Archimedes Texts

115
by Copernicus. Which arguments, as being of somewhat a diste
rent nature, may be produced, after we have examined the
strength of these already propounded.

An argument
taken from the air
which we feel to
beat upon us when
we run a Horse at
full speed.

An argument
taken from the
whirling of circu
lar motion, which
hath a faculty to
extrude and dissi
pate.

SAGR. What say you Simplicius? do you think that Salviatus
is Master of, and knoweth how to unfold the Ptolomean and Ari
stotelian arguments? Or do you think that any Peripatetick is e
qually verst in the Copernican demonstrations?

SIMPL. Were it not for the high esteem, that the past discour
ses have begot in me of the learning of Salviatus, and of the a
cutenesse of Sagredus, I would by their good leave have gone my
way without staying for their answers; it seeming to me a thing
impossible, that so palpable experiments should be contradicted;
and would, without hearing them farther, consirm my self in my
old perswasion; for though I should be made to see that it was er
roneous, its being upheld by so many probable reasons, would ren
der it excuseable. And if these are fallacies, what true demonstra
tions were ever so fair?

SAGR. Yet its good that we hear the responsions of Salviatus;
which if they be true, must of necessity be more fair, and that by
insinite degrees; and those must be deformed, yea most deformed,
if the Metaphy sical Axiome hold, That true and fair are one and

the same thing; as also false and deformed. Therefore Salviatus
let's no longer lose time.

SALV. The first Argument alledged by Simplicius, if I well re
member it, was this. The Earth cannot move circularly, because
such motion would be violent to the same, and therefore not per
petual: that it is violent, the reason was: Because, that had it been
natural, its parts would likewise naturally move round, which is
impossible, for that it is natural for the parts thereof to move with a
right motion downwards. To this my reply is, that I could glad
ly wish, that Aristotle had more cleerly exprest himself, where he

said; That its parts would likewise move circularly; for this mo
ving circularly is to be understood two wayes, one is, that every
particle or atome separated from its Whole would move circularly
about its particular centre, describing its small Circulets; the other
is, that the whole Globe moving about its centre in twenty four
hours, the parts also would turn about the same centre in four and
twenty hours. The first would be no lesse an impertinency, than
if one should say, that every part of the circumference of a Circle
ought to be a Circle; or because that the Earth is Spherical, that
therefore every part thereof be a Globe, for so doth the Axiome
require: Eadem est ratio totius, & partium. But if he took it in
the other sense, to wit, that the parts in imitation of the Whole
should move naturally round the Centre of the whole Globe in
twenty four hours, I say, that they do so; and it concerns you,