Chapter III: Part 3

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Apologia pro Galilaeo._]

[Sidenote 2: _Confession. l. 13. c. 32._]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Proposition 9.

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Nat. hist. l. 36. c. 1._]

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: Deut. 33. 15]

[Sidenote 2: Gen. 49. 26]

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

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1*: _Lect. aut l. 1. c. 15._
_Plut. de plac. l. 2. c. 25._]

[Sidenote 2: _De coelo. l. 2. p. 49._]

[Sidenote 3: _De Mundi fab. pars 3ª. c. 4._]

[Sidenote 4: _Astron. Opt. c. 6. num 9._]

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

[Sidenote 1: _Nuncius Sydereus._]

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

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Cap. 11._]

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

But to this I answere:

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

[Sidenote 1: _Hist. l. 1. c. 7. Sec. 11._]

[Sidenote 2: _Poly. histor. c. 21._]

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

Whereas 'tis the common opinion and found true enough by observation, that _Olympus_, _Atlas_, _Taurus_ and _Enius_, with many others are much above this height. _Tenariffa_ in the Canary Ilands is proved by computation to bee above 8 miles perpendicular, and about this height is the mount _Perjacaca_ in _America_. Sr. _Walter Rawleigh_ seemes to thinke, that the highest of these is neere 30 miles upright: nay _Aristotle_[1] speaking of _Caucasus_ in _Asia_, affirmes it to bee visible for 560 miles, as some interpreters finde by computation, from which it will follow, that it was 78 miles perpendicularly high, as you may see confirmed by _Jacobus Mazonius_,[2] and out of him in _Blancanus_ the Jesuite.[3] But this deviates from the truth more in excesse then the other doth in defect. However though these in the moone are not so high as some amongst us, yet certaine it is they are of a great height, and some of them at the least foure miles perpendicular. This I shall prove from the observation of _Galilaeus_, whose glasse can shew this truth to the senses, a proofe beyond exception and certaine that man must needs be of a most timerous faith who dares not believe his owne eye.

[Sidenote 1: _Meteor. l. 1. c. 11._]

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

[Sidenote 3: _Exposi. in loc. Math. Artis. loc. 148._]

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

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

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

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

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

To this I shall answere out of _Galilaeus_.

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

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

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

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

Proposition 10.

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Vide_ Euseb. Nierem. _de Nat. Hist. l. 2. c. 11._]

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

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

_Quod radii Solares a vaporibus Lunam ambientibus fuerint
intercisi_,[1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Hist. l. 1. c. 7. Sec. 11._]

Proposition 11.

_That as their world is our Moone, so our world is their Moone._

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

1. Of the Seasons;

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _De gen. animal. l. 4. 12._]

[Sidenote 2: _Plat. de fac._
_De natura populorum. c. 3._]

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Plut. de fac. lunae._]

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

_Provehimur portu, terraeque urbesque recedunt._

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

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

_Terra accepto solis lumine clarescit, tantummodo, non relucet._

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

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

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

Unto this it may be answered:

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

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

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

Thus also _Carolus Malapertius_, whose words are these,[2]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Ant. lect. l. 1. c. 4._]

[Sidenote 2: _Praefat. ad Austrica syd._]

[Sidenote 3: _Meteor. l. 1. c. 2. Art. 2._]

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _De mundi fab. p. 3ª. c. 3._]

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Progym. 1._]

[Sidenote 2: _l. 20. c. 5._]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Sidenote 1: _Scal. exerc. 62._]

[Sidenote 2: _Epit. Astro. l. 4. part. 2._]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

o O o

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Proposition 12.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_dubio est incerto, pedem modo referente, modo producente._

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

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

[Sidenote 1*: _Epist. 95._]

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