vius qui ad experimenta haec contradicendi animo accesserant.

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

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

[Sidenote 1: ibid. c. 5.]

[Sidenote 2: Cap. 1.]

[Sidenote 3: Cap. 5.]

I have now cited such Authors both ancient and moderne, who have directly maintained the same opinion. I told you likewise in the proposition that it might probably be deduced from the tenent of others: such were Aristarchus, Philolaus and Copernicus, with many other later writers who assented to their hypothesis, so Ioach. Rlelicus, David Origanus, Lansbergius, Guil. Gilbert, and (if I may believe Campanella[1]) Innumeri alii Angli & Galli. Very many others both English and French, all who affirmed our Earth to be one of the Planets, and the Sunne to bee the Centre of all, about which the heavenly bodies did move, and how horrid soever this may seeme at the first, yet is it likely enough to be true, nor is there any maxime or observation in Opticks (saith Pena) that can disprove it.

[Sidenote 1: Apologia pro Galilaeo.]

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

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

The order by which I shall bee guided will be that which Aristotle[1] uses in his booke De mundo (if that booke were his.)

[Sidenote 1: a 1. cap. ad 10m.]

First, peri ton en aute of those chiefe parts which are in it; not the elementary and aethereall (as he doth there) since this doth not belong to the elementary controversie, but of the Sea and Land, &c. Secondly, peri auten pathon, of those things which are extrinsecall to it, as the seasons, meteors and inhabitants.



Proposition 7.

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

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

Some there are that thinke those spots doe not arise from any deformity of the parts, but a deceit of the eye, which cannot at such a distance discerne an equall light in that planet, but these do but onely say it, and shew not any reason for the proofe of their opinion: Others think[1] that there be some bodies betwixt the Sunne and Moone, which keeping off the lights in some parts, doe by their shadow produce these spots which wee there discerne.

[Sidenote 1: So Bede in d. de Mund. constit.]

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

[Sidenote 1: De subtil. lib. 3.]

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

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

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

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

[Sidenote 2: Iosephus l. 2. con. App. August. de civit. Dei. l. 18. c. 41.]

[Sidenote 3: Nat. Hist. lib. 2. c. 9.]

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: Opt. lib. 9. Comment. in Purb. pag. 164.]

[Sidenote 2: Ex qua parte luna est transpicua non totum secundum superficiem, sed etiam secundum substantiam, eatenus clara, ex qua autem parte opaca est, eatenus obscura videtur. De Phaenom. cap. 11.]

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

[Sidenote 1: Albert. mag. de coaevis. Q. 4. Art. 21. Colleg. Con.]

[Sidenote 2: De Somniis.]

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

[Sidenote 1: Scalig. exercit. 62.]

Tis likely then that she had some other end which moved her to produce this variety, and this in all probability was her intent to make it a fit body for habitation with the same conveniencies of sea and land, as this inferiour world doth partake of. For since the Moone is such a vast, such a solid and opacous body like our earth (as was above proved) why may it not be probable, that those thinner and thicker parts appearing in her, doe shew the difference betwixt the sea and land in that other world; and Galilaeus doubts not, but that if our earth were visible at the same distance, there would be the like appearance of it.

As for the forme of those spots, some of the vulgar thinke they represent a man, and the Poets guesse 'tis the boy Endimion, whose company shee loves so well, that shee carries him with her, others will have it onely to be the face of a man as the Moone is usually pictured, but Albertus thinkes rather, that it represents a Lyon with his taile towards the East, and his head the West, and [1]*some others have thought it to be very much like a Fox, & certainly 'tis as much like a Lyon as that in the Zodiake, or as Vrsa major is like a Beare.

[Sidenote 1*: Eusebius Nioremb. Hist. Nat. lib. 8. c. 15.]

I should guesse that it represents one of these as well as another, and any thing else as well as any of these, since 'tis but a strong imagination, which fancies such images as schoole-boyes usually doe in the markes of a wall, whereas there is not any such similitude in the spots themselves, which rather like our Sea, in respect of the land, appeares under a rugged and confused figure, and doth not represent any distinct image, so that both in respect of the matter and the forme it may be probable enough, that those spots and brighter parts may shew the distinction betwixt the Sea and Land in that other world.



Proposition 8.

The spots represent the Sea, and the brighter parts the Land.

When I first compared the nature of our earth and water with those appearances in the Moone; I concluded contrary to the proposition, that the brighter parts represented the water, and the spots the land; of this opinion likewise was Keplar at the first; but my second thoughts, and the reading of others,[1] have now convinced me (as after he was) of the truth of that Proposition which I have now set downe. But before I come to the confirmation of it, I shall mention those scruples which at first made mee doubt of the truth of this opinion.

[Sidenote 1: Opt. Astro. c. 6. num. 9. Dissert. cum nuncio Gal.]

1. It may be objected, 'tis probable, if there be any such sea and land as ours, that it bears some proportion and similitude with ours: but now this Proposition takes away all likenesse betwixt them, for whereas the superficies of our earth is but the third part of the whole surface in the globe, two parts being overspread with the water (as Scaliger[1] observes) yet here according to this opinion, the Sea should be lesse then the Land, since there is not so much of the bespotted, as ther is of the enlightened parts, wherefore 'tis probable, that either there is no such thing at all, or else that the brighter parts are the Sea.

[Sidenote 1: Exercit. 38.]

2. The water, by reason of the smoothnesse of its superficies, seemes better able to reflect the Sun beames then the earth, which in most places is so full of ruggednesse of grasse and trees, and such like impediments of reflection, and besides, comon experience shewes, that the water shines with a greater and more glorious brightnesse then the earth, therefore it should seeme that the spots are the earth, and the brighter parts the water.

But to the first it may be answered.

1. There is no great probability in this consequence, that because 'tis so with us, therefore it must be so with the parts of the Moone, for since there is such a difference betwixt them in divers other respects, they may not, perhaps, agree in this.

2. That assertion of Scaliger is not by all granted for a truth. Fromondus[1] with others, thinke, that the superficies of the Sea and Land in so much of the world as is already discovered, is equall, and of the same extension.

[Sidenote 1: De Meteoris l. 5. c. 1. Art. 1.]

3. The Orbe of thicke and vaporous aire which encompasses the Moone, makes the brighter parts of that Planet appeare bigger then in themselves they are; as I shall shew afterwards.

To the second it may be answered, that though the water be of a smooth superficies, and so may seeme most fit to reverberate the light, yet because 'tis of a perspicuous nature, therefore the beames must sinke into it, and cannot so strongly and clearely be reflected. Sicut in speculo ubi plumbum abrasum fuerit, (saith Cardan) as in Looking-glasses where part of the lead is raized off, and nothing left behind to reverberate the image, the species must there passe through and not backe againe; so it is where the beames penetrate and sinke into the substance of the body, there cannot be such an immediate and strong reflection as when they are beate backe from the superficies, and therefore the Sunne causes a greater heate by farre upon the Land then upon the water. Now as for that experiment, where 'tis said, that the waters have a greater brightness then the Land: I answer, 'tis true onely there where they represent the image of the Sunne or some bright cloud, and not in other places, as is very plaine by common observation.

So that notwithstanding those doubts, yet this Proposition may remaine true, that the spots may be the Sea, and the brighter parts the Land. Of this opinion was Plutarch: unto him assented Keplar and Galilaeus, whose words are these,

Si quis veterum Pythagoraeorum sententiam excuscitare velit, lunam scilicet esse quasi tellurem alteram, ejus pars lucidior terrenam superficiem, obscurior vero aqueam magis congrue repraesentet. Mihi autem dubium fuit numquam terrestris globi a longe conspecti, atque a radiis solaribus perfusi, terream superficiem clariorem, obscuriorem vero aqueam sese in conspectum daturam.[1]

"If any man have a minde to renew the opinion of the Pythagoreans, that the Moone is another earth, then her brighter parts may fitly represent the earths superficies, and the darker part the water: and for my part, I never doubted but that our earthly globe being shined upon by the Sunne, and beheld at a great distance, the Land would appeare brightest and the Sea more obscurely."

[Sidenote 1: De facie lun. Dissertatio. Nunc. Syd.]

The reasons may be.

1. That which I urged about the foregoing Chapter, because the water is the thinner part, and therefore must give the lesse light.

2. Because observation tels us, that the spotted parts are alwaies smooth and equall, having every where an equality of light, when once they are enlightened by the Sunne, whereas the brighter parts are full of rugged gibbosities and mountaines having many shades in them, as I shall shew more at large afterwards.

That in this Planet there must be Seas, Campanella[1] indeavours to prove out of Scripture interpreting the waters above the Firmament spoken of in Genesis to be meant of the Sea in this world. For (saith he) 'tis not likely that there are any such waters above the Orbes to moderate that heate which they receive from their swift motion (as some of the Fathers thinke) nor did Moses meane the Angells which may be called spirituall waters, as Origen and Austin[2] would have it, for both these are rejected by the generall consent: nor could he meane any waters in the second region, as most Commentators interpret it. For first there is nothing but vapours, which though they are afterwards turned into water, yet while they remaine there, they are onely the matter of that element, which may as well be fire or earth, or aire. 2. Those vapors are not above the expansum, but in it. So that hee thinkes there is no other way to salve all, but by making the Planets severall worlds with Sea & Land, with such Rivers and Springs, as wee have here below: Especially since Esdras[3] speakes of the springs above the Firmament, but I cannot agree with him in this, nor doe I thinke that any such thing can be proved out of Scripture.

[Sidenote 1: Apologia pro Galilaeo.]

[Sidenote 2: Confession. l. 13. c. 32.]

[Sidenote 3: 2 Esdr. 4. 7.]

Before I proceede to the next Position, I shall first answer some doubts which might be made against the generality of this truth, whereby it may seeme impossible that there should be either Sea or Land in the Moone; for since she moves so swiftly as Astronomers observe, why then does there nothing fall from her, or why doth shee not shake something out by the celerity of her revolution? I answer, you must know that the inclination of every heavie body, to its proper Center doth sufficiently tie it unto its place, so that suppose any thing were separated, yet must it necessarily returne againe, and there is no more danger of their falling into our world then there is feare of our falling into the Moone.

But yet there are many fabulous relations of such things as have dropped thence. There is a tale of the Nemean Lyon that Hercules slew, which first rushing among the heards out of his unknowne den in the Mountaine of Cytheron in Boeotia, the credulous people thought he was sent from their Goddesse the Moone. And if a whirle-winde did chance to snatch any thing up, and afterwards raine it downe againe, the ignorant multitude are apt to believe that it dropt from Heaven. Thus Avicenna relates the story of a Calfe which fell downe in a storme, the beholders thinking it a Moone-calfe, and that it fell thence. So Cardan travelling upon the Apennine Mountaines, a sudden blast tooke off his hat, which if it had beene carryed farre, he thinkes the peasants who had perceived it to fall, would have sworne it had rained hats. After some such manner many of our prodigies come to passe, and the people are willing to believe anything, which they may relate to others as a very strange and wonderfull event. I doubt not but the Trojan Palladium, the Romane Minerva, and our Ladies Church at Loretto, with many sacred reliques preserved by the Papists might droppe from the Moone as well as any of these.

But it may be againe objected, suppose there were a bullet shot up in that world, would not the Moone runne away from it, before it could fall downe, since the motion of her body (being every day round our earth) is farre swifter than the other, and so the bullet must be left behinde, and at length fall downe to us? To this I answer,

1. If a bullet could be shot so farre till it came to the circumference of those things which belong to our center, then it would fall downe to us.

2. Though there were some heavie body a great height in that ayer, yet would the motion of its centre by an attractive vertue still hold it within its convenient distance, so that whether their earth moved or stood still, yet would the same violence cast a body from it equally farre. That I may the plainer expresse my meaning, I will set downe this Diagramme.



Suppose this earth were A, which was to move in the circle C, D. and let the bullet be supposed at B. within its proper verge; I say, whether this earth did stand stil or move swiftly towards D, yet the bullet would still keepe at the same distance by reason of that Magneticke vertue of the center (if I may so speake) whereby all things within its spheare are attracted with it. So that the violence to the bullet, being nothing else but that whereby 'tis removed from its center, therefore an equall violence can carry a body from its proper place, but at an equall distance whether or no the center stand still or move.

The impartiall Reader may finde sufficient satisfaction for this and such other arguments as may be urged against the motion of that earth in the writings of Capernicus and his followers, unto whom for brevities sake I will referre them.



Proposition 9.

That there are high Mountaines, deepe vallies, and spacious plains in the body of the Moone.

Though there are some who thinke Mountaines to bee a deformity in the earth, as if they were either beate up by the flood, or else cast up like so many heaps of rubbish left at the creation, yet if well considered, they will be found as much to conduce to the beauty and conveniency of the universe as any of the other parts. Nature (saith Pliny[1]) purposely framed them for many excellent uses: partly to tame the violence of greater Rivers, to strengthen certaine joynts within the veines and bowels of the earth, to breake the force of the Seas inundation, and for the safety of the earths inhabitants, whether beasts or men. That they make much for the protection of beasts the Psalmist[2] testifies, The highest hils are a refuge for the wilde Goats, and the rockes for Conies. The Kingly Prophet had learned the safety of these by his owne experience, when he also was faine to make a mountaine his refuge from the fury of his Master Saul, who persecuted him in the wildernesse.

[Sidenote 1: Nat. hist. l. 36. c. 1.]

[Sidenote 2: Psal. 104. v. 18.]

True indeed, such places as these keepe their neighbours poore, as beeing most barren, but yet they preserve them safe, as being most strong, witnesse our unconquered Wales and Scotland, whose greatest protection hath beene the naturall strength of their Countrey, so fortified with Mountaines, that these have alwaies been unto them sure retraites from the violence and oppression of others, wherefore a good Authour doth rightly call them natures bulwarkes cast up at God Almighties owne charges, the scornes and curbs of victorious armies, which made the Barbarians in Curtius so confident of their owne safety, when they were once retired to an inaccessible mountaine, that when Alexanders Legate had brought them to a parley and perswading them to yeeld, told them of his masters victories, what Seas and Wildernesses hee had passed, they replyed that all that might be, but could Alexander fly too? Over the Seas he might have ships, and over the land horses, but hee must have wings before he could get up thither. Such safety did those barbarous nations conceive in the mountaines whereunto they were retyred, certainely then such usefull parts were not the effect of mans sinne, or produced by the Worlds curse the flood, but rather at the first created by the goodnesse and providence of the Almighty.

So that if I intend to prove that the Moone is such a habitable world as this is, 'tis requisite that I shew it to have the same conveniences of habitation as this hath, and here if some Rabbi or Chymicke were to handle the point they would first prove it out of Scripture, from that place in Moses his blessing,[1] where hee speakes of the ancient mountaines and lasting hils, Deut. Hareray kedem ugva'ot olam for having immediately before mentioned those blessings which should happen unto Ioseph by the influence of the Moone, he does presently exegetically iterate them in blessing him with the chiefe things of the ancient Mountaines and lasting hils; you may also see the same expression used in Iacobs blessing of Ioseph.[2]

[Sidenote 1: Deut. 33. 15]

[Sidenote 2: Gen. 49. 26]

But however we may deale pro or con in Philosophy, yet we must not jest with divine truths, or bring Scripture to patronize any fancy of our owne, though, perhaps, it be truth. For the better proofe of this proposition, I might here cite the testimony of Diodorus, who thought the Moone to bee full of rugged places, vel ut terrestribus tumulis superciliosam, but he erred much in some circumstances of this opinion, especially where he saies, there is an Iland amongst the Hyperboreans, wherein those hils may to the eye bee plainely discovered, and for this reason. [1]*Caelius calls him a fabulous Writer, but you may see more expresse authority for the proofe of this in the opinions of Anaxagoras and Democritus,[2] who held that this Planet was full of champion grounds, mountains and vallies, and this seemed likewise probable unto Augustinus Nifus, whose words are these:

Forsitan non est remotum dicere, lunae partes esse diversas, veluti sunt partes terrae, quarum aliae sunt vallosae, aliae montosae, ex quarum differentia effici potest facies illa lunae; nec est rationi dissonum, nam luna est corpus imperfecte Sphaericum, cum sit corpus ab ultimo coelo elongatum, ut supra dixit Aristoteles.

"Perhaps, it would not be amisse to say that the parts of the Moone were divers, as the parts of this earth, whereof some are vallies, and some mountaines, from the difference of which, some spots in the Moone may proceed, nor is this against reason, for that Planet cannot be perfectly sphericall, since 'tis so remote a body from the first orbe, as Aristotle had said before."

You may see this truth assented unto by Blancanus the Jesuit,[3] and by him confirmed with with divers reasons. Keplar hath observed in the Moones eclipses,[4] that the division of her enlightened part from the shaded, was made by a crooked unequall line, of which there cannot be any probable cause conceived, unlesse it did arise from the ruggednesse of that planet, for it cannot at all be produc'd from the shade of any mountains here upon earth, because these would be so lessned before they could reach so high in a conicall shadow, that they would not be at all sensible unto us (as might easily be demonstrated) nor can it be conceived what reason of this difference there should be in the Sunne. Wherefore there being no other body that hath any thing to doe in eclipses, we must necessarily conclude, that it is caused by a variety of parts in the Moone it selfe, and what can there be but its gibbosities? Now if you should aske a reason why there should be such a similitude of these in that Planet, the same Keplar shall jest you out an answere, for supposing (saith he) those inhabitants are bigger than any of us in the same proportion, as their daies are longer than ours, viz. by fifteen times it may bee for want of stones to erect such vast houses as were requisite for their bodies, they are faine to digge great and round hollowes in the earth, where they may both procure water for their thirst, and turning about with the shade, may avoid those great heats which otherwise they would be lyable unto; or if you will give Caesar la Galla leave to guesse in the same manner, he would rather think that those thirsty nations cast up so many and so great heaps of earth in digging of their wine cellars, but this onely by the way.

[Sidenote 1*: Lect. aut l. 1. c. 15. Plut. de plac. l. 2. c. 25.]

[Sidenote 2: De coelo. l. 2. p. 49.]

[Sidenote 3: De Mundi fab. pars 3. c. 4.]

[Sidenote 4: Astron. Opt. c. 6. num 9.]

I shall next produce the eye-witnesse of Galilaeus,[1] on which I most of all depend for the proofe of this Proposition, when he beheld the new Moone through his perspective, it appeared to him under a rugged and spotted figure, seeming to have the darker and enlightned parts divided by a tortuous line, having some parcels of light at a good distance from the other, and this difference is so remarkable, that you may easily perceive it through one of those ordinary perspectives, which are commonly sold amongst us, but for your better apprehending of what I deliver, I will set downe the Figure as I find it in Galilaeus:

[Sidenote 1: Nuncius Sydereus.]



Suppose ABCD to represent the appearance of the Moones body being in a sextile, you may see some brighter parts separated at a pretty distance from the other, which can bee nothing else but a reflexion of the Sunne-beames upon some parts that are higher then the rest, and those obscure gibbosities which stand out towards the enlightened parts must bee such hollow and deepe places whereto the rayes cannot reach, but when the Moone is got further off from the Sunne, and come to that fulnesse, as this line BD doth represent her under, then doe these parts also receive an equall light, excepting onely that difference which doth appeare betwixt their sea and land. And if you do consider how any rugged body would appeare, being enlightned, you would easily conceive that it must necessarily seeme under some such gibbous unequall forme, as the Moone is here represented. Now for the infallibility of these appearances, I shall referre the reader to that which hath beene said in the 6th Proposition.

But Caesar la Galla affirmes, that all these appearances may consist with a plaine superficies, if wee suppose the parts of the body to be some of them, Diaphanous, and some opacous; and if you object that the light which is conveyed to any diaphanous part in a plaine superficies must be by a continued line, whereas here there appeare many brighter parts among the obscure at some distance from the rest. To this he answers, it may arise from some secret conveyances and channels within her body, that doe consist of a more diaphanous matter which being covered over with an opacious superficies, the light passing through them may breake out a great way off, whereas the other parts betwixt may still remaine darke. Just as the River Arethusa in Sicile which runnes under ground for a great way, and afterwards breakes out againe. But because this is one of the chiefest fancies whereby hee thinkes hee hath fully answered the arguments of this opinion, I will therefore set downe his answere in his owne words, lest the Reader might suspect more in them then I have expressed.[1]

Non est impossibile coecos ductus diaphani & perspicui corporis, sed opaca superficie protendi, usque in diaphanam aliquam ex profundo in superficiem, emergentem partem, per quos ductus lumen longo postmodum interstitio erumpat, &c.

But I reply, if the superficies betwixt these two enlightened parts remaine darke because of its opacity, then would it alwaies be darke, and the Sunne could not make it partake of light more then it could of perspicuity: But this contradicts all experience as you may see in Galilaeus, who affirmes that when the Sunne comes nearer to his opposition, then that which is betwixt them, both is enlightned as well as either. Nay this opposes his owne eye-witnesse, for he confesses himselfe that he saw this by the glasse. He had said before that he came to see those strange sights discovered by Galilaeus his glasse with an intent of contradiction, and you may reade that confirmed in the weakenesse of this answere, which rather bewrayes an obstinate then a perswaded will, for otherwise sure hee would never have undertooke to have destroyed such certaine proofes with so groundlesse a fancy.

[Sidenote 1: Cap. 11.]

But it may bee objected, that 'tis almost impossible, and altogether unlikely that in the Moone thete should be any mountaines so high as those observations make them, for doe but suppose according to the common principles, that the Moones diameter unto the Earths is very neere to the proportion of 2. to 7, suppose withall that the Earths diameter containes about 7000 Italian miles, and the Moones 2000 (as is commonly granted) now Galiaeus hath observed that some parts have been enlightened when they were the twentieth part of the diameter distant from the common terme of illumination, so that hence it must necessarily follow that there may bee some Mountaines in the Moone so high, that they are able to cast a shadow a 100 miles off. An opinion that sounds like a prodigie or a fiction; wherefore 'tis likely that either those appearances are caused by somewhat else besides mountaines, or else those are fallible observations, from whence may follow such improbable inconceiveable consequences.

But to this I answere:

1. You must consider the height of the Mountaines is but very little, if you compare them to the length of their shadowes. Sr. Walter Rawleigh[1] observes that the Mount Athos now called Lacas casts its shadow 300 furlongs, which is above 37 miles, and yet that Mount is none of the highest, nay Solinus[2] (whom I should rather believe in this kinde) affirmes that this Mountaine gives his shadow quite over the Sea, from Macedon to the Ile of Lemnos which is 700 furlongs or 84 miles, and yet according to the common reckoning it doth scarce reach 4 miles upwards, in its perpendicular height.

[Sidenote 1: Hist. l. 1. c. 7. Sec. 11.]

[Sidenote 2: Poly. histor. c. 21.]

2. I affirme that there are very high Mountaines in the Moone. Keplar and Galilaeus thinke that they are higher than any which are upon our earth. But I am not of their opinion in this, because I suppose they goe upon a false ground whilst they conceive that the highest mountaine upon the earth is not above a mile perpendicular.

Whereas 'tis the common opinion and found true enough by observation, that Olympus, Atlas, Taurus and Enius, with many others are much above this height. Tenariffa in the Canary Ilands is proved by computation to bee above 8 miles perpendicular, and about this height is the mount Perjacaca in America. Sr. Walter Rawleigh seemes to thinke, that the highest of these is neere 30 miles upright: nay Aristotle[1] speaking of Caucasus in Asia, affirmes it to bee visible for 560 miles, as some interpreters finde by computation, from which it will follow, that it was 78 miles perpendicularly high, as you may see confirmed by Jacobus Mazonius,[2] and out of him in Blancanus the Jesuite.[3] But this deviates from the truth more in excesse then the other doth in defect. However though these in the moone are not so high as some amongst us, yet certaine it is they are of a great height, and some of them at the least foure miles perpendicular. This I shall prove from the observation of Galilaeus, whose glasse can shew this truth to the senses, a proofe beyond exception and certaine that man must needs be of a most timerous faith who dares not believe his owne eye.

[Sidenote 1: Meteor. l. 1. c. 11.]

[Sidenote 2: Comparatio Arist. cum Platone, Sect. 3. c. 5.]

[Sidenote 3: Exposi. in loc. Math. Artis. loc. 148.]

By that perspective you may plainely discerne some enlightned parts (which are the mountaines) to be distant from the other about the twentieth part of the diameter. From whence it will follow, that those mountaines must necessarily be at the least foure Italian miles in height.



For let BDEF be the body of the moone, ABC will be a ray or beame of the Sunne, which enlightens a mountaine at A and B is the point of contingency, the distance betwixt A and B must bee supposed to be the twentieth part of the diameter which is an 100 miles, for so far are some enlightened parts severed from the common terme of illumination. Now the aggregate of the quadrate from A B a hundred, and B G a 1000 will bee 1010000, unto which the quadrate arising from A G must be equall according to the 47th proposition in the first booke of elements. Therefore the whole line A G is somewhat more than 104, and the distance betwixt H A must be above 4 miles, which was the thing to be proved.

But it may be againe objected, if there be such rugged parts, and so high mountaines, why then cannot wee discerne them at this distance, why doth the moone appeare unto us so exactly round, and not rather as a wheele with teeth?

I answere, by reason of too great a distance, for if the whole body appeare to our eye so little, then those parts which beare so small a proportion to the whole will not at all be sensible.

But it may be replied, if there were any such remarkeable hils, why does not the limbe of the moone appeare like a wheele with teeth to those who looke upon it through the great perspective on whose witnesse you so much depend? or what reason is there that she appeares as exactly round through it as shee doth to the bare eye? certainely then either there is no such thing as you imagine, or else the glasse failes much in this discovery.

To this I shall answere out of Galilaeus.

1. You must know that there is not meerely one ranke of mountaines about the edge of the moone, but divers orders, one mountaine behind another, and so there is somewhat to hinder those void spaces which otherwise, perhaps, might appeare.

Now where there be many hils, the ground seemes even to a man that can see the tops of all. Thus when the sea rages, and many vast waves are lifted up, yet all may appeare plaine enough to one that stands at the shore. So where there are so many hils, the inequality will be lesse remarkable, if it be discerned at a distance.

2. Though there be mountains in that part which appeares unto us, to be the limbe of the Moone, as well as in any other place, yet the bright vapours hide their appearance: for there is an orbe of thicke vaporous aire that doth immediatly compasse the body of the Moone, which though it have not so great opacity, as to terminate the sight, yet being once enlightened by the Sunne, it doth represent the body of the Moone under a greater forme, and hinders our sight from a distinct view of her true circumference. But of this in the next Chapter.

I have now sufficiently proved, that there are hills in the Moone, and hence it may seeme likely that there is also a world, for since providence hath some speciall end in all its workes, certainly then these mountaines were not produced in vaine, and what more probable meaning can wee conceive there should be, than to make that place convenient for habitation.



Proposition 10.

That there is an Atmo-sphaera, or an orbe of grosse vaporous aire, immediately encompassing the body of the Moone.

As that part of our aire which is neerest to the earth, is of a thicker substance than the other, by reason tis alwaies mixed with some vapours, which are continually exhaled into it. So is it equally requisite, that if there be a world in the Moone, that the aire about that should be alike qualified with ours. Now, that there is such an orbe of grosse aire, was first of all (for ought I can reade) observed by Meslin, afterwards assented unto by Keplar and Galilaeus,[1] and since by Baptistae Cisatus, Sheiner with others, all of them confirming it by the same arguments which I shall onely cite, and then leave this Proposition.

[Sidenote 1: Vide Euseb. Nierem. de Nat. Hist. l. 2. c. 11.]

1. 'Tis observed, that so much of the Moone as is enlightened, is alwaies part of a bigger circle then that which is darker. Their frequent experience hath proved this, and an easie observation may quickely confirme it. But now this cannot proceede from any other cause so probable, as from this orbe of aire, especially when we consider how that planet shining with a borrowed light, doth not send forth any such rayes as may make her appearance bigger then her body.

2. 'Tis observed in the Solary eclipses, that there is a great trepidation about the body of the Moone, from which we may likewise argue an Atmo-sphaera, since we cannot well conceive what so probable a cause there should be of such an appearance as this,

Quod radii Solares a vaporibus Lunam ambientibus fuerint intercisi,[1]

that the Sun beames were broken and refracted by the vapours that encompassed the Moone.

[Sidenote 1: Scheiner. Ros. Vrs. l. 4. pars 2. c. 27.]

3. I may adde the like argument taken from another observation which will be easily tried and granted. When the Sunne is eclipsed, wee discerne the Moone as shee is in her owne naturall bignesse, but then she appeares somewhat lesse then when shee is in the full, though she be in the same place of her supposed excentrick and epicycle, and therefore Tycho hath calculated a Table for the Diameter of the divers new Moones. But now there is no reason so probable to salve this appearance, as to place an orbe of thicker aire, neere the body of that Planet, which may be enlightened by the reflected beames, and through which the direct raies may easily penetrate.

But some may object that this will not consist with that which was before delivered, where I said, that the thinnest parts had least light.

If this were true, how comes it to passe then, that this aire should be as bright as any of the other parts, when as tis the thinnest of all?

I answer, if the light be received by reflection, then the thickest body hath most because it is best able to beare backe the raies, but if the light be received by illumination[1] (especially if there be an opacous body behinde, which may double the beames by reflexion) as it is here, then I deny not but a thinne body may retaine much light, and perhaps, some of those appearances which wee take for fiery comets, are nothing else but a bright cloud enlightened, so that probable it is, there may be such aire without the Moone, and hence it comes to passe, that the greater spots are onely visible towards her middle parts, and none neere the circumference, not but that there are some as well in those parts as else where, but they are not there perceiveable, by reason of those brighter vapours which hide them.

[Sidenote 1: Hist. l. 1. c. 7. Sec. 11.]



Proposition 11.

That as their world is our Moone, so our world is their Moone.

I have already handled the first thing that I promised according to the Method which Aristotle uses in his Booke de Mundo, and shew'd you the necessary parts that belong to this world in the Moone. In the next place 'tis requisite that I proceed to those things which are extrinsecall unto it, as the Seasons, the Meteors, and the Inhabitants.

1. Of the Seasons;

And if there be such a world in the Moone, 'tis requisite then that their seasons should be some way correspondent unto ours, that they should have Winter and Summer, night and day, as wee have.

Now that in this Planet there is some similitude of Winter and Summer is affirmed by Aristotle [1] himselfe, since there is one hemispheare that hath alwaies heate and light, and the other that hath darknesse and cold. True indeed, their daies and yeeres are alwaies of one and the same length, but tis so with us also under the Poles, and therefore that great difference is not sufficient to make it altogether unlike ours, nor can we expect that every thing there should be in the same manner as it is here below, as if nature had no way but one to bring about her purposes. Wee may easily see what great differences there are amongst us, betwixt things of the same kinde. Some men (say they) [2] there are, who can live onely upon smells, without eating any thing, and the same Plant, saith Besoldus, hath sometimes contrary effects. Mandragora which growes in Syria inflames the lust, wheras Mandragora which grows in other places doth coole the blood & quench lust.

[Sidenote 1: De gen. animal. l. 4. 12.]

[Sidenote 2: Plat. de fac. De natura populorum. c. 3.]

Now if with us there be such great difference betwixt things of the same kinde, we have no reason then to thinke it necessary that both these worlds should be altogether alike, but it may suffice if they bee correspondent in something onely, however it may be questioned whether it doth not seeme to be against the wisedome of providence, to make the night of so great a length, when they have such a long time unfit for worke? I answere no, since tis so, and more with us also under the poles; and besides, the generall length of their night is somewhat abated in the bignesse of their Moone which is our earth. For this returnes as great a light unto that Planet, as it receives from it. But for the better proofe of this, I shall first free the way from such opinions as might otherwise hinder the speede of a clearer progresse.

Plutarch[1] one of the chiefe patrons of this world in the Moone, doth directly contradict this proposition; affirming, that those who live there may discerne our world as the dregges and sediment of all other creatures, appearing to them through clouds and foggy mists, and that altogether devoid of light, being base and unmoveable, so that they might well imagine the darke place of damnation to be here situate, and that they onely were the inhabiters of the world, as being in the midst betwixt Heaven and Hell.

[Sidenote 1: Plut. de fac. lunae.]

To this I may answere, 'tis probable that Plutarch spake this inconsiderately, and without a reason, which makes him likewise fall into another absurditie, when he sayes our earth would appeare immoveable, whereas questionlesse though it did not, yet would it seeme to move, and theirs to stand still, as the Land doth to a man in a Shippe; according to that of the Poet:

Provehimur portu, terraeque urbesque recedunt.

And I doubt not but that ingenuous Authour would easily have recanted if hee had beene but acquainted with those experiences which men of latter times have found out, for the confirmation of this truth.

2. Unto him assents Macrobius, whose words are these;

Terra accepto solis lumine clarescit, tantummodo, non relucet.

"The earth is by the Sunne-beames made bright, but not able to enlighten any thing so farre."

And his reason is, because this being of a thicke and grosse matter, the light is terminated in its superficies, and cannot penetrate into the substance; whereas the moone doth therefore seeme so bright to us, because it receives the beames within it selfe. But the weaknesse of this assertion, may bee easily manifest by a common experience, for polished steele (whose opacity will not give any admittance to the rayes) reflects a stronger heate then glasse, and so consequently a greater light.

3. 'Tis the generall consent of Philosophers, that the reflection of the Sunne-beames from the earth doth not reach much above halfe a mile high, where they terminate the first region, so that to affirme they might ascend to the moone, were to say, there were but one region of aier, which contradicts the proved and received opinion.

Unto this it may be answered:

That it is indeed the common consent, that the reflexion of the Sunne-beames reach onely to the second region, but yet some there are, and those too Philosophers of good note, who thought otherwise. Thus Plotinus is cited by Caelius,[1]

Si concipias te in sublimi quopiam mundi loco, unde oculis subjiciatur terrae moles aquis circumfusa, & solis syderumque radiis illustrata, non aliam profecto visam iri probabile est, quam qualis modo visatur lunaris globi species.

"If you did conceive your selfe to bee in some such high place, where you might discerne the whole Globe of the earth and water, when it was enlightned by the Sunnes rayes, 'tis probable it would then appeare to you in the same shape as the moone doth now unto us."

Thus also Carolus Malapertius, whose words are these,[2]

Terra haec nostra si in luna constituti essemus, splendida prorsus quasi non ignobilis planeta, nobis appareret.

"If wee were placed in the moone, and from thence beheld this our earth, it would appeare unto us very bright, like one of the nobler Planets."

Unto these doth Fromondus assent, when he sayes,[3]

Credo equidem quod si oculus quispiam in orbe lunari foret, globum terrae & aquae instar ingentis syderis a sole illustrem conspiceret.

"I believe that this globe of earth and water would appeare like some great Starre to any one, who should looke upon it from the moone."

Now this could not be, nor could it shine so remarkably, unlesse the beames of light, were reflected from it. And therefore the same Fromondus expresly holds, that the first region of ayre is there terminated, where the heate caused by reflexion begins to languish, whereas the beames themselves doe passe a great way further. The chiefe argument which doth most plainely manifest this truth, is taken from a common observation which may be easily tryed.

[Sidenote 1: Ant. lect. l. 1. c. 4.]

[Sidenote 2: Praefat. ad Austrica syd.]

[Sidenote 3: Meteor. l. 1. c. 2. Art. 2.]

If you behold the Moone a little before or after the conjunction, when she is in a sextile with the Sunne, you may discerne not onely the part which is enlightned, but the rest also to have in it a kind of a duskish light, but if you chuse out such a scituation, where some house or chimney (being some 70 or 80 paces distant from you) may hide from your eye the enlightned hornes, you may then discerne a greater and more remarkeable shining in those parts unto which the Sunne beames cannot reach; nay there is so great a light, that by the helpe of a good perspective you may discerne its spots. Inso much that Blancanus the Jesuite speaking of it sayes[1]

Haec experientia ita me aliquando fefellit, ut in hunc fulgorem casu ac repente incidens, existimarim novo quodam miraculo tempore adolescentis lunae factum esse plenilunium.

"This experiment did once so deceive mee, that happening upon the sight of this brightnesse upon a sudden, I thought that by some new miracle the Moone had beene got into her full a little after her change."

[Sidenote 1: De mundi fab. p. 3. c. 3.]

But now this light is not proper to the Moone, it doth not proceed from the rayes of the Sunne which doth penetrate her body, nor is it caused by any other of the Planets and Starres. Therefore it must necessarily follow, that it comes from the earth. The two first of these I have already proved, and as for the last, it is confidently affirmed by Caelius,[1]

Quod si in disquisitionem evocet quia, an lunari syderi lucem foenerent planetae item alii, asseveranter astruendum non foenerare.

"If any should aske whether the other Planets lend any light to the Moone; I answer they doe not." True indeed, the noble Tycho[2] discussing the reason of this light attributes it to the Planet Uenus, and I grant that this may convey some light to the Moone; but that it is not the cause of this whereof wee now discourse, is of itselfe sufficiently plaine, because Uenus is sometimes over the Moone, when as shee cannot convey any light to that part which is turned from her.

[Sidenote 1: Progym. 1.]

[Sidenote 2: l. 20. c. 5.]

It doth not proceede from the fixed starres, for then it would retaine the same light in eclipses, whereas the light at such times is more ruddy and dull. Then also the light of the Moone would not be greater or lesser, according to its distance from the edge of the earths shadow, since it did at all times equally participate this light of the starres.

Now because there is no other body in the whole Universe, save the earth, it remaines that this light must necessarily be caused by that which with a just gratitude repaies to the Moone, such illumination as it receives from her.

And as loving friends equally participate of the same joy and griefe, so doe these mutually partake of the same light from the Sunne, and the same darkenesse from the eclipses, being also severally helped by one another in their greatest wants: For when the Moone is in conjunction with the Sunne, and her upper part receives all the light, then her lower Hemispheare (which would otherwise be altogether darke) is enlightened by the reflexion of the Sunne beames from the earth. When these two planets are in opposition, then that part of the earth which could not receive any light from the Sunne beames, is most enlightened by the Moone, being then in her full; and as she doth most illuminate the earth when the Sunne beames cannot, so the gratefull earth returnes to her as great, nay greater light when shee most wants it; so that alwaies that visible part of the Moone which receives nothing from the Sunne, is enlightened by the earth, as is proved by Galilaeus, with many more arguments, in that Treatise which he calls Systema mundi. True indeed, when the Moone comes to a quartile, then you can neither discerne this light, nor yet the darker part of her body, but the reason is, because of the exuperancy of the light in the other parts. Quippe illustratum medium speciem recipit valentiorem,[1] the clearer brightnesse involves the weaker, it being with the species of sight, as it is with those of sound, and as the greater noise drownes the lesse, so the brighter object hides that which is more obscure. But they doe alwaies in their mutuall vicissitudes participate of one anothers light; so also doe they partake of the same defects and darknings, for when our Moone is eclipsed, then is their Sunne darkened, and when our Sunne is eclipsed, then is their Moone deprived of its light, as you may see affirmed by Maeslin.[2]

Quod si terram nobis ex alto liceret intueri, quemadmodum deficientem lunam ex longinquo spectare possumus, videremus tempore eclipsis solis terrae aliquam partem lumine solis deficere, eodem plane modo sicut ex opposito luna deficit,

"If wee might behold this globe of earth at the same distance as we doe the Moone in her defects, wee might discerne some part of it darkened in the Sunnes eclipses, just so as the Moone is in hers."

For as our Moone is eclipsed by the interposition of our earth, so is their Moone eclipsed by the interposition of theirs. The manner of this mutuall illumination betwixt these two you may plainly discerne in this Figure following.

[Sidenote 1: Scal. exerc. 62.]

[Sidenote 2: Epit. Astro. l. 4. part. 2.]



Where A represents the Sun, B the Earth, and C the Moone; Now suppose the Moone C to be in a sextile of increase, when there is onely one small part of her body enlightened, then the earth B will have such a part of its visible Hemispheare darkened, as is proportionable to that part of the Moone which is enlightened; and as for so much of the Moone, as the Sun beames cannot reach unto, it receives light from a proportionall part of the earth which shines upon it, as you may plainly perceive by the Figure.

You see then that agreement and similitude which there is betwixt our earth and the Moone. Now the greatest difference which makes them unlike, is this, that the Moone enlightens our earth round about, whereas our earth gives light onely to that Hemispheare of the Moone which is visible unto us, as may be certainly gathered from the constant appearance of the same spots, which could not thus come to passe, if the Moone had such a diurnall motion about its own axis, as perhaps our earth hath. And though some suppose her to move in an epicycle, yet this doth not so turne her body round, that we may discerne both Hemispheares, for according to that hypothesis, the motion of her eccentrick, doth turne her face towards us, as much as the other doth from us.

But now if any question what they doe for a Moone who live in the upper part of her body? I answer, the solving of this is the most uncertaine and difficult thing that I know of concerning this whole matter. But yet I will give you two probable conjectures.

1. Perhaps, the upper Hemispheare of the Moone doth receive a sufficient light from those planets about it, and amongst these Venus (it may be) bestowes a more especiall brightnesse, since Galilaeus hath plainly discerned that she suffers the same increase and decreases, as the Moone hath, and 'tis probable that this may be perceived there without the help of a glasse, because they are farre neerer it than wee. When Venus (saith Keplar) lies downe in the Perige or lower part of her supposed Epicycle, then is she in conjunction with her husband the Sunne, from whom after she hath departed for the space of ten moneths, shee gets plenum uterum, and is in the full.

But you'll reply, though Venus may bestow some light when she is over the Moone, and in conjunction, yet being in opposition, she is not visible to them, and what shall they then doe for light?

I answer, then they have none: nor doth this make so great a difference betwixt those two Hemispheares as there is with us, betwixt the places under the poles, and the line, but if this bee not sufficient, then I say in the second place that

2. Perhaps there may be some other enlightened body above the Moone which we cannot discerne, nor is this altogether improbable because there is almost the like observed in Saturne, who appeares through this glasse with two lesser bodies on each side, which may supply the office of Moones, unto each hemispheare thus:

o O o

So in this world also there may be some such body, though wee cannot discerne it, because the Moone is alwaies in a streight line, betwixt our eye and that. Nor is it altogether unlikely that there should bee more moones to one Orbe, because Jupiter also is observed to have foure such bodies that move round about him.

But it may seeme a very difficult thing to conceive, how so grosse and darke a body as our earth, should yeeld such cleare light as proceedes from the Moone, and therefore the Cardinall de Cusa[1] (who thinkes every Starre to be a severall world) is of opinion that the light of the Sunne is not able to make them appeare so bright, but the reason of their shining is, because wee behold them at a great distance through their regions of fire which doe set a shining lustre upon those bodies that of themselves are darke.

Vnde si quis esset extra regionem ignis, terra ista in circumferentia suae regionis per medium ignis lucida stella appareret.

"So that if man were beyond the region of fire, this earth would appear through that as a bright Starre."

But if this were the onely reason then would the Moone bee freed from such increases and decreases as shee is now lyable unto.

[Sidenote 1: De doct. ig. l. 2. c. 12.]

Keplar thinkes that our earth receives that light whereby it shines from the Sunne, but this (saith he) is not such an intended cleare brightnesse as the Moone is capable of, and therefore hee guesses, that the earth there is of a more chokie soyle like the Ile of Creete, and so is better able to reflect a stronger light, whereas our earth must supply this intention with the quantity of its body, but this I conceive to be a needlesse conjecture, since our earth if all things were well considered, will be found able enough to reflect as great a light. For

1. Consider its opacity, if you marke these sublunary things, you shall perceive that amongst them, those that are most perspicuous, are not so well able to reverberate the Sunne beames as the thicker bodies. The rayes passe singly through a diaphanous matter, but in an opacous substance they are doubled in their returne and multiplyed by reflexion. Now if the moone and the other Planets can shine so clearely by beating backe the Sunne beames, why may not the earth also shine as well, which agrees with them in the cause of this brightnesse their opacity?

2. Consider what a cleare light wee may discerne reflected from the earth in the middest of Summer, and withall conceive how much greater that must bee which is under the line, where the rayes are more directly and strongly reverberated.

3. Consider the great distance at which wee behold the Planets, for this must needs adde much to their shining and therefore Cusanus (in the above cited place) thinkes that if a man were in the Sunne, that Planet would not appeare so bright to him, as now it doth to us, because then his eye could discerne but little, whereas here wee may comprehend the beames as they are contracted in a narrow body. Keplar beholding the earth from a high mountaine when it was enlightned by the Sunne confesses that it appeared unto him of an incredible brightnesse, whereas then the reflected rayes entered into his sight obliquely; but how much brighter would it have appeared if hee might in a direct line behold the whole globe of earth and these rayes gathered together? So that if wee consider that great light which the earth receives from the Sunne in the Summer, and then suppose wee were in the Moone, where wee might see the whole earth hanging in those vast spaces where there is nothing to terminate the sight, but those beames which are there contracted into a little compasse; I say, if wee doe well consider this, wee may easily conceive, that our earth appeares as bright to those other inhabitants in the Moone, as theirs doth to us.



Proposition 12.

That tis probable there may bee such Meteors belonging to that world in the Moone, as there are with us.

Plutarch discussing this point affirmes that it is not necessary there should be the same meanes of growth and fructifying in both these worlds, since nature might in her policy finde out more waies then one how to bring about the same effect. But however he thinks its probable that the Moone her selfe sendeth forth warme winds, and by the swiftnesse of her motion there should breathe out a sweet and comfortable ayer, pleasant dewes and gentle moysture, which might serve for the refreshing and nourishment of the inhabitants and plants in that other world.

But since they have all things alike with us, as sea and land, and vaporous ayer encompassing both, I should rather therefore thinke that nature there should use the same way of producing meteors as she doth with us (and not by a motion as Plutarch supposes) because shee doth not love to vary from her usuall operations without some extraordinary impediment, but still keepes her beaten path unlesse she be driven thence.

One argument whereby I shall manifest this truth, may be taken from those new Starres which have appeared in divers ages of the world, and by their parallax have beene discerned to have been above the Moone, such as was that in Cassiopeia, that in Sagittarius, with many others betwixt the Planets. Hipparchus in his time tooke especiall notice of such as these,[1] and therefore fancied out such constellations in which to place the Starres, shewing how many there were in every asterisme, that so afterwards posterity might know, whether there were any new Starre produced or any old one missing. Now the nature of these Comets may probably manifest, that in this other world there are other meteors also; for these in all likelihood are nothing else but such evaporations caused by the Sunne, from the bodies of the Planets. I shall prove this by shewing the improbabilities and inconveniences of any other opinion.

[Sidenote 1: Plin. nat. hist. l. 2. c. 26.]

For the better pursuite of this 'tis in the first place requisite that I deale with our chiefe adversary, Caesar la Galla, who doth most directly oppose that truth which is here to bee proved. Hee endeavouring to confirme the incorruptibility of the Heavens, and being there to satisfie the argument which is taken from these comets, He answers it thus:

Aut argumentum desumptum ex paralaxi non est efficax, aut si est efficax, eorum instrumentorum usum decipere, vel ratione astri vel medii, vel distantiae, aut ergo erat in suprema parte aeris, aut si in coelo, tum forsan factum erat ex reflectione radiorum Saturni & Jovis, qui tunc in conjunctione fuerant.

"Either the argument from the paralax is not efficacious, or if it be, yet the use of the instruments might deceive either in regard of the starre or the medium, or the distance, and so this comet might be in the upper regions of the aire, or if it were in the heavens, there it might be produced by the reflexion of the rayes from Saturne and Jupiter, who were then in conjunction."

You see what shifts hee is driven to, how he runnes up and downe to many starting holes, that hee may find some shelter, and in stead of the strength of reason, he answers with a multitude of words, thinking (as the Proverbe is) that hee may use haile, when hee hath no thunder, Nihil turpius (saith [1]*Seneca)

dubio est incerto, pedem modo referente, modo producente.

"What can there bee more unseemely in one that should be a faire disputant, then to be now here, now there, and so uncertaine, that one cannot tell where to find him."

He thinkes that there are not Comets in the heavens, because there may be many other reasons of such appearances, but what he knowes not, perhaps (he saies) that argument from the parallax is not sufficient, or if it be, then there may be some deceit in the observation. To this I may safely say, that hee may justly be accounted a weake Mathematician who mistrusts the strength of this argument, nor can hee know much in Astronomy, who understands not the parallax, which is the foundation of that Science, and I am sure that hee is a timorous man, who dares not believe the frequent experience of his senses, or trust to a demonstration.

[Sidenote 1*: Epist. 95.]

True indeed, I grant tis possible, that the eye, the medium, and the distance may al deceive the beholder, but I would have him shew which of all these was likely to cause an error in this observation? Meerely to say they might be deceived is no sufficient answer, for by this I might confute the positions of all Astronomers, and affirme the starres are hard by us, because 'tis possible they may be deceived in their observing that distance. But I forbeare any further reply; my opinion is of that Treatise, that either it was set forth purposely to tempt a confutation, that hee might see the opinion of Galilaeus confirmed by others, or else it was invented with as much haste and negligence as it was printed, there being in it almost as many faults as lines.

Others thinke that these are not any new Comets, but some ancient starres that were there before, which now shine with that unusuall brightnesse, by reason of the interposition of such vapors which doe multiply their light, and so the alteration will be here onely, and not in the heavens. Thus Aristotle thought the appearance of the milkie way was produced, for he held that there were many little starres, which by their influence did constantly attract such a vapour towards that place of heaven, so that it alwaies appeared white. Now by the same reason may a brighter vapor be the cause of these appearances.

But how probable soever this opinion may seeme, yet if well considered, you shall finde it to be altogether absurd and impossible: for,

1. These starres were never seene there before, and tis not likely that a vapour being hard by us can so multiply that light which could not before be at all discerned.

2. This supposed vapour cannot be either contracted into a narrow compasse or dilated into a broad: 1. it could not be within a little space, for then that starre would not appeare with the same multiplied light to those in other climates: 2. it cannot be a dilated vapour, for then other starres which were discerned through the same vapour would seeme as bigg as that; this argument is the same in effect with that of the paralax, as you may see in this Figure.



Suppose A B to be a Hemispheare of one earth, C D to be the upper part of the highest region, in which there might be either a contracted vapour, as G, or else a dilated one, as H I. Suppose E F likewise to represent halfe the heavens, wherein was this appearing Comet at K. Now I say, that a contracted vapour, as G, could not cause this appearance, because an inhabitant at M could not discerne the same starre with this brightnesse, but perhaps another at L, betwixt which the vapour is directly interposed. Nor could it be caused by a dilated vapour, as H I, because then all the starres that were discerned through it would be perceived with the same brightnesse.

Tis necessary therefore that the cause of this appearance should be in the heavens. And this is granted by the most and best Astronomers. But, say some, this doth not argue any naturall alteration in those purer bodies, since tis probable that the concourse of many little vagabond starres by the union of their beames may cause so great a light. Of this opinion were Anaxagoras and Zeno amongst the ancient, and Baptista Cisatus, Blancanus, with others amongst our moderne Astronomers. For, say they, when there happens to be a concourse of some few starres, then doe many other flie unto them from all the parts of heaven like so many Bees unto their King. But 1. tis not likely that amongst those which wee count the fixed starres there should be any such uncertaine motions, that they can wander from all parts of the heavens, as if Nature had neglected them, or forgot to appoint them a determinate course. 2. If there be such a conflux of these, as of Bees to their King, then what reason is there that they doe not still tarry with it, that so the Comet may not be dissolved? But enough of this. You may commonly see it confuted by many other arguments. Others there are, who affirme these to be some new created stars, produced by an extraordinary supernaturall power. I answer, true indeed, tis possible they might be so, but however tis not likely they were so, since such appearances may be salved some other way, wherefore to fly unto a miracle for such things, were a great injury to nature, and to derogate from her skill, an indignitie much mis-becomming a man who professes himselfe to be a Philosopher, Miraculum (saith one) est ignorantiae Asylum, a miracle often serves for the receptacle of a lazy ignorance which any industrious Spirit would be ashamed of, it being but an idle way to shift off the labour of any further search. But here's the misery of it, wee first tie our selves unto Aristotles Principles, and then conclude, that nothing could contradict them but a miracle, whereas 'twould be much better for the Common-wealth of learning, if we would ground our Principles rather upon the frequent experiences of our owne, then the bare authority of others.

Some there are, who thinke that these Comets are nothing else, but exhalations from our earth, carried up into the higher parts of the Heaven. So Peno, Rothmannus & Galilaeus,[1] but this is not possible, since by computation 'tis found that one of them is above 300 times bigger than the whole Globe of Land and Water. Others therefore have thought that they did proceed from the body of the Sun, and that that Planet onely is

Cometarum officina, unde tanquam emissarii & exploratores emitterentur, brevi ad solem redituri:

The shop or forge of Comets from whence they were sent, like so many spies, that they might in some short space returne againe, but this cannot be, since if so much matter had proceeded from him alone, it would have made a sensible diminution in his body. The Noble Tycho therefore thinkes that they consist of some such fluider parts of the Heaven, as the milkie way is framed of, which being condenst together, yet not attaining to the consistency of a Starre, is in some space of time rarified againe into its wonted nature. But this is not likely, for if there had beene so great a condensation as to make them shine so bright, and last so long, they would then sensibly have moved downewards towards some center of gravity, because whatsoever is condenst must necessarily grow heavier, whereas these rather seemed to ascend higher, as they lasted longer. But some may object, that a thing may be of the same weight, when it is rarified, as it had while it was condenst: so metalls, when they are melted, and when they are cold: so water also when it is frozen, and when it is fluid, doth not differ in respect of gravity. But to these I answer: First, Metalls are not rarified by melting, but molified. Secondly, waters are not properly condensed, but congealed into a harder substance, the parts being not contracted closer together, but still possessing the same extension.

[Sidenote 1: Tycho Progym. l. 1. cap. 9.]

And beside, what likely cause can we conceive of this condensation, unlesse there be such qualities there, as there are in our ayre, and then why may not the Planets have the like qualities, as our earth? and if so, then 'tis more probable that they are made by the ordinary way of nature, as they are with us, and consist of exhalations from the bodies of the Planets. Nor is this a singular opinion; but it seemed most likely to Camillus Gloriosus, Th. Campanella, Fromondus,[1] with some others. But if you aske whither all these exhalations shall returne, I answer, every one into his owne Planet: if it be againe objected,[2] that then there will be so many centers of gravity, and each severall Planet will be a distinct world; I reply, perhaps all of them are so except the Sunne, though Cusanus thinkes there is one also, and later times have discovered some lesser Planets moving round about him. But as for Saturne, he hath two Moones on each side. Jupiter hath foure, that incircle his body with their motion. Venus is observed to increase and decrease as the Moone. Mars, and all the rest, derive their light from the Sunne onely. Concerning Mercury, there hath beene little or no observation, because for the most part, he lies hid under the Sunne beames, and seldome appeares by himselfe. So that if you consider their quantity, their opacity, or these other discoveries, you shall finde it probable enough, that each of them may be a severall world. But this would be too much for to vent at the first: the chiefe thing at which I now ayme in this discourse, is to prove that there may be one in the Moone.

[Sidenote 1: De Comet. l. 5. c. 4. Apolog. Meteor. l. 3. c. 2. Art. 6.]

[Sidenote 2: Iohan. Fabr. Carolus Malaptius de Heliocyc. Scheiner. Rosa Vrsina.]

It hath beene before confirmed that there was a spheare of thicke vaporous aire encompasing the Moone, as the first and second regions doe this earth. I have now shewed, that thence such exhalations may proceede as doe produce the Comets: now from hence it may probably follow, that there may be wind also and raine, with such other Meteors as are common amongst us. This consequence is so dependant, that Fromondus[1] dares not deny it, though hee would (as hee confesses himselfe) for if the Sunne be able to exhale from them such fumes as may cause Comets, why not then such as may cause winds, and why not such also as cause raine, since I have above shewed, that there is Sea and Land as with us. Now raine seemes to be more especially requisite for them, since it may allay the heate and scorchings of the Sunne, when he is over their heads. And nature hath thus provided for those in Peru, with the other inhabitants under the line.

[Sidenote 1: De meteor. l. 3. c. 2. Art. 6.]

But if there be such great, and frequent alterations in the Heavens, why cannot wee discerne them?

I answer:

1. There may be such, and we not able to perceive them, because of the weaknesse of our eye, and the distance of those places from us, they are the words of Fienus, as they are quoted by Fromondus in the above cited place,

Possunt maximae permutationes in coelo fieri, etiamsi a nobis non conspiciantur, hoc visus nostri debilitas & immensa coeli distantia faciunt.

And unto him assents Fromondus himselfe, when a little after hee saies,

Si in sphaeris planetarum degeremus, plurima forsan coelestium nebularum vellere toto aethere passim dispersa videremus, quorum species jam evanescit nimia spatii intercapedine.

"If we did live in the spheares of the Planets, wee might there, perhaps, discerne many great clouds dispersed through the whole Heavens, which are not now visible by reason of this great distance."

2. Maeslin and Keplar affirme, that they have seene some of these alterations. The words of Maeslin are these (as I finde them cited.)[1]

In eclipsi Lunari vespere Dominicae Palmarum Anni 1605, in corpore Lunae versus Boream, nigricans quaedam macula conspecta fuit, obscurior caetero toto corpore, quod candentis ferri figuram repraesentabat; dixisses nubila in multam regionem extensa pluviis & tempestuosis imbribus gravida, cujusmodi ab excelsorum montium jugis in humiliora convallium loca videre non raro contingit.

"In that lunary eclipse which happened in the even of Palme-sunday, in the yeere 1605, there was a certaine blackish spot discerned in the Northerly part of the Moone, being darker than any other part of her body, and representing the colour of red hot yron; you might conjecture that it was some dilated cloud, being pregnant with showers, for thus doe such lower clouds appeare from the tops of high mountaines."

[Sidenote 1: Disser. 2. cum nunc. Galil.]

Unto this I may adde another testimony of Bapt. Cisatus, as he is quoted by Nierembergius,[1] grounded upon an observation taken 23. yeeres after this of Maeslin, and writ to this Euseb. Nieremberg. in a letter by that diligent and judicious Astronomer. The words of it runne thus:

Et quidem in eclipsi nupra solari quae fuit ipso die natali Christi, observavi clare in luna soli supposita, quidpiam quod valde probat id ipsum quod Cometae quoque & maculae solares urgent, nempe coelum non esse a tenuitate & variationibus aeris exemptum, nam circa Lunam adverti esse sphaeram seu orbem quendam vaporosum, non secus atque circum terram, adeoque sicut ex terra in aliquam usque sphaeram vapores & exhalationes expirant, ita quoque ex luna.

"In that late solary eclipse which happened on Christmas day, when the Moone was just under the Sunne, I plainly discerned that in her which may clearely confirme what the Comets and Sunne spots doe seeme to prove, viz. that the heavens are not solid, nor freed from those changes which our aire is liable unto, for about the Moone I perceived such an orbe of vaporous aire, as that is which doth encompasse our earth, and as vapours and exhalations, are raised from our earth into this aire, so are they also from the Moone."

[Sidenote 1: Hist. Nat. l. 2. c. 11.]

You see what probable grounds and plaine testimonies have brought for the confirmation of this Proposition: many other things in this behalfe might be spoken, which for brevity sake I now omit, and passe unto the next.



Proposition 13.

That tis probable there may be inhabitants in this other World, but of what kinde they are is uncertaine.

I have already handled the Seasons and Meteors belonging to this new World: 'tis requisite that in the next place I should come unto the third thing which I promised, and to say somewhat of the inhabitants, concerning whom there might be many difficult questions raised, as whether that place be more inconvenient for habitation then our World (as Keplar thinkes) whether they are the seed of Adam, whether they are there in a blessed estate, or else what meanes there may be for their salvation, with many other such uncertaine enquiries, which I shall willingly omit, leaving it to their examination, who have more leisure and learning for the search of such particulars.

Being for mine own part content only to set downe such notes belonging unto these which have observed in other Writers.

Cum tota illa regio nobis ignota sit, remanent inhabitores illi ignoti penitus,

(saith Cusanus)[1] since we know not the regions of that place, wee must be altogether ignorant of the inhabitants. There hath not yet beene any such discovery concerning these, upon which wee may build a certainty, or good probability: well may wee guesse at them, and that too very doubtfully, but we can know nothing, for if we doe hardly guesse aright at things which be upon earth, if with labour wee doe finde the things that are at hand, [2]how then can wee search out those things that are in Heaven? What a little is that which wee know? in respect of those many matters contained within this great Universe, this whole globe of earth and water? though it seeme to us to be of a large extent, yet it beares not so great a proportion unto the whole frame of Nature, as a small sand doth unto it; and what can such little creatures as wee discerne, who are tied to this point of earth? or what can they in the Moone know of us? If wee understand any thing (saith Esdras[3]) 'tis nothing but that which is upon the earth, and hee that dwelleth above in the Heavens, may onely understand the things that are above in the heighth of the heavens.

[Sidenote 1: De doct. ign. l. 2. c. 12.]

[Sidenote 2: Wisd. 9. 16.]

[Sidenote 3: 2 Esd. 4. 22.]

So that 'twere a very needelesse thing for us, to search after any particulars, however, wee may guesse in the generall, that there are some inhabitans in that Planet: for why else did Providence furnish that place with all such conveniences of habitation as have beene above declared?

But you will say, perhaps, is there not too great and intollerable a heate, since the Sunne is in their Zinith every moneth, and doth tarry their so long before hee leaves it?

I answer, 1. This may, perhaps, be remedied (as it is under the line) by the frequencie of mid-day showers, which may cloud their Sunne, and coole their earth: 2. The equality of their nights doth much temper the scorching of the day, and the extreme cold that comes from the one, require some space before it can be dispelled by the other, so that the heate spending a great while before it can have the victory, hath not afterwards much time to rage in. Wherfore notwithstanding this, yet that place may remaine habitable. And this was the opinion of the Cardinal de Cusa, when speaking of this Planet, he saies,[1]

Hic locus Mundi est habitatio hominum & animalium atque vegetabilium.

"This part of the world is inhabited by men and beasts, and Plantes."

To him assented Campanella, but hee cannot determine whether there were men, or rather some other kinde of creatures. If they were men, then he thinkes they could not be infected with Adams sinne; yet, perhaps, they had some of their owne, which might make them liable to the same misery with us, out of which, perhaps, they were delivered by the same means as we, the death of Christ, and thus he thinkes that place of the Ephesians may be interpreted, where the Apostle saies,[2] God gathered all things together in Christ, both which are in earth, and which are in the heavens: So also that of the same Apostle to the Colossians, where hee saies,[3] that it pleased the Father to reconcile all things unto himselfe by Christ, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.