1Quadrature, the ſame appears very weak, becauſe it continually
loſeth more and more of the view of the luminous part of the
Earth: and yet it ſhould ſucceed quite contrary, if that light were
its own, or communicated to it from the Stars; for then we ſhould
ſee it in the depth of night, and in ſo very dark an ambient.
loſeth more and more of the view of the luminous part of the
Earth: and yet it ſhould ſucceed quite contrary, if that light were
its own, or communicated to it from the Stars; for then we ſhould
ſee it in the depth of night, and in ſo very dark an ambient.
*By the Moons two
Quadratures you
are to underſtand
its firſt and last
quarters, as
ſtrologers call them
Quadratures you
are to underſtand
its firſt and last
quarters, as
ſtrologers call them
SIMPL. Stay a little; for I juſt now remember, that I have
read in a little modern tract, full of many novelties; “That this
ſecondary light is not derived from the Stars, nor innate in the
Moon, and leaſt of all communicated by the Earth, but that it is
received from the ſame illumination of the Sun, which, the
ſtance of the Lunar Globe being ſomewhat tranſparent,
trateth thorow all its body; but more livelily illuminateth the
ſuperficies of the Hemiſphere expoſed to the rays of the Sun:
and its proſundity imbuing, and (as I may ſay) ſwallowing that
light, after the manner of a cloud or chryſtal, tranſmits it, and
renders it viſibly lucid. And this (if I remember aright) he
proveth by Authority, Experience and Reaſon; citing Cleomedes,
Vitellion, Macrobius, and a certain other modern Author: and
adding, That it is ſeen by experience to ſhine moſt in the days
neareſt the Conjunction, that is, when it is horned, and is chiefly
bright about its limb. And he farther writes, That in the Solar
Ecclipſes, when it is under the Diſcus of the Sun, it may be ſeen
tranſlucid, and more eſpecially towards its utmoſt Circle. And
in the next place, for Arguments, as I think, he ſaith, That it not
being able to derive that light either from the Earth, or from the
Stars, or from it ſelf, it neceſſarily follows, that it cometh from
the Sun. Beſides that, if you do but grant this ſuppoſition, one
may eaſily give convenient reaſons for all the particulars that
occur. For the reaſon why that ſecundary light ſhews more
lively towards the outmoſt limb, is, the ſhortneſs of the ſpace
that the Suns rays hath to penetrate, in regard that of the lines
which paſs through a circle, the greateſt is that which paſſeth
through the centre, and of the reſt, thoſe which are fartheſt from
it, are always leſs than thoſe that are nearer. From the ſame
principle, he ſaith, may be ſhewn why the ſaid light doth not
much diminiſh. And laſtly, by this way the cauſe is aſſigned
whence it comes, that that ſame more ſhining circle about the
utmoſt edge of the Moon, is ſeen at the time of the Solar
clipſe, in that part which lyeth juſt under the Diſcus of the Sun,
but not in that which is beſide the Diſcus: which happeneth
becauſe the rays of the Sun paſs directly to our eye, through the
parts of the Moon underneath: but as for the parts which are
beſides it, they fall beſides the eye.”
read in a little modern tract, full of many novelties; “That this
ſecondary light is not derived from the Stars, nor innate in the
Moon, and leaſt of all communicated by the Earth, but that it is
received from the ſame illumination of the Sun, which, the
ſtance of the Lunar Globe being ſomewhat tranſparent,
trateth thorow all its body; but more livelily illuminateth the
ſuperficies of the Hemiſphere expoſed to the rays of the Sun:
and its proſundity imbuing, and (as I may ſay) ſwallowing that
light, after the manner of a cloud or chryſtal, tranſmits it, and
renders it viſibly lucid. And this (if I remember aright) he
proveth by Authority, Experience and Reaſon; citing Cleomedes,
Vitellion, Macrobius, and a certain other modern Author: and
adding, That it is ſeen by experience to ſhine moſt in the days
neareſt the Conjunction, that is, when it is horned, and is chiefly
bright about its limb. And he farther writes, That in the Solar
Ecclipſes, when it is under the Diſcus of the Sun, it may be ſeen
tranſlucid, and more eſpecially towards its utmoſt Circle. And
in the next place, for Arguments, as I think, he ſaith, That it not
being able to derive that light either from the Earth, or from the
Stars, or from it ſelf, it neceſſarily follows, that it cometh from
the Sun. Beſides that, if you do but grant this ſuppoſition, one
may eaſily give convenient reaſons for all the particulars that
occur. For the reaſon why that ſecundary light ſhews more
lively towards the outmoſt limb, is, the ſhortneſs of the ſpace
that the Suns rays hath to penetrate, in regard that of the lines
which paſs through a circle, the greateſt is that which paſſeth
through the centre, and of the reſt, thoſe which are fartheſt from
it, are always leſs than thoſe that are nearer. From the ſame
principle, he ſaith, may be ſhewn why the ſaid light doth not
much diminiſh. And laſtly, by this way the cauſe is aſſigned
whence it comes, that that ſame more ſhining circle about the
utmoſt edge of the Moon, is ſeen at the time of the Solar
clipſe, in that part which lyeth juſt under the Diſcus of the Sun,
but not in that which is beſide the Diſcus: which happeneth
becauſe the rays of the Sun paſs directly to our eye, through the
parts of the Moon underneath: but as for the parts which are
beſides it, they fall beſides the eye.”
The ſecondary
light of the Moon
cauſed by the Sun,
according to ſome.
light of the Moon
cauſed by the Sun,
according to ſome.
SALV. If this Philoſopher had been the firſt Author of this
pinion, I would not wonder that he ſhould be ſo affectionate to it,
pinion, I would not wonder that he ſhould be ſo affectionate to it,
zoom in
zoom out
zoom area
full page
page width
set mark
remove mark
get reference
digilib