A Source Book in Medieval Science Edited by Edward Grant Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts 1974‘of Seville (4, 636) ‘by Ernest Brehaut? ter of Isidore’s Erymologies is aptly by the title. Much of the treatise is given fantastic word derivations for all kinds of ‘terms (for instance, see Isidore’s chapter ‘numerus is derived). We shall follow H. Stahl’s advice, “The less said about word derivations, the better.”? But Stahl provided a concise insight into Isidore’s ‘authorities in the Eiymologies: ‘Meticulous research has uncovered abundant ions in Isidore’s references to his authori- ‘Kettner has pointed out that 36 passages ‘Varro were not derived from Varro and Isidore did not consult Varro’s works. found nearly 70 passages derived from 1's works, and yet Isidore does not cite . Mynors’ edition of Cassiodorus’ On land Profane Literature ists 34 borrowings that slim work in the first three books of Etymologies, many of them extended passages. ‘ef close correspondence or verbatim copying; ‘but Isidore withholds acknowledgment, Momm- in his edition of Solinus’ Collectanea lists “searly 600 excerp's drawn by Isidore, but Soli ‘sus’ name appears nowhere in the Etymolo- ‘gies. . .. On the other hand, there is an array of ‘Gtations of early Latin playrights, satirists, and ‘pic poets, most of whose works had disappeared ‘centuries before Isidore’s time: Livius Androni- cus, Naevius, Plautus, Ennius, Caecilius, Tur- pilius, Afranius, Pacuvius, and Lucilius. Ithas ‘been presumed that Isidore derived most of these ‘excerpts from Servius’ Virgil commentaries. . . , ‘but his name is omitted. Itis not reassuring to ‘reflect that our knowledge today about the text ‘znd attributions of the collected fragments of Jost classical works must depend, in many cases, ‘upon the scholarship of such compilers as. Isidore. (Stahl, pp. 215-216.) ‘On the basis of such wholly derivative and un- “ginal scholarship, it is depressing to learn that 2's Etymologies “was one of the most widely ‘expanded, and annotated by Edward Grant The Latin Encyclopedists THE QUADRIVIUM, OR FOUR MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES read books for the next thousand years; and its serving as a model for encyclopedists as late as Vincent of Beauvais affords a measure of Isidore’s importance in the world of scholarship” (Stahl, p. 215). In the selections from Isidore which follow, the reader will see what passed for science, mathe- matics, and knowledge of the physical world for many centuries. For science, it was truly a dark age. The original treatises of Greek science had, for the most part, been left untranslated. The meager scientific knowledge that came across into Latin was derived from a handbook tradition that went back ultimately to the Hellenistic period. Thus, Isidore was the hapless heir of a drastically diluted scientific heritage. He was rarely better than his sources, and occasionally much worse. Book HI ‘ON MATHEMATICS [PREFACE] Mathematics is called in Latin doctrinalis scientia (that is, a theoretical science). It considers abstract quantity. For that is abstract quantity which we treat by reason alone, separating it by the intellect from the material or from other nonessentials, as for ‘example, equal, unequal, or the like. And there are four sorts of mathematics, namely, arithmetic, 1. The selection below is drawn from Isidore of Seville’s Etymologies (Etymologiae), Book III, as trans- lated in Ernest Brehaut, An Encyclopedist of the Dark Ages (New York: Columbia University Press, 1912), pp. 125-152. Brehaut’s volume consists of a series of extracts from a few of the twenty books of Isidore of Seville’s Etymologies, written toward the end of Isidore’s life (he died in 636). Since Brehaut’s translation is frequently inaccurate and distorted, [have corrected it freely, using the later Latin edition of W. M. Lindsay (see ‘n, 3) and have also translated a number of passages that Brehaut omitted, often without indication, 2, William H. Stahl, Roman Science (Madi University of Wisconsin Press, 1962), p. 216.§1 Isidore of Seville geometry, music, and astronomy.® Arithmetic is the science of quantity numerable in itself. Geometry is the science of magnitude and forms. Music is the science that treats of numbers that are found in sounds. Astronomy is the science that contemplates the courses of the heavenly bodies and their figures, and all the phenomena of the stars. These sciences we shall next describe at a little greater length in order that their significance may be fully shown. ‘HAPTER | (ON THE NAME OF THE SCIENCE OF ARITHMETIC 1, Arithmetic is the science of numbers. For the Greeks call number ép¢6 6s. The writers of secular literature have decided that it is first among the mathematical sciences since it needs no other sci. ence for its own existence. 2. But music and geometry and astronomy, which follow, need its aid in order to be and exist. CHAPTER 2 (ON THE WRITERS 1. They say that Pythagoras was the first among the Greeks to write of the science of number, and that it was later described more fully by Nicoma- chus, whose work Apuleius first, and then Boethius, translated into Latin. CHAPTER 3 WHAT NUMBER 1S, 1, Number is multitude made up of units. For one is the seed of number but not number. Num- ‘mus (coin) gave its name to numerus (number), and from being frequently used, originated the word. Unus derives its name from the Greek, for the Greeks call unus Ever, likewise duo, tria, which they call 640 and zpca. 2. Quattuor took its name from a square figure (figura quadrata). Quinque, however, received its name from one who gave the names to numbers not according to nature but according to whim. ‘Sex and septem come from the Greek. 3. For in many names that are aspirated in Greek ‘we use s instead of the aspiration. We have sex for &, septem for éxté, and also the word serpillum (thyme) for herpillum. Octo is borrowed without change; they have é.vée, we novem; they déka, we decem. 4. Decem is so called from a Greek etymology, because it ties together and unites the numbers below it. For to tie together and unite is called among them deayds. . . .® ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS CHAPTER 4 WHAT NUMBERS SIGNIFY 1. The science of number must not be despised. For in many passages of the holy scriptures it is manifest what great mystery they contain, For it is not said in vain in the praises of God (Book of Wisdom 11:21): “but thou hast ordered all things in measure, and number, and weight.”” For the senarius, which is perfect in respect to its parts, declares the perfection of the universe by a certain ‘meaning of its number. In like manner, too, the forty days which Moses and Elias and the Lord himself fasted are not understood without an understanding of number. 3. So, too, other numbers appear in the holy scriptures whose nature none but experts in this art can wisely declare the meaning of. It is granted to uus, too, to depend in some part upon the science of 3. These four mathematical sciences were customarily designated as the quadrivium and formed the scientific part of the traditional seven liberal arts. The remaining three, called the ‘rivium, consisted of grammar, rhetoric, lectic (or logic). The concept of seven liberal at is, artes liberales, studies fit for a free man as opposed to a slave—can be traced to the Greeks as far back as the fourth century 8.c. Itwas Martianus Capella (fl. 410-439), however, in his tremendously influential book The Marriage of Mercury and Philology, who ‘canonized the seven liberal aris for the Latin medieval tradition, Isidore is but following this tradition, which he also helps to establish. Ttshould be noted that Brehaut's translation was ‘made from DuBreul’s edition of Isidore’s works publi ‘ed in Paris in 1601. In the more recent two-volume edi tion of the Etymologies (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1911) by W. M. Lindsay, music appears before geometry in this sentence and is described immediately after arith- metic a few sentences below. Such trivial differences will bbe ignored. 4. The substance, and sometimes the very words, of this paragraph were taken from Cassiodorus’ section “On Mathematics” in his An Introduction to Divine and Human Readings, translated by L. W. Jones (New York: Columbia University Press, 1946), pp. 178-179. Almost all of what Isidore writes on arithmetic was taken from Cassiodorus, who in turn drew largely upon Boethius’ Arithmetic. 5. This paragraph is drawn directly from Cassiodorus (see Jones, p. 187). 6. In the next few lines Isidore gives etymological derivations for 20, 30, 100, 200, 1,000, and thousands. 7. Thave replaced the Latin text of this Biblical quota- tion with the English translation from the Douay ver~ sion. This quotation was widely cited as justification for the study of mathematics, 8. Six was considered a perfect number because it equals the sum of all its factors.‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS ‘with strings and instruments that are beaten, to ‘which are assigned the different species of cithara, ‘the drum, and the cymbal, the sistrum, acitabula of bronze and silver, and others of metallic stiffness ‘that when struck return a pleasant tinkling sound, ‘and the rest of this sort. 2... .The form of the cithara in the beginning said to have been like the human breast, because as the voice was uttered from the breast so was music from the cithara, and it was so called for the Same reason. For pectus is in the Doric language called kedépa. (CHAPTER 23 (ON THE NUMBERS OF MUSIC 1, You inquire into numbers according to music as follows: Setting down the extremes, as, for ex- ample, VI and twelve, you see by how many units Vi is surpassed by XII, and it is by VI units; you square it; six times six make XXXVI. You add those first-mentioned extremes, VI and XII} to- gether they make XVIII; you divide thirty-six by ‘eighteen; two is the result. This you add to the smaller amount, six namely; the result will be VIII and it will be a mean between VI and XII. Because VIII surpasses VI by two units, that is by a third of VI, and VIII is surpassed by XII by four units, a third part [of twelve]. By what part, then, the mean surpasses, by the same is it surpassed. ? 2. Just as this proportion exists in the universe, being constituted by the revolving circles, so also in the microcosm—not to speak of the voice—it has such great power that man does not exist without harmony. (CHAPTER 24 ON THE NAME OF ASTRONOMY 1, Astronomy is the law of the stars, and it traces with inquiring reason the courses of the heavenly bodies, and their figures, and the regular movements of the stars with reference to one an- other and to the earth. ‘cHaprTER 25, ‘ON ITS DISCOVERERS 1. The Egyptians were the first to discover astron- omy (astronomia). And the Chaldeans first taught astrology (astrologia)® and the observance ‘of nativity. Moreover, Josephus asserts®! that Abraham taught astrology to the Egyptians. The Greeks, however, say that this art was first elabo- On the Quadrivium §1 rated by Atlas, and therefore it was said that he held the heavens up. 2. Whoever was the discoverer, it was the move- ‘ment of the heavens and his rational faculty that stirred him, and in the light of the succession of seasons, the observed and established courses of the stars, and the regularity of the intervals, he considered carefully certain dimensions and numbers, and by limiting and distinguishing them he wove them into order and discovered astrology. CHAPTER 26 (ON ITS TEACHERS 1, In both Greek and Latin there are volumes written on astronomy by different writers. Of these Ptolemy, King of Alexandria,*? is considered chief among the Greeks. He also formulated rules (canones) by which the courses of the stars may be discovered. ‘CHAPTER 27 THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ASTRONOMY AND AS- ‘TROLOGY 1. There is some difference between astronomy and astrology. For astronomy embraces the rev- olution of the heavens, the rising, setting, and motion of the heavenly bodies, and the origin of their names. Astrology, on the other hand, is in part natural, in part superstitious. 2. It is natural astrology when it describes the courses of the sun and the moon or the fixed posi- tions of the stars and the times (seasons?) Super- stitious astrology is that which the mathematici 49. Here we have an harmonic mean involving the numbers 6, 8, and 12. See Isidore’s chapter 8, paragraph 3, and my note 27. 50. Isidore uses the Latin terms astronomia and as- trologia much as we would use their English equivalents (see his chapter 27). However, through much of the later Middle Ages, the two terms were used interchangeably and without meaningful distinction. 51. Cassiodorus, who cites Josephus (Antiquities, Bk, I, ch. 9), is Isidore’s source for this remark. See An Introduction to Divine and Human Readings ; Secular Letters (Jones, p. 179). 52. Isidore has confused Claudius Ptolemy, the Greek astronomer of the second century A.D. and author of the Almagest, with the Greek dynasty of Ptolemaic kings who ruled in Egypt from around 304 n.c. to 30... (see selection by Claudius Ptolemy in the section on Cos- mology, and a short biography of him at the end of this source book. Il§1 Isidore of Seville follow who prophesy by the stars and who dis- tribute the twelve signs of the heavens among the individual parts of the soul or body and endeavor to predict the nativities and characters of men from the course of the stars. ‘CHAPTER 28 (ON THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ASTRONOMY 1. The subject matter of astronomy is made up of many kinds. For it defines what the universe is, the heavens, the position and movement of the sphere, the axis of the heavens and the poles, what are the climates of the heavens, what the courses of the sun and moon and stars, and so forth. ‘CHAPTER 29 (ON THE UNIVERSE AND ITS NAME 1, Mundus (the universe) is that which is made up of the heavens and earth and the sea and all the heavenly bodies. And it is called mundus for the reason that it is always in motion (motus).® For no repose is granted to its elements. ‘CHAPTER 30 (ON THE FORM OF THE UNIVERSE 1. The form of the universe is described as follows: As the universe is raised toward the region of the north, so it is inclined toward the south; its head and face are, as it were, the east, and its extreme part the north. (CHAPTER 31 (ON THE HEAVENS AND THEIR NAME 1. The philosophers have asserted that the heav- ‘ens are round, in rapid motion, and made of fire, and that they are called by this name (coelum) because they have the forms of the stars fixed on them, like a dish with figures in relief (coelatum). 2, For God decked them with bright lights, and filled them with the glowing orbs of the sun and moon, and adorned them with the glittering images of fiashing stars. . . cuapTeR 32 (ON THE SITUATION OF THE CELESTIAL SPHERE 1, The sphere of the heavens is rounded and its center is the earth, equally shut in on every side. This sphere, they say, has neither beginning nor 12 ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS end, for the reason that being rounded like a circle it is not easily perceived where it begins or where it ends.** 2. The philosophers have brought in the theory of seven heavens of the universe, that is, planets moving with the harmony of the spheres, and they assert that all planets are connected to their orbs, and they think that these, being connected and, as it were, fitted to one another, move backward and are borne with definite motions in contrary diree- tions. ‘CHAPTER 33, ‘ON THE MOTION OF THE SAME SPHERE 1. The sphere revolves on two axes, of which one is the northern, which never sets, and is called Boreas; the other is the southern, which is never seen, and is called Austronotius. 2. On these two poles the sphere of heaven moves, they say, and with its motion the stars fixed in it pass from the east all the way around to the west, with the northern stars near the pole (iuxta card- inem) describing smaller circles. (CHAPTER 34 (ON THE COURSE OF THE SAME SPHERE 1. The sphere of heaven, [moving] from the east towards the west, turns once in a day and night, in the space of twenty-four hours, within which the sun completes his swift revolving course over and under the earth. 53. As indicated by the title (Etymologies), Isidore is frequently interested in showing the origin of words, motivated by the belief that such knowledge conveys an insight into subject matter. Almost all are false and forced, as is mundus from motus, 54. Chapter 30s almost a verbatim repetition of Isidore's words in his earlier work On the Nature of Things (De natura rerum), chapter 9, “On the World.” ‘Since the earlier work is exclusively concerned with astronomy, cosmology, and natural phenomena in the upper regions of air and fire (for example, he considers thunder, lightning, rain, clouds), Isidore draws heavily upon it in the Etymologies. Indeed, the section on astron- ‘omy in the Etymologies often seems a highly abbrevi- ated version of the De natura rerum. The latter treatise has been edited and translated into French by Jacques Fontaine, Isidore de Seville Traité de la Nature (Bor- deaux: Féret et Fils, 1960). '55. One sentence involving the derivation of the Greek word for heavens, ouranos, is omitted. 36. Here again, Isidore forms this chapter by repeat- ing, almost verbatim, a few lines from chapter 12, para- graph 4, of his earlier De natura rerum (see Fontaine, p. 219).“THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS 35 |SWIFTNESS OF THE HEAVENS ‘With such swiftness is the sphere of heaven ‘run, that if the planets (astra) did not run its headlong course in order to delay it, it destroy the universe.*” 36 AXIS OF THE HEAVENS ‘The axis is a straight line north which passes the center of the globe of the sphere and is ‘axis because the sphere revolves on it like a ‘or it may be because the Wain is there. 37 [THE POLES OF THE HEAVENS The poles are little circles which run on the ‘Of these one is the northern, which never sets is called Boreas; the other is the southern, is never seen and is called Austronotius. 38 “THE CARDINES OF THE HEAVENS 1. The cardines of the heavens are the ends of the ss and are called cardines (hinges) because the turn on them or because they turn like the (cor).58 40 ‘THE GATES OF THE HEAVENS |. There are two gates of the heavens, the east the west. For by one the sun appears, by the he retires. a “THE FOUR PARTS OF THE HEAVENS 1. The climata of the heavens, that is, the tracts parts, are four, of which the first part is the east- ‘where some stars rise; the second, the western, some stars set; the third, the northern, where ‘sun comes in the longer days; the fourth, the where the sun comes in the time of the nights.°° 4, There are also other climata of the heavens, in number, as if seven lines from east to west, which the manners of men are dissimilar and On the Quadrivium §1 animals of different species appear; they are named from certain famous places, of which the first is Meroe; the second, Syene; the third, Catachoras, that is Africa; the fourth, Rhodus; the fifth, Hellespontus; the sixth, Mesopontus; the seventh, Boristhenes.6° CHAPTER 43, (ON THE HEMISPHERES 1, A hemisphere is half a sphere. The hemisphere ‘above the earth is that part of the heavens the whole of which is seen by us; the hemisphere under the earth is that which cannot be seen as long as it is under the earth. 57. The periodic motion of the planets from west to ‘east in a contrary direction to the daily motion of the heavens from east to west slows the great velocity of the daily motion and prevents the destruction of the heavens. '58. In what sense cardines turn unclear. ‘59. Isidore uses the term climara in two different senses, both of which derive from Greek antiquity. Here he employs it to represent the four directions of the celestial sphere, a usage which can be found in Cleom- ‘edes’ treatise On the Circular Motion of the Heavenly Bodies, chapter 9, and in Strabo's Geography (see D. R. Dicks, The Geographical Fragments of Hipparchus (Lon- don: University of London, 1960}, pp. 155-156). The more usual sense of climata is discussed in the next para~ graph and in the next note. ‘60. The seven climata mentioned here agree with the seven distinguished by the Greeks except that the latter have Lower Egypt in place of Isidore’s Catachoras. The seven climara were apparently introduced late (probably in the second century n.c.) and only because “they hap pened to be the seven parallels which passed through the best-known regions of the inhabited world” (Dicks, p. 157). Originally “the «2/pava were narrow belts or strips of land on either side of a parallel of latitude; in- habitants of the same clima were assumed to be situated in the same geographical latitude, since, for practical purposes, the celestial phenomena, lengths of the longest and shortest days, and general climatic conditions did. not change appreciably within the clima. . .” (Dicks, a heart is wholly p. 154). Writers like Polybius and Strabo came to use the term in a broader sense to represent a district or region of the inhabited world (Dicks, p. 156). Eventually “the ‘word lost its original scientific meaning and acquired the broader one of ‘region’ or ‘district’, but the names of the seven best known parallels were perpetuated” (Dicks, p. 158). In Almagest, Book II, chapter 13, Ptolemy drew Up tables based upon the seven climara using the syn- onymous terms xdpd2n2oc and «ié waa to designate them, a practice which most ancient writers followed. Pliny (Natural History, VI, 212-220) also described seven circles or parallels which, however, were based on astrological rather than geographical criteria (Dicks, p. 157). 13§ 1 Isidore of Seville cuapTer 44 (ON THE FIVE CIRCLES OF THE HEAVENS 1. There are five zones in the heavens, according to the differences of which certain parts of the earth are inhabitable because of their moderate temper- ature and certain parts are uninhabitable because of extremes of heat and cold. And these are called sones or circles for the reason that they exist on the circumference of the sphere. 2, The first of these circles is called dpxcends [the Arctic] because the constellations of the north are seen enclosed within it; the second is called fdepevds [ue summer}, which is called spenesds {ie., summer tropic], because in this circle the sun makes summer in northern regions and does not pass beyond it but immediately returns. 3, The third circle is called jjzepede, which is equivalent to equinoctialis in Latin, for the reason that when the sun comes to this circle it makes equal day and night. For 729000 means in Latin dday equal to the night, and by this circle the sphere fs cen to be equally divided. The fourth circle is called dvtapsrexds [antarctic] for the reason that it is opposite to the circle which we call Arctic. 4 The fifth circle is called the Xecuepeds ponesds [i.e winter tropic, or tropic of Capri- corn}®! which in Latin is hiemalis or brumalis, because when the sun comes to this circle it makes winter for those who are in the north and summer for those who dwell in the parts of the south. cuapTer 47 (ON THE SIZE OF THE SUN 1. The size of the sun is greater than that of the earth, and so from the moment when it rises it ap- pears equally to east and west at the same time. rand as to its appearing to us about a cubit in width, it is necessary to reflect how far the sun is from the ‘earth, which distance causes it to seem small to us. cHaprer 48 (ON THE SIZE OF THE MOON 1. The size of the moon also is said to be less than that of the sun, For while the sun is higher than the ‘moon and still appears to us larger than the moon, if it should approach near to us it would be plainly seen to be much larger than the moon. Just as the ‘sun is larger than the earth, so the earth is in some degree larger than the moon. 14 ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS cHaprer 49 (ON THE NATURE OF THE SUN 1, The sun, being made of fire, heats to a whiter glow because of the excessive speed of its circular motion. And its fire, philosophers declare, is fed ‘with water, and it receives the virtue of light and heat from an element opposed to it. Whence we see that it is often wet and dewy. cHaPTER 50 (ON THE MOTION OF THE SUN 1. They say that the sun has a motion of its own and does not turn with the universe. For if it re- mained fixed in the heavens all days and nights ‘would be equal, but since we see that it will set tomorrow in a different place from where it set yesterday, itis plain that it has a motion of its own, And does not move with the universe. For it ac- complishes its yearly orbits by unequal distances on 61. Obviously, the fourth and fifth circles should be reversed. Isidore repeats this very same order of circles Ta Book XIII (On he World and Its Parts), chapter 6. ‘This is surprising, since he seems to have ordered them Aorrectly in his earlier work On the Nature of Things (De corura rerum), where chapter 10s titled “On the Five Circles of the World.” In the latter treatise, however, Teudore arranges the circles according to the fingers of the hand, seemingly asif these circles were ina single plane. In neither treatise does Isidore identify the zones is ying between two circles, or a pole and a circle; wether he identifies one zone with one circle, rendering fis account unclear. Here is my translation of the rel- ‘vant passage in On the Nature of Things, chapter 10 (translated from Fontaine, p. 209): In their definition of the world the philosophers have five circles (which the Greeks call parallels, i.e.,20€s) into which the orb of the earth is divided. In the Geor- icy Virgil shows these, saying: “The sky has five zones [Georgies I, 233—Ed But let us fix them in the mantet your right hand so that our thumb is the aretic circle, {which is] uninhabitable because of cold; the second {finger is the summer (cherinos) circle, [which i] tem, perate and habitable; the middle finger isthe equinoe- Pal (isomerinos) circle, (which is} torrid and uninhabit- able; the fourth [finger] is the winter (xeimerinos) ‘Sire [which is] temperate and habitable; the smallest [finger] isthe antarctic circle, (which is} frigid and un~ inhabitable. 2) The first of these is the north circle, the second the solstitial eirele fie. tropic of Cancer}, the third the cquinoetial circle [.e., equator}, the fourth is the wintes sale fe. tropic of Capricorn}, and the fifth isthe sou circle fie., antarctic circle].” ‘Despite Isidore's arrangement of the circles in the same plane, itis not likely that he thought the earth, flat, He was simply confused.‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS ‘of the changes of the seasons (femporum 5) 82 For going further to the south, it makes winter, ‘order that the land may be enriched by winter ‘and frosts. Approaching the north, it restores ‘summer, in order that fruits may mature and green in the damp weather may ripen in ‘heat. 32 "THE JOURNEY OF THE SUN ‘The rising sun makes a journey to the meridian; ‘after it comes to the west and has bathed itself ‘ocean, it passes by unknown ways beneath the and again returns to the east. 33 THE LIGHT OF THE MOON ‘1. Certain philosophers hold that the moon has of its own, that one part of its globe is and another dark, and that, turning by it assumes different shapes. Others, on the ,, assert that the moon has no light of its ‘ut is illumined by the rays of the sun. And it suffers an eclipse if the shadow of the is interposed between itself and the sun. For sun is farther than it. Hence when the moon is, it [ie., between earth and sun], the sun the farther [or upper] part of the moon, and -nearer [or lower] part, which it holds toward the ‘would be darker. 56 "THE MOTION OF THE MOON 4. The moon governs the measures of the months ‘alternately losing and recovering its light. It in its path obliquely, not directly as the ‘Jest it should appear in the center of the [shadow] and frequently suffer eclipse.®® ‘orbit is near the earth. The waxing moon ‘is horns looking east; the waning, west: right- “Because it is going to set and lose its light. 7 THE NEARNESS OF THE MOON TO THE EARTH 1 The moon is nearer the earth than is the sun. with a smaller orb, it finishes its course quickly. For it traverses in thirty days the ‘the sun accomplishes in three hundred and Whence the ancients made the months On the Quadrivium 1 depend on the moon, the years on the course of the sun. ‘CHAPTER 58 (ON THE ECLIPSE OF THE SUN 1, There is an eclipse of the sun as often as the thirtieth moon reaches the same line where the sun is passing, and, interposing itself, darkens the sun. For it seems that the sun disappears to us when the moon's orb is opposed to it. CHAPTER 59 (ON THE ECLIPSE OF THE MOON 1, There is an eclipse of the moon as often as the moon runs into the shadow of the earth. For it is thought to have no light of its own but to be illumined by the sun, whence it suffers eclipse if the shadow of the earth comes between it and the sun. ‘The fifteenth moon suffers this until it passes out from the center and shadow of the interposing earth and sees the sun and is seen by the sun. CHAPTER 61 (ON THE LIGHT OF THE STARS 1, Stars are said to have no light of their own, but to be lighted by the sun like the moon. CHAPTER 62 (ON THE POSITION OF THE STARS 1, Stars are motionless, and being fixed, are carried along by the heavens in perpetual course, and they do not set by day but are obscured by the brilliance of the sun. CHAPTER 63 (ON THE COURSES OF THE STARS 1. Stars either are borne along or have motion. Those are borne along which are fixed in the heav- ens and revolve with the heavens. Certain have motion, like the planets, that is, the wandering stars, which go through roaming courses, but with definite limitations. (62. Since the lengths of the seasons are unequal and the sun’s motion is always assumed to be uniform, it follows that the distances, which represent each of the four parts of the sun’s annual orbit and which cor~ respond to the four seasons, would be unequal. 63. Isidore is here referring to the obliquity of the lunar and solar orbits. If they were in the same plane, eclipses would occur frequently. 15§ 1 Isidore of Seville ‘CHAPTER 64 ON THE VARYING COURSES OF THE STARS 1, According as stars are carried on different orbs of the heavenly planets, certain ones rise earlier snd set later, and certain rising later, come to their setting earlier. Others rise together and do not set at the same time. But all in their own time revolve in a course of their own. CHAPTER 65 (ON THE DISTANCES OF THE STARS 1, Stars are at different distances from the earth ‘and therefore, being of unequal brightness, they dare more or less plain to the sight; many are larger than the bright ones which we see, but being fur- ther away they appear small to us. CHAPTER 66 (ON THE CIRCULAR NUMBER OF THE STARS 1, There is a circular number of the stars by which it is said to be known in what time each and every star finishes its orbit, whether in longitude or latitude. 2. For the moon is said to complete its orbit every year, Mercury in twenty, Lucifer in nine, the Sun in nineteen, Vesper in fifteen, Phaeton in twelve, Saturn in thirty.¢® When these are finished, they return to a repetition of their orbits through the ‘same constellations and regions.*° ‘CHAPTER 67 (ON THE WANDERING STARS 1. Certain stars are called planetae, that is, wandering, because they hasten around through the whole universe with varying motions. Because they wander or produce irregularities, they are called retrograde; that is, when they add and sub- tract little bits. When they subtract so much of the rest, they are said to be retrograde; when, how- ever, they stand [or rest], they make @ station.!? CHAPTER 68 (ON THE PRECEDING [MOTION] OF STARS 1, Praecedentia or antegradatio of stars is when & star seems to be making its usual course and [really] is somewhat ahead of it. CHAPTER 69 1. Remotio or retrogradatio of stars is when & 16 ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS star, while moving on its regular orbit, seems at the same time to be moving backward. CHAPTER 70 1. The status of stars means that while a star is continuing its proper motion it nevertheless seems in some places to stand still. CHAPTER 71 (ON THE NAMES OF STARS 3, Stellae is derived from stare, because the stars always remain (stant) fixed in the heavens and do ‘hot fall. As to our seeing stars fall, as it were, from heaven, they are not stars but litle bits of fire that have fallen from the ether, and this happens when the wind, blowing high, carries along with it fire from the ether, which as itis carried along gives the appearance of falling stars. For stars cannot fall; they are motionless (as has been said above) and. are fixed in the heavens and carried around with them. 16. A comet is so called because it spreads light from itself as it if were hair (comas). And when this Kind of star appears it indicates pestilence, famine, or war. 17, Comets are called in Latin crinitae because they have a trail of flames resembling hair (in ‘modum crinium). The Stoics say there are Over thirty of them, and certain astrologers have write ten down their names and qualities. ‘64, Here Isidore appears to assume that the stars are at different distances from the earth, a position that ae sms incongruous with the notion of astellar sphere seerpich the stars are embedded. Only ifthe sphere of ‘fxed stars was thought to be of enormous thickness Breidd one suppose that stars of varying sizes were scat- (ered about between its widely separated concentric surfaces. ‘65 In this strange passage Lucifer is Venus, Phaeton is Jupiter, and Vesper, which means evening star, must Sianily Mars (probably Pyroeis, the Greek name for Ruts, was intended), although it was a name used for Venus, Aside from twelve years for Jupiter and thirty Jar Saturn, which are their respective sidereal periods, # {swholly unclear what orbital phenomena Isidore thought he was representing with his other data. ‘66. Paragraph 3, which consists of a few lines: ‘cludes chapter 66, has been omitted. “o7 This opaque description is improved somewhat in chapter 69. Fora discussion of retrogradations and stations see Selection 64. °g The remainder of chapter 71, the final chapter of ‘Book III, contains approximately two more pages 08 Posy various celestial bodies and divisions received names.‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS (ON THE UNIVERSE AND ITS PARTS of Seville (d. 636) by Ernest Brehaut* and annotated by Edward Grant Book XIII ] this book, as it were ina brief outline, we have ited on certain causes in the heavens, and the ‘of the lands, and the spaces of the sea, so that ‘reader may run them over in a little time and ‘their etymologies and causes with compendi- brevity. [UNIVERSE The universe is the heavens, the earth, the sea, ‘what in them is the work of God, of whom it dd (John 1:10): “And the universe was made him.” The universe (mundus) is so named in ‘by the philosophers because it is in perpetual (motu),2 as for example, the heavens, the ‘moon, air, seas. For no rest is permitted to is, and therefore it is always in motion. ‘Whence also the elements seem to Varro living since, he says, they move of themselves. Greeks have borrowed a name for the universe ‘ornament, on account of the variety of the and the beauty of the stars. For it is called them xéoy0s, which means ornament. ‘with the eyes of the flesh we see nothing fairer the universe. 2 The philosophers call by the name of atoms jin parts of bodies in the universe so very that they do not appear to the sight nor ‘of copp, that is, division, whence they are ‘oy0t (atoms). These are said to flit through jd of the whole universe with restless motions to move hither and thither like the finest dust ‘is seen when the rays of the sun pour through -windows.® From these certain philosophers of have thought that trees are produced, Jherbs and all fruits, and fire and water, and all ‘are made out of them.* ‘Atoms exist either in a body, or in time, or in On the Universe and Its Parts §3 number, or in the letters. In a body as a stone. ‘You divide it into parts, and the parts themselves you divide into grains like the sands, and again you divide the very grains of sand into the finest dust, until if you could, you would come to some little particle which is now [such] that it cannot be divided or cut. This is an atom in a body. 3. In time, the atom is thus understood: You divide a year, for example, into months, the months into days, the days into hours, the parts of the hours still admit of division, until you come to such ‘a point of time and small part of a moment that it could not be produced by any pause (morulam), and therefore cannot be divided.’ This is an atom of time. 1. This selection is drawn from various chapters in ‘Book XIII of Isidore of Seville’s Etymologies and was translated by E. Brehaut in An Encyclopedist of the Dark Ages (New York: Columbia University Press, 1912), pp. 234-238, For further details on these works, see Selection 1, note 1. 2. Here Isidore repeats his etymological derivation given in Book II, chapter 29 (see Selection 1). 3. In chapter 9, paragraph 1, of On the Nature of Things (De natura rerum), Isidore had remarked that “the ancients established tae communion of man with the structure of the world, for since the world (mundus) is called cosmos in Greek, man is a microcosmos, i.e., he is called a smaller world” (the Latin text of De natura ‘rerum has been edited and translated into French by Jacques Fontaine in Isidore de Seville, Traité de la Nature [Bordeaux: Féret et Fils, 1960)). This was a very popular view in antiquity and the Middle Ages. 4. The remaining paragraphs, 3 to 8, of chapter 1 have been omitted because they repeat material included the earlier selection from Book III (‘*On the Quad- rivium”). 5. This analogy is found in Lucretius, On the Nature of Things V1. 114-141 6. Atomism was formulated in Greece during the fifth century .c. by Leucippusand Democritus. Much of what was known about it in the later Middle Ages was furnished by Aristotle by way of his numerous attacks against it. 7. For Isidore, since theatom of time is smaller than any detectable or measurable pause that man can deter- ‘mine or know, it would not be further divisible into any ‘other temporal units; hence itis an atom of time. Be- ‘cause it was misleading ard confused, I have altered Brehaut's translation, which says (P. 235) that for Isidore an atom of time is such “that it cannot be lengthened by any little bit and therefore it cannot be divided.” 25§3 Isidore of Seville 4, In numbers, as for example, eight is divided into fours, again four into twos, then two into ones. ‘One is an atom because itis indivisible. So also in ase of the letters. For you divide a speech into words, words into syllables, the syllable into Tet- Tore, The letter, the smallest part, is the atom and cannot be divided. The atom is therefore what Cannot be divided, like the point in geometry. For Givision is called répos in Greek; no division [is called] dropos.® (CHAPTER 3 (ON THE ELEMENTS 1. The Greeks call 8p (hyle) the prime matter of things, which is in no way formed but has @ 2 pacity for all bodily forms, and out of it these Fisible elements are formed. Wherefore they have Yerived their name from this source. This hyle the Latins called materia, for the reason that every thing in the rough from which something is made is always called materia. Then the poets, not inaP- propriately, called it silva because materials are made of wood. 2. The Greeks moreover call the elements roxzeta, because they are akin to one another in & harmonious association and have a sort of common character, for they are said to be allied with one cpother in a certain natural way, now tracing their origin from fire all the way to earth, now from Sarth all the way to fire, so that fire fades into air, Sir is thickened to water, water coarsened to earth, fand again earth is dissolved into water, water Te fined into air, air rarefied into fire. 3, Wherefore all elements (omnia elementa) are present in all, but each of them has received its Prene from that which it has in greater degree? ‘and they have been assigned by divine providence athe living creatures that are suited to them, for the Creator himself filled the heaven with angels, the air with birds, the sea with fish, the earth with ‘men and other living creatures. CHAPTER 5 [ON THE PARTS OF THE HEAVENS 1, Ether is the place in which the stars are, and it signifies that fire which is separated on high from the whole universe. Ether is the element itself; and vaethra is the glow of the ether and is a Greek word... -1° 26 ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS CHAPTER 7 (ON THE AIR AND THE CLOUDS 1. Air is emptiness, having more rarity mixed with it than the other elements. Of it Virgil says. Ceneid, XIT, 354): “Length pursued by empl: ete" Ait (aer) is 80 called from dzper» (to raise), Pecause it supports the earth or, it may be, is supported by it. This belongs partly to the sub- Stanoe of heaven, partly to that of the earth. For onder thin air, where windy and gusty blast yemnot come into existence, belongs to the heavenly part; but this more disordered air, which takes pcorporeal character because of dank exhalations, is assigned to earth, and it has many subdivisions. Tor being set in motion, it makes winds; red being vigorously agitated, lightnings and thunderings; being contracted, clouds; being thickened, rain; when the clouds freeze, snows \vhen thick clouds freeze in a more disordered ways hails being spread abroad, it causes fine weathers for itis known that dense air is a cloud and that ‘a cloud rarefied and dissolved is air." CHAPTER 8: (ON THUNDER 1, Thunder (sonitruum) is so called because its sound terrifies (terreat), for fonus is sound. And it 8. This isa pitiful description and understanding of the atomic theory as expounded much earlier by F.¥- the gus, Throughout chapter 2itisnot clear whether (ieties himself subscribes to the atomic theory or is wacely reporting on it. On the basis of paragraph by mre ne describes what the philosophers say about it we dan the fact that he says “certain philosophers of an Neathen" have thought that all things are made out Ue toms, one is left with the impression that Isidore Srobably did not subscribe to the atomic theory, Indeed, eae ery next chapter, he goes on to speak of AtisIO¥, in Ue ur element theory, which was the great rival theory te felgtomist doctrine. That he appears to accept the four element theory may perhaps be argued ferhig statement in chapter 3, paragraph 3 ofthis lee, ci here he says thatthe Creator has assigned the fe ‘elements to living creatures. Only the visible elements were conceived this way taige authors, See my note 7 to Selection 109.1, Rufinus: ‘on “Simple Medicines.” ‘10, Much of the remainder of chapter 5 repeats nt al in'Book HI, chapters 33, 37-39 (see Selection 1 fer 6, “On the Circles of the Heaven,” is also omitted, tees Oit repeats what is substantially given in Book IH, chapter 44. sorte four or five lines of chapter 7, paragraph 2, have been omitted.LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS shakes everything so severely that it Jbave split the heavens, since when a great ‘most furious wind suddenly bursts into its circular motion becoming stronger ‘an outlet, it tears asunder with great it has hollowed out, and thus comes ‘ears with a horrifying noise ‘ought not to wonder at this since a vesicle, ‘small, emits a great sound when it is ex- Lightning is caused at the same time with =, but the former is seen more quickly ‘tis bright and the latter comes to our ears r. Moreover, the light (lux) which ap- the thunder is called lightning (ful- ‘And, as we said, it is seen before because it light (lumen) ; the thunder reaches the slowly. ‘THE ORDER OF THE PLANETS (fi. 400) by William H. Stahl? and annotation by Edward Grant of the planets expressed in terms of from the earth, taken as the center ‘was a much-discussed subject in the and compendia of antiquity and the Ages. Astronomically, the problem was not with the means available, and other cri- invoked to resolve the issue. The nature and the impossibility of a decisive are clearly described by Ptolemy, who hhis own reasons for selecting one of the arrangements current in antiquity. In TX, chapter 1, of the Almagest, we read: then, concerning the order of their all of which have their positions about ‘poles of the ecliptic, we see the foremost ticians agree that all these spheres are ‘the earth than the sphere of the fixed and farther from the earth than that of the ; that the three—of which Saturn’s is the Jupiter's next earthward, and Mars’ be- ‘that—are all farther from the earth than the and that of the sun. On the other hand, -spheres of Venus and Mercury are placed by lier mathematicians below the sun’s, but ‘of the later ones above the sun’s because never having seen the sun eclipsed by But this judgment seems to us unsure since On the Order of the Planets §4 CHAPTER 10 (ON THE RAINBOW AND THE CAUSES OF CLOUDS: 1. The rainbow is so called from its resemblance to a bent bow. Its proper name is Iris and it is called Iris, as it were aeris (of the air), because it comes down through the air to earth. It comes from the radiance of the sun when hollow clouds receive the sun’s rays full in front, and they create the appearance of a bow; end this thing gives various colors because the water is rarefied, the air clear, the clouds darkening. The rays issuing forth create different colors. 2. Rains (pluviae) are so called because they flow, as if fluviae. They arise by exhalation from earth and sea, and being carried aloft they fall in drops on the lands, being acted upon by the heat of the sun or condensed by strong winds.1® these planets could be below the sun and never yet have been in any of the planes through the sun and our eye but in another, and therefore not have appeared in a line with it; just as in the case of the moon’s conjunctive passages there are for the most part no eclipses. Since there is no other way of getting at this because of the absence of any sensible parallax in these stars, from which appearance alone line- ar distances are gotten, the order of the earlier ‘mathematicians seems the more trustworthy, using the sun as a natural dividing line between those planets which can be eny angular distance 12, The remaining chapters (there are twenty-two) of Book XIII are omitted. 1. Reprinted by permission of Columbia University Press from Macrobius: Commentary on the Dream of Scipio. Translated with an Introduction and Notes by William Harris Stahl (New York, 1952), pp. 162-164. The Dream of Scipio constituted the closing section of Cicero's On the Republic (De re publica). Macrobius’ ‘two-book commentary on the Dream proved instrumental in the preservation of the only known version of it up to the nineteenth century (Stahl, ‘Macrobius, p. 10). The present selection is drawn from Book I, chapter 19, My annotations draw heavily upon Stah’s accompanying notes and appendices as well as upon his volume Roman Science (Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1962). 27§4 Macrobius from the sun and those which cannot but which always move near it. Besides, it does not place them far enough at their perigees to produce a sensible parallax. The issue rested squarely on determinations about the relation between the sun, Mercury, and Venus, which are always seen in close proximity and whose periods appear to be of approximately the same duration (see n. 5). Lacking means for determining, sensible parallax, Ptolemy arbitrarily resorts to reasons of convenience and similarity for using the sun as a natural divider between “those planets which have the full range of angular: ‘elongation from the sun” (Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars)® and ‘those which do not” (Mercury and Venus). This very order of the planets had earlier been adopted by Cicero, Geminus, Cleomedes, Vitruvius, and Pliny. Macrobius, who was a Platonist, chose to follow Plato (Timaeus 38D), as did Aristotle (Met- aphysics X1.8.1073B) and others: he placed the moon, sun, Venus, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter, and ‘Saturn beyond the earth in that order. (Macrobius later reversed the positions of Mercury and Venus and erroneously ascribed this reversal to Plato; ‘Stahl doubts he ever read Plato [see Roman Science, p. 158). CHAPTER 19 [1] Next we must say a few things about the order of the spheres, a matter in which it is possible to find Cicero differing with Plato, in that he speaks of the sphere of the sun as the fourth of seven, ‘occupying the middle position, whereas Plato says that it is just above the moon, that is, holding the sixth place from the top among the seven spheres. [2] Cicero is in agreement with Archimedes and the Chaldean System; Plato followed the Egyptians, the authors of all branches of philosophy, who preferred to have the sun located between the moon ‘and Mercury even though they discovered and made known the reason why others believed that the sun was above Mercury and Venus. ‘Those who hold the latter opinion are not far from a semblance of truth; indeed, their misap- prehension arose from the following cause. [3] From the sphere of Saturn, the first of the seven, to the sphere of Jupiter, the second from the top, there is so much space intervening that the upper planet completes its circuit of the zodiac in thirty years, the lower one in twelve. Again, the sphere of Mars is so far removed from Jupiter that it completes its circuit in two years.* [4] Venus is so 28 ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS much lower than Mars that one year is sufficient for it to traverse the zodiac. But the planet Mercury is so near Venus and the sun so near Mercury that these three complete their revolutions in the same space of time, that is, a year more or less.‘ On this account Cicero called Mercury and Venus the sun's companions, for they never stray far from each other in their annual periods. [5] The moon, moreover, lies so much farther below these that what they accomplish in a year it does in twenty- eight days. Hence there was no disagreement ‘among the ancients regarding the correct order of the three superior planets, the vast distances be- tween them clearly arranging them, nor about the location of the moon, which is so much lower than the rest. But the proximity of the three neighboring. planets, Venus, Mercury, and the sun, was respon- sible for the confusion in the order assigned to them by astronomers, that is, with the exception of the skillful Egyptians, who understood the reason, here outlined. [6] The sphere in which the sun journeys is en- circled by the sphere of Mercury, which is above it, and by the higher sphere of Venus as well. As @ result, when these two planets course through the upper reaches of their spheres, they are perceived to be above the sun, but when they pass into the 2. This translation is by R. Catesby Taliaferro in Great Books of the Western World (Chicago: Encyclo- pedia Britannica, Inc., 1952), XVI, 270. +3. This division omits the moon, which is below the sun and has the full range of angular elongation, thus jnvalidating Ptolemy's reasoning, as Copernicus obsery- (ed in De revolutionibus, Book I, chapter 10 (see “Nich- ‘olas Copernicus on the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres,” trans. Charles Glenn Wallis in Great Books of the Western World, XVI, 523). “4. These were the standard approximations. Mars is considerably off, since its sidereal period is 687 days. 'S, Stahl observes (Macrobius, p. 163, n.4) that “the orbits of Venus and Mercury are within the earth’s orbit and so these planets appear to swing back and forth with respect to the sun. They never go very far from the sun’s position in the sky and are seen during the same year as morning and evening stars. The greatest apparent ‘distance of Venus from the sun (maximum elongation) js 48 degrees of celestial arc and of Mercury 28 degrees. ‘At the beginning of a solar year Mercury and Venus ‘might appear ahead of the sun as morning stars and at the end of the year might be behind as evening stars, or vice versa, So Macrobius, who is using a geocentric orientation, says that their revolutions consume ‘a year more or less.” The revolutions of Venus and Mercury fare actually 225 and 88 days respectively. Macrobius’ figures for the duration of the five planets’ revolutions are the same as those regularly found in the classical handbooks.”LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS ts of their spheres they are thought to be the sun. [7] Those who assigned to them a ‘beneath the sun made their observations ‘when the planets’ courses seemed to be ‘the sun, which, as we noted sometimes indeed, this position is more noticeable by Sir Thomas Heath is and annotation by Edward Grant (@1. fourth century)! ‘preceding selection it was suggested that may have garbled a report about Her- Pontus. In the text that follows, Chal- mentions Heraclides by name but and misrepresents his views. ‘of describing Mercury and Venus as moving ‘the sun, the physical center of their orbits, places the sun, Mercury, and Venus on circles that move around a geometric ‘common center, which presumably its center the earth. Thus, Chal- converted Heraclides’ limited helio- stem for Mercury and Venus into a system three concentric epicycles. Indeed, ‘ascribes to Plato essentially the same view, ‘identifying the circles of sun, Mercury, and epicycles even though Plato lived before m of epicycles was devised. It should be {that although Chalcidius mentions only Venus it Lucifer) and the sun in the passage ‘below, he had implied earlier that Mercury's isalso included. ‘of Lucifer as well as that of the sun, and ‘the two circles one point (unum punctum)® middle (unam medietatem),? showed how ‘says (Macrobius, p. 164): “The reason given ct. Venus and Mercury are less brilliant when ‘nearing superior conjunction because of their tance from us. Greatest brilliance of Venus is 136 days before or after inferior conjunction, at she is 2} times as brilliant as at superior “false opinion’ is the one adopted by Ptolemy. sparagraph, when Macrobius speaks of Mercury “coursing through the upper reaches of their ‘and then passing “into the lower tracts of their ‘and so lying beneath the sun, he is probably ;something he read about the system proposed ‘of Pontus (see the next selection), His Jobscure account, embedded in the context of a Mercury and Venus §5 since we get a clearer view at that time. When Mercury and Venus are in their upper regions, they are less apparent because of the sun’s rays. As a result, the false opinion has grown stronger, and this order has received almost universal ac- ceptance.? ‘THE MOTION OF MERCURY AND VENUS AROUND THE SUN discussion about the correct fixed order of the planets, makes it apparent that Macrobius failed to understand what he had read or heard about Heraclides. For the Heraclidean theory is incompatible with a fixed order of the planets. In any event, Macrobius’ account is too ‘unclear to have conveyed or transmitted the Heractidean system, and Stahl is right to reject the views of those historians of astronomy (for instance, Dreyer, Heath, and Duhem) who have interpreted this passage as a proper description of that system (see Macrobius, pp. 249-250, and Roman Science, p. 159). 1. This selection is reprinted by permission of the Clarendon Press, Oxford, from Aristarchus of Samos, the Ancient Copernicus (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), . 256. Heath’s translation was made from Chalcidius” Latin Commentary on Plato's Timaeus, chapter 110. This commentary, and Chalcidius’ accompanying Latin translation of the Timaeus, formed the basis of medieval knowledge of Plato and was a factor of some importance in the history of medieval science. 2. For unum punctum, Ihave replaced Heath’s “one center” with “one point.” The Latin expressions are my additions, taken from the recent edition of Chalcidius, Timaeus a Calcidio translatus commentarioque instructus in societatem operis coniuncto P. J. Jensen edidit J. H. Waszink (London: Warburg Institute; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962), p. 157. 3. The “one point” and “one middle” are, of course, the same center for the concentric epicycles. Heath writes (Aristarchus, p. 257): “According to this we are to suppose a point which revolves uniformly about the earth from west to east ina year. This point is the centre of three concentric circles (picyctes) on which move respectively the sun (on the innermost), Mercury (on the middle circle), and Venus (on the outermost); the sun takes, of course, a year to describe its epicycle. That the epicycle for the sun is ‘wrongly imported into Heraclides’ true system is con- firmed by the next chapter of Chalcidius, with its illus- trative figure, where he imports epicycles into Plato's systemalso .”. . . Hence the epicycles must be rejected altogether so far as Plato's system is concerned. Similar- ly, we must eliminate the sun’s epicycle from the ac- count of Heraclides’ system, and we must suppose that he regarded Mercury and Venus as simply revolving in concentric circles about the sun.” The system of Heraclides, whose works have not survived, is a reconstruction based on reports of a few authors who lived long after him. Of these authors, Chalcidius and Capella are probably the most important. 29§6 Macrobius Lucifer is sometimes above, sometimes below the sun. For he says that the position of the sun, the moon, Lucifer, and all the planets, wherever they are, is defined by one line passing from the centre of the earth to that of the particular heavenly body. There will then be one straight line drawn from the centre of the earth showing the position of the sun, ‘and there will be equally two other straight lines to the right and left of it respectively, and distant 50° from it, and 100° degrees from each other, the line nearest to the east showing the position of Lucifer or the Morning Star when it is furthest from the sun and near the eastern regions, a position in virtue of which it then receives the name of the Evening Star, because it appears in the east at evening after the setting of the sun, 2. Martianus Capella (fl. 410-439)* Although the Heraclidean scheme (see preceding selection by Chalcidius) is inconsistent with a defi- nite fixed order of the planets (Mercury and Venus ‘would at times be on the far side of the sun and at times on the near, or earth, side of the sun), neither Chalcidius nor Capella, the two significant trans- mitters of this doctrine, seemed to recognize this. They discussed the two traditional fixed orders without in any way taking cognizance of the in- consistency of such arrangements with the Her- aclidean view of the motions of Mercury and Venus around the sun.® Later authors who found occasion to discuss or repeat the Heraclidean system also did so as part of a general consideration of the fixed order of the planets (for instance, Baudoin de Courtenay in his L'Introductoire d’Astronomie, 6 ON OCEAN AND TIDES Macrobius (fl. 400) Translated by William H. Stahl” Annotated by Edward Grant [1] After giving these matters an examination that is by no means useless, as it seems to me, let us now confirm the statement we made about Ocean, that the whole earth is girt about not by a single but by a twofold body of water whose true and original course man in his ignorance has not yet determined. 4. This selection is reprinted by permission of the Clarendon Press, Oxford, from Aristarchus of Samos the “Ancient Copernicus (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), 1p. 256. The translation was made from Martianus Capel- 30 ‘THE LATIN ENCYCLOPEDISTS written in 1270, and Peter of Abano in his Lucidator astrologiae of 1310; see Stahl, p. 247). ‘The Heraclidean theory was partly geocentric, partly heliocentric (the sun, with Mercury and Venus circling about it, was described as rotating around the earth, the center of the world). Exten- sion of the Heraclidean scheme to embrace the other planets and the earth would have produced the full heliocentric systems proposed by Aris- tarchus of Samos in antiquity and Copernicus in the sixteenth century. Indeed, Copernicus himself, in referring to the text reproduced below, em- phasized (De Revolutionibus, Bk. 1,ch, 10) that his own, theory was but an extension of the “ingenious view held by Martianus Capella,” which, as we know but apparently Copernicus did not, is nothing other than the system of Heraclides of Pontus, whose name, however, was not mentioned by Capella. For, although Venus and Mercury are seen to rise and set daily, their orbits do not encircle the earth at all, but circle round the sun in a freer motion. In fact, they make the sun the centre of their circles, so that they are sometimes carried above it, at other times below it and nearer to the earth, and Venus diverges from the sun by the breadth of one sign and a half [45°]. But, when they are above the sun, Mercury is the nearer to the earth, and when they are below the sun, Venus is the nearer, as it circles in a greater and wider-spread orbit... . The wider circles of Mercury and Venus I have above described as epicycles.° That is, they do not include the round earth within their own orbit, but revolve laterally to it in a certain way. la’s Marriage of Philology and Mercury (De nuptiis Phil- ologiae et Mercurii), Bk. VIII, 880, 882 5. William H. Stahl, Roman Science (Madison, Wis: University of Wisconsin Press, 1962), pp. 147, 149, 183-184. 6 Since the circles of Mercury and Venus have an actual body (the sun), rather than a geometric point, as, their physical center, they cannot properly be called epicycles. 1. Reprinted by permission of Columbia University Press from Macrobius: Commentary on the Dream of ‘Scipio. Translated with an Introduction and Notes by. William Harris Stahl (New York, 1952), p. 214. The present selection is taken from the beginning of Book Il, chapter 19.‘Ocean which is generally supposed to be ‘one is really a secondary body, a great sich was obliged to branch off from the ‘body. [2] The main course actually flows ‘the earth’s torrid zone, girdling our hemi: ‘2nd the underside, and follows the circum- of the equator. In the east it divides, one Bowing off to the northern extremity, the the southern; likewise, in the west, streams ‘the north and south, where they meet the from the east at the poles.? [3] As they rush ‘with great violence and impetus and buffet r, the impact produces the remarkable flow of Ocean,? and wherever our seat ‘whether in narrow straits or open coast, it the tidal movement of Ocean’s streams. ‘now speak of as Ocean proper because of that our sea is filled from Ocean's streams. ‘the truer bed of Ocean, if I may call it that, the torrid zone; it follows the circuit of the 4s the streams originating in it follow the ‘of the horizon in their course, thus dividing earth into four parts and making each quarter, as we previously stated, an On Ocean and Tides §6 2. The theory that two oceans, one running east and west along the equatorial regions and the other north and south at right angles to the equatorial ocean, the inhabited portions of the world into four land masses surrounded by ocean and in complete isolation'from one another can be traced to Crates of Mallus (second cen- tury .c.), Mankind, as they knew it, was thought to be confined to one of these four island masses. This partic- ular theory was held by Macrobius and Martianus Capella and was influential in the Middle Ages in geo- graphical literature and in map-making. For further details, see John K. Wright, Geographical Lore of the Time of the Crusades (New York: American Geographi- cal Society, 1925), pp. 18-19. 3. This theory of tides may have originated with Crates of Mallus (see Stahl, p. 214, n. 2). Apart from fanciful i ions seemed to fall into two major ‘categories: (1) those involving the influence of the moon (Posidonius and Pliny were ancients who invoked the ‘moon in tidal discussions); and (2) those utilizing the i jing near the polar regions and rebounding to cause the ebb and flow of the tides. Obviously, Macrobius belongs in the second category. His opinion was widely known in the idle Ages. The problem is discussed by John Wright Geographical Lore (pp. 190-196). For a viewpoint upholding lunar influence on the tides, see Selection 82 by Robert Grosseteste 4, The Mediterranean. 31