1ſmalneſſe of the body of this, in compariſon to the magnitude
of the other, it cannot be denied but that the will and as it
were valour of this, is very great. Thus much for their
gruities or reſemblances. It ſhould next follow that we diſcourſe
touching their diſparity; but becauſe Simplicius will favour us
with his objections againſt the former, its neceſſary that we hear
and examine them, before we proceed any farther.
of the other, it cannot be denied but that the will and as it
were valour of this, is very great. Thus much for their
gruities or reſemblances. It ſhould next follow that we diſcourſe
touching their diſparity; but becauſe Simplicius will favour us
with his objections againſt the former, its neceſſary that we hear
and examine them, before we proceed any farther.
Seventhly, The
Earth and Moon
do mutually eclipſe.
Earth and Moon
do mutually eclipſe.
SAGR. And the rather, becauſe it is to be ſuppoſed that
Simplicius will not any wayes oppoſe the diſparities, and
gruities betwixt the Earth and Moon, ſince that he accounts their
ſubſtances extremely different.
Simplicius will not any wayes oppoſe the diſparities, and
gruities betwixt the Earth and Moon, ſince that he accounts their
ſubſtances extremely different.
SIMPL. Amongſt the reſemblances by you recited, in the
rallel you make betwixt the Earth and Moon, I find that I can
admit none confidently ſave onely the firſt, and two others; I
grant the firſt, namely, the ſpherical figure; howbeit, even in
this there is ſome kind of difference, for that I hold that of the
Moon to be very ſmooth and even, as a looking-glaſſe,
as, we find and feel this of the Earth to be extraordinary
ous and rugged; but this belonging to the inequality of
cies, it ſhall be anon conſidered, in another of thoſe
ces by you alledged; I ſhall therefore reſerve what I have to ſay
thereof, till I come to the conſideration of that. Of what you
affirm next, that the Moon ſeemeth, as you ſay in your ſecond
Reſemblance, opacous and obſcure in its ſelf, like the Earth; I
admit not any more than the firſt attribute of opacity, of which
the Eclipſes of the Sun aſſure me. For were the Moon
rent, the air in the total obſcuration of the Sun, would not
come ſo duskiſh, as at ſuch a time it is, but by means of the
tranſparency of the body of the Moon, a refracted light would
paſſe through it, as we ſee it doth through the thickeſt clouds. But
as to the obſcurity, I believe not that the Moon is wholly
ved of light, as the Earth; nay, that clarity which is ſeen in the
remainder of its Diſcus, over and above the ſmall creſcent
lightened by the Sun, I repute to be its proper and natural light,
and not a reflection of the Earth, which I eſteem unable, by
reaſon of its aſperity (craggineſſe) and obſcurity, to reflect the
raies of the Sun. In the third Parallel I aſſent unto you in one
part, and diſſent in another: I agree in judging the body of the
Moon to be moſt ſolid and hard, like the Earth, yea much more;
for if from Ariſtotle we receive that the Heavens are impenetrable,
and the Stars the moſt denſe parts of Heaven, it muſt neceſſarily
follow, that they are moſt ſolid and moſt impenetrable.
rallel you make betwixt the Earth and Moon, I find that I can
admit none confidently ſave onely the firſt, and two others; I
grant the firſt, namely, the ſpherical figure; howbeit, even in
this there is ſome kind of difference, for that I hold that of the
Moon to be very ſmooth and even, as a looking-glaſſe,
as, we find and feel this of the Earth to be extraordinary
ous and rugged; but this belonging to the inequality of
cies, it ſhall be anon conſidered, in another of thoſe
ces by you alledged; I ſhall therefore reſerve what I have to ſay
thereof, till I come to the conſideration of that. Of what you
affirm next, that the Moon ſeemeth, as you ſay in your ſecond
Reſemblance, opacous and obſcure in its ſelf, like the Earth; I
admit not any more than the firſt attribute of opacity, of which
the Eclipſes of the Sun aſſure me. For were the Moon
rent, the air in the total obſcuration of the Sun, would not
come ſo duskiſh, as at ſuch a time it is, but by means of the
tranſparency of the body of the Moon, a refracted light would
paſſe through it, as we ſee it doth through the thickeſt clouds. But
as to the obſcurity, I believe not that the Moon is wholly
ved of light, as the Earth; nay, that clarity which is ſeen in the
remainder of its Diſcus, over and above the ſmall creſcent
lightened by the Sun, I repute to be its proper and natural light,
and not a reflection of the Earth, which I eſteem unable, by
reaſon of its aſperity (craggineſſe) and obſcurity, to reflect the
raies of the Sun. In the third Parallel I aſſent unto you in one
part, and diſſent in another: I agree in judging the body of the
Moon to be moſt ſolid and hard, like the Earth, yea much more;
for if from Ariſtotle we receive that the Heavens are impenetrable,
and the Stars the moſt denſe parts of Heaven, it muſt neceſſarily
follow, that they are moſt ſolid and moſt impenetrable.
The ſecond clarity
of the Moon
ſteemed to be its
native light.
of the Moon
ſteemed to be its
native light.
The Earth unable
to reflect the Suns
raies.
to reflect the Suns
raies.
The ſubſtance of
the Heavens
netrable,
ing to Ariſtotle.
the Heavens
netrable,
ing to Ariſtotle.
SAGR. What excellent matter would the Heavens afford us for
to make Pallaces of, if we could procure a ſubſtance ſo hard and ſo
tranſparent?
to make Pallaces of, if we could procure a ſubſtance ſo hard and ſo
tranſparent?