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,