But however we may deale pro or con in Philosophy, yet we must not bee too bold with divine truths, or bring Scripture to patronize any fancy of our owne, though, perhaps, it be a truth. I am not of their mind who think it a good course to confirme Philosophicall secrets from the letter of the Scripture, or by abusing some obscure text in it. Mee thinks it savors too much of that Melancholly humor of the Chymicks, who, aiming in all their studies at the making of gold, doe perswade themselves, that the most learned and subtile of the antient Authors, in all their obscure places doe meane some such sence as may make to their purpose. And hence it is that they derive such strange mysteries from the fables of the Poëts, and can tell you what great secret it was that antiquitie did hide under the fiction of Iupiter being turned into a shower of gold: of Mercuries being made the interpreter of the gods: of the Moones descending to the earth for the love of Endymion: with such ridiculous interpretations of these and the like fables, which any reasonable considering man cannot conceive to proceed from any but such as are distracted. No lesse fantasticall in this kind are the Jewish Rabbies, amongst whom is not any opinion, whether in nature or policy, whether true or false, but some of them, by a Cabalisticall interpretation can father it upon a darke place of Scripture, or (if need bee) upon a text that is cleane contrary. There being not any absurditie so grosse and incredible, for which these abusers of the text, will not find out an argument. Whereas, ‘tis the more naturall way, and should be observed in all controversies, to apply unto every thing, the proper proofes of it; and when wee deale with Philosophicall truths, to keepe our selves within the bounds of humane reason and authority.

But this by the way. 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, velut terrestribus tumulis superciliosam; but hee erred much in some circumstances of this opinion, especially where he sayes, there is an Iland amongst the Hyperboreans, wherein those hills may to the eye bee plainly discovered; and for this reason⁴ 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,⁵ who held that this Planet was full of champion· grounds, mountains and vallies. And this seemed likewise probable unto Augustinus Nifus,⁶ 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 imperfectè 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 perfecty 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,⁷ and by him confirmed with divers reasons. Keplar hath observed in the Moones eclipses,⁸ that the division of her inlightned part from the shaded, was made by a crooked unequall line, of which there cannot bee any probable cause conceived, unlesse it did arise from the ruggednes of that Planet; for it cannot at all be produc’d from the shade of any mountaines here upon earth, because these would bee so lessened before they could reach so high in a conicall shadow, that they would not be at all sensible unto us (as might easily bee demonstrated) nor can it be conceived what reason of this difference there should be in the Sun. 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 these be but its gibbosi[…]ties? Now if you should aske a reason why there should bee such a multitude of these in that Planet, the same Keplar shall jest you out an answer. Supposing (saith hee) that those inhabitants are bigger than any of us in the same proportion, as their dayes are longer than ours, viz. by fifteen times it may be, 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,⁹ may avoid those great heats which otherwise they would be liable unto; or if you will give Caesar la Galla leave to guesse in the same manner, he would rather thinke 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.

I shall next produce the eye-witnesse of Galilaeus,¹⁰ 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.

Suppose A B C D 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 be nothing else but a reflexion of the Sun beames upon some parts that are higher than the rest, and those obscure gibbosities which stand out towards the enlightened parts, must be such hollow and deepe places whereto the rayes cannot reach. But when the Moone is got farther off from the Sunne, and come to that fulnesse as this line B D doth represent her under, then doe these parts also receive an equall light, excepting onely that difference which doth appeare betwixt their sea & land. And if you doe 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 been said in the sixth 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 convayd to any diaphanous part in a plaine superficies, must bee 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 opacous superficies, the light passing through them may break out a great way off; whereas the other parts betwixt, may still remaine darke. Just as the River Arethusa in Sicily which runnes under ground for a great way, and afterwards breaks out againe. But because this is one of the chiefest fancies, whereby hee thinks hee hath fully answered the argument of this opinion; I will therefore set downe his answer in his owne words, least the Reader might suspect more in them than I have expressed.¹¹ Non est impossibile coecos ductus diaphani & perspicui corporis, sed opacâ superficie protendi, usque in diaphanam aliquam ex profundo in superficiem emergentem partem, per quos ductus lume nlongo postmodum interstitio erumpat, &c. But I reply, if the superficies betwixt these two enlightened parts remaine darke because of its opacity, then would it alwayes be darke, and the Sunne could not make it partake of light more than it could of perspicuity: But this contradicts all experience, as you may see in Galilaeus, who affirmes that when the Sunne comes neerer 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. Hee 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 weaknesse of this answer, which rather bewrayes an obstinate, than a perswaded will; for otherwise sure he would never have undertooke to have destroyed such certaine proofes with so groundlesse a fancy.

That instance of Galilaeus,¹² would have beene a better evasion had this Author been acquainted with it; who might then have compared the Moone to that which wee call mother of pearle, which though it bee most exactly polished in the superficies of it; yet will seeme unto the eye as if there were divers swellings and risings in its severall parts. But yet, this neither would not well have shifted the experiment of the perspective. For these rugged parts doe not only appeare upon one side of the Moone, but as the Sunne dos turne about in divers places, so doe they also cast their shadow. When the Moone is in her increase, then doe they cast their shadowes to the East. When she is in the decrease, and the Sunne on the other side of her, then likewise may we discover these brighter parts casting their shadowes Westward. Whereas in the full Moone there are none of all these to be seene.

But it may be objected, that ‘tis almost impossible, and altogether unlikely, that in the Moone there should bee 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 Galilaeus hath observed, that some parts have beene enlightned, when they were the twentieth part of the diameter distant from the common terme of illumination. From whence, 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 answer:

1. You must consider the height of the Mountaines is but very little, if you compare them to the length of their shadowes.¹³ Sir Walter Rawleigh observes that the Mount Athos now called Lacas, cast its shadow 300 furlongs, which is above 37 miles; and yet that Mount is none of the highest. Nay Solinus (whom I should rather believe in this kinde) affirmes that this Mountaine gives his shadow quite over the Sea,¹⁴ 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.

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, Atlus, Tauras and Emus, with many others, are much above this height. Tenariffa in the Canary Ilands, is commonly related to bee above 8 miles perpendicular, and bout this height (say some) is the mount Perjacaca in America.¹⁵ Sir Walter Rawleigh seemes to thinke, that the highest of these is neere 30 miles upright: nay,¹⁶ Aristotle 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,¹⁷ as you may see confirmed by Iacobus Mazonius, and out of him in Blancanus the Jesuite. But this deviates from the truth more in excesse,¹⁸ than 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 to the senses a proofe beyond exception; and certainly that man must needs be of a most timerous faith who dares not believe his own eye.

By that perspective you may plainly discerne some enlightned parts (which are the mountaines) to bee 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 B D E F be the body of the Moone, A B C 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 bee 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 be 1010000; unto which the quadrate arising from A G must be equall; according to the 47 proposition in the first booke of elements. Therfore 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 we discerne them at this distance? why doth the Moone appeare unto us so exactly round, and not rather as a wheele with teeth?

I answer, 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 bee 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 shee 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 answer 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 bee lesse remarkable, if it be discerned at a distance.

2. Though there be mountains in that part which apeares unto us to be the limbe of the Moone, as well as in any other place, yet the bright vapors 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.

3. Keplar hath observed,¹⁹ that in the solary Eclipses, when the rays may passe thorough this vaporous ayre, there are some gibbosities to be discerned in the limbe of the Moone.

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 works, certainly then these mountaines were not produced in vaine; and what more probable meaning can wee conceive there should be,²⁰ than to make that place convenient for habitation?

---

← Book 1, Proposition 8. The spots represent the Sea, and the brighter parts the · Contents · Book 1, Proposition 10. That there is an Atmo-sphaera, or an orbe of grosse →

Footnotes

1. Nat. hist. l. 36. c. 1. ↩

2. Psal. 104. v. 18. ↩

3. Ioseph. Ant. lib. […]. c. 3. ↩

4. Lect. aut. l. 1. c. 15. ↩

5. Plut. de plac. l. 2. c. 25. ↩

6. De Coelo. l. 2. part. 49. ↩

7. De Mundi fab. pars 3. c. 4. ↩

8. Astron. Opt. c. 6. num. 9. ↩

9. Kep append. Selenogra. ↩

10. Nuncius Sydereus. ↩

11. Cap. 11. ↩

12. Syst. mundi coll. 1. ↩

13. Hist. l. 1. c. 7. sect. 11. ↩

14. Poly. histor. c. 21. ↩

15. Hist. l. 1. c. 7. sect. 11. ↩

16. Meteor. l. 1. c. 11. ↩

17. Comparatio Arist. cum. Platone. Sect. 3. c. 5. ↩

18. Expost. in loc. Math. Arlis loc. 148. ↩

19. Somn. Astr. not. 207. ↩

20. LIB. 1. Cap. 10. ↩