it.
[78] The hostility which Cato bore to Scipio Africanus is mentioned by
Livy, xxxviii. 54, and by Corn. Nepos, Cato, i.
[79] Lucius Munatius Plancus took a conspicuous part in the political
intrigues of the times and was especially noted for his follies and
extravagance.
[80] Asinius Pollio is a name which stands high in Roman literature;
according to the remark of Alexandre, “Vir magnus fuit, prono tamen
ad obtrectandum ingenio, quod arguunt ejus cum Cicerone simultates,”
Lemaire, i. 30. This hostile feeling towards Cicero is supposed to have
proceeded from envy and mortification, because he was unable to attain
the same eminence in the art of oratory with his illustrious rival. See
Hardouin’s Index Auctorum, in Lemaire, i. 168.
[81] “Vitiligatores.”
[82] The table of contents, which occupies no less than 124 pages in
Lemaire’s edition, I have omitted, in consequence of its length; the
object which the author proposed to effect by the table of contents
will be gained more completely by an alphabetical index.
[83] “Ἐποπτίδων.” For an account of Valerius Soranus see Hardouin’s
Index Auctorum, in Lemaire, i. 217.
[84] To the end of each book of the Natural History is appended, in the
original, a copious list of references to the sources from which the
author derived his information. These are very numerous; in the second
book they amount to 45, in the third to 35, in the 4th to 53, in the
fifth to 60, in the sixth to 54, and they are in the same proportion in
the remaining books.
[85] “Spartum;” this plant was used to make bands for the vines and
cables for ships.
[86] “Mundus.” In translating from one language into another, it is
proper, as a general principle, always to render the same word in the
original by the same word in the translation. But to this rule there
are two exceptions; where the languages do not possess words which
precisely correspond, and where the original author does not always
use the same word in the same sense. Both these circumstances, I
apprehend, apply to the case in question. The term _Mundus_ is used
by Pliny, sometimes to mean _the earth_ and its immediate appendages,
the visible solar system; and at other times _the universe_; while
I think we may venture to assert, that in some instances it is used
in rather a vague manner, without any distinct reference to either
one or other of the above designations. I have, in almost all cases,
translated it by the term _world_, as approaching nearest to the
sense of the original. The word _mundus_ is frequently employed by
Lucretius, especially in his fifth book, and seems to be almost always
used in the more extended sense of _universe_. There are, indeed, a
few passages where either meaning would be equally appropriate, and in
one line it would appear to be equivalent to _firmament_ or _heavens_;
“et mundi speciem violare serenam,” iv. 138. Cicero, in his treatise
De Natura Deorum, generally uses the term _mundus_ in the sense of
_universe_, as in ii. 22, 37, 58 and 154; while in one passage, ii.
132, it would appear to be employed in the more limited sense of _the
earth_. It occasionally occurs in the Fasti of Ovid, but it is not
easy to ascertain its precise import; as in the line “Post chaos, ut
primum data sunt tria corpora mundo,” v. 41, where from the connexion
it may be taken either in the more confined or in the more general
sense. Manilius employs the word very frequently, and his commentators
remark, that he uses it in two distinct senses, _the visible firmament_
and the _universe_; and I am induced to think that he attaches still
more meaning to the term. It occurs three times in the first eleven
lines of his poem. In the third line, “deducere mundo aggredior,”
_mundus_ may be considered as equivalent to the celestial regions as
opposed to the earth. In the ninth line, “concessumque patri mundo,”
we may consider it as signifying the celestial regions generally; and
in the eleventh, “Jamque favet mundus,” the whole of the earth, or
rather its inhabitants. We meet with it again in the sixty-eighth line,
“lumina mundi,” where it seems more properly to signify the visible
firmament; again in the 139th, “Et mundi struxere globum,” it seems
to refer especially to the earth, synonymous with the general sense
of the English term _world_; while in the 153rd line, “per inania
mundi,” it must be supposed to mean the universe. Hyginus, in his
Poeticon Astronomicon, lib. i. p. 55, defines the term as follows:
“Mundus appellatur is qui constat in sole et luna et terra et omnibus
stellis;” and again, p. 57, “Terra mundi media regione collocata.” We
may observe the different designations of the term _mundus_ in Seneca;
among other passages I may refer to his Nat. Quæst. vii. 27 & iii. 30;
to his treatise De Consol. § 18 and De Benef. iv. 23, where I conceive
the precise meanings are, respectively, the universe, the terrestrial
globe, the firmament, and the heavenly bodies. The Greek term κόσμος,
which corresponds to the Latin word _mundus_, was likewise employed to
signify, either the visible firmament or the universe. In illustration
of this, it will be sufficient to refer to the treatise of Aristotle
Περὶ Κόσμου, cap. 2. p. 601. See also Stephens’s Thesaurus, _in loco_.
In Apuleius’s treatise De Mundo, which is a free translation of
Aristotle’s Περὶ Κόσμου, the term may be considered as synonymous with
universe. It is used in the same sense in various parts of Apuleius’s
writings: see Metam. ii. 23; De Deo Socratis, 665, 667; De Dogmate
Platonis, 574, 575, _et alibi_.
[87] Cicero, in his Timæus, uses the same phraseology; “Omne igitur
cœlum, sive mundus, sive quovis alio vocabulo gaudet, hoc a nobis
nuncupatum est,” § 2. Pomponius Mela’s work commences with a similar
expression; “Omne igitur hoc, quidquid est, cui mundi cœlique nomen
indideris, unum id est.” They were probably taken from a passage in
Plato’s Timæus, “Universum igitur hoc, Cœlum, sive Mundum, sive quo
alio vocabulo gaudet, cognominemus,” according to the translation of
Ficinus; Platonis Op. ix. p. 302. The word _cœlum_, which is employed
in the original, in its ordinary acceptation, signifies _the heavens_,
the visible firmament; as in Ovid, Met. i. 5, “quod tegit omnia,
cœlum.” It is, in most cases, employed in this sense by Lucretius and
by Manilius, as in i. 2. of the former and in i. 14. of the latter.
Occasionally, however, it is employed by both of these writers in the
more general sense of _celestial regions_, in opposition to the earth,
as by Lucretius, i. 65, and by Manilius, i. 352. In the line quoted
by Cicero from Pacuvius, it would seem to mean the place in which the
planets are situated; De Nat. Deor. ii. 91. The Greek word οὐρανὸς may
be regarded as exactly corresponding to the Latin word _cœlum_, and
employed with the same modifications; see Aristotle, De Mundo and De
Cœlo, and Ptolemy, Mag. Const. lib. i. _passim_; see also Stephens’s
Thesaurus, _in loco_. Aratus generally uses it to designate the visible
firmament, as in l. 10, while in l. 32 it means the heavenly regions.
Gesner defines _cœlum_, “Mundus exclusa terra,” and _mundus_, “Cœlum et
quidquid cœli ambitu continetur.” In the passage from Plato, referred
to above, the words which are translated by Ficinus _cœlum_ and
_mundus_, are in the original οὐρανὸς and κόσμος; Ficinus, however, in
various parts of the Timæus, translates οὐρανὸς by the word _mundus_:
see t. ix. p. 306, 311, _et alibi_.
[88] The following passage from Cicero may serve to illustrate the
doctrine of Pliny: “Novem tibi orbibus, vel potius globis, connexa
sunt omnia: quorum unus est cœlestis, extimus, qui reliquos omnes
complectitur, summus ipse Deus, arcens et continens cœlum;” Som. Scip.
§ 4. I may remark, however, that the term here employed by our author
is not _Deus_ but _Numen_.
[89] We have an interesting account of the opinions of Aristotle on
this subject, in a note in M. Ajasson’s translation, ii. 234 _et seq._,
which, as well as the greater part of the notes attached to the second
book of the Natural History, were written by himself in conjunction
with M. Marcus.
[90] The philosophers of antiquity were divided in their opinions
respecting the great question, whether the active properties of
material bodies, which produce the phænomena of nature, are inherent
in them, and necessarily attached to them, or whether they are
bestowed upon them by some superior power or being. The Academics and
Peripatetics generally adopted the latter opinion, the Stoics the
former: Pliny adopts the doctrine of the Stoics; see Enfield’s Hist. of
Phil. i. 229, 283, 331.
[91] I may remark, that the astronomy of our author is, for the most
part, derived from Aristotle; the few points in which they differ will
be stated in the appropriate places.
[92] This doctrine was maintained by Plato in his Timæus, p. 310,
and adopted by Aristotle, De Cœlo, lib. ii. cap. 14, and by Cicero,
De Nat. Deor. ii. 47. The spherical form of the world, οὐρανὸς, and
its circular motion are insisted upon by Ptolemy, in the commencement
of his astronomical treatise Μεγάλη Σύνταξις, Magna Constructio,
frequently referred to by its Arabic title Almagestum, cap. 2. He is
supposed to have made his observations at Alexandria, between the years
125 and 140 A.D. His great astronomical work was translated into Arabic
in the year 827; the original Greek text was first printed in 1538 by
Grynæus, with a commentary by Theon. George of Trebisond published a
Latin version of it in 1541, and a second was published by Camerarius
in 1551, along with Ptolemy’s other works. John Muller, usually called
Regiomontanus, and Purback published an abridgement of the Almagest in
1541. For an account of Ptolemy I may refer to the article in the Biog.
Univ. xxxv. 263 _et seq._, by Delambre, also to Hutton’s Math. Dict.,
_in loco_, and to the high character of him by Whewell, Hist. of the
Inductive Sciences, p. 214.
[93] See Ptolemy, _ubi supra_.
[94] This opinion, which was maintained by Pythagoras, is noticed and
derided by Aristotle, De Cœlo, lib. ii. cap. 9. p. 462-3. A brief
account of Pythagoras’s doctrine on this subject is contained in
Enfield’s Philosophy, i. 386.
[95] Pliny probably here refers to the opinion which Cicero puts into
the mouth of one of the interlocutors in his treatise De Nat. Deor.
ii. 47, “Quid enim pulchrius ea figura, quæ sola omnes alias figuras
complexa continet, quæque nihil asperitatis habere, nihil offensionis
potest, nihil incisum angulis, nihil anfractibus, nihil eminens, nihil
lacunosum?”
[96] The letter Δ, in the constellation of the triangle; it is named
Δελτωτὸν by Aratus, l. 235; also by Manilius, i. 360. We may remark,
that, except in this one case, the constellations have no visible
resemblance to the objects of which they bear the name.
[97] “Locum hunc Plinii de Galaxia, sive Lactea via, interpretantur
omnes docti.” Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 227. It may be remarked, that
the word _vertex_ is here used in the sense of the astronomical term
zenith, not to signify the pole.
[98] De Ling. Lat. lib. iv. p. 7, 8. See also the remarks on the
derivation of the word in Gesner, Thes., _in loco_.
[99] “Signifer.” The English term is taken from the Greek word
Ζωδιακὸς, derived from Ζῶον; see Aristotle, De Mundo, cap. 2. p. 602.
The word _Zodiacus_ does not occur in Pliny, nor is it employed by
Ptolemy; he names it λοξὸς κύκλος, _obliquus circulus_; Magn. Const.
i. 7, 13, _et alibi_. It is used by Cicero, but professedly as a Greek
term; Divin. ii. 89, and Arati Phænom. l. 317. It occurs in Hyginus,
p. 57 _et alibi_, and in A. Gellius, 13. 9. Neither _signifer_ taken
substantively, nor _zodiacus_ occur in Lucretius or in Manilius.
[100] The account of the elements, of their nature, difference, and,
more especially, the necessity of their being four, are fully discussed
by Aristotle in various parts of his works, more particularly in his
treatise De Cœlo, lib. iii. cap. 3, 4 and 5, lib. iv. cap. 5, and De
Gener. et Cor. lib. ii. cap. 2, 3, 4 and 5. For a judicious summary of
the opinions of Aristotle on this subject, I may refer to Stanley’s
History of Philosophy; Aristotle, doctrines of, p. 2. l. 7, and to
Enfield, i. 764 _et seq._ For the Epicurean doctrine, see Lucretius, i.
764 _et seq._
[101] Although the word _planeta_, as taken from the Greek πλανήτης, is
inserted in the title of this chapter, it does not occur in any part
of the text. It is not found either in Lucretius, Manilius, or Seneca,
nor, I believe, was it used by any of their contemporaries, except
Hyginus, p. 76. The planets were generally styled _stellæ erraticæ_,
_errantes_, or _vagæ_, _sidera palantia_, as in Lucretius, ii. 1030,
or simply the _five stars_, as in Cicero, De Nat. Deor. ii. 51, and
in Seneca, Nat. Quæst. vii. 24. Pliny, by including the sun and moon,
makes the number seven. Aratus calls them πέντ’ ἄστερες, l. 454.
[102] “Aër.” “Circumfusa undique est (terra) hac animabili spirabilique
natura, cui nomen est aër; Græcum illud quidem, sed perceptum jam tamen
usu a nobis;” Cicero, De Nat. Deor. ii. 91.
[103] “universi cardine.” “Revolutionis, ut aiunt, centro. Idem
Plinius, hoc ipso libro, cap. 64, terram cœli cardinem esse dicit;”
Alexandre, in Lem. i. 228. On this subject I may refer to Ptolemy,
Magn. Const, lib. i. cap. 3, 4, 6. See also Apuleius, near the
commencement of his treatise De Mundo.
[104] “Sidera.” The word _sidus_ is used, in most cases, for one of the
heavenly bodies generally, sometimes for what we term a constellation,
a particular assemblage of them, and sometimes specially for an
individual star. Manilius employs the word in all these senses, as will
appear by the three following passages respectively; the first taken
from the opening of his poem,
“Carmine divinas artes, et conscia fati
Sidera....”
The second,
“Hæc igitur texunt æquali sidera tractu
Ignibus in varias cœlum laqueantia formas.” i. 275, 276.
The third
“... pectus, fulgenti sidere clarius;” i. 356.
In the Fasti of Ovid, we have examples of the two latter of these
significations:—
“Ex Ariadnæo sidere nosse potes;” v. 316.
“Et canis (Icarium dicunt) quo sidere noto
Tosta sitit tellus;” iv. 939, 940.
Lucretius appears always to employ the term in the general sense. J.
Obsequens applies the word _sidus_ to a meteor; “sidus ingens cœlo
demissum,” cap. 16. In a subsequent part of this book, chap. 18 _et
seq._, our author more particularly restricts the term _sidus_ to the
planets.
[105] Cicero remarks concerning them; “quæ (stellæ) falso vocantur
errantes;” De Nat. Deor. ii. 51.
[106] “... vices dierum alternat et noctium, quum sidera præsens
occultat, illustrat absens;” Hard. in Lem. i. 230.
[107] “ceteris sideribus.” According to Hardouin, _ubi supra_, “nimium
stellis errantibus.” There is, however, nothing in the expression of
our author which sanctions this limitation.
[108] See Iliad, iii. 277, and Od. xii. 323.
[109] It is remarked by Enfield, Hist. of Phil. ii. 131, that “with
respect to philosophical opinions, Pliny did not rigidly adhere to any
sect.... He reprobates the Epicurean tenet of an infinity of worlds;
favours the Pythagorean notion of the harmony of the spheres; speaks
of the universe as God, after the manner of the Stoics, and sometimes
seems to pass over into the field of the Sceptics. For the most part,
however, he leans to the doctrine of Epicurus.”
[110] “Si alius est Deus quam sol,” Alexandre in Lem. i. 230. Or
rather, if there be any God distinct from the world; for the latter
part of the sentence can scarcely apply to the sun. Poinsinet and
Ajasson, however, adopt the same opinion with M. Alexandre; they
translate the passage, “s’il en est autre que le soleil,” i. 17 and ii.
11.
[111] “totus animæ, totus animi;” “Anima est qua vivimus, animus quo
sapimus.” Hard. in Lem. i. 230, 231. The distinction between these two
words is accurately pointed out by Lucretius, iii. 137 _et seq._
[112] “fecerunt (Athenienses) Contumeliæ fanum et Impudentiæ.” Cicero,
De Leg. ii. 28. See also Bossuet, Discours sur l’Histoire univ. i. 250.
[113] The account which Cicero gives us of the opinions of Democritus
scarcely agrees with the statement in the text; see De Nat. Deor. i.
120.
[114] “In varios divisit Deos numen unicum, quod Plinio cœlum est aut
mundus; ejusque singulas partes, aut, ut philosophi aiunt, attributa,
separatim coluit;” Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 231.
[115] “Febrem autem ad minus nocendum, templis celebrant, quorum adhuc
unum in Palatio....” Val. Max. ii. 6; see also Ælian, Var. Hist. xii.
11. It is not easy to ascertain the precise meaning of the terms
_Fanum_, _Ædes_, and _Templum_, which are employed in this place by
Pliny and Val. Maximus. Gesner defines _Fanum_ “area templi et solium,
_templum_ vero ædificium;” but this distinction, as he informs us,
is not always accurately observed; there appears to be still less
distinction between _Ædes_ and _Templum_; see his Thesaurus _in loco_,
also Bailey’s Facciolati _in loco_.
[116] “Orbona est Orbitalis dea.” Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 231.
[117] “Appositos sibi statim ab ortu custodes credebant, quos viri
Genios, Junones fœminæ vocabant.” Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 232. See
Tibullus, 4. 6. 1, and Seneca, Epist. 110, _sub init._
[118] We may suppose that our author here refers to the popular
mythology of the Egyptians; the “fœtidi cibi” are mentioned by Juvenal;
“Porrum et cæpe nefas violare et frangere morsu,” xv. 9; and Pliny, in
a subsequent part of his work, xix. 32, remarks, “Allium cæpeque inter
Deos in jurejurando habet Ægyptus.”
[119] See Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 42 _et alibi_, for an illustration
of these remarks of Pliny.
[120] This sentiment is elegantly expressed by Cicero, De Nat. Deor.
ii. 62, and by Horace, Od. iii. 3. 9 _et seq._ It does not appear,
however, that any of the Romans, except Romulus, were deified, previous
to the adulatory period of the Empire.
[121] “Planetarum nempe, qui omnes nomina mutuantur a diis.” Alexandre
in Lemaire, i. 234.
[122] This remark may be illustrated by the following passage from
Cicero, in the first book of his treatise De Nat. Deor. Speaking of
the doctrine of Zeno, he says, “neque enim Jovem, neque Junonem, neque
Vestam, neque quemquam, qui ita appelletur, in deorum habet numero:
sed rebus inanimis, atque mutis, per quandam significationem, hæc docet
tributa nomina.” “Idemque (Chrysippus) disputat, æthera esse eum,
quem homines Jovem appellant: quique aër per maria manaret, eum esse
Neptunum: terramque eam esse, quæ Ceres diceretur: similique ratione
persequitur vocabula reliquorum deorum.”
[123] The following remarks of Lucretius and of Cicero may serve to
illustrate the opinion here expressed by our author:—
“Omnis enim per se Divum natura necesse est Immortali ævo summa cum
pace fruatur, Semota ab nostris rebus, sejunctaque longe;” Lucretius,
i. 57-59.
“Quod æternum beatumque sit, id nec habere ipsum negotii quidquam, nec
exhibere alteri; itaque neque ira neque gratia teneri, quod, quæ talia
essent, imbecilla essent omnia.” Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 45.
[124] The author here alludes to the figures of the Egyptian deities
that were engraven on rings.
[125] His specific office was to execute vengeance on the impious.
[126] “sola utramque paginam facit.” The words _utraque pagina_
generally refer to the two sides of the same sheet, but, in this
passage, they probably mean the contiguous portions of the same surface.
[127] “astroque suo eventu assignat;” the word _astrum_ appears to
be synonymous with _sidus_, generally signifying a single star, and,
occasionally, a constellation; as in Manilius, i. 541, 2.
“... quantis bis sena ferantur
Finibus astra....”
It is also used by synecdoche for the heavens, as is the case with the
English word _stars_. See Gesner’s Thesaurus.
[128] “Quæ si suscipiamus, pedis offensio nobis ... et sternutamenta
erunt observanda.” Cicero, De Nat. Deor. ii. 84.
[129] “Divus Augustus.” The epithet _divus_ may be regarded as merely
a term of court etiquette, because all the Emperors after death were
deified _ex officio_.
[130] We learn the exact nature of this ominous accident from
Suetonius; “... si mane sibi calceus perperam, et sinister pro dextro
induceretur;” Augustus, Cap. 92. From this passage it would appear,
that the Roman sandals were made, as we term it, right and left.
[131] It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the opinions here
stated respecting the Deity are taken partly from the tenets of the
Epicureans, combined with the Stoical doctrine of Fate. The examples
which are adduced to prove the power of fate over the Deity are, for
the most part, rather verbal than essential.
[132] “affixa mundo.” The peculiar use of the word _mundus_ in this
passage is worthy of remark, in connexion with note [86], ch. 1.
page 13.
[133] We have many references in Pliny to the influence of the
stars upon the earth and its inhabitants, constituting what was
formerly regarded as so important a science, judicial astrology.
Ptolemy has drawn up a regular code of it in his “Centum dicta,” or
“Centiloquiums.” We have a highly interesting account of the supposed
science, its origin, progress, and general principles, in Whewell’s
History of the Inductive Sciences, p. 293 _et seq._ I may also refer to
the same work for a sketch of the history of astronomy among the Greeks
and the other nations of antiquity.
[134] There are certain metaphorical expressions, which have originated
from this opinion, adopted by the moderns; “his star is set;” “the star
of his fortune,” &c.
[135] Ovid, when he compares Phaëton to a falling star, remarks,
concerning this meteor,—
“Etsi non cecidit, potuit cecidisse videri.” Metam. ii. 322.
[136] Manilius supposes that comets are produced and rendered luminous
by an operation very similar to the one described in the text; i. 815
_et seq._ Seneca, in the commencement of his Nat. Quæst., and in other
parts of the same treatise, refers to this subject. His remarks may be
worth perusing by those who are curious to learn the hypotheses of the
ancients on subjects of natural science. We may remark, that Seneca’s
opinions are, on many points, more correct than our author’s.
[137] The author probably refers to that part of his work in which he
treats on agriculture, particularly to the 17th and 18th books.
[138] The æra of the Olympiads commenced in the year 776 before
Christ; each olympiad consists of 4 years; the 58th olympiad will
therefore include the interval 548 to 544 B.C. The 21st vol. of the
“Universal History” consists entirely of a “chronological table,” and
we have a useful table of the same kind in Brewster’s Encycl., article
“Chronology.”
[139] “rerum fores aperuisse ... traditur.” An account of the astronomy
of Anaximander is contained in Brewster’s Encycl., article “Astronomy,”
p. 587, and in the article “Anaximander” in the supplement to the same
work by Scott of Aberdeen. I may remark, that these two accounts do
not quite agree in their estimate of his merits; the latter author
considers his opinions more correct. We have also an account of
Anaximander in Stanley, pt. 2. p. 1 _et seq._, and in Enfield, i. 154
_et seq._
[140] In the translation of Ajasson, ii. 261-7, we have some valuable
observations by Marcus, respecting the origin and progress of astronomy
among the Greeks, and the share which the individuals mentioned in the
text respectively had in its advancement; also some interesting remarks
on the history of Atlas. Diodorus Siculus says, that “he was the first
that discovered the knowledge of the sphere; whence arose the common
opinion, that he carried the world upon his shoulders.” Booth’s trans.
p. 115.
[141] “nunc relicto mundi ipsius corpore, reliqua inter cœlum terrasque
tractentur.” I have already had occasion to remark upon the various
modes in which the author uses the word _mundus_; by _cœlum_, in
this passage, he means the body or region beyond the planets, which
is conceived to contain the fixed stars. _Sphæra_, in the preceding
sentence, may be supposed to mean the celestial globe.
[142] “ac trigesimo anno ad brevissima sedis suæ principia regredi;” I
confess myself unable to offer any literal explanation of this passage;
nor do the remarks of the commentators appear to me satisfactory; see
Hardouin and Alexandre in Lemaire, ii. 241, 2. It is translated by
Ajasson “en trente ans il reviens à l’espace minime d’où il est parti.”
The period of the sidereal revolutions of the planets, as stated by
Mrs. Somerville, in her “Mechanism of the Heavens,” and by Sir J.
Herschel, in his “Treatise on Astronomy,” are respectively as follows:—
days. days.
Mercury 87·9705 87·9692580
Venus 224·7 224·7007869
Earth 365·2564 365·2563612
Mars 686·99 686·9796458
Jupiter 4332·65 4332·5848212
Saturn 10759·4 10759·2198174
Somerville, p. 358. Herschel, p. 416.
[143] “‘mundo;’ hoc est, cœlo inerrantium stellarum.” Hardouin, in
Lemaire, ii. 242.
[144] Our author supposes, that the spectator has his face directed
towards the south, as is the case with the modern observers. We are,
however, informed by Hardouin, that this was not the uniform practice
among the ancients; see the remarks of Alexandre in Lemaire, ii. 242,
and of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 269.
[145] The _constant revolution_ refers to the apparent daily
motion; the _opposite direction_ to their annual course through the
zodiac. Ptolemy gives an account of this double motion in his Magna
Constructio, i. 7.
[146] For the exact period, according to Somerville and Herschel, see
note [142], p. 27.
[147] Aristotle informs us, that Mars was also called Hercules or
Pyrosis; De Mundo, cap. ii. p. 602. See also Apuleius, De Mundo, § 710.
Hyginus is said by Hardouin to give the name of Hercules to the planet
Mars, but this appears to be an inaccuracy; he describes the planet
under its ordinary appellation; lib. ii. p. 62; and ii. 78, 9.
[148] Cicero, speaking of the period of Mars, says, “Quatuor et viginti
mensibus, sex, ut opinor, diebus minus;” De Nat. Deor. For the exact
period, see note [142], p. 27.
[149] “Sed ut observatio umbrarum ejus redeat ad notas.” According to
the interpretation of Hardouin, “Ad easdem lineas in solari horologio.”
Lemaire, ii. 243.
[150] This is an example of the mode of computation which we meet with
among the ancients, where, in speaking of the period of a revolution,
both the time preceding and that following the interval are included.
[151] The division of the planets into superior and inferior was not
known to Aristotle, De Mundo, cap. ii. p. 602, to Plato, Timæus, p.
318, 319, or the older Greek astronomers. It was first made by the
Egyptians, and was transferred from them to the Romans. It is one of
the points in which our author differs from Aristotle. See the remarks
of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 242 _et seq._ Marcus notices the various
points which prove the deficiency of Pliny’s knowledge of astronomy; he
particularizes the four following:—his ignorance of the true situation
of the constellations; his erroneous opinion respecting the cause of
the seasons; his account of the phases of the moon, and of the position
of the cardinal points. He appears not to have been aware, that certain
astronomical phænomena undergo a regular progression, but supposed that
they remained, at the time when he wrote, in the same state as in the
age of Hipparchus or the original observers. Columella, when treating
on these subjects, describes the phænomena according to the ancient
calculation, but he informs us, that he adopts it, because it was the
one in popular use, and better known by the farmers (De Re Rust. ix.
14), while Pliny appears not to have been aware of the inaccuracy.
[152] “Modo solem antegrediens, modo subsequens.” Hardouin in Lemaire,
ii. 243.
[153] It was not known to the earlier writers that Lucifer and Vesper
were the same star, differently situated with respect to the Sun.
Playfair remarks, that Venus is the only planet mentioned in the sacred
writings, and in the most ancient poets, such as Hesiod and Homer;
Outlines, ii. 156.
[154] There has been much discussion among the commentators respecting
the correctness of the figures in the text; according to the æra of the
olympiads, the date referred to will be between the years 750 and 754
B.C.; the foundation of Rome is commonly referred to the year 753 B.C.
See the remarks of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 278, 9.
[155] Aristotle informs us, that it was called either Phosphorus, Juno,
or Venus; De Mundo, cap. 2. t. i. p. 602. See also Hyginus, Poet. Astr.
lib. iii. p. 76, 7; and Apuleius, De Mundo, § 710.
[156] It will be scarcely necessary to refer the reader to the
well-known commencement of Lucretius’s poem for the illustration of
this passage; it is remarkable that Pliny does not refer to this writer.
[157] The periodical revolution of Venus is 224·7 days, see note
[142], p. 27. Its greatest elongation is 47° 1′; Somerville, § 641.
p. 391.
[158] According to Aristotle, this planet had the three appellations
of Stilbon, Mercury, and Apollo; De Mundo, cap. 2. p. 602; see also
Apuleius, De Mundo, § 710. Cicero inverts the order of the planets;
he places Mercury next to Mars, and says of Venus, that it is “infima
quinque errantium, terræque proxima;” De Nat. Deor. ii. 53. Aristotle
places the stars in the same order, _ubi supra_, and he is followed in
this by Apuleius, _ubi supra_; this appears to have been the case with
the Stoics generally; see Enfield’s Phil. i. 339.
[159] For the periodical revolution of Mercury see note[142], p. 27.
Its greatest elongation, according to Playfair, p. 160, is 28°. Mrs.
Somerville, p. 386, states it to be 28° 8′. Ptolemy supposed it to be
26·5 degrees; Almagest, ix. 7. We learn from Hardouin, Lemaire, i. 246,
that there is considerable variation in the MSS. with respect to the
greatest elongation of Mercury.
[160] Sosigenes was an Egyptian mathematician and astronomer, who is
said to have assisted Cæsar in the formation of his Kalendar, as our
author informs us in a subsequent part of his work, xviii. 25; see also
Aikin, Gen. Biog., _in loco_; Enfield’s Phil. ii. 96; Whewell, p. 210;
and Hardouin’s “Index Auctorum,” in Lemaire, i. 213.
[161] Concerning the “magnus annus” Cicero remarks, “efficitur cum
solis et lunæ et quinque errantium ad eandem inter se comparationem,
confectis omnibus spatiis, est facta conversio.” De Nat. Deor. ii. 51.
See the remarks of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 281-3.
[162] For the various appellations which the moon has received in the
ancient and modern languages, and their relation to each other, the
reader is referred to the learned remarks of Marcus in Ajasson, ii.
283-5.
[163] Marcus conceives that the epithet _maculosa_ does not refer to
what are called the spots on the moon, but to the circumstance of
the edge of the disc being not illuminated when it is near the full;
Ajasson, ii. 286. But, from the way in which the word is employed at
the end of the chapter, and from the explanation which is given of the
cause of the “maculæ,” I think it ought to be referred to the spotted
appearance of the face of the moon.
[164] “Quum laborare non creditur.” It was a vulgar notion among the
ancients, that when the moon is eclipsed, she is suffering from the
influence of magicians and enchanters, who are endeavouring to draw
her down to the earth, in order to aid them in their superstitious
ceremonies. It was conceived that she might be relieved from her
sufferings by loud noises of various kinds which should drown the songs
of the magicians. Allusion is frequently made to this custom by the
ancient poets, as Virgil, Æn. i. 742, Manilius, i. 227, and Juvenal,
vi. 444; and the language has been transferred to the moderns, as in
Beattie’s Minstrel, ii. 47, “To ease of fancied pangs the labouring
moon.”
[165] We have some interesting remarks by Marcus respecting Endymion,
and also on the share which Solon and Thales had in correcting the
lunar observations; Ajasson, ii. 288-290.
[166] “Lucem nobis aperuere in hac luce.”
[167] “Cardo.”
[168] Astronomers describe two different revolutions or periods of the
moon; the synodical and the sidereal. The synodical marks the time in
which the moon passes from one conjunction with the sun to the next
conjunction, or other similar position with respect to the sun. The
sidereal period is the time in which the moon returns to the same
position with respect to the stars, or in which it makes a complete
revolution round the earth. These numbers are, for the synodical
period, 29ᵈ 12ʰ 44ᵐ 2·87ˢ, and for the sidereal, 27ᵈ 7ʰ 43ᵐ 11·5ˢ;
Herschel, pp. 213, 224.
[169] Our author, as Marcus remarks, “a compté par nombres ronds;”
Ajasson, ii. 291; the correct number may be found in the preceding note.
[170] It was a general opinion among the ancients, and one which
was entertained until lately by many of the moderns, that the moon
possessed the power of evaporating the water of the ocean. This opinion
appears to have been derived, at least in part, from the effect which
the moon produces on the tides.
[171] “quantum ex sole ipsa concipiat;” from this passage, taken
singly, it might be concluded, that the author supposed the quantity
of light received by the moon to differ at different times; but the
succeeding sentence seems to prove that this is not the case; see the
remarks of Alexandre in Lemaire, ii. 249. Marcus, however, takes a
different view of the subject; Ajasson, ii. 291, 292. He had previously
pointed out Pliny’s opinion respecting the phases of the moon, as one
of the circumstances which indicate his ignorance of astronomy, _ut
supra_, ii. 245, 246.
[172] This doctrine is maintained by Seneca, Quæst. Nat. lib. ii. §
5. p. 701, 702. From the allusion which is made to it by Anacreon, in
his 19th ode, we may presume that it was the current opinion among the
ancients.
[173] I may remark, that Poinsinet, in this passage, substitutes
“umbra” for “umbræque,” contrary to the authority of all the MSS.,
merely because it accords better with his ideas of correct reasoning.
Although it may be of little consequence in this particular sentence,
yet, as such liberties are not unfrequently taken, I think it
necessary to state my opinion, that this mode of proceeding is never
to be admitted, and that it has proved a source of serious injury to
classical literature. In this account of the astronomical phenomena,
as well as in all the other scientific dissertations that occur in
our author, my aim has been to transfer into our language the exact
sense of the original, without addition or correction. Our object in
reading Pliny is not to acquire a knowledge of natural philosophy,
which might be better learned from the commonest elementary work of the
present day, but to ascertain what were the opinions of the learned
on such subjects when Pliny wrote. I make this remark, because I have
seldom if ever perused a translation of any classical author, where, on
scientific topics, the translator has not endeavoured, more or less, to
correct the mistakes of the original, and to adapt his translation to
the state of modern science.
[174] The terms here employed are respectively _interventus_,
_objectio_, and _interpositus_; it may be doubted whether the author
intended to employ them in the precise sense which is indicated by
their etymology.
[175] “metæ et turbini inverso.” The _metæ_ were small pyramids placed
at the two extremities of the spina, or central division of the circus:
see Montfaucon, v. iii. p. 176; Adam, p. 341.
[176] The eclipses of the moon are only visible when the spectator is
so situated as to be able to observe the shadow of the earth, or is on
that side of the earth which is turned from the sun.
[177] “non semper in scrupulis partium congruente siderum motu.” On
the term _scrupulus_ Hardouin remarks, “Scrupuli, nodi sunt, in quibus
circuli, quos in suo cursu Sol et Luna efficiunt, se mutuo secant.”
Lemaire, ii. 251. Ptolemy, Magn. Const. vi. 6-11, gives a full and
generally correct account of the principal phænomena of eclipses.
[178] Marcus conceives that our author must here mean, not the actual,
but the apparent size of these bodies; Ajasson, ii. 295; but I do not
perceive that the text authorizes this interpretation.
[179] I have given the simple translation of the original as it
now stands in the MSS.; whether these may have been corrupted, or
the author reasoned incorrectly, I do not venture to decide. The
commentators have, according to their usual custom, proposed various
emendations and explanations, for which I may refer to the note of
Hardouin in Lemaire, ii. 252, with the judicious remarks of Alexandre,
and to those of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 295-298, who appear to me to
take a correct view of the subject.
[180] Alexandre remarks, “Hinc tamen potius distantia quam magnitudo
Solis colligi potest.” Lemaire, ii. 252. And the same remark applies to
the two next positions of our author.
[181] Alexandre remarks on the argument of our author, perhaps a little
too severely, “Absurde dictum; nam aliis oritur, aliis occidit, dum
aliis est a vertice; quod vel pueri sentiunt.” Lemaire, ii. 253. But
we may suppose, that Pliny, in this passage, only meant to say, that
as the sun became vertical to each successive part of the equinoctial
district, no shadows were formed in it.
[182] The commentators have thought it necessary to discuss the
question, whether, in this passage, Pliny refers to the Ida of Crete
or of Asia Minor. But the discussion is unnecessary, as the statement
of the author is equally inapplicable to both of them. Mela appears to
refer to this opinion in the following passage, where he is describing
the Ida of Asia Minor; “ipse mens ... orientem solem aliter quam in
aliis terris solet aspici, ostentat.” lib. i. cap. 18.
[183] “Ut dictum est superiore capite, quo Plinius falso contendit
Terram esse Luna minorem.” Alexandre in Lemaire, ii. 253. The words of
the text, however, apply equally to the comparative size of the earth
and the sun, as of the earth and the moon.
[184] “turbo rectus;” literally an upright top.
[185] “meta.”
[186] This has been pointed out as one of our author’s erroneous
opinions on astronomy. The earth is really about 1/30 nearer the sun in
our winters than in our summers. The greater degree of heat produced
by his rays in the latter case depends upon their falling on the
surface of the earth less obliquely. This is the principal cause of the
different temperatures of the equatorial and polar regions.
[187] This eclipse is calculated to have occurred on the 28th of June,
168 B.C.; Brewster’s Encyc. “Chronology,” p. 415, 424. We have an
account of this transaction in Livy, xliv. 37, and in Plutarch, Life of
Paulus Æmilius, Langhorne’s trans. ii. 279; he however does not mention
the name of Gallus. See also Val. Maximus, viii. 11. 1, and Quintilian,
i. 10. Val. Maximus does not say that Gallus predicted the eclipse, but
explained the cause of it when it had occurred; and the same statement
is made by Cicero, De Repub. i. 15. For an account of Sulpicius, see
Hardouin’s Index auctorum, Lemaire, i. 214.
[188] An account of this event is given by Herodotus, Clio, § 74. There
has been the same kind of discussion among the commentators, respecting
the dates in the text, as was noticed above, note [154], p. 29: see the
remarks of Brotier and of Marcus in Lemaire and Ajasson, _in loco_.
Astronomers have calculated that the eclipse took place May 28th, 585
B.C.; Brewster, _ut supra_, pp. 414, 419.
[189] Hipparchus is generally regarded as the first astronomer who
prosecuted the science in a regular and systematic manner. See Whewell,
C. 3. p. 169 _et seq._, 177-179. He is supposed to have made his
observations between the years 160 and 125 B.C. He made a catalogue of
the fixed stars, which is preserved in Ptolemy’s Magn. Const. The only
work of his now extant is his commentary on Aratus; it is contained in
Petau’s Uranologie. We find, among the ancients, many traces of their
acquaintance with the period of 600 years, or what is termed the great
year, when the solar and lunar phænomena recur precisely at the same
points. Cassini, Mem. Acad., and Bailly, Hist. Anc. Astron., have shown
that there is an actual foundation for this opinion. See the remarks of
Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 302, 303.
[190] Seneca, the tragedian, refers to this superstitious opinion in
some beautiful verses, which are given to the chorus at the termination
of the fourth act of the Thyestes.
[191] We have an account of this event in Thucydides, Smith’s trans.
ii. 244, and in Plutarch, Langhorne’s trans. iii. 406. It is calculated
to have happened Aug. 27th, 413 B.C.; Brewster, _ut supra_, p. 415, 421.
[192] The elegant lines of Ovid, in his Fasti, i. 297 _et seq._,
express the same sentiment: “Felices animos, quibus hoc cognoscere
primis,” &c.
[193] I have already remarked upon the use of this term as applied to
the eclipses of the moon in note [164], p. 31.
[194] According to the remarks of Marcus, it appears probable that
this sol-lunar period, as it has been termed, was discovered by the
Chaldeans; Ajasson, ii. 306, 307.
[195] “coitus.”
[196] “Hoc enim periodo (223 mensium) plerumque redeunt eclipses, non
multum differentes, denis tamen gradibus zodiaci antecedentes;” Kepler,
as quoted by Alexandre, in Lemaire, ii. 238.
[197] The terms “sub terra” and “superne” are interpreted, by most of
the commentators, below and above the horizon respectively; see Marcus
in Ajasson, ii. 307.
[198] “globo terræ obstante convexitatibus mundi.” The term _convexus_,
as applied to the heavens, or visible firmament, simply signifies
_arched_; not opposed to _concave_, like the English word _convex_.
[199] This point is discussed by Ptolemy, Magn. Const. vi. 6; “De
distantia eclipticorum mensium.” See also the remarks of Hardouin in
Lemaire, ii. 260, 261; and of Poinsinet, i. 67.
[200] These are styled horizontal eclipses; they depend on the
refractive power of the atmosphere, causing the sun to be visible above
the horizon, although it is actually below it. Brotier states, that
eclipses of this description occurred on the 17th July, 1590, on the
30th November, 1648, and on the 16th January, 1660; Lemaire, ii. 260.
[201] This is supposed to have been in the year 72 of our æra, when it
is said that the sun was eclipsed, in Italy, on the 8th, and the moon
on the 22nd of February; see Hardouin and Alexandre, in Lemaire, ii.
261.
[202] In a subsequent part of the work, xviii. 75, the author gives
a different rate of increase, viz. 51-1/2 minutes; neither of these
numbers is correct; the mean rate of increase being, according to
Alexandre, about 54′ or 55′; Lemaire, ii. 261, 262. See also Marcus in
Ajasson, ii. 311-14.
[203] It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the effect, as here
stated, has no connexion with the supposed cause.
[204] “luminum canonica.”
[205] Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn.
[206] They are then said, in astronomical language, to rise heliacally.
[207] In the last chapter this distance was stated to be 7 degrees; see
the remarks of Alexandre, in Lemaire, ii. 263.
[208] “radiorum ejus contactu reguntur.” The doctrine of the ancient
astronomers was, that the motions of the planets are always governed by
the rays of the sun, according to its position, attracting or repelling
them.
[209] A planet appears to be stationary, _i. e._ to be referred to
the same point of the zodiac, when it is so situated with respect to
the earth, that a straight line passing through the two bodies forms
a tangent to the smaller orbit. The apparent motion of the planets,
sometimes direct and at other times retrograde, with their stationary
positions, is occasioned by the earth and the planets moving in
concentric orbits, with different velocities. One hundred and twenty
degrees is the mean distance at which the three superior planets become
stationary. We have an elaborate dissertation by Marcus, on the unequal
velocities of the planets, and on their stations and retrogradations,
as well according to the system of Aristotle as to that of Copernicus;
Ajasson, ii. 316 _et seq._ He remarks, and, I conceive, with justice,
“... ce n’est pas dans les traités d’astronomie de nos savans que l’on
doit puiser les détails destinés à éclaircir le texte des chapitres
xii, xiii, xiv et xv du second livre de Pline.... Je ne dis rien des
commentaires de Poinsinet, d’Hardouin et d’autres savans peu versés
en matière d’astronomie, qui ont fait dire à Pline les plus grandes
absurdités.”
[210] “Occasus planetæ vespertinus dicitur, quo die desinit post
occasum solis supra horizontem oculis se præbere manifestum;” Alexandre
in Lemaire, ii. 265. It is then said to set heliacally.
[211] The interpretation of this passage has given rise to much
discussion among the commentators and translators; I may refer the
reader to the remarks of Poinsinet, i. 70, 71; of Alexandre in Lemaire,
ii. 266; and of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 328. I conceive the meaning
of the author to be, that while the other planets become stationary,
when at 120 degrees from the sun, Mars becomes so at 90 degrees,
being detained by the rays, which act upon him more powerfully, in
consequence of his being nearer to their source.
[212] I may refer to the remarks of Marcus on the respective distances
from the sun at which Venus and Mercury become stationary, and when
they attain their greatest elongations; Ajasson, ii. 328, 329.
According to Ptolemy, Magn. Constr. lib. viii. cap. 7, the evening
setting of Venus is at 5° 40′ from the sun, and that of Mercury at 11°
30′.
[213] “Ἁψὶς, ligneus rotæ circulus, ab ἅπτω necto;” Hederic _in loco_.
The term is employed in a somewhat different sense by the modern
astronomers, to signify the point in the orbit of a planet, when it
is either at the greatest or the least distance from the earth, or
the body about which it revolves; the former being termed the apogee,
aphelion, or the higher apsis; the latter the perigee, perhelion, or
lower apsis; Jennings on the Globes, pp. 64, 65.
[214] “mundo.”
[215] “ratione circini semper indubitata.”
[216] In consequence of the precession of the equinoxes these points
are continually advancing from W. to E., and are now about 30 degrees
from the situation they were in when the observations were first made
by the modern astronomers.
[217] Our author here probably refers to the motions of the planets
through their epicycles or secondary circles, the centres of which were
supposed to be in the peripheries of the primary circles. See Alexandre
in Lemaire, ii. 270.
[218] It is to this visible appearance of convexity in the heavens that
Ovid refers in the story of Phaëton, where he is describing the daily
path of the sun; Metam. ii. 63-67.
[219] “quam quod illi subjacet;” under this designation the author
obviously meant to include the temperate zones, although it technically
applies only to the part between the tropics. It is scarcely necessary
to remark, that modern discoveries have shown that this opinion
respecting the Arctic zone is not strictly correct.
[220] The breadth of the zodiac, which was limited by the ancients
to 12 degrees, has been extended by the modern astronomers to 18,
and would require to be much farther extended to include the newly
discovered planet. Herschel’s Astronomy, § 254.
[221] There is considerable difficulty in ascertaining the meaning
of the terms employed by our author in describing the course of
the planet Mercury through the zodiac; “medio ejus,” “supra,” and
“infra.” Hardouin’s comment is as follows: “Duas zodiaci partes seu
gradus pererrat, quum ipse per medium incedit signiferum: supra, quum
deflectit ad Aquilonem, per quatuor alias ejusdem partes vagatur:
infra, quum descendit ad Austrum, discedit duabus.” Lemaire, ii. 271,
272. But Marcus has shown that the opinion of Hardouin is inadmissible
and inconsistent with the facts; Ajasson, ii. 338-341. He proposes one,
which he conceives to be more correct, but we may probably be led to
the conclusion, that the imperfect knowledge and incorrect opinions of
our author on these subjects must render it impossible to afford an
adequate explanation.
[222] “flexuoso draconum meatu;” Poinsinet remarks, “Les Grecs ...
appellaient dragons les bracelets, les hausse-cols, les chainettes, et
généralement tout ce qui avait une figure armillaire;” i. 79, 80.
[223] As this remark appears to contradict what was said in the last
sentence respecting the sun, we may suspect some error in the text; see
Poinsinet, Alexandre, and Marcus, _in loco_.
[224] The following comparative statement is given by Alexandre of the
geocentric latitudes of the planets, as assigned by Pliny, and as laid
down by the moderns. Lemaire, ii. 273:—
_Pliny._ _Moderns._
Venus 8° 9° 22′
Moon 6 6 0
Mercury 5 6 54
Mars 2 0 1 51
Jupiter 1 30 1 30
Saturn 1 (or 2°) 2 30
[225] It appears from the remark at the end of this chapter, that this
explanation applies to the superior planets alone.
[226] It is not easy, as Marcus observes, Ajasson, ii. 341, 345, to
comprehend the exact meaning of this passage, or to reconcile it with
the other parts of our author’s theory.
[227] “Ecliptica,” called by the moderns the nodes; i. e. the two
points where the orbits of the planets cut the ecliptic. See the
remarks of Marcus on this term; Ajasson, ii. 345, 346.
[228] We may presume that our author here refers to the apparent motion
of the planets, not to their actual acceleration or retardation.
[229] The editors have differed in the reading of this passage; I have
followed that of Lemaire.
[230] “incipit detrahi numerus.” According to the explanation of
Alexandre, “numerus nempe partium quas certo temporis intervallo
emetiuntur.” Lemaire, ii. 275. Marcus remarks in this place, “Dans tout
ce chapitre et dans le suivant, Pline a placé dans une correlation de
causité, tout ce qu’il croit arriver en même temps; mais il n’a pas
prouvé par-là que les phenomènes célestes qui sont contemporains sont
engendrés les uns par les autres.” Ajasson, ii. 349.
[231] The hypothesis of Pliny appears to be, that the planets are
affected by the rays of the sun, and that according to the angle at
which they receive the impulse, they are either accelerated or retarded
in their course.
[232] “ex priore triquetro.”
[233] Alexandre supposes, as I conceive justly, that our author, in
this passage, only refers to the writings of his own countrymen;
Lemaire, ii. 276.
[234] According to Ptolemy, these numbers are respectively 47° 51′ and
24° 3′; the modern astronomers have ascertained them to be 48° and 29°.
The least elongations of the planets are, according to Ptolemy, 44° 7′
and 18° 50′, and according to the observations of the moderns, 45° and
16°; Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 354.
[235] I have not translated the clause, “quum sint diversæ stelæ,” as,
according to Hardouin, it is not found “in probatissimis codd.,” and
appears to have little connexion with the other parts of the sentence;
it is omitted by Valpy and Lemaire, but is retained by Poinsinet and
Ajasson.
[236] When these inferior planets have arrived at a certain apparent
distance from the sun, they are come to the extent of their orbits, as
seen from the earth.
[237] “Quum ad illam Solis distantiam pervenerunt, ultra procedere
non possunt, deficiente circuli longitudine, id est, amplitudine.”
Alexandre in Lemaire, ii. 277.
[238] The transits of the inferior planets had not been observed by the
ancients.
[239] “utroque modo;” “latitudine et altitudine;” Hardouin in Lemaire,
ii. 279.
[240] “Catholica.”
[241] “... quæ (stella Martis) ut maxime excentrica volvitur, motus
etiam maxime dissonos habere diu visa est....;” Alexandre in Lemaire,
ii. 180.
[242] “... qui numerus sexangulas mundi efficit formas.”
[243] Lynceus was one of the Argonauts and was celebrated for the
acuteness of his vision; Val. Flaccus, i. 462 _et seq._
[244] The relative situation of these astronomical phænomena has
changed since the time of Pliny, in consequence of the precession of
the equinoxes. For an illustration and explanation of the various
statements in this chapter I may refer to the remarks of Marcus in
Ajasson, ii. 368-370.
[245] Ptolemy’s account of the colours of the planets is nearly similar
to that of our author; “Candidus color Jovialis est, rutilus Martius,
flavus Veneris, varius Mercurii;” De Jur. Astrol. ii. 9.
[246] This effect cannot be produced by any of the planets, except
perhaps, to a certain extent, by Venus.
[247] “mundi.”
[248] It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the method which Pliny
employs to explain the different phases of the moon betrays his
ignorance, not only of the cause of these particular phænomena, but
of the general principles which affect the appearance of the heavenly
bodies.
[249] “seminani ambitur orbe.” According to the interpretation of
Hardouin, “Orbe non perfecto et absoluto;” “major dimidia, minor
plena;” Lemaire, ii. 284.
[250] As Alexandre justly remarks, our author refers here to the
aspects only of the planets, not to their phases; ii. 284.
[251] “centrum terræ;” the equator, the part equally distant from the
two poles or extremities.
[252] It may be remarked, that the equinoxes did not actually take
place at this period in the points mentioned by Pliny, but in the
28th degrees of Pisces and Virgo respectively; he appears to have
conformed to the popular opinion, as we may learn from Columella, lib.
ix. cap. 14. The degrees mentioned above were those fixed by the Greek
astronomers who formed the celestial sphere, and which was about 138
years before the Christian æra. See the remarks of Marcus in Ajasson,
ii. 246 & 373, 374.
[253] The same remark applies to this as to the former observation.
[254] “siderum.”
[255] The hypothesis of the author is, that the excess of moisture in
the orbit of Saturn, and the excess of heat in that of Mars, unite in
the orbit of Jupiter and are discharged in the form of thunder.
[256] Alexandre remarks, that Pliny mentions this, not as his own
opinion, but that of _many_ persons; for, in chap. 21, he attempts to
prove mathematically, that the moon is situated at an equal distance
between the sun and the earth; Lemaire, ii. 286.
[257] Marcus remarks upon the inconsistency between the account here
given of Pythagoras’s opinion, and what is generally supposed to have
been his theory of the planetary system, according to which the sun,
and not the earth, is placed in the centre; Enfield’s Philosophy, i.
288, 289. Yet we find that Plato, and many others among the ancients,
give us the same account of Pythagoras’s doctrine of the respective
distances of the heavenly bodies; Ajasson, ii. 374. Plato in his
Timæus, 9. p. 312-315, details the complicated arrangement which he
supposes to constitute the proportionate distances of the planetary
bodies.
[258] Sulpicius has already been mentioned, in the ninth chapter of
this book, as being the first among the Romans who gave a popular
explanation of the cause of eclipses.
[259] “Διὰ πασῶν, omnibus tonis contextam harmoniam.” Hardouin in
Lemaire, ii. 287.
[260] These appellations appear to have originated from different
nations having assumed different notes as the foundation or
commencement of their musical scale. The Abbé Barthelemi informs
us, that “the Dorians executed the same air a tone lower than the
Phrygians, and the latter a tone still higher than the Lydians; hence
the denomination of the Dorian, Phrygian, and Lydian modes.” It appears
to have been a general practice to employ the lowest modes for the
slowest airs; Anacharsis’s Travels, iii. 73, 74.
[261] Hence the passus will be equal to 5 Roman feet. If we estimate
the Roman foot at 11·6496 English inches, we shall have the _miliare_
of 8 stadia equal to 1618 English yards, or 142 yards less than an
English statute mile. See Adam’s Roman Antiquities, p. 503; also the
articles Miliare and Pes in Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman
Antiquities; and for the varieties of the stadium, as employed at
different periods and in different countries, see the article Stadium.
The stadium which Herodotus employed in measurements of Babylon has
been supposed to consist of 490 English feet, while that of Xenophon
and Strabo has been estimated at 505; see Ed. Rev. xlviii. 190. The
Abbé Barthelemi supposes the stadium to be equal to 604 English feet;
Anach. Travels, vii. 284.
[262] There appears to have been two individuals of this name, who
have been confounded with each other; the one referred to by Pliny was
an astronomer of Alexandria, who flourished about 260 years B.C.; the
other was a native of Apamea, a stoic philosopher, who lived about two
centuries later; see Aikin’s Biog. _in loco_; also Hardouin’s Index
Auctorum, Lemaire, i. 209.
[263] The terms in the original are respectively _nubila_ and _nubes_.
The lexicographers and grammarians do not appear to have accurately
discriminated between these two words.
[264] The words in the text are “vicies centum millia” and “quinquies
millia.”
[265] Archimedes estimated that the diameter of a circle is to its
circumference as 1 to 3·1416; Hutton’s Dict. _in loco_. Ptolemy states
it to be precisely as 1 to 3; Magn. Const. i. 12.
[266] The author’s reasoning is founded upon the supposition of the
length of the sun’s path round the earth being twelve times greater
than that of the moon’s; the orbit therefore would be twelve times
greater and the radius in the same proportion.
[267] “Non inter Lunam et Saturnum, sed inter Lunam et cœlum affixarum
stellarum, medium esse Solem modo dixerat. Quam parum sui meminit!”
Alexandre in Lem. i. 291.
[268] “Qui computandi modus plurimum habet verecundiæ et modestiæ, quum
ibi sistit, nec ulterius progreditur.” Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 292.
[269] “... ad Saturni circulum addito Signiferi ipsius intervallo, ...”
[270] We may remark, that our author, for the most part, adopts the
opinions of Aristotle respecting comets and meteors of all kinds, while
he pays but little attention to those of his contemporary Seneca,
which however, on some points, would appear to be more correct.
See the remarks of Marcus in Ajasson, ii. 244. Under the title of
comets he includes, not only those bodies which are permanent and
move in regular orbits, but such as are transient, and are produced
from various causes, the nature of which is not well understood. See
Aristotle, Meteor. lib. i. cap. 6, 7, and Seneca, Nat. Quæst. lib. 7,
and Manilius, i. 807 _et seq._
[271] a κόμη, coma.
[272] a πωγωνίος, barbatus. Most of these terms are employed by
Aristotle and by Seneca.
[273] ab ἀκόντιον, jaculum.
[274] a ξίφος, ensis.
[275] a δίσκος, orbis.
[276] a πίθος, dolium. Seneca describes this species as “magnitudo
vasti rotundique ignis dolio similis;” Nat. Quæst. lib. i. § 14. p. 964.
[277] a κέρας, cornu.
[278] a λαμπὰς, fax.
[279] ab ἵππος, equus. Seneca mentions the fax, the jaculum, and the
lampas among the prodigies that preceded the civil wars; Phars. i. 528
_et seq._
[280] Alexandre remarks, that these dates do not correspond, and adds,
“Desperandum est de Pliniana chronologia; nec satis interdum scio,
utrum librarios, an scriptorem ipsum incusem,....” Lemaire, i. 295.
According to the most approved modern chronology, the middle of the
109th olympiad corresponds to the 211th year of the City.
[281] “errantium modo;” this may mean, that they move in orbits like
those of the planets and exhibit the same phænomena, or simply that
they change their situation with respect to the fixed stars.
[282] Seneca remarks on this point, “Placet igitur nostris (Stoicis)
cometas ... denso aëri creari. Ideo circa Septemtrionem frequentissime
apparent, quia illic plurimi est aëris frigor.” Quæst. Nat. i. 7.
Aristotle, on the contrary, remarks that comets are less frequently
produced in the northern part of the heavens; Meteor. lib. i. cap. 6.
p. 535.
[283] _Ubi supra._
[284] See Aristotle, _ut supra_, p. 537.
[285] “Videtur is non cometes fuisse, sed meteorus quidam ignis;”
Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 296.
[286] Virgil, Geor. i. 488 _et seq._, Manilius, i. 904 _et seq._, and
Lucan, i. 526 _et seq._, all speak of the comets and meteors that
were observed previous to the civil wars between Pompey and Cæsar. In
reference to the existence of a comet about the time of Julius Cæsar,
Playfair remarks, that Halley supposed the great comet of 1680 to
have been the same that appeared in the year 44 A.C., and again in
Justinian’s time, 521 P.C., and also in 1106; Elem. Nat. Phil. ii. 197,
198. See Ptolemy’s Cent. Dict. no. 100, for the opinion, that comets
presented an omen especially unfavourable to kings. To this opinion the
following passage in the Paradise Lost obviously refers; “And with fear
of change perplexes monarchs.”
[287] Seneca refers to the four comets that were seen, after the death
of Cæsar, in the time of Augustus, of Claudius, and of Nero; Quæst.
Nat. i. 7. Suetonius mentions the comet which appeared previous to the
death of Claudius, cap. 46, and Tacitus that before the death of Nero,
Ann. xiv. 22.
[288] “A Julio Cæsare. Is enim paulo ante obitum collegium his ludis
faciendis instituerat, confecto Veneris templo;” Hardouin in Lemaire,
i. 299. Jul. Obsequens refers to a “stella crinita,” which appeared
during the celebration of these games, cap. 128.
[289] “Hoc est, hora fere integra ante solis occasum;” Hardouin in
Lemaire, i. 299.
[290] All these circumstances are detailed by Suetonius, in Julio, §
88. p. 178.
[291] “terris.”
[292] Seneca remarks, “... quidam nullos esse cometas existimant, sed
species illorum per repercussionem vicinorum siderum,... Quidam aiunt
esse quidem, sed habere cursus suos et post certa lustra in conspectum
mortalium exire.” He concludes by observing, “Veniet tempus, quo ista
quæ nunc latent, in lucem dies extrahat, et longioris diei diligentia;”
Nat. Quæst. lib. 7. § 19. p. 807.
[293] For some account of Hipparchus, see note [189], p. 37.
[294] Nothing is known respecting the nature of these instruments, nor
have we any means of forming even a conjecture upon the subject.
[295] The terms “faces,” “lampades,” “bolides,” and “trabes,” literally
torches, lamps, darts, and beams, which are employed to express
different kinds of meteors, have no corresponding words in English
which would correctly designate them.
[296] From this account it would appear, that the “fax” was what we
term a falling star. “Meteora ista, super cervices nostras transeuntia,
diversaque a stellis labentibus, modo aërolithis ascribenda sunt, modo
vaporibus incensis aut electrica vi prognata videntur, et quamvis
frequentissime recurrant, explicatione adhuc incerta indigent.”
Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 302.
[297] Seneca refers to this meteor; “Vidimus non semel flammam ingenti
pilæ specie, quæ tamen in ipso cursu suo dissipata est ... nec
Germanici mors sine tali demonstratione fuit;” Nat. Quæst, lib. i. cap.
1. p. 683.
[298] This meteor is mentioned by Dion Cassius, lib. xlv. p. 278, but
is described by him as a lampas.
[299] We may presume that the _trabes_ are, for the most part, to be
referred to the aurora borealis. _The chasma_ and the appearances
described in the twenty-seventh chapter are probably varieties of this
meteor. On these phænomena we have the following remarks by Seneca:
“Lucem in aëre, seu quamdam albedinem, angustam quidem, sed oblongam,
de noctu quandoque visam, sereno cœlo, si parallelo situ sit, Trabem
vocant; si perpendiculari, Columnam; si, cum cuspide Bolida, sive
Jaculum.” Nat. Quæst. vii. 4, and again, vii. 5, “Trabes autem non
transcurrunt nec prætervolant, ut faces, sed commorantur, et in eadem
parte cœli collucent.”
[300] Seneca describes this meteor, _ubi supra_, i. 14. “Sunt chasmata,
cum aliquando cœli spatium discedit, et flammam dehiscens velut in
abdito ostentat. Colores quoque horum omnium plurimi sunt. Quidam
ruboris acerrimi, quidam evanidæ et levis flammæ, quidam candidæ lucis,
quidam micantes, quidam æquabiliter et sine eruptionibus aut radiis
fulvi.” Aristotle’s account of chasmata is contained in his Meteor.
lib. i. cap. 5. p. 534.
[301] The meteor here referred to is probably a peculiar form of the
aurora borealis, which occasionally assumes a red colour. See the
remarks of Fouché, in Ajasson, i. 382.
[302] The doctrine of the author appears to be, that the prodigies are
not the cause, but only the indication of the events which succeed
them. This doctrine is referred to by Seneca; “Videbimus an certus
omnium rerum ordo ducatur, et alia aliis ita complexa sint, ut quod
antecedit, aut causa sit sequentium aut signum.” Nat. Quæst. i. 1.
[303] It would appear that, in this passage, two phænomena are
confounded together; certain brilliant stars, as, for example, Venus,
which have been occasionally seen in the day-time, and the formation
of different kinds of halos, depending on certain states of the
atmosphere, which affect its transparency.
[304] This occurrence is mentioned by Seneca, Nat. Quæst. i. 2; he
enters into a detailed explanation of the cause; also by V. Paterculus,
ii. 59, and by Jul. Obsequens, cap. 128. We can scarcely doubt of the
reality of the occurrence, as these authors would not have ventured to
relate what, if not true, might have been so easily contradicted.
[305] The term here employed is “arcus,” which is a portion only of a
circle or “orbis.” But if we suppose that the sun was near the horizon,
a portion only of the halo would be visible, or the condition of the
atmosphere adapted for forming the halo might exist in one part only,
so that a portion of the halo only would be obscured.
[306] The dimness or paleness of the sun, which is stated by various
writers to have occurred at the time of Cæsar’s death, it is
unnecessary to remark, was a phænomenon totally different from an
eclipse, and depending on a totally different cause.
[307] Aristotle, Meteor. lib. iii. cap. 2. p. 575, cap. 6. p. 582, 583,
and Seneca, Quæst. Nat. lib. i. § 11, describe these appearances under
the title which has been retained by the moderns of παρήλια. Aristotle
remarks on their cause as depending on the refraction (ἀνάκλασις) of
the sun’s rays. He extends the remark to the production of halos (ἅλως)
and the rainbow, _ubi supra_.
[308] This occurrence is referred to by Livy, xli. 21.
[309] This meteor has been named παρασελήνη; they are supposed to
depend upon the same cause with the Parhelia. A phænomenon of this
description is mentioned by Jul. Obsequens, cap. 92, and by Plutarch,
in Marcellus, ii. 360. In Shakspeare’s King John the death of Prince
Arthur is said to have been followed by the ominous appearance of five
moons.
[310] This phænomenon must be referred to the aurora borealis. See
Livy, xxviii. 11. and xxix. 14.
[311] “clypei.”
[312] Probably an aërolite. Jul. Obsequens describes a meteor as “orbis
clypei similis,” which was seen to pass from west to east, cap. 105.
[313] “ceu nubilo die.”
[314] It would be difficult to reconcile this phænomenon with any
acknowledged atmospherical phenomenon.
[315] Perhaps the phænomena here alluded to ought to be referred to
some electric action; but they are stated too generally to admit of our
forming more than a conjecture on the subject. Virgil refers to the
occurrence of storms of wind after the appearance of a falling star;
Geor. i. 265-6.
[316] These phænomena are admitted to be electrical; they are referred
to by Seneca, Nat. Quæst. i. 1. This appearance is noticed as of
frequent occurrence in the Mediterranean, where it is named the fire of
St. Elmo; see Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 311, and Fouché in Ajasson, ii.
382.
[317] Perhaps this opinion may be maintained on the principle, that,
when there is a single luminous appearance only, it depends upon the
discharge of a quantity of electrical fluid in a condensed state; its
effects are, in this case, those that would follow from a stroke of
lightning.
[318] This is said by Livy to have occurred to Servius Tullius while he
was a child; lib. i. cap. 39; and by Virgil to Ascanius, Æn. ii. 632-5.
[319] “Ut circumagendo balistæ vel fundæ impetus augetur.” Alexandre in
Lemaire, i. 313.
[320] “sed assidue rapta (natura) convolvitur, et circa terram immenso
rerum causas globo ostendit, subinde per nubes cœlum aliud obtexens.”
On the words “immenso globo,” Alexandre has the following comment:
“Immensis cœli fornicibus appicta sidera, dum circumvolvitur, terris
ostendit;” and on the words “cœlum aliud,” “obductæ scilicet nubes
falsum quasi cœlum vero prætexunt.” Lemaire, i. 313.
[321] The author probably means to speak of all the atmospheric
phænomena that have been mentioned above.
[322] Marcus has made some remarks on this subject which may be read
with advantage; Ajasson, ii. 245-6.
[323] The diminutive of Sus.
[324] Ab ὕω, pluo.
[325] The Hædi were in the constellation Auriga.
[326] We have the same account of the Oryx in Ælian, lib. vii. cap. 8.
[327] Our author again refers to this opinion, viii. 63, and it was
generally adopted by the ancients; but it appears to be entirely
unfounded.
[328] “cum tempestatibus confici sidus intelligimus.”
[329] “afflantur.” On this term Hardouin remarks, “Siderantur.
Sideratio morbi genus est, partem aliquam corporis, ipsumque sæpe
totum corpus percutientis subito: quod quum repentino eveniat impetu, e
cœlo vi quadam sideris evenire putatur.” Lemaire, i. 317.
[330] Cicero alludes to these opinions in his treatise De Divin. ii.
33; see also Aul. Gellius, ix. 7.
[331] The heliotropium of the moderns has not the property here
assigned to it, and it may be doubted whether it exists in any plant,
except in a very slight and imperfect degree: the subject will be
considered more fully in a subsequent part of the work, xxii. 29, where
the author gives a more particular account of the heliotrope.
[332] “conchyliorum;” this term appears to have been specifically
applied to the animal from which the Tyrian dye was procured.
[333] “soricum fibras;” Alexandre remarks on these words, “fibras
jecoris intellige, id est, lobos infimos ...;” Lemaire, i. 318; but I
do not see any ground for this interpretation.
[334] It does not appear from what source our author derived this
number; it is considerably greater than that stated by Ptolemy and the
older astronomers. See the remarks of Hardouin and of Brotier; Lemaire.
i. 319.
[335] The Vergiliæ or Pleiades are not in the tail of the Bull,
according to the celestial atlas of the moderns.
[336] “Septemtriones.”
[337] The doctrine of Aristotle on the nature and formation of mists
and clouds is contained in his treatises De Meteor. lib. i. cap. 9.
p. 540, and De Mundo, cap. 4. p. 605. He employs the terms ἀτμὶς,
νέφος, and νεφέλη, which are translated _vapor_, _nubes_ and _nebula_,
respectively. The distinction, however, between the two latter does not
appear very clearly marked either in the Greek or the Latin, the two
Greek words being indiscriminately applied to either of the Latin terms.
[338] It is doubtful how far this statement is correct; see the remarks
of Hardouin, Lem. i. 320.
[339] The words in the original are respectively _fulmen_ and
_fulgetrum_; Seneca makes a similar distinction between _fulmen_ and
_fulguratio_: “Fulguratio est late ignis explicitus; fulmen est coactus
ignis et impetu jactus.” Nat. Quæst. lib. ii. cap. 16. p. 706.
[340] “Præsertim ex tribus superioribus planetis, uti dictum est, cap.
18.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 322.
[341] Our author’s opinion respecting the origin of winds nearly
agrees with that of Aristotle; “nihil ut aliud ventus (ἄνεμος) sit,
nisi aër multus fluctuans et compressus, qui etiam spiritus (πνεῦμα)
appellatur;” De Meteor. This treatise contains a full account of the
phænomena of winds. Seneca also remarks, “Ventus est aër fluens;” Nat.
Quæst. lib. 3 & 5.
[342] Aristotle informs us, that the winds termed apogæi (ἀπόγαιοι)
proceed from a marshy and moist soil; De Mundo, cap. 4. p. 605. For
the origin and meaning of the terms here applied to the winds, see the
remarks of Hardouin and Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 323.
[343] This is mentioned by Pomp. Mela.
[344] “In domibus etiam multis manu facta inclusa opacitate
conceptacula....” Some of the MSS. have _madefacta_ for _manu facta_,
and this reading has been adopted by Lemaire; but nearly all the
editors, as Dalechamps, Laët, Grovonius, Poincinet and Ajasson, retain
the former word.
[345] The terms in the original are “flatus” and “ventus.”
[346] “illos (flatus) statos atque perspirantes.”
[347] “qui non aura, non procella, sed mares appellatione quoque ipsa
venti sunt.” This passage cannot be translated into English, from
our language not possessing the technical distinction of genders, as
depending on the termination of the substantives.
[348] “Septem nimirum errantibus.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 306.
[349] In his account and nomenclature of the winds, Pliny has, for the
most part, followed Aristotle, Meteor. lib. ii. cap. 4. pp. 558-560,
and cap. 6. pp. 563-565. The description of the different winds by
Seneca is not very different, but where it does not coincide with
Aristotle’s, our author has generally preferred the former; see Nat.
Quæst. lib. 5. We have an account of the different winds, as prevailing
at particular seasons, in Ptolemy, De Judiciis Astrol. 1. 9. For the
nomenclature and directions of the winds, we may refer to the remarks
of Hardouin, Lemaire, i. 328 _et seq._
[350] Odyss. v. 295, 296.
[351] In giving names to the different winds, the author designates the
points of the compass whence they proceed, by the place where the sun
rises or sets, at the different periods of the year. The following are
the terms which he employs:—“Oriens æquinoctialis,” the place where the
sun rises at the equinox, i. e. the East. “Oriens brumalis,” where he
rises on the shortest day, the S.E. “Occasus brumalis,” where he sets
on the shortest day, the S.W. “Occasus æquinoctialis,” where he sets
at the equinox, the W. “Occasus solstitialis,” where he sets on the
longest day, the N.W. “Exortus solstitialis,” where he rises on the
longest day, the N.E. “Inter septemtrionem et occasum solstitialem,”
between N. and N.W., N.N.W. “Inter aquilonem et exortum æquinoctialem,”
between N. and N.E., N.N.E. “Inter ortum brumalem et meridiem,” between
S. and S.E., S.S.E. “Inter meridiem et hybernum occidentem,” between S.
and S.W., S.S.W.
[352] “Quod sub sole nasci videtur.”
[353] This name was probably derived from the town Vulturnum in
Campania.
[354] Seneca informs us, that what the Latins name Subsolanus, is named
by the Greeks Ἀφηλιώτης; Quæst. Nat. lib. 5. § 16. p. 764.
[355] “quia favet rebus nascentibus.”
[356] “... semper spirantes frigora Cauri.” Virgil, Geor. iii. 356.
[357] The eight winds here mentioned will bear the following relation
to our nomenclature: Septemtrio, N.; Aquilo, N.E.; Subsolanus, E.;
Vulturnus, S.E.; Auster, S.; Africus, N.W.; Favonius, W.; and Corus,
N.W.
[358] The four winds here mentioned, added to eight others, making, in
the whole, twelve, will give us the following card:—
N. Septemtrio.
N.N.E. Boreas or Aquilo.
E.N.E. Cæcias.
E. Apeliotes or Subsolanus.
E.S.E. Eurus or Vulturnus.
S.S.E. Euronotus or Phœnices.
S. Notos or Auster.
S.S.W. Libonotos.
W.S.W. Libs or Africus.
W. Zephyrus or Favonius.
W.N.W. Argestes or Corus.
N.N.W. Thrascias.
We are informed by Alexandre, Lemaire, i. 330, that there is an ancient
dial plate in the Vatican, consisting of twelve sides, in which the
names of the twelve winds are given both in Greek and in Latin. They
differ somewhat from those given above, both absolutely and relatively;
they are as follows:—
Ἀπαρκτίας, Septemtrio.
Βορέας, Aquilo.
Καικίας, Vulturnus.
Ἀφηλιώτης, Solanus.
Εὖρος, Eurus.
Εὐρόνοτος, Euronotus.
Νότος, Auster.
Λιβόνοτος, Austroafricus.
Λὶψ, Africus.
Ζέφυρος, Zephyrus.
Ἰάπυξ, Corus.
Θρασκίας, Circius.
[359] This wind must have been N.N.W.; it is mentioned by Strabo, iv.
182; A. Gellius, ii. 22; Seneca, Nat. Quæst. v. 17; and again by our
author, xvii. 2.
[360] We may learn the opinions of the Romans on the subject of this
chapter from Columella, xi. 2.
[361] corresponding to the 8th day of the month.
[362] ... lustro sequenti ...; “tribus annis sequentibus.” Alexandre,
in Lemaire, i. 334.
[363] corresponding to the 22nd of February.
[364] a χελιδὼν, hirundo.
[365] This will be either on March 2nd or on February 26th, according
as we reckon from December the 21st, the real solstitial day, or the
17th, when, according to the Roman calendar, the sun is said to enter
Capricorn.
[366] “quasi Avicularem dixeris.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 334.
[367] Corresponding to the 10th of May.
[368] According to the Roman calendar, this corresponds to the 20th
July, but, according to the text, to the 17th. Columella says, that the
sun enters Leo on the 13th of the Calends of August; xi. 2.
[369] “quasi præcursores;” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 335. Cicero refers
to these winds in one of his letters to Atticus; xiv. 6.
[370] ἐτησίαι, ab ἔτος, annus.
[371] This will be on the 13th of September, as, according to our
author, xviii. 24, the equinox is on the 24th.
[372] This corresponds to the 11th of November; forty-four days before
this will be the 29th of September.
[373] Or Halcyonides. This topic is considered more at length in a
subsequent part of the work; x. 47.
[374] The author, as it appears, portions out the whole of the year
into fourteen periods, during most of which certain winds are said to
blow, or, at least, to be decidedly prevalent. Although the winds of
Italy are less irregular than those of England, Pliny has considerably
exaggerated the real fact.
[375] On this subject the reader may peruse the remarks of Seneca, Nat.
Quæst. v. 18, written in his style of flowery declamation.
[376] The greatest part of the remarks on the nature of the winds, in
this chapter, would appear to be taken from Aristotle’s Treatise De
Meteor., and it may be stated generally, that our author has formed
his opinions more upon those of the Greek writers than upon actual
observation.
[377] 9 A.M.
[378] In the last chapter Ornithias is said to be a west wind.
[379] This obviously depends upon the geographical situation of the
northern parts of Africa, to which the observation more particularly
applies, with respect to the central part of the Continent and the
Mediterranean. See the remarks of Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 340.
[380] The influence of the fourth day of the moon is referred to by
Virgil, Geor. i. 432 _et seq._ “Sin ortu quarto,” &c.
[381] This refers to the genders of the names of the winds, analogous
to the remark in note [346], p. 71.
[382] Eudoxus was a native of Cnidus, distinguished for his knowledge
in astrology and science generally; he was a pupil of Plato, and is
referred to by many of the ancients; see Hardouin’s Index Auctorum, in
Lemaire, i. 187, and Enfield’s Hist. of Phil. i. 412, with the very
copious list of references.
[383] “flatus repentini.”
[384] Cicero refers to an opinion very similar to this as maintained by
the Stoics; De Div. ii. 44.
[385] “procella.”
[386] “ἐκ νέφους, ex nube, erumpente spiritu.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i.
343. Perhaps it most nearly corresponds to the term “hurricane.”
[387] a τύφω, incendo, ardeo. We have no distinct term in our language
which corresponds to the account of the typhon; it may be considered as
a combination of a whirlwind and a hurricane.
[388] Plutarch, Sympos. Quæst. iii. 5, refers to the extraordinary
power of vinegar in extinguishing fire, but he ascribes this effect,
not to its coldness, but to the extreme tenuity of its parts. On this
Alexandre remarks, “Melius factum negassent Plinius et Plutarchus, quam
causam inanem rei absurdissimæ excogitarent.” Lemaire, i. 344.
[389] The terms here employed are respectively “turbines,” “presteres,”
and “vortices.”
[390] πρηστὴρ, a πρήθω, incendo. Seneca calls it “igneus turbo;” Nat.
Quæst. v. 13. p. 762. See also Lucretius, vi. 423.
[391] Plutarch.
[392] A water-spout. We have a description of this phænomenon in
Lucretius, vi. 425 _et seq._
[393] “fulmen.”
[394] This has been pointed out by Alexandre, Lemaire, i. 346, as one
of the statements made by our author, which, in consequence of his
following the Greek writers, applies rather to their climate than to
that of Italy. The reader may form a judgement of the correctness of
this remark by comparing the account given by Aristotle and by Seneca;
the former in Meteor. iii. 1. p. 573, 574, the latter in Nat. Quæst.
ii. 32 _et seq._
[395] “fulgur.” The account of the different kinds of thunder seems
to be principally taken from Aristotle; Meteor. iii. 1. Some of the
phænomena mentioned below, which would naturally appear to the ancients
the most remarkable, are easily explained by a reference to their
electrical origin.
[396] “quod clarum vocant.”
[397] This account seems to be taken from Aristotle, Meteor. iii. 1. p.
574; see also Seneca, Nat. Quæst. ii. 31. p. 711. We have an account of
the peculiar effects of thunder in Lucretius, vi. 227 _et seq._
[398] This effect may be easily explained by the agitation into which
the female might have been thrown. The title of “princeps Romanarum,”
which is applied to Marcia, has given rise to some discussion among the
commentators, for which see the remarks of Hardouin and Alexandre, in
Lemaire, i. 348.
[399] Sometimes a partial thunder-cloud is formed, while the atmosphere
generally is perfectly clear, or, as Hardouin suggests, the effect
might have been produced by a volcanic eruption. See Lemaire, i. 348.
[400] Seneca gives us an account of the opinions of the Tuscans; Nat.
Quæst. ii. 32; and Cicero refers to the “libri fulgurales” of the
Etrurians; De Divin. i. 72.
[401] According to Hardouin, “Summanus est Deus summus Manium, idem
Orcus et Pluto dictus.” Lemaire, i. 349; he is again referred to by
our author, xxix. 14; Ovid also mentions him, Fast. vi. 731, with the
remark, “quisquis is est.”
[402] The city of Bolsena is supposed to occupy the site of the ancient
Volsinium. From the nature of the district in which it is situate,
it is perhaps more probable, that the event alluded to in the test
was produced by a volcanic eruption, attended by lightning, than by a
simple thunder-storm.
[403] “Vocant et familiaria ... quæ prima fiunt familiam suam cuique
indepto.” This remark is explained by the following passage from
Seneca; Nat. Quæst. ii. 47. “Hæc sunt fulmina, quæ primo accepto
patrimonio, in novo hominis aut urbis statu fiunt.” This opinion, as
well as most of those of our author, respecting the auguries to be
formed from thunder, is combated by Seneca; _ubi supra_, § 48.
[404] This opinion is also referred to by Seneca in the following
passage; “privata autem fulmina negant ultra decimum annum, publica
ultra trigesimum posse deferri;” _ubi supra_.
[405] “in deductione oppidorum;” according to Hardouin, Lemaire, i.
350, “quum in oppida coloniæ deducuntur.”
[406] The following conjecture is not without a degree of probability;
“Ex hoc multisque aliis auctorum locis, plerique conjiciunt Etruscis
auguribus haud ignotam fuisse vim electricam, licet eorum arcana
nunquam divulgata sint.” Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 350.
[407] Alexandre remarks in this place, “An morbus aliquis fuit, qui
primum in agros debacchatus, jam urbi minabatur, forsitan ab aëris
siccitate natus, quem advenientes cum procella imbres discusserunt?”
Lemaire, i. 350.
[408] For a notice of Piso, see Lemaire, i. 208.
[409] We have an account of the death of Tullus Hostilius in Livy, i.
31.
[410] “ab eliciendo, seu quod precationibus cœlo evocaretur, id nomen
traxit.” This is confirmed by the following lines from Ovid, Fast. iii.
327, 328:—
“Eliciunt cœlo te, Jupiter: unde minores
Nunc quoque te celebrant, Eliciumque vocant.”
[411] “beneficiis abrogare vires.”
[412] “ictum autem et sonitum congruere, ita modulante natura.” This
remark is not only incorrect, but appears to be at variance both with
what precedes and what follows.
[413] The following remark of Seneca may be referred to, both as
illustrating our author and as showing how much more correct the
opinions of Seneca were than his own, on many points of natural
philosophy; “... necesse est, ut impetus fulminis et præmittat
spiritus, et agat ante se, et a tergo trahat ventum....;” Nat. Quæst.
lib. ii. § 20. p. 706.
[414] “quoniam læva parte mundi ortus est.” On this passage Hardouin
remarks; “a Deorum sede, quum in meridiem spectes, ad sinistram sunt
partes mundi exorientes;” Lemaire, i. 353. Poinsinet enters into a
long detail respecting opinions of the ancients on this point and the
circumstances which induced them to form their opinions; i. 34 _et seq._
[415] See Cicero de Divin. ii. 42.
[416] “Junonis quippe templum fulmine violatum ostendit non a Jove, non
a Deis mitti fulmina.” Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 354. The consulate of
Scaurus was in the year of Rome 638. Lucan, i. 155, and Horace, Od. i.
2. refer to the destruction of temples at Rome by lightning.
[417] Obviously because faint flashes are more visible in the night.
[418] We have an explanation of this peculiar opinion in Tertullian, as
referred to by Hardouin, Lemaire. i. 355; “Qui de cœlo tangitur, salvus
est, ut nullo igne decinerescat.”
[419] Although it has been thought necessary by M. Fée, in the notes to
Ajasson’s trans., ii. 384, 385, to enter into a formal examination of
this opinion of the author’s, I conceive that few of our readers will
agree with him in this respect.
[420] Suetonius informs us, that Augustus always wore a seal’s skin for
this purpose; Octavius, § 90.
[421] The eagle was represented by the ancients with a thunderbolt in
its claws.
[422] There is strong evidence for the fact, that, at different
times, various substances have fallen from the atmosphere, sometimes
apparently of mineral, and, at other times, of animal or vegetable
origin. Some of these are now referred to those peculiar bodies termed
aërolites, the nature and source of which are still doubtful, although
their existence is no longer so. These bodies have, in other instances,
been evidently discharged from distant volcanoes, but there are many
cases where the substance could not be supposed to have proceeded
from a volcano, and where, in the present state of our knowledge,
it appears impossible to offer an explanation of their nature, or
the source whence they are derived. We may, however, conclude,
that notwithstanding the actual occurrence of a few cases of this
description, a great proportion of those enumerated by the ancients
were either entirely without foundation or much exaggerated. We meet
with several variations of what we may presume to have been aërolites
in Livy; for example, xxiv. 10, xxx. 38, xli. 9, xliii. 13, and xliv.
18, among many others. As naturally may be expected, we have many
narratives of this kind in Jul. Obsequens.
[423] The same region from which lightning was supposed to proceed.
[424] We have several relations of this kind in Livy, xxiv. 10, xxxix.
46 and 56, xl. 19, and xliii. 13. The red snow which exists in certain
alpine regions, and is found to depend upon the presence of the Uredo
nivalis, was formerly attributed to showers of blood.
[425] This occurrence may probably be referred to an aërolite, while
the wool mentioned below, i. e. a light flocculent substance, was
perhaps volcanic.
[426]
Armorum sonitum toto Germania cœlo
Audiit.—Virgil, Geor. i. 474, 475.
“ ... in Jovis Vicilini templo, quod in Compsano agro est, arma
concrepuisse.” Livy, xxiv. 44.
[427] See Plutarch, by Langhorne; Marius, iii. 133.
[428] See Livy, iii. 5 & 10, xxxi. 12, xxxii. 9, _et alibi_.
[429] I have already had occasion to remark, concerning this class of
phænomena, that there is no doubt of their actual occurrence, although
their origin is still unexplained.
[430] The life of Anaxagoras has been written by Diogenes Laërtius. We
have an ample account of him by Enfield in the General Biography, _in
loco_; he was born B.C. 500 and died B.C. 428.
[431] There is some variation in the exact date assigned by different
authors to this event; in the Chronological table in Brewster’s Encyc.
vi. 420, it is said to have occurred 467 B.C.
[432] Aristotle gives us a similar account of this stone; that it fell
in the daytime, and that a comet was then visible at night; Meteor.
i. 7. It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the authority for this
fact must be referred entirely to Aristotle, without receiving any
additional weight from our author. The occurrence of the comet at the
same time with the aërolite must have been entirely incidental.
[433] “Deductis eo sacri lapidis causa colonis, extructoque oppido,
cui nomen a colore adusto lapidis, est inditum, Potidæa. Est enim ποτὶ
Dorice πρὸς, ad, apud; δαίομαι, uror.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 361. It
was situated in the peninsula of Pallene, in Macedonia.
[434] The Vocontii were a people of Gallia Narbonensis, occupying a
portion of the modern Dauphiné.
[435] “Manifestum est, radium Solis immissum cavæ nubi, repulsa acie in
Solem, refringi.”
[436] Aristotle treats of the Rainbow much in detail, principally in
his Meteor. iii. 2, 3, 4, and 5, where he gives an account of the
phænomena, which is, for the most part, correct, and attempts to form
a theory for them; see especially cap. 4. p. 577 _et seq._ In the
treatise De Mundo he also refers to the same subject, and briefly sums
up his doctrine with the following remark: “arcus est species segmenti
solaris vel lunaris, edita in nube humida, et cava, et perpetua;
quam velut in speculo intuemur, imagine relata in speciem circularis
ambitûs.” cap. 4. p. 607. Seneca also treats very fully on the
phænomena and theory of the Rainbow, in his Nat. Quæst. i. 3-8.
[437] _Vide supra_, also Meteor. iii. 2, and Seneca, Nat. Quæst. i. 3.
[438] Aristotle, Meteor. iii. 5. p. 581, observes, that the rainbow is
less frequently seen in the summer, because the sun is more elevated,
and that, consequently, a less portion of the arch is visible. See also
Seneca, Nat. Quæst. i. 8. p. 692.
[439] Aristotle treats at some length of dew, snow, and hail, in his
Meteor. i. cap. 10, 11 & 12 respectively.
[440] When water is frozen, its bulk is increased in consequence of its
assuming a crystalline structure. Any diminution which may be found
to have taken place in the bulk of the fluid, when thawed, must be
ascribed to evaporation or to some accidental circumstance.
[441] “Velini lacus ... præcipiti cursu in gurgitem subjectum defertur,
et illo aquarum lapsu, dispersis in aëra guttis humidis, ... iridis
multiplicis phænomenon efficit....” Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 365.
[442] We have an example in Martial, v. 34. 9, of the imprecation which
has been common in all ages:
Mollia nec rigidus cespes tegat ossa, nec illi
Terra gravis fueris;
and in Seneca’s Hippolytus, _sub finem_:
... istam terra defossam premat,
Gravisque tellus impio capiti incubet.
[443] The author refers to this opinion, xxix. 23, when describing the
effects of venomous animals.
[444] inertium; “ultione abstinentium,” as explained by Alexandre, in
Lemaire, i. 367.
[445] “Quod mortis genus a terræ meritis et benignitate valde
abhorret.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 367.
[446] “Terra, inquit, sola est, e quatuor naturæ partibus sive
elementis, adversus quam ingrati simus.” Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 368.
[447] “Est ironiæ formula. Quid, ait, feras et serpentes et venena
terræ exprobramus, quæ ne ad tuendam quidem illam satis valent?”
Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 369.
[448] “ossa vel insepulta cum tempore tellus occultat, deprimentia
pondere suo mollitam pluviis humum.” Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 370.
[449] “figura prima.” I may refer to the second chapter of this book,
where the author remarked upon the form of the earth as perfect in all
its parts, and especially adapted for its supposed position in the
centre of the universe.
[450] “... si capita linearum comprehendantur ambitu;” the meaning of
this passage would appear to be: if the extremities of the lines drawn
from the centre of the earth to the different parts of the surface were
connected together, the result of the whole would be a sphere. I must,
however, remark, that Hardouin interprets it in a somewhat different
manner; “Si per extremitates linearum ductarum a centro ad _summos_
quosque vertices montium circulus exigatur.” Lemaire, i. 370.
[451] “... immensum ejus globum in formam orbis assidua circa eam mundi
volubilitate cogente.” As Hardouin remarks, the word _mundus_ is here
used in the sense of _cœlum_. Lemaire, i. 371.
[452] As our author admits of the existence of antipodes, and expressly
states that the earth is a perfect sphere, we may conclude that the
resemblance to the cone of the pine is to be taken in a very general
sense. How far the ancients entertained correct opinions respecting the
globular figure of the earth, or rather, at what period this opinion
became generally admitted, it is perhaps not easy to ascertain. The
lines in the Georgics, i. 242, 243, which may be supposed to express
the popular opinion in the time of Virgil, certainly do not convey the
idea of a sphere capable of being inhabited in all its parts:
Hic vertex nobis semper sublimis; at illum
Sub pedibus Styx atra videt, manesque profundi.
[453] “spiritus vis mundo inclusi.”
[454] “... Alpium vertices, longo tractu, nec breviore quinquaginta
millibus passuum assurgere.” To avoid the apparent improbability of
the author conceiving of the Alps as 50 miles high, the commentators
have, according to their usual custom, exercised their ingenuity in
altering the text. See Poinsinet, i. 206, 207, and Lemaire, i. 373. But
the expression does not imply that he conceived them as 50 miles in
perpendicular height, but that there is a continuous ascent of 50 miles
to get to the summit. This explanation of the passage is adopted by
Alexandre; Lemaire, _ut supra_. For what is known of Dicæarchus I may
refer to Hardouin, Index Auctorum, in Lemaire, i. 181.
[455] “coactam in verticem aquarum quoque figuram.”
[456] “aquarum nempe convexitas.” Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 374.
[457] “Quam quæ ad extremum mare a primis aquis.” I profess myself
altogether unable to follow the author’s mode of reasoning in this
paragraph, or to throw any light upon it. He would appear to be arguing
in favour of the actual flatness of the surface of the ocean, whereas
his previous remarks prove its convexity.
[458] Alexandre remarks on this passage, “Nempe quod remotissimos etiam
fontes alat oceanus. Sed omittit Plinius vaporationis intermedia ope
hoc fieri.” Lemaire, i. 376. Aristotle has written at considerable
length on the origin of springs, in his Meteor. i. 13. p. 543 _et seq._
He argues against the opinion of those who suppose that the water of
springs is entirely derived from evaporation. Seneca’s account of the
origin of springs is found in his Nat. Quæst. iii. 1.
[459] The voyage which is here alluded to was probably that performed
by Drusus; it is mentioned by Dio, lib. iv., Suetonius, Claud. § 1,
Vel. Paterculus, ii. 106, and by Tacitus, Germ. § 34.
[460] What is here spoken of we may presume to have been that part of
the German Ocean which lies to the N.W. of Denmark; the term Scythian
was applied by the ancients in so very general a way, as not to afford
any indication of the exact district so designated.
[461] “Sub eodem sidere;” “which lies under the same star.”
[462] The ancients conceived the Caspian to be a gulf, connected with
the northern ocean. Our author gives an account of it, vi. 15.
[463] That is, of the Caspian Sea.
[464] The remarks which our author makes upon the Palus Mæotis, in the
different parts of his work, ii. 112 and vi. 7, appear so inconsistent
with each other, that we must suppose he indiscriminately borrowed
them from various writers, without comparing their accounts, or
endeavouring to reconcile them to each other. Such inaccuracies may
be thought almost to justify the censure of Alexandre, who styles our
author, “indiligens plane veri et falsi compilator, et ubi dissentiunt
auctores, nunquam aut raro sibi constans.” Lemaire, i. 378.
[465] The son of Agrippa, whom Augustus adopted. Hardouin, in Lemaire,
i. 378.
[466] See Beloe’s Herodotus, ii. 393, 394, for an account of the voyage
round Africa that was performed by the Phœnicians, who were sent to
explore those parts by Necho king of Egypt.
[467] It is generally supposed that C. Nepos lived in the century
previous to the Christian æra. Ptolemy Lathyrus commenced his reign
U.C. 627 or B.C. 117, and reigned for 36 years. The references made to
C. Nepos are not found in any of his works now extant.
[468] We have previously referred to Eudoxus, note [382], p. 78.
[469] We have a brief account of Antipater in Hardouin’s Index
Auctorum; Lemaire, i. 162.
[470] We are informed by Alexandre that this was in the year of the
City 691, the same year in which Cicero was consul; see note in
Lemaire, i. 379.
[471] It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the account here given
must be incorrect; the reader who may be disposed to learn the opinions
of the commentators on this point, may consult the notes in Poinsinet
and Lemaire _in loco_.
[472] Dividuo globo; “Eoas partes a vespertinis dividente oceano.”
Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 380.
[473] “Jam primum in dimidio computari videtur.”
[474] “Cœlum;” the rigour of the climate.
[475] The division of the globe into five zones is referred to by
Virgil, Geor. i. 233-239, and by Ovid, Met. i. 45, 46.
[476] “... interna maria allatrat, ...”
[477] This is considerably more than the distance in the present day.
The Isthmus of Suez appears, according to the statement of the most
accurate geographers, to be about 70 miles in breadth.
[478] Hæ tot portiones terræ, as Alexandre correctly remarks, “ironice
dictum. Quam paucæ enim supersunt!” Lemaire, i. 383.
[479] “Mundi punctus.” This expression, we may presume, was taken from
Seneca; “Hoc est illud punctum, quod inter tot gentes ferro et igni
dividitur.” Nat. Quæst. i. præf. p. 681.
[480] Nostro solo adfodimus; “addimus, adjungimus, annectimus, ut una
fossione aretur.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 383.
[481] “Mundi totius.”
[482] “Æquinoctii paribus horis.”
[483] Dioptra. “Græce διόπτρα, instrumentum est geometricum, _un quart
de cercle_, quo apparentes rerum inter se distantiæ anguli apertura
dijudicantur.” Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 384.
[484] This title does not correspond with the contents of the chapter.
[485] “Tropici duo, cum æquinoctiali circulo;” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i.
384.
[486] The Troglodytice of the ancients may be considered as nearly
corresponding to the modern Abyssinia and Nubia.
[487] This remark is incorrect, as far as respects nearly the whole of
Egypt; see the remarks of Marcus, in Ajasson, ii. 245.
[488] This is a star of the first magnitude in the southern
constellation of Argo; we have a similar statement in Manilius, i. 216,
217.
[489] The commentators suppose that the star or constellation here
referred to cannot be the same with what bears this name on the modern
celestial atlas; vide Hardouin _in loco_, also Marc. in Ajasson, _ut
supra_. The constellation of Berenice’s hair forms the subject of
Catullus’s 67th poem.
[490] In Troglodytice and in Egypt.
[491] The first watch of the night was from 6 P.M. to 9; the second
from 9 to midnight.
[492] According to Columella, xi. 2. 369, this was 9 Calend. Mart.,
corresponding to the 21st of February.
[493] “In alia adverso, in alia prono mari.” I have adopted the opinion
of Alexandre, who explains the terms “adverso” and “prono,” “ascendenti
ad polum,” and “ad austrum devexo;” a similar sense is given to the
passage by Poinsinet and Ajasson, in their translations.
[494] “Anfractu pilæ.” See Manilius, i. 206 _et seq._ for a similar
mode of expression.
[495] “Aut;” as Poinsinet remarks, “_aut_ est ici pour _alioqui_;” and
he quotes another passage from our author, xix. 3, where the word is
employed in a similar manner.
[496] We may presume that the author meant to convey the idea, that
the eclipses which are visible in any one country are not so in those
which are situated under a different meridian. The terms “vespertinos,”
“matutinos,” and “meridianos,” refer not to the time of the day, but
to the situation of the eclipse, whether recurring in the western,
eastern, or southern parts of the heavens.
[497] Brewster, in the art. “Chronology,” p. 415, mentions this eclipse
as having taken place Sept. 21st, U.C. 331, eleven days before the
battle of Arbela; while, in the same art. p. 423, the battle is said to
have taken place on Oct. 2nd, eleven days after a total eclipse of the
moon.
[498] It took place on the 30th of April, in the year of the City 811,
A.D. 59; see Brewster, _ubi supra_. It is simply mentioned by Tacitus,
Ann. xiv. 12, as having occurred among other prodigies which took place
at this period.
[499] We have an account of Corbulo’s expedition to Armenia in Dion
Cassius, lx. 19-24, but there is no mention of the eclipse or of any
peculiar celestial phænomenon.
[500] The terms employed in the original are “oppositu” and “ambitu.”
Alexandre’s explanation of the first is, “quum globi terraquei
crassitudo interposita solis arcet radios;” and of the second, “quum
nostra hujus globi pars a sole ambitur.” Lemaire, i. 389.
[501] One of these towers is mentioned by Livy, xxxiii. 48; it is said
to have been situated between Acholla and Thapsus, on the sea-coast.
[502] Hardouin, according to his usual custom, employs all his
learning and ingenuity to give a plausible explanation of this
passage. Alexandre, as it must be confessed, with but too much reason,
remarks, “Frustra desudavit Harduinus ut sanum aliquem sensum ex illis
Plinii deliramentis excuteret.” He correctly refers the interval
of time, which was said to occur between these signals, not to any
astronomical cause, but to the necessary delay which took place in the
transmission of them. He concludes, “Sed ad cursum solis hoc referre,
dementiæ est. Nam ut tanta horarum differentia intersit, si moram
omnem in speculandis ac transmittendis signis sustuleris, necesse
erit observatores illos ultimos 135 gradibus, id est, sesquidimidio
hemisphærio, a primis distare furribus. Recte igitur incredibilem
Plinii credulitatem ludibrio vertit Baylius in Dictionario suo.”
Lemaire, i. 389.
[503] The distance, as here stated, is about 150 miles, which he is
said to have performed in nine hours, but that the same distance, in
returning, required fifteen hours. We have here, as on the former
occasion, a note of Hardouin’s to elucidate the statement of the
author. On this Alexandre observes, “Optime; sed in tam parva locorum
distantia, Elidis et Sicyonis horologia vix quinque unius horæ
sexagesimis differre poterant; quare eunti ac redeunti ne discrimen
quidem quadrantis horæ intererat. Ineptos igitur auctores sequitur hoc
quoque loco Plinius.” Lemaire, i. 390, 391.
[504] “Vincunt spatia nocturnæ navigationis.” This expression would
appear to imply, that the author conceived some physical difficulty
in sailing during the night, and so it seems to be understood by
Alexandre; vide not. _in loco_.
[505] “Vasa horoscopica.” “Vasa horoscopica appellat horologia in plano
descripta, horizonti ad libellam respondentia. Vasa dicuntur, quod area
in qua lineæ ducebantur, labri interdum instar et conchæ erat, cujus in
margine describebantur horæ. Horoscopa, ab ὥρα et σκοπέω, hoc est, ab
inspiciendis horis.” Hardouin, in Lemaire, i. 391.
[506] These distances are respectively about 38 and 62 miles.
[507] We are not to expect any great accuracy in these estimates, and
we accordingly find, that our author, when referring to the subject in
his 6th book, ch. 39, makes the shadow at Ancona 1/35 greater than the
gnomon, while, in Venetia, which is more northerly, he says, as in the
present chapter, that the shadow and the gnomon are equal in length.
See the remarks of M. Alexandre in Lemaire, _ut supra_.
[508] This would be about 625 miles. Strabo, ii. 114, and Lucan, ii.
587, give the same distance, which is probably nearly correct. Syene
is, however, a little to the north of the tropic.
[509] This remark is not correct, as no part of this river is between
the tropics. For an account of Onesicritus see Lemaire, i. 203, 204.
[510] “In meridiem umbras jaci.” M. Ajasson translates this passage,
“les ombres tombent pendant quatre-vingt-dix jours sur le point central
du méridien.” ii. 165. But I conceive that Holland’s version is more
correct, “for 90 days’ space all the shadows are cast into the south.”
i. 36. The remarks of M. Alexandre are to the same effect; “... ut bis
solem in zenitho haberet (Ptolemais), Maii mensis et Augusti initio;
interea vero, solem e septemtrione haberet.” Lemaire, i. 393.
[511] About 625 miles.
[512] These days correspond to the 8th of May and the 4th of August
respectively.
[513] There is considerable uncertainty respecting the identity of this
mountain; our author refers to it in a subsequent part of his work,
where it is said to be in the country of the Monedes and Suari; vi. 22.
See the note of Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 394.
[514] Our author, in a subsequent part of his work, vi. 23, describes
the island of Patale as situated near the mouth of the Indus; he again
refers to it, xii. 25. His account of the position of the sun does not,
however, apply to this place.
[515] If we may suppose this to have been actually the case, we might
calculate the time of the year when Alexander visited this place and
the length of his stay.
[516] We may presume, that our author means to say no more than that,
in those places, they are occasionally invisible; literally the
observation would not apply to any part of India.
[517] ἄσκια, shadowless.
[518] If this really were the case, it could have no relation to the
astronomical position of the country.
[519] “In contrarium,” contrary to what takes place at other times,
_i. e._ towards the south. This observation is not applicable to the
whole of this country, as its northern and southern parts differ from
each other by seven or eight degrees of latitude. For an account of
Eratosthenes see Lemaire, i. 186.
[520] “Hora duodecim in partes, ut as in totidem uncias dividebatur.
Octonas igitur partes horæ antiquæ, sive bessem, ut Martianus vocat,
nobis probe repræsentant horarum nostratium 40 sexagesimæ, quas minutas
vocamus.” Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 396.
[521] For a notice of Pytheas see Lemaire, i. 210. He was a geographer
and historian who lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus; but
his veracity does not appear to have been highly estimated by his
contemporaries.
[522] The Thule of Pliny has been generally supposed to be the Shetland
Isles. What is here asserted respecting the length of the day, as well
as its distance from Britain, would indeed apply much more correctly
to Iceland than to Shetland; but we have no evidence that Iceland was
known to the ancients. Our author refers to the length of the day in
Thule in two subsequent parts of his work, iv. 30 and vi. 36.
[523] Supposed to be Colchester in Essex; while the Mona of Pliny
appears to have been Anglesea. It is not easy to conceive why the
author measured the distance of Mona from Camelodunum.
[524] Chap. 6 of this book.
[525] a σκιὰ, umbra, and θηράω, sector. It has been a subject for
discussion by the commentators, how far this instrument of Anaximenes
is entitled to the appellation of a dial, whether it was intended to
mark the hours, or to serve for some other astronomical purpose. See
Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 398, 399. It has been correctly remarked by
Brotier, that we have an account of a much more ancient dial in the 2nd
book of Kings, xx. 9, 11.
[526] A. Gellius, iii. 3, informs us, that the question concerning
the commencement of the day was one of the topics discussed by Varro,
in his book “Rerum Humanarum:” this work is lost. We learn from the
notes of Hardouin, Lemaire, i. 399, that there are certain countries in
which all these various modes of computation are still practised; the
last-mentioned is the one commonly employed in Europe.
[527] It has been supposed, that in this passage the author intended
to say no more than that the nights are shorter at the summer solstice
than at the other parts of the year; see Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 399,
400. But to this, I conceive, it may be objected, that the words “inter
ortus solis” can scarcely apply to the period while the sun is below
the horizon, and that the solstices generally would seem to be opposed
to the equinoxes generally. Also the words “obliquior” and “rectior”
would appear to have some farther reference than merely to the length
of time during which the sun is above or below the horizon.
[528] “Vibrato;” the same term is applied by Turnus to the hair of
Æneas; Æn. xii. 100.
[529] “Mobilitate hebetes;” it is not easy to see the connexion between
these two circumstances.
[530] There is a passage in Galen, De Temperamentis, iii. 6, which may
appear to sanction the opinion of our author; “Siccos esse, quibus
macra sunt crura; humidos, quibus crassa.”
[531] The latter part of the remark is correct, but the number of
ferocious animals is also greater in the warmer regions; there is, in
fact, a greater variety in all the productions of nature in the warmer
districts of the globe, except in those particular spots where animal
or vegetable life is counteracted by some local circumstances, as in
many parts of Asia and Africa by the want of water.
[532] “Sensus liquidus;” Alexandre explains this expression, “judicium
sanum, mens intelligendo apta.” Lemaire, i. 401.
[533] Saturn, Jupiter and Mars: see the 8th chapter of this book.
[534] “Vel quando meant cum Sole in conjunctione cum eo, vel quando
cum eo conveniunt in aspectu, maxime vero in quadrato, qui fit, quum
distant a Sole quarta mundi sive cœli parte.” Hardouin in Lemaire, i.
401.
[535] “Ut urbem et tecta custodirent.” This anecdote is referred to by
Cicero, who employs the words “ut urbem et tecta linquerent.” De Divin.
i. 112.
[536] This anecdote is also referred to by Cicero, de Div. ii.
[537] It has been observed that earthquakes, as well as other great
convulsions of nature, are preceded by calms; it has also been observed
that birds and animals generally exhibit certain presentiments of the
event, by something peculiar in their motions or proceedings; this
circumstance is mentioned by Aristotle, Meteor. ii. 8, and by Seneca,
Nat. Quæst. vi. 12.
[538] It is scarcely necessary to remark, that this supposed
resemblance or analogy is entirely without foundation. The phænomena of
earthquakes are described by Aristotle, De Mundo, cap. 4, and Meteor.
ii. 7 and 8; also by Seneca in various parts of the 6th book of his
Quæst. Nat.
[539] On this subject we shall find much curious matter in Aristotle’s
Treatise de Mundo, cap. 4.
[540] Poinsinet enters into a long detail of some of the most
remarkable earthquakes that have occurred, from the age of Pliny to the
period when he wrote, about fifty years ago; i. 249. 2.
[541] See Aristotle, Meteor. ii. 8.
[542] See Aristotle, Meteor. ii. 8, and Seneca, Nat. Quæst. vi. 13.
[543] “Fervente;” “Fremitum aquæ ferventis imitante.” Alexandre in
Lemaire, i. 404.
[544] The reader will scarcely require to be informed, that many of the
remarks in the latter part of this chapter are incorrect. Our author
has principally followed Aristotle, whose treatise on meteorology,
although abounding in curious details, is perhaps one of the least
correct of his works.
[545] This observation is taken from Aristotle, Meteor. ii. 8.
[546] Phænomena of this kind have been frequently noticed, and are not
difficult of explanation.
[547] “In iisdem;” “Iidem, inquit, putei inclusum terra spiritum libero
meatu emittentes, terræ motus avertunt.” Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 406.
[548] “Quæ pendent.” M. Ajasson translates this passage, “qui sont
comme suspendues.” Hardouin’s explanation is, “Structis fornice cameris
imposita ædificia intelligit; quod genus camerarum spiramenta plerumque
habet non pauca, quibus exeat ad libertatem aer.” Lemaire, i. 407.
[549] Many of these circumstances are referred to by Seneca, Nat.
Quæst. vi. 30. On the superior security of brick buildings, M.
Alexandre remarks, “Muri e lateribus facti difficilius quam cæteri
dehiscunt, unde fit ut in urbibus muniendis id constructionum genus
plerumque præferatur. Ex antiquæ Italiæ palatiis templisve nihil fere
præter immensas laterum moles hodie superest.”
[550] These remarks upon the different kinds of shocks are probably
taken from Aristotle, Meteor. ii. 8.
[551] This observation is also in Aristotle, ii. 8.
[552] In the year of the city 663; A.C. 90.
[553] In the year of the city 821; A.D. 68.
[554] The continuation of Aufidius Bassus’ history; our author refers
to it in the first book.
[555] We have no authentic accounts of this mutual change of place
between two portions of land, nor can we conceive of any cause capable
of effecting it. Our author mentions this circumstance again in book
xvii. ch. 38.
[556] See Aristotle, Meteor. ii. 8.
[557] “Eodem videlicet spiritu infusi (maris) ac terræ residentis sinu
recepti.”
[558] U.C. 770; A.D. 17. We have an account of this event in Strabo,
xii. 57; in Tacitus, Ann. ii. 47; and in the Universal History,
xiv. 129, 130. We are informed by Hardouin, that coins are still in
existence which were struck to commemorate the liberality of the
emperor on the occasion, inscribed “civitatibus Asiæ restitutis.”
Lemaire, i. 410.
[559] U.C. 537; A.C. 217.
[560] This circumstance is mentioned by Livy, xxii. 5, and by Floras,
ii. 6.
[561] “Præsagiis, inquit, quam ipsa clade, sæviores sunt terræ motus.”
Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 410.
[562] This phænomenon is distinctly referred to by Seneca, Nat. Quæst.
vi. 21. It presents us with one of those cases, where the scientific
deductions of the moderns have been anticipated by the speculations of
the ancients.
[563] Odyss. iv. 354-357; see also Arist. Meteor. i. 14; Lucan, x.
509-511; Seneca, Nat. Quæst. vi. 26; Herodotus, ii. 4, 5; and Strabo,
i. 59.
[564] These form, at this day, the Monte Circello, which, it is
remarked, rises up like an island, out of the Pontine marshes. It
seems, however, difficult to conceive how any action of the sea could
have formed these marshes.
[565] See Strabo, i. 58.
[566] ii. 5. _et alibi_.
[567] The plain in which this river flows, forming the windings from
which it derives its name, appears to have been originally an inlet of
the sea, which was gradually filled up with alluvial matter.
[568] “Paria secum faciente natura.” This appears to have been a
colloquial or idiomatic expression among the Romans. See Hardouin in
Lemaire, i. 412.
[569] It may be remarked, that the accounts of modern travellers and
geologists tend to confirm the opinion of the volcanic origin of many
of the islands of the Archipelago.
[570] Brotier remarks, that, according to the account of Herodotus,
this island existed previous to the date here assigned to it; Lemaire,
i. 412, 413: it is probable, however, that the same name was applied to
two islands, one at least of which was of volcanic origin.
[571] U.C. 517, A.C. 237; and U.C. 647, A.C. 107; respectively.
[572] Hiera, Automata; ab ἱερὰ, sacer, et αὐτομάτη, sponte nascens.
Respecting the origin of these islands there would appear to be some
confusion in the dates, which it is difficult to reconcile with each
other; it is, I conceive, impossible to decide whether this depends
upon an error of our author himself, or of his transcribers.
[573] July 25th, U.C. 771; A.C. 19.
[574] U.C. 628; A.C. 125.
[575] See Ovid, Metam. xv. 290, 291; also Seneca, Nat. Quæst. vi. 29.
[576] This event is mentioned by Thucydides, lib. 3, Smith’s Trans, i.
293; and by Diodorus, xii. 7, Booth’s Trans. p. 287, as the consequence
of an earthquake; but the separation was from Locris, not from Eubœa.
See the remarks of Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 415.
[577] It is somewhat uncertain to what island our author applied this
name; see the remarks of Alexandre in Lemaire.
[578] See Ovid, Metam. xv. 287.
[579] It is not improbable, from the situation and geological structure
of the places here enumerated, that many of the changes mentioned above
may have actually occurred; but there are few of them of which we have
any direct evidence.
[580] This celebrated narrative of Plato is contained in his Timæus,
Op. ix. p. 296, 297; it may be presumed that it was not altogether a
fiction on the part of the author, but it is, at this time, impossible
to determine what part of it was derived from ancient traditions and
what from the fertile stores of his own imagination. It is referred
to by various ancient writers, among others by Strabo. See also the
remarks of Brotier in Lemaire, i. 416, 417.