The Project Gutenberg eBook of Ocellus Lucanus on the nature of the universe
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Ocellus Lucanus on the nature of the universe
Taurus, the Platonic philosopher, on the eternity of the world. Julius Firmicus Maternus of the thema mundi. Select theorems on the perpetuity of time, by Proclus.
Translator: Thomas Taylor
Author: Julius Firmicus Maternus
Proclus
Tauros
Dubious author: active 6th century B.C. ho Leukanos Okellos
Release date: February 16, 2025 [eBook #75391]
Language: English
Original publication: London: Printed for the translator, 1831
Credits: Wouter Franssen and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OCELLUS LUCANUS ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE ***
OCELLUS LUCANUS
ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE;
_&c. &c. &c._
OCELLUS LUCANUS
ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE.
TAURUS, THE PLATONIC PHILOSOPHER,
ON THE ETERNITY OF THE WORLD.
JULIUS FIRMICUS MATERNUS
OF THE THEMA MUNDI;
IN WHICH THE POSITIONS OF THE STARS AT THE
COMMENCEMENT OF THE SEVERAL MUNDANE
PERIODS IS GIVEN.
SELECT THEOREMS
ON THE PERPETUITY OF TIME, BY PROCLUS.
TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINALS BY
THOMAS TAYLOR.
Αρχα και αιτια και κανων εντι τας ανθρωπινας ευδαιμοσυνας α τω
θειων και τιμιωτατων επιγνωσις.
_i. e._ The knowledge of divine and the most honourable things,
is the principle and cause and rule of human felicity.—ARCHYTAS.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR THE TRANSLATOR; AND SOLD BY JOHN BOHN,
HENRIETTA-STREET; HENRY BOHN, YORK-STREET;
AND THOMAS RODD, GREAT NEWPORT-STREET.
MDCCCXXXI.
PRINTED BY RICHARD TAYLOR,
RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
INTRODUCTION.
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 _universals_, and not
_particulars_; since the former are _definite_, _immutable_, and _real_;
but the latter are _indefinite_, 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 said to be “shadows
falling upon shadow[1], like images in water, or in a mirror, or a dream.”
With respect to Ocellus Lucanus, the author of the first of these Tracts,
though it is unknown at what _precise_ 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[2],” “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 _political_ world, Phalaris, Pisistratus, Crœsus,
Polycrates, and Tarquin the Proud; and in the _philosophical_ world, the
seven sages of Greece, Heraclitus of Ephesus, Democritus of Abdera, &c.
&c.”
All that is extant of his works is the treatise On the Universe[3], and
a Fragment preserved by 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:
“Plato to Archytas the Tarentine, prosperity.
“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 _ten thousand_[4] in number;
and, according to report, were the best of all those Trojans
that migrated under Laomedon.
“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.”
“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[5].’
“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 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.
“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
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[6].”
To the treatise of Ocellus I have subjoined a translation of a Fragment
of Taurus, a Platonic philosopher, On the Eternity of the World[7]; and
also a translation of the Mundi Thema, or _Geniture of the World_, 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.
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
“_geometrical necessities_” (γεωμετρικαις αναγκαις).
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.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] viz. falling on _matter_, or the general receptacle of all sensible
forms. See my Translation of the admirable treatise of Plotinus “On the
Impassivity of Incorporeal Natures.”
[2] Περι νομου, περι βασιλειας και ὁσιοτητος, και της του παντος γενεσεως.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.”
OCELLUS LUCANUS ON THE UNIVERSE.
CHAP. I.
Ocellus Lucanus has written what follows concerning the Nature of the
Universe; having learnt some things through clear arguments from Nature
herself, _but others from opinion, in conjunction with reason_[8], it
being his intention [in this work] to derive what is probable from
intellectual perception.
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 which it would be dissolved would be the last part of it.
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[9]. The universe,
therefore, is without a beginning, and without an end; nor is it possible
that it can have any other mode of subsistence.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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 the world, as being parts
of its common arrangement. The world, however, has not a conjunction with
anything else than itself.
Further still[10], 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 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.
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.
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 in the universe, and the world is _the whole_
and _the all_. 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[11], 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[12].
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.
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.
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[13], 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.
Further still, it is credible that the universe is without a beginning,
and without an end, from its 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.
CHAP. II.
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 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.
But the Fates themselves distinguish and separate the impassive part of
the world from that which is perpetually moved [or mutuable][14]. 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.
In that part of the world, however, in which nature and generation
predominate, it is necessary that the three following things[15] 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 _relation_ to the things that are generated from it, as water to
taste, _silence to sound_[16], 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 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.
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.
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.
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[17]; but matter is the first 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.
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.
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
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.
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[18].
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.
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. 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.
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.
The body, however, which is the subject and recipient of mutations, is a
universal receptacle, and is in capacity the first tangible substance.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Again, earth is cold and dry, but air is hot and moist. When, therefore,
the coldness in earth vanquishes the heat in air, and the dryness in
earth, the moisture in air, then a mutation from air into earth is
effected.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Since, however, the world is indestructible and unbegotten, and neither
received a beginning of generation, nor will ever have an end, it is
necessary 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.
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.
CHAP. III.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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 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.
And thus much has been sufficiently said by me respecting _the whole_
and _the universe_; 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.
CHAP. IV.
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.
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.
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[19], if it
does not intend to be a deserter either of the domestic, or political,
or divine Vestal hearth.
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.
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[20], (for man
is the most mild and the best of all animals,) but, as a thing of the
greatest consequence, to cause them to abound with the most excellent
men.
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.
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 first
in domestic sway, is unable, in the management of his family, to take the
lead.
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[21].
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.
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.
Those, therefore, who direct their attention to the propagation of the
human species, ought to guard against everything which is dissimilar and
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.
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.
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.
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.
And universally, it is requisite that all preternatural 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.
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.
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
such things as are proper, and when it is proper[22]; 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.
FOOTNOTES:
[8] See Additional Notes, [a].
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] i. e. It is not true that the universe can contain anything greater
and more powerful than itself.
[12] 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.
[13] 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.
[14] 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 _impassive_, because not subject to generation and
corruption, but the latter being subject to both these is _perpetually
mutable_.
[15] 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.
[16] 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.
[17] 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.”
[18] 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.
[19] 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.
[20] 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.”
[21] For _whole_, 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 _whole_, 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.
[22] 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.
OCELLUS LUCANUS ON LAWS.
A FRAGMENT PRESERVED BY STOBÆUS, ECLOG. PHYS. LIB. I. CAP. 16.
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 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[23]
of things which are generated, is the salvation of the matter from which
they are generated. That nature, however, which is perpetually moved[24]
governs, but that which is always passive[25] 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.
FOOTNOTES:
[23] In the original, απογενεσις; but the true reading is doubtless
απωλεια, and Vizzanus has in his version _interitus_. 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:
“All forms that perish other forms supply;
By turns they catch the vital breath and die;
Like bubbles on the sea of matter born,
They rise, they break, and to that sea return.”
[24] i. e. The celestial region.
[25] i. e. The sublunary region.
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
[a] Page 1.—“_But others from opinion in conjunction with reason_;”—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 _intelligence in conjunction with
reason_, since it always subsists with invariable sameness; but the
latter is perceived _by opinion in conjunction with irrational sense_,
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 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 _the summit of
our reasoning power_; 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.
Ocellus adds, “that it is his intention [in this treatise On the
Universe] to derive what is _probable_ 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, _or
that a thing is_, 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.
“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 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.
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,
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.”
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 _scientifically_, i. e. _necessarily_, true. Thus in
the syllogism, Every stone is an animal; every man is a stone; therefore
every man is an animal,—the conclusion is true, but not _scientific_.
_Note to p. 14._—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[26]. 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[27] 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.
“But some others, as Ocellus, who was the precursor of Timæus, attribute
two powers to each of the elements; to 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 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.
“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. _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._ But this is in order that
each of the elements may have two powers, each[28] 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[29], and permeates through all the other elements.
It is also moved with facility[30], 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. _For the sides are the powers of which bodies consist._
Hence, as fire and earth are similar bodies, and similar solids, two
analogous 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.
“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.”
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.
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:
Fire. Air.
3 × 5 × 4 3 × 10 × 4 ::
Subtle, acute, moveable. Subtle, blunt, moveable.
Water. Earth.
6 × 10 × 4 : 6 × 10 × 8.
Dense, blunt, moveable. Dense, blunt, immoveable.
“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 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.”
FOOTNOTES:
[26] For το εναντιωτατα here, read τα εναντιωτατα, and for τῳ θερμον τῳ
ψυχρῳ, read το θερμον, κ. τ. λ.
[27] For απηρτημενα in this place, I read διῃρημενα.
[28] For μιαν here, it is obviously necessary to read ἑκατεραν.
[29] For ὑπατικον in this place, read ὑπακτικον.
[30] Instead of ακινητον here, it is necessary to read ευκινητον.
FRAGMENTS OF TAURUS, A PLATONIC PHILOSOPHER, ON THE ETERNITY OF THE WORLD.
EXTRACTED FROM PHILOPONUS AGAINST PROCLUS.
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[31]. 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, 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[32] 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 _generated_ 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 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.
“The world, likewise, may be said to be generated, 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 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 _becoming to be_,
it may be said to be generated.”
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,
‘Though in their race posterior found,’
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[33],
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 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, 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[34], 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 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.”
FOOTNOTES:
[31] Timæus, in the Dialogue which bears his name, is represented by
Plato as saying this; for, speaking of the world, he says γεγονεναι, _it
was generated_.
[32] 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.
[33] viz. Whether the world is unbegotten, or generated.
[34] 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, _quæ ortu carent_, perinde atque ea, quæ oriuntur,
explicare.”
MUNDI THEMA, OR THE GENITURE OF THE WORLD.
TRANSLATED FROM THE THIRD BOOK OF THE MATHESIS OF JULIUS FIRMICUS
MATERNUS.
“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[35]. 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,
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[36], and also the sun and moon, sustain man by
a fiery and eternal agitation, as if he were a minor world[37]; 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[b], 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 perennially supported by
the companions of perpetuity[38].
“According to Æsculapius, therefore, and Anubius[39], 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 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.
“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[40] 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
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.
“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 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[41], and thought that they
could not discover the destiny of man, except those radiations were
collected by a sagacious investigation. Lest, however, the fabulous
device[42] 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.
“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[43], consists of 300,000
years[c]. 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 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.
“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[d] [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[44], 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 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 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[e],
so that, in imitation of that star, the human race might give birth to
inventions replete with evil[45].
“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[46]. 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 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.”
FOOTNOTES:
[35] Nature may be said to point out the way, because its forerunning
energy is employed by Divinity in the formation of bodies. By _the
fabricator_, in the above sentence, Firmicus means Jupiter, who is called
the _Demiurgus_ by Plato, in the Timæus.
[36] i. e. Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury.
[37]
—— Quid mirum noscere mundum
Si possent homines, quibus est et mundus in ipsis;
Exemplumque Dei quisque est in imagine parva?
MANILIUS.
[38] By _the companions of perpetuity_, Firmicus means the stars, whose
nature, and motions, and influences are perpetual. Hence, in the Orphic
Hymn to the Stars, they are invoked as
—— αει γενετηρες απαντων,
“Th’ _eternal_ fathers of whate’er exists.”
[39] 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.
[40] The feminine signs are, Taurus, Cancer, Virgo, Scorpio, Capricornus,
and Pisces; but the masculine signs are, Aries, Gemini, Leo, Libra,
Sagittarius, and Aquarius.
[41] 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.”
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.”
[42] Firmicus calls the geniture of the world a _fabulous_ device,
because it supposes the mundane periods to have had a temporal beginning,
though they are in reality eternal. For in a fable, the _inward_ is
different from the _outward_ meaning.
[43] 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 _the great winter_, and _the great summer_. But _the
great winter_ is when all the planets become situated in a wintry sign,
viz. either in Aquarius or in Pisces. And _the great summer_ 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 _a great summer_, but when they have departed from
this position, _a great winter_. In _the great winter_, therefore, the
continent becomes sea, but in _the great summer_ 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 _the great winter_ happens,
a part of the earth being deluged, a change then takes place to a more
dry condition, till _the great summer_ 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.
[44] In the original, “positæ humanitatis ratio deserebat;” but for
_positæ humanitatis_, it appears to me to be requisite to read,
conformably to the above translation, _positâ humanitate_.
[45] Is not what is here said about the last period verified in the
present age?
[46] 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.
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
[b] _Page 50._—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 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, _Concerning
the Mysteries of the Egyptians_, the loss of which work must be deeply
regretted by every lover of ancient lore. He is also mentioned by
Juvenal, vi. 580.
“Aptior hora cibo nisi quam dederit Petosiris.”
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.
“Lest Petosiris should incur disgrace,
Himself he strangled from a lofty place.”
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 XI. Kalend. Octobris defecit, ob
id, ne falleret, mortem suâ inediâ accelerasse creditus.’ 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.’ _Id. ib._ 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.
“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; _Diu,
durè, feliciter_. See Limier’s Hist. du Règne de Louis XIV.
“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.
“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.”
We are informed by Fabricius, that Marsham, in Canone 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.
[c] _Page 56._—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.
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].”
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 _the same_ [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 the apocatastases
are surveyed with reference to the points of it. Thus, for instance, all
of them make their apocatastasis about the equinoctial point[47], 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 comprehends the period of
every divinely generated nature[48], 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.”
“The year (says Macrobius) which is called mundane, is _truly_ 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
[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 _truly revolving year_,
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 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.”—_Macrob. in Somn. Scip._ lib. ii.
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.
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:
“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[49], and depress the heads of the sacred birds[50]. 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. _For when those_, said he, _who are now in power,
shall endeavour to make an innovation in our religion, then in a short
time after expect that the GIANTS_ (meaning by these, men of another
nation) _shall be entirely expelled, being agitated by their own avenging
furies_. 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. _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._ 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. _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._ 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 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.”
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[51] 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 _apocatastatic_[52]
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 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.”
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:—
“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. _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._ 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
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 [_lege_ reductio] sanctitatis et
pietatis magistra, erit maximæ crudelitatis exemplum. _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._ Nam et tenebræ præponentur lumini, et mors vita
utiloir judicabitur. Nemo suspiciet cœlum. _Religiosus pro insano,
irreligiosus putabitur prudens, furiosus fortis, pro bono habebitur
pessimus._ 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. _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._ 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 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.
“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. _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)
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._ 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 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. _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._ 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. _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[53]; noxious angels[54] 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._ Then the earth shall be in a preternatural state; the sea
shall not be sailed in, nor shall the heavens accord with the course
of the stars, nor the course of the stars continue in the heavens.
_Every divine voice shall be dumb by a necessary silence_, 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 _geniture_[55]
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[56]; 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.”
Of this very remarkable extract, it is necessary to observe, in the
first place, that it was principally made by me from 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 _instinctu fallacis spiritûs_,—_by the instinct or suggestion of
a deceitful spirit_. 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, 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.
[d] _Page 57._—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
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.
The reader, however, must be careful not to confound this Saturnian
period with the _golden age_, 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 _golden age_, 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.
[e] _Page 59._—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 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[57]; 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.
The different periods in which these mutations happen are called by
Plato, with great propriety, periods of _fertility_ and _sterility_; 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 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 _mournful_ 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 _mournfulness_ of this sound of the trumpet was evidently
an indication that a barren period was about to commence.—For an account
of the _great year_, see the note to page 478 of the treatise on Meteors.
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.
“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.
_Years._
The first, or the Sutty Youg, is said to have lasted 3,200,000
The Tirtah Youg, or second age 2,400,000
The Dwapaar Youg, or third age 1,600,000
And they say the Kaly Youg, or present age, will last 400,000.”
p. 222.
“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[58], that by calculation
it appears, 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.
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
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. _But the
seven planetary spheres conjoin their revolutions with the inerratic
sphere, through many myriads of years_; and this is the period which
Plato calls τον αει χρονον, _for ever_.”—See the Introduction to the
volume of my Aristotle, which contains a translation of Aristotle’s
treatise on the Soul, &c. &c.
FOOTNOTES:
[47] 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.
[48] See my explanation of this perfect, which is also called the
geometric number, in p. 150 of my Theoretic Arithmetic.
[49] i. e. material dæmons, or θηρες χθονος, _the wild beasts of the
earth_, as they are called in the Chaldean oracles.
[50] i. e. the whole choir of beneficent natures superior to man. But
by _the depression of the heads of the sacred birds_, the inaptitude of
persons and places to receive divine influence is denoted.
[51] 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.
[52] i. e. restitutions to a pristine form or condition.
[53] 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; _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_.”
[54] i. e. evil dæmons.
[55] By the _geniture of the world_, the greater _apocatastasis_ is
signified, as is evident from the preceding extract from Julius Firmicus.
[56] i. e. a mundane period being finished.
[57] See the Introduction to my Translation of the Timæus of Plato.
[58] Traité de l’Astronomie Indienne et Orientale, par Monsieur Bailly,
published in 1787.
SELECT THEOREMS IN PROOF OF THE PERPETUITY OF TIME, AND OF THAT WHICH IS
NATURALLY MOVED WITH A CIRCULAR MOTION.
EXTRACTED FROM THE SECOND BOOK OF PROCLUS ON MOTION.
HYPOTHESES.
Every natural body is moveable according to place.
Every local motion is either in a circle, or in a right line, or mixed
from these.
Every natural body is moved according to one of these motions.
Every natural body is either simple or compounded.
Every simple motion is the motion of a simple[59] body.
Every simple body is moved with one motion according to nature.
DEFINITIONS.
That is heavy which is moved towards the middle.
That is light which is moved from the middle.
That is said to be moved in a circle which is continually borne from the
same to the same.
Contrary motions are from contraries to contraries.
One motion is contrary to one.
Time is the number of the motion of the celestial bodies.
The motion is one which is without difference according to species, and
belongs to one subject, and is produced in a continued time.
THEOREM 1.
Things which are naturally moved in a circle are simple.
_Demonstration._—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.
THEOREM 2.
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.
_Demonstration._—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.
THEOREM 3.
Things which are naturally moved in a circle, neither participate of
gravity nor levity.
_Demonstration._—For if AB is either heavy or light, it is either
naturally moved to the middle, or 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.
THEOREM 4.
Nothing is contrary to a circular motion.
_Demonstration._—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 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.
THEOREM 5.
Things which are naturally moved in a circle, neither receive generation
nor corruption.
_Demonstration._—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 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.
THEOREM 6.
The powers of bodies terminated according to magnitude are not infinite.
_Demonstration._—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 species should be both
finite and infinite in the same thing, is impossible.
THEOREM 7.
Simple bodies are terminated according to species.
_Demonstration._—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.
THEOREM 8.
Time is continued and perpetual.
_Demonstration._—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 a moment or _the now_, it will be indivisible,
and the boundary of another time: for _the now_ 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 _the now_, the same
will also be a beginning: for _the now_ is not only a boundary, but a
beginning[60].
THEOREM 9.
A motion which is naturally circular is perpetual.
_Demonstration._—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 _now_ 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 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.
THEOREM 10.
That which moves a perpetual motion is perpetual.
_Demonstration._—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 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.
THEOREM 11.
That which is immoveable is the leader of things moving and moved.
_Demonstration._—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 _ad infinitum_. 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 _ad infinitum_. There is, therefore, that which moves
immoveably, and which is perpetual.
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.
THEOREM 12.
Everything which is moved, is moved by something.
_Demonstration._—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.
THEOREM 13.
That which first moves a circular motion is impartible, or without parts.
_Demonstration._—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.
FOOTNOTES:
[59] Simple bodies, according to Aristotle, are those which _naturally_
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.
[60] Hence the world is perpetual; for it is consubsistent with time.
THE END.
PRINTED BY RICHARD TAYLOR, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OCELLUS LUCANUS ON THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.