; for it exceeded the power of human sagacity to +conjecture, that so powerful a multitude as were then collected +together in arms, and who even in time of peace were +by law obliged to be armed, should be vanquished without +any opposition. He considered with himself, therefore, how +these things could be accomplished, for they appeared to +surpass the power of reason. <i>But after no great length of +time, a certain depraved fragment of religion, and an adulteration +of divine worship, like that of money, as it were, prevailed, +which the ancient law exterminated from cities, shutting the doors +against impiety, and expelling it to a great distance from the +walls.</i> Typhos, however, did not himself introduce this impiety, +for he feared the Egyptian multitude, but for this purpose +called in the assistance of the Barbarians, and erected a temple +in the city, having previously subverted the laws of his +country. When these things, therefore, came to pass, the +stranger began to think that this was the event which divinity<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69"></a>[69]</span> +had predicted. ‘And perhaps,’ said he, ‘I shall be a +spectator of what will follow.’ He likewise then learnt some +particulars about Osiris, which would shortly happen, and +others which would take place at some greater distance of +time, viz. when the boy Horus would choose, as his associate +in battle, a wolf instead of a lion. But who the wolf is, +is a sacred narration, which it is not holy to divulge, even +in the form of a fable.”</p> + +<p>Typhos, however, through his tyranny, was at length +dethroned, and Osiris recalled from exile; and Synesius, +towards the end of this treatise, observes, “that the blessed +body which revolves in a circle is the cause of the events in +the sublunary world. For both are parts of the universe, +and they have a certain relation to each other. If, therefore, +the cause of generation<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> in the things which surround +us originates in the natures which are above us, it follows +that the seeds of things which happen here descend from +thence. And if some one should add, since astronomy imparts +credibility to this, that there are <i>apocatastatic</i><a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> periods +of the stars and spheres, some of which are simple, but +others compounded; such a one will partly accord with the +Egyptians, and partly with the Grecians, and will be perfectly +wise from both, conjoining intellect to science. A +man of this kind therefore will not deny, that, in consequence +of the same motions returning, effects also will return, +together with their causes; and that lives on the +earth, generations, educations, dispositions, and fortunes, will +be the same with those that formerly existed. We must +not wonder, therefore, if we behold a very ancient history<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70"></a>[70]</span> +verified in life, and should see things which flourished before +our times accord with what is unfolded in this narration; +and, besides this, perceive that the forms which are +inserted in matter are consentaneous to the arcana of a +fable.”</p> + +<p>The following is the extract from the Asclepian Dialogue, +a Latin translation only of which is extant, and is generally +believed by the learned to have been made by Apuleius:—</p> + +<p>“An ignoras, O Asclepi, quod Ægyptus imago sit cœli, +aut, quod est verius, translatio et descensio omnium quæ +gubernantur atque exercentur in cœlo? Et, si dicendum est, +verius terra nostra totius mundi est templum: et tamen +quoniam præscire cuncta prudentes decet, istud vos ignorare +fas non est, futurum tempus est, quum appareat Ægyptios +incassum pia mente divinitatem et sedula religione servasse, +et omnis eorum sancta veneratio in irritum casura frustrabitur. +E terris enim ad cœlum est recursura divinitas. +<i>Linquatur Ægyptus, terraque, quæ fuit divinitatis sedes, religione +viduata, Numinum præsentia destituetur. Alienigenis enim +regionem istam terramque complentibus, non solum neglectus +religionum, sed (quod est durius) quasi de legibus, a religione, +pietate, cultuque divino statuetur præscripta pœna, prohibitio. +Tunc terra ista sanctissima, sedes delubrorum et templorum, +sepulchrorum erit mortuorumque plenissima. O Ægypte, +Ægypte, religionum solæ supererunt fabulæ, eæque incredibiles +posteris suis; solaque supererunt verba lapidibus incisa, +tua pia facta narrantibus; et inhabitabit Ægyptum Scythos aut +Indus aut aliquis talis.</i> Divinitas enim repetet cœlum, deserti +homines toti morientur, atque ita Ægyptus Deo et +homine viduata deseretur. Te verò appello sanctissimum +flumen, tibique futura prædico: torrenti sanguine plenus ad +ripas usque erumpes, undæque divinæ non solum polluentur +sanguine, sed totæ rumpentur, et vivis multo major erit<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71"></a>[71]</span> +numerus sepultorum; superstes verò qui erit, lingua sola +cognoscetur Ægyptius, actibus verò videbitur alienus. Quid +fles, O Asclepi? Et his amplius, multoque deterius ipsa +Ægyptus suadebitur, imbueturque pejoribus malis, quæ +sancta quondam et divinitatis amantissima deorum in terras +religionis suæ merito, sola seductio [<i>lege</i> reductio] sanctitatis +et pietatis magistra, erit maximæ crudelitatis exemplum. +<i>Et tunc tædio hominum non admirandus videbitur mundus, +neque adorandus. Hoc totum bonum, quo melius nec est, +nec fuit, nec erit, quod videri possit, periclitabitur. Eritque +grave hominibus, ac per hoc contemnetur, nec diligetur totus hic +mundus, Dei opus immutabile, gloriosa constructio, bonum multiformi +imaginum varietate compositum, machina voluntatis Dei +in suo opere sine invidia suffragantis omnium in unum, quæ venerari, +laudari, amari denique à videntibus possunt, multiformis +adunata congestio.</i> Nam et tenebræ præponentur lumini, +et mors vita utiloir judicabitur. Nemo suspiciet cœlum. +<i>Religiosus pro insano, irreligiosus putabitur prudens, furiosus +fortis, pro bono habebitur pessimus.</i> Anima enim et omnia +circum eam quibus aut immortalis nata est, aut immortalitatem +se consecuturam esse præsumit, secundum quod vobis +exposui, non solum risus, sed etiam putabitur vanitas. <i>Sed +mihi credite etiam periculum capitate constituetur in eum, qui se +mentis religioni dederit. Nova constituentur jura, lex nova; +nihil sanctum, nihil religiosum, nec cœlo, nec cœlestibus dignum +audietur, aut mente credetur. Fiet Deorum ab hominibus dolenda +secessio; soli nocentes angeli remanebant, qui humanitati +commixti ad omnia audaciæ mala miseros manu injecta compellent +in bella, in rapinas, in fraudes, et in omnia quæ sunt animarum +naturæ contraria.</i> Tunc non terra constabit, nec +navigabitur mare, nec cœlum astrorum cursibus, nec siderum +cursus constabit in cœlo. Omnis vox divina necessaria +taciturnitate mutescet, fructus terræ corrumpentur, nec<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_72"></a>[72]</span> +fœcunda erit tellus, et aër ipse mœsto torpore languescet. +Hæc et talis senectus veniet mundi, irreligio, inordinatio, +irrationabilitas bonorum omnium. Cùm hæc cuncta contigerint, +O Asclepi, tunc ille dominus et pater, Deus primipotens, +et unus gubernator mundi, intuens in mores factaque +voluntaria voluntate sua, quæ est Dei benignitas, vitiis +resistens, et corruptelæ omnium errorem revocans, malignitatem +omnem vel alluvione diluens, vel igne consumens, +vel morbis pestilentiisque per diversa loca dispersis finiens, +ad antiquam faciem mundum revocabit, ut et mundus ipse +adorandus videatur et mirandus, et tanti operis effector et +restitutor Deus ab omnibus qui tunc erunt frequentibus +laudum præconiis benedictionibusque celebretur. Hæc enim +mundi genitura cunctarum reformatio rerum bonarum, et +naturæ ipsius sanctissima et religiosissima restitutio, peracto +temporis cursu, quæ est et fuit sine initio sempiterna. Voluntas +enim Dei caret initio, quæ eadem est, et ubique est +sempiterna.” i. e.</p> + +<p>“Are you ignorant, O Asclepius, that Egypt is the +image of heaven, or, which is more true, a translation and +descent of everything which is governed and exercised in +heaven? And, if it may be said, our land is truly the temple +of the whole world. Nevertheless, because it becomes wise +men to foreknow all things, it is not lawful that you should be +ignorant that the time will come when it may seem that the +Egyptians have in vain, with a pious mind and sedulous religion, +paid attention to divinity, and all their holy veneration +shall become void and of no effect. For divinity shall +return back from earth to heaven. <i>Egypt shall be forsaken, +and the land which was the seat of divinity shall be destitute +of religion, and deprived of the presence of the Gods. For +when strangers shall possess and fill this region and land, there +shall not only be a neglect of religion, but (which is more miserable)<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_73"></a>[73]</span> +there shall be laws enacted against religion, piety, and +divine worship; they shall be prohibited, and punishments shall +be inflicted on their votaries. Then this most holy land, the seat +of places consecrated to divinity, and of temples, shall be full +of sepulchres and dead bodies. O Egypt, Egypt, fables alone +shall remain of thy religion, and these such as will be incredible +to posterity; and words alone shall be left engraved in stones, +narrating thy pious deeds. The Scythian also, or Indian, or +some other similar nation, shall inhabit Egypt.</i> For divinity +shall return to heaven, all its inhabitants shall die, and thus +Egypt, bereft both of God and man, shall be deserted. I +call on thee, O most holy river, and predict to thee future +events. Thou shalt burst forth with a torrent of blood, full +even to thy banks, and thy divine waters shall not only be +polluted with blood, but the land shall be inundated with it, +and the number of the dead shall exceed that of the living. +He, likewise, who survives, shall only, by his language, be +known to be an Egyptian, but by his deeds he will appear +to be a stranger. Why do you weep, O Asclepius? Egypt +shall experience more ample and much worse evils than +these, though she was once holy, and the greatest lover of +the Gods on the earth, by the desert of her religion. And +she who was alone the reductor of sanctity and the mistress +of piety will be an example of the greatest cruelty. Then +also, through the weariness of men, the world will not appear +to be an admirable and adorable thing. This whole +good, a better than which, as an object of perception, there +neither is, nor was, nor will be, will be in danger, and will be +grievous to men. Hence this whole world will be despised, +and will not be beloved, though it is the immutable work of +God, a glorious fabric, a good compounded with a multiform +variety of images, a machine of the will of God, who, +in his work, gave his suffrage without envy, that all things<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74"></a>[74]</span> +should be one. It is also a multiform collected heap, capable +of being venerated, praised and loved by those that behold +it. For darkness shall be preferred to light, and death +shall be judged to be more useful than life. No one shall +look up to heaven. <i>The religious man shall be accounted insane, +the irreligious shall be thought wise, the furious brave, and the +worst of men shall be considered a good man.</i> For the soul, and +all things about it, by which it is either naturally immortal, +or conceives that it shall attain to immortality, conformably +to what I have explained to you, shall not only be the subject +of laughter, but shall be considered as vanity. <i>Believe +me, likewise, that a capital punishment shall be appointed for +him who applies himself to the religion of intellect. New statutes +and new laws shall be established, and nothing religious, +or which is worthy of heaven or celestial concerns, shall be heard, +or believed by the mind. There will be a lamentable departure +of the Gods from men<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a>; noxious angels<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> will alone remain, who, +being mingled with human nature, will violently impel the miserable +men [of that time] to war, to rapine, to fraud, and to every +thing contrary to the nature of the soul.</i> Then the earth shall +be in a preternatural state; the sea shall not be sailed in,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75"></a>[75]</span> +nor shall the heavens accord with the course of the stars, +nor the course of the stars continue in the heavens. <i>Every +divine voice shall be dumb by a necessary silence</i>, the fruits of +the earth shall be corrupted, nor shall the earth be prolific, +and the air itself shall languish with a sorrowful torpor. +These events and such an old age of the world as this shall +take place, such irreligion, inordination, and unreasonableness +of all good. When all these things shall happen, O +Asclepius, then that lord and father, the God who is first in +power, and the one governor of the world, looking into the +manners and voluntary deeds [of men], and by his will, +which is the benignity of God, resisting vices, and recalling +the error arising from the corruption of all things; washing +away likewise all malignity by a deluge, or consuming it by +fire, or bringing it to an end by disease and pestilence dispersed +in different places, will recall the world to its ancient +form, in order that the world itself may appear to be an +adorable and admirable production, and God, the fabricator +and restorer of so great a work, may be celebrated, by all that +shall then exist, with frequent solemn praises and benedictions. +For this <i>geniture</i><a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> of the world is the reformation of +all good things, and the most holy and religious restitution +of the nature of it, the course of time being accomplished<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a>; +since time is perpetual, and always was without a beginning. +For the will of God is without beginning, is always the +same, and is everywhere eternal.”</p> + +<p>Of this very remarkable extract, it is necessary to observe, +in the first place, that it was principally made by me from<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76"></a>[76]</span> +the edition of the Asclepian Dialogue by Ficinus, as he appears +to have had a more correct manuscript in his possession +than any that have been consulted by more modern +editors. Of this the learned and at the same time philosophic +reader will be immediately convinced, by comparing +this extract with the same part of that dialogue in the most +modern editions of it. In the second place, that this dialogue +is of genuine antiquity and no forgery, is, I think, +unquestionably evident from neither Lactantius nor Augustin +having any doubt of its authenticity, though it was their +interest to have proved it to be spurious if they could, because +it predicts, (which is the third thing especially deserving +of remark,) that the memorials of the martyrs should +succeed in the place of the temples of the Gods. Hence +Augustin concludes this to be a prophecy or prediction made +<i>instinctu fallacis spiritûs</i>,—<i>by the instinct or suggestion of a deceitful +spirit</i>. But that this prediction was accomplished, is +evident, as Dr. Cudworth observes in his True Intellectual +System of the Universe, p. 329, from the following passages +of Theodoret, which I shall quote as translated by the +Doctor. “Now the martyrs have utterly abolished and +blotted out of the minds of men the memory of those who +were formerly called Gods.” And again, “Our Lord hath +now brought his dead (i. e. his martyrs) into the room and +place (i. e. into the temples) of the Gods; whom he hath +sent away empty, and bestowed their honour upon these his +martyrs. For now, instead of the festivals of Jupiter and +Bacchus, are celebrated those of Peter and Paul, Thomas +and Sergius, and other holy martyrs.” Antoninus the philosopher +also, according to Eunapius, predicted the very same +thing, viz. that after his decease the magnificent temple of +Serapis in Egypt, together with the rest, should be demolished,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77"></a>[77]</span> +and the temples of the Gods be turned into sepulchres, +και τα ἱερα ταφους γενησεσθαι. And in the fourth +and last place, the intelligent reader who compares this prediction +with what is said about the philosophic stranger by +Synesius, in the foregoing extract, will immediately see that +the former wonderfully accords with the latter.</p> + +<p><a id="Footnote_d" href="#FNanchor_d" class="label">[d]</a> <a href="#Page_57"><i>Page 57.</i></a>—This first period of the world, which was +uncultivated and rude, and, according to Firmicus, was under +the dominion of Saturn, is mentioned by Plato at the beginning +of his third book On Laws. For there having observed +that time is infinite, he says, “that myriads upon +myriads of cities have existed in this time, and that, in consequence +of the same temporal infinity, as many have been +destroyed.” He also says, “that they will everywhere +have been governed according to every kind of polity; and +at one time pass from the less to the greater, and at another +from the greater to the less, and have become worse from +the better, and better from the worse.” He adds, “that the +cause of this mutation, viz. the many destructions of the +human race, is through deluges, diseases, and numerous +other things, in which a very small part of mankind was +left....” After this he observes, “that those who escaped +the destruction which was caused by a deluge, were nearly +mountain shepherds, a few dormant sparks of the human +race, preserved on the summits of mountains. That such +as these must necessarily have been ignorant of other arts, +and of those artifices, in cities, of men towards each other, +with a view to prerogative and contention, and other base +ends.” He also supposes “that the cities which were situated +in plains, and those bordering on the sea, entirely perished +at that time. That hence, all instruments were destroyed, +together with every invention pertaining to art, political<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78"></a>[78]</span> +discipline, or anything else characterized by wisdom.” He +adds, “We must therefore assert, that when that devastation +by a deluge took place, human affairs were in a state of +infinite and dreadful solitude; that a prodigious part of the +earth was unprolific; and other animals having perished, +some herds of oxen, and a few goats, which were rarely +found, supplied those men with food that escaped the devastation.” +See what the divine philosopher further observes on +this interesting subject, in my Translation of this book of his +Laws.</p> + +<p>The reader, however, must be careful not to confound +this Saturnian period with the <i>golden age</i>, which also was +under Saturn. For the latter, says Damascius (apud Phot.), +consisted of a race of men proximate to the gods, and is +most magnificently celebrated by poets who were seated on +the tripos of the Muse. But by the <i>golden age</i>, as Proclus +on Hesiod beautifully observes, “an intellectual life is implied. +For such a life is pure, impassive, and free from +sorrow; and of this impassivity and purity gold is an image, +because it is never subject to rust or putrefaction. Such a +life, too, is very properly said to be under Saturn, because +Saturn is an intellectual god.”—See more concerning this +Divinity in the Additional Notes at the end of the 5th vol. +of my Plato, p. 675, &c.</p> + +<p><a id="Footnote_e" href="#FNanchor_e" class="label">[e]</a> <a href="#Page_59"><i>Page 59.</i></a>—Plato, in the eighth book of his Republic, +speaking of the dissolution of the city which he has constituted, +observes as follows: “Not only with respect to terrestrial +plants, but likewise in terrestrial animals, a fertility +and sterility of soul as well as of body takes place, when the +revolutions of the heavenly bodies complete the periphery of +their respective orbits; which are shorter to the shorter +lived, and contrarywise to such as are the contrary.” The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79"></a>[79]</span> +necessity for such a mutation taking place is this (as I have +observed in the Introduction to my Translation of Aristotle’s +History of Animals),—that all the parts of the universe are +unable to participate the providence of divinity in a similar +manner, but some of its parts enjoy this perpetually, and +others only for a time; some in a primary, and others in a +secondary degree. For the universe, being a perfect whole, +must have a first, a middle, and a last part. But its first +part, as having the most excellent subsistence, must always +exist according to nature; and its last part must sometimes +subsist according to, and sometimes contrary to, nature. +Hence the celestial bodies, which are the first parts of the +universe, perpetually subsist according to nature, both the +whole spheres and the multitude co-ordinate to these wholes<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a>; +and the only alteration which they experience is a mutation +of figure, and variation of light at different periods; but in +the sublunary region, while the spheres of the elements +remain, on account of their subsistence as wholes, always +according to nature, the parts of these wholes have sometimes +a natural, and sometimes an unnatural subsistence; +for thus alone can the circle of generation unfold all the +variety which it contains.</p> + +<p>The different periods in which these mutations happen +are called by Plato, with great propriety, periods of <i>fertility</i> +and <i>sterility</i>; for in these periods a fertility or sterility of +men, irrational animals, and plants takes place; so that +in fertile periods mankind will be both more numerous, and +upon the whole superior in mental and bodily endowments, +to the men of a barren period. And a similar reasoning +must be extended to animals and plants. The so much +celebrated heroic age was the result of one of these fertile<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80"></a>[80]</span> +periods, in which men transcending the herd of mankind +both in practical and intellectual virtue abounded on the +earth. And a barren period may be considered as having +commenced somewhat prior to the Augustan age, the destruction +of all the great ancient cities, with all their rites, +philosophy, &c. being the natural consequence of such a +period. It appears to me that this period commenced in +the time of Sylla, and I found this opinion on the following +passage in Plutarch’s Life of that great commander:—Το +δε παντων μεγιστον, εξ ανεφελου και διαιθρου του +περιεχοντος ηχησε φωνη σαλπιγγος, οξυν αποτεινουσα και +θρηνωδη φθογγον, ὡστε παντας εκφρονας γενεσθαι, και +καταπτηξαι το μεγεθος. Τυρῥηνων δε οἱ λογιοι μεταβολην +ἑτερου γενους απεφαινοντο, και μετακοσμησιν αποσημαινειν +το τερας. ειναι μεν γαρ αυτῳ οκτω τα συμπαντα γενη διαφεροντα +τοις βιοις και τοις ηθεσι δ’ αλληλων, ἑκαστῳ δε +αφωρισθαι χρονων αριθμον, ὑπο του θεου συμπεραινομενον +ενιαυτου μεγαλου περιοδῳ· και ὁταν αυτη σχη τελος, ἑτερας +ενισταμενης κινεισθαι τι σημειον εκ γης ἢ ουρανου θαυμασιον. +i. e. “But the greatest of all [the signs prior to the +civil wars] was the following: On a cloudless and clear day, +the sound of a trumpet was heard, so acute and <i>mournful</i> as +to astonish and terrify by its loudness all that heard it. The +Tuscan wise men and soothsayers, therefore, declared that +this prodigy signified the mutation into and commencement +of another age. For according to them there are eight +ages, differing from each other in lives and manners, each +of which is limited by divinity to a certain time of duration, +and the number of years of which this time consists is +bounded by the period of the great year. Hence, when one +age is finished, and another is about to commence, a certain +wonderful sign will present itself, either from the earth +or the heavens.” The <i>mournfulness</i> of this sound of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_81"></a>[81]</span> +trumpet was evidently an indication that a barren period +was about to commence.—For an account of the <i>great year</i>, +see the note to page 478 of the treatise on Meteors.</p> + +<p>The following extracts from a work entitled “Sketches +chiefly relating to the History, Religion, &c. of the Hindoos, +concerning the Mundane Periods,” appear to me to be +highly interesting, and to form a most important addition +to what has been before said about the revolutions which +take place in the universe.</p> + +<p>“They reckon the duration of the world by four Yougs, +corresponding in their nature with the Golden, Silver, +Brazen, and Iron ages of the ancients.</p> + +<table> + <tr> + <th></th> + <th><i>Years.</i></th> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>The first, or the Sutty Youg, is said to have lasted</td> + <td class="tdr">3,200,000 </td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>The Tirtah Youg, or second age</td> + <td class="tdr">2,400,000 </td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>The Dwapaar Youg, or third age</td> + <td class="tdr">1,600,000 </td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="nw">And they say the Kaly Youg, or present age, will last</td> + <td class="tdr">400,000.”</td> + </tr> +</table> + +<p class="right">p. 222.</p> + +<p>“The beginning of the Kaly Youg, or present age, is +reckoned from 2 hours, 27 minutes, and 30 seconds of the +morning of the 16th of February 3102 years before the +Christian era; but the time for which their astronomical +tables are constructed, is 2 days, 3 hours, 32 minutes, and +30 seconds after that on the 18th of February, about six +in the morning. They say there was then a conjunction +of the planets, and their tables show that conjunction. +Monsieur Bailly observes<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a>, that by calculation it appears,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_82"></a>[82]</span> +that Jupiter and Mercury were then in the same degree of +the ecliptic; that Mars was distant about 8 degrees, and +Saturn 17; and it results from thence, that at the time of the +date given by the Brahmans to the commencement of the +Kaly Youg, they saw those four planets successively disengage +themselves from the rays of the sun; first Saturn, then +Mars, then Jupiter, and then Mercury. These four planets, +therefore, showed themselves in conjunction; and though +Venus could not have appeared, yet, as they only speak in +general terms, it was natural enough to say there was then +a conjunction of the planets. The account given by the +Brahmans is confirmed by the testimony of our European +tables, which prove it to be the result of a true observation. +Monsieur Bailly is of opinion, that their astronomical time +is dated from an eclipse of the moon, which appears then +to have happened, and that the conjunction of the planets +is only mentioned by the way.”—pp. 224, 225.</p> + +<p>The conjunction of the planets mentioned in the above +extract, is admirably elucidated by Olympiodorus in his +MS. Scholia on the Gorgias of Plato, as follows: “There +are seven spheres, that of the moon, that of the sun, and +those of the other planets; but the inerratic is the eighth +sphere. The lunar sphere, therefore, makes a complete +revolution more swiftly, for it is accomplished in thirty +days. That of the sun is more slow, for it is accomplished +in a year. That of Jupiter is still slower, for it is effected +in twelve years. And much more that of Saturn, for it is +completed in thirty years. The stars, therefore, are not +conjoined with each other in their revolutions, except rarely. +Thus, for instance, the sphere of Saturn and the sphere of +Jupiter are conjoined with each other in their revolutions +in sixty years. For if the sphere of Jupiter comes from the +same to the same in twelve years, but that of Saturn in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_83"></a>[83]</span> +thirty years, it is evident that when Jupiter has made five, +Saturn will have made two revolutions; for twice thirty +is sixty, and so likewise is twelve times five; so that their +revolutions will be conjoined in sixty years. Souls, therefore, +are punished for such-like periods. <i>But the seven planetary +spheres conjoin their revolutions with the inerratic sphere, +through many myriads of years</i>; and this is the period which +Plato calls τον αει χρονον, <i>for ever</i>.”—See the Introduction +to the volume of my Aristotle, which contains a translation +of Aristotle’s treatise on the Soul, &c. &c.</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h4>FOOTNOTES:</h4> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> For ισομερικον here, it is obviously necessary to read ισημερινον. +It must also be observed that there are two equinoctial points or +signs, and these are Aries and Libra.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> See my explanation of this perfect, which is also called the +geometric number, in p. 150 of my Theoretic Arithmetic.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> i. e. material dæmons, or θηρες χθονος, <i>the wild beasts of the +earth</i>, as they are called in the Chaldean oracles.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> i. e. the whole choir of beneficent natures superior to man. But +by <i>the depression of the heads of the sacred birds</i>, the inaptitude of +persons and places to receive divine influence is denoted.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> Instead of ει δη γενεσις εν τοις περι ἡμας, αιτια γενεσεως εν τοις +ὑπερ ἡμας, it is necessary to read, conformably to the above translation, +ει δη γενεσεως εν τοις περι ἡμας, αιτια γινεται, κ. τ. λ.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> i. e. restitutions to a pristine form or condition.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> Proclus, finding that this was partially the case in his time, +says prophetically, in the Introduction to his Commentary on +the Parmenides of Plato, Τουτον εγω φαιην αν τυπον φιλοσοφιας εις +ανθρωπους ελθειν επ’ ευεργεσια των τηδε ψυχων, αντι των αγαλματων, +αντι των ἱερων, αντι της ὁλης αγιστειας αυτης, και σωτηριας αρχηγον +τοις γε νυν ουσιν ανθρωποις, και τοις εισαυθις γενησομενοις. i. e. “With +respect to this form of philosophy [viz. of the philosophy of +Plato], I should say that it came to men for the benefit of +terrestrial souls; <i>that it might be instead of statues, instead of +temples, instead of the whole of sacred institutions, and the leader of +salvation both to the men that now are, and to those that shall exist +hereafter</i>.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> i. e. evil dæmons.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> By the <i>geniture of the world</i>, the greater <i>apocatastasis</i> is signified, +as is evident from the preceding extract from Julius Firmicus.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> i. e. a mundane period being finished.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> See the Introduction to my Translation of the Timæus of +Plato.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, par Monsieur +Bailly, published in 1787.</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84"></a>[84]</span></p> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85"></a>[85]</span></p> + +<h2 class="nobreak" id="SELECT_THEOREMS">SELECT THEOREMS<br> +<span class="smaller">IN PROOF OF</span><br> +THE PERPETUITY OF TIME,<br> +<span class="smaller">AND OF THAT WHICH IS NATURALLY MOVED +WITH A CIRCULAR MOTION.<br> +EXTRACTED FROM THE SECOND BOOK OF PROCLUS ON MOTION.</span></h2> + +</div> + +<h3>HYPOTHESES.</h3> + +<p>Every natural body is moveable according to +place.</p> + +<p>Every local motion is either in a circle, or in a +right line, or mixed from these.</p> + +<p>Every natural body is moved according to one +of these motions.</p> + +<p>Every natural body is either simple or compounded.</p> + +<p>Every simple motion is the motion of a simple<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> +body.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86"></a>[86]</span></p> + +<p>Every simple body is moved with one motion +according to nature.</p> + +<h3>DEFINITIONS.</h3> + +<p>That is heavy which is moved towards the +middle.</p> + +<p>That is light which is moved from the middle.</p> + +<p>That is said to be moved in a circle which is +continually borne from the same to the same.</p> + +<p>Contrary motions are from contraries to contraries.</p> + +<p>One motion is contrary to one.</p> + +<p>Time is the number of the motion of the celestial +bodies.</p> + +<p>The motion is one which is without difference +according to species, and belongs to one subject, +and is produced in a continued time.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 1.</h3> + +<p>Things which are naturally moved in a circle +are simple.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—Let AB be that which is naturally +moved in a circle. I say that AB is simple: +for, since the motion in a circle is a simple motion; +but every simple motion is the motion of a simple +body; hence AB is a simple body. Things, therefore, +which are naturally moved in a circle are +simple.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87"></a>[87]</span></p> + +<h3>THEOREM 2.</h3> + +<p>Things naturally moved in a circle, are neither +the same with those moved in a right line, nor +with those which are composed from things moved +in a right line.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—Let AB be that which is naturally +moved in a circle. I say that it is not the +same with those things which are moved in a right +line. For, if it is the same with any one of these, +it must either be naturally moved upwards or +downwards. But every simple body is moved with +one simple motion according to nature. Hence, +that which is naturally moved in a circle, is not the +same with anything moved in a right line. But +neither is it the same with anything compounded. +For it has been shown that everything which naturally +moves in a circle is simple; but that which +consists from things moved in a right line is a composite. +AB therefore, which is naturally moved +in a circle, is neither the same with things moved +in a right line, nor with those composed from +these.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 3.</h3> + +<p>Things which are naturally moved in a circle, +neither participate of gravity nor levity.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For if AB is either heavy or +light, it is either naturally moved to the middle, or<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88"></a>[88]</span> +from the middle: for, from the definitions, that is +heavy which is moved to the middle, and that is +light which is moved from the middle. But that +which is moved either from or to the middle, is +the same with some one of the things moved in a +right line. AB, therefore, is the same with something +moved in a right line, though naturally +moved in a circle, which is impossible.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 4.</h3> + +<p>Nothing is contrary to a circular motion.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For if this be possible, let the +motion from A to B be a circular motion, and let +the motion contrary to this be either some one of +the motions in a right line, or some one of those +in a circle. If, then, the motion upwards is contrary +to that in a circle, the motion downwards and +that in a circle will be one. But if the motion +downwards is contrary to that in a circle, the motion +upwards and that in a circle will be the same +with each other; for one motion is contrary to one +into opposite places. But if the motion from A is +contrary to the motion from B, there will be infinite +spaces between two contraries; for between +the points A, B infinite circumferences may be described. +But let AB be a semicircle, and let the +motion from A to B be contrary to the motion from +B to A. If, therefore, that which moves in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89"></a>[89]</span> +semicircle from A to B stops at B, it is by no +means a motion in a circle: for a circular motion +is continually from the same to the same point. +But, if it does not stop at B, but continually moves +in the other semicircle, A is not contrary to B. +And if this be the case, neither is the motion from +A to B contrary to the motion from B to A: for +contrary motions are from contraries to contraries. +But let ABCD be a circle, and let the motion +from A to C be contrary to the motion from C to A. +If therefore that which is moved from A passes +through all the places similarly, and there is one +motion from A to D, C is not contrary to A. But +if these are not contrary, neither are the motions +from them contrary. And in a similar manner +with respect to that which is moved from C, if it +is moved with one motion to B, A is not contrary +to C, so that neither will the motions from these +be contrary.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 5.</h3> + +<p>Things which are naturally moved in a circle, +neither receive generation nor corruption.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For let AB be that which is +naturally moved in a circle, I say that AB is without +generation and corruption: for if it is generable +and corruptible, it is generated from a contrary, +and is corrupted into a contrary. But that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90"></a>[90]</span> +which is moved in a circle has not any contrary. +It is therefore without generation and corruption. +But that there is nothing contrary to things naturally +moving in a circle, is evident from what has +been previously demonstrated: for the motions of +things contrary according to nature are contrary. +But, as we have demonstrated, there is nothing +contrary to the motion in a circle. Neither, therefore, +has that which is moved in a circle any +contrary.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 6.</h3> + +<p>The powers of bodies terminated according to +magnitude are not infinite.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For, if possible, let B be the +infinite power of the finite body A; and let the +half of A be taken, which let be C, and let the +power of this be D. But it is necessary that the +power D should be less than the power B: for a +part has a power less than that of the whole. Let +the ratio, therefore, of C to A be taken, and D will +measure B. The power B therefore is finite, and +it is as C to A, so D to B; and alternately as C +to D, so A to B. But the power D is the power +of the magnitude C, and therefore B will be the +power of the magnitude A. The magnitude A, +therefore, has a finite power B; but it was infinite, +which is impossible: for, that a power of the same<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91"></a>[91]</span> +species should be both finite and infinite in the +same thing, is impossible.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 7.</h3> + +<p>Simple bodies are terminated according to species.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For let the magnitude A be a +simple body. Since, therefore, a simple body is +moved with a simple motion, A will be moved with +a simple motion. And if it is moved in a circle, it +will have one nature and one form. But if it is +moved according to any one of the motions in a +right line, if it is moved from the middle only, it +will be fire, but if only to the middle, earth. But, +if it is light with respect to one thing, and heavy +with respect to another, it will be some one of the +middle elements. The species therefore of simple +bodies are terminated.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 8.</h3> + +<p>Time is continued and perpetual.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For, if it is neither continued +nor eternal, it will have a certain beginning. Let, +therefore, A B be time, and let its beginning be A. +But if A is time, it is divisible, and we shall not +yet have the beginning of time, but there will be +another beginning of the beginning. But, if A is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92"></a>[92]</span> +a moment or <i>the now</i>, it will be indivisible, and +the boundary of another time: for <i>the now</i> is not +only a beginning, but an end. There will therefore +be time before A. Again: if B is the boundary +of time, if B is time, it may be divided to +infinity, and into the many boundaries which it +contains. But if B is <i>the now</i>, the same will also +be a beginning: for <i>the now</i> is not only a boundary, +but a beginning<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a>.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 9.</h3> + +<p>A motion which is naturally circular is perpetual.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—Let the circular motion be that +of the circle A B, I say that it is perpetual: for, +since time is perpetual, it is also necessary that +motion should be perpetual. And since time is +continued, (for there is the same <i>now</i> in the past +and present time,) it is necessary that there should +be some one continued motion: for time is the +number of motion. However, all other motions +are not perpetual: for they are generated from +contraries into contraries. A circular motion, +therefore, is alone perpetual: for to this, as we have +demonstrated, nothing is contrary. But that all +the motions which subsist between contraries, are<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93"></a>[93]</span> +bounded, and are not perpetual, we thus demonstrate. +Let A B be a motion between the two +contraries A and B. The motion, therefore, of +A B is bounded by A and B, and is not infinite. +But the motion from A is not continued with that +from B. But, when that which is moved returns, +it will stand still in B: for, if the motion from A +is one continued motion, and also that from B, that +which is moved from B will be moved into the +same. It will therefore be moved in vain, being +now in A. But nature does nothing in vain: and +hence, there is not one motion. The motions, +therefore, between contraries are not perpetual. +Nor is it possible for a thing to be moved to infinity +in a right line: for contraries are the boundaries. +Nor when it returns will it make one +motion.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 10.</h3> + +<p>That which moves a perpetual motion is perpetual.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For let A be that which moves +a perpetual motion. I say that A also is perpetual: +for, if it is not, it will not then move when +it is not. But this not moving, neither does the +motion subsist, which it moved before. It is however +supposed to be perpetual. But, nothing else +moving, that will be immoveable which is perpetually<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94"></a>[94]</span> +moved. And if anything else moves when +A is no more, the motion is not continual; which +is impossible. Hence, that which moves a perpetual +motion is itself perpetual.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 11.</h3> + +<p>That which is immoveable is the leader of things +moving and moved.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For let A be moved by B, and +B by C, I say that this will some time or other +stop, and that not everything which moves will be +itself moved: for, if possible, let this take place. +Motions, therefore, are either in a circle, or <i>ad +infinitum</i>. But, if things moving and moved are +infinite, there will be infinite multitude and magnitude: +for everything which is moved is divisible, +and moves from contact. Hence, that which consists +from things moving and moved infinite in +multitude, will be infinite in magnitude. But it is +impossible that any body, whether composite or +simple, can be infinite. But if motions are in a +circle, some one of things moved at a certain time, +will be the cause of perpetual motion, if all things +move and are moved by each other in a circle. +This, however, is impossible: for that which moves +a perpetual motion is perpetual. Neither, therefore, +is the motion of things moved, in a circle, nor<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_95"></a>[95]</span> +<i>ad infinitum</i>. There is, therefore, that which moves +immoveably, and which is perpetual.</p> + +<p>But from hence it is evident, that all things are +not moved; for there is also something which is +immoveable. Nor are all things at rest; for there +are also things which are moved. Nor are some +things always at rest, but others always moved; +for there are also things which are sometimes at +rest, and sometimes moved, such as are things +which are moved from contraries into contraries. +Nor are all things sometimes at rest, and sometimes +moved; for there is that which is perpetually +moved, and also that which is perpetually immoveable.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 12.</h3> + +<p>Everything which is moved, is moved by something.</p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—Let A be that which is moved, +I say that A is moved by something: for it is either +moved according or contrary to nature. If, therefore, +it is moved according to nature, that which +moves is nature; but, if contrary to nature, that +which employs violence moves; for every motion +contrary to nature is violent.</p> + +<h3>THEOREM 13.</h3> + +<p>That which first moves a circular motion is impartible, +or without parts.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_96"></a>[96]</span></p> + +<p><i>Demonstration.</i>—For let A be that which moves +the first motion: for it is necessary that there +should be something of this kind, because everything +which is moved is moved by something. But +A, if it is that which first moves, will be immoveable: +for that which is immoveable is the +leader of all things which are moved. And, since +it moves a perpetual motion, it will possess an +infinite power of moving; for finite powers have +also finite energies: for energy proceeds from +power. So that if its energy is infinite, its power +also will be infinite. Hence, that which first +moves a circular motion, must necessarily either +be body, or incorporeal. But if body, it is either +finite or infinite. There is not however an infinite +body. And if it is a finite body, it will not possess +an infinite power. But the powers of things +bounded according to magnitude are finite, as has +been demonstrated. Hence, that which first moves +a circular motion, is not a body. It is therefore +incorporeal, and possesses infinite power.</p> + +<div class="footnotes"> + +<h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> Simple bodies, according to Aristotle, are those which <i>naturally</i> +possess an inherent principle of motion. For animals and +plants possess a principle of motion; but in these it proceeds from +soul and not from nature.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> Hence the world is perpetual; for it is consubsistent with +time.</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<p class="titlepage">THE END.</p> + +<p class="center smaller">PRINTED BY RICHARD TAYLOR, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.</p> + +<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75391 ***</div> +</body> +</html> + diff --git a/75391-h/images/cover.jpg b/75391-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..363ad12 --- /dev/null +++ b/75391-h/images/cover.jpg |
