[1]The earliest observation Ptolemy uses is an Egyptian one of an eclipse occurring March 21, 721 B.C. (Cumont: 7). [In these references, the Roman numerals refer to the volume, the Arabic to the page, except as stated otherwise. The full title is given in thebibliographyat the back under the author's name.]
[1]The earliest observation Ptolemy uses is an Egyptian one of an eclipse occurring March 21, 721 B.C. (Cumont: 7). [In these references, the Roman numerals refer to the volume, the Arabic to the page, except as stated otherwise. The full title is given in thebibliographyat the back under the author's name.]
[2]Warren: 40. See "Calendar" in Hastings:Ency. of Religion and Ethics.
[2]Warren: 40. See "Calendar" in Hastings:Ency. of Religion and Ethics.
[3]For a summary of recent researches, see the preface of Heath:Aristarchus of Samos. For further details, see Heath:Op. cit., and the writings of Kugler and Schiaparelli.
[3]For a summary of recent researches, see the preface of Heath:Aristarchus of Samos. For further details, see Heath:Op. cit., and the writings of Kugler and Schiaparelli.
[4]See Plutarch:Moralia: De placitas Philosophorum, Lib. I et II, (V. 264-277, 296-316).
[4]See Plutarch:Moralia: De placitas Philosophorum, Lib. I et II, (V. 264-277, 296-316).
[5]Diogenes Laërtius:De Vitis, Lib. IX, c. 3 (252).
[5]Diogenes Laërtius:De Vitis, Lib. IX, c. 3 (252).
[6]Plato:Timæus, sec. 39 (III, 459 in Jowett's translation).
[6]Plato:Timæus, sec. 39 (III, 459 in Jowett's translation).
[7]Aristotle:De Mundo, c. 2 et 6 (III, 628 and 636).
[7]Aristotle:De Mundo, c. 2 et 6 (III, 628 and 636).
[8]Plutarch:Op. cit., Lib. III, c. 2 (V, 303-4).
[8]Plutarch:Op. cit., Lib. III, c. 2 (V, 303-4).
[9]Diogenes Laërtius:De Vitis, Lib. VIII, c. 1, et 8 (205, 225).
[9]Diogenes Laërtius:De Vitis, Lib. VIII, c. 1, et 8 (205, 225).
[10]Diogenes:Op. cit., Lib. VIII, c. 7 (225).
[10]Diogenes:Op. cit., Lib. VIII, c. 7 (225).
[11]Cicero:Academica, Lib. II, c. 39 (322).
[11]Cicero:Academica, Lib. II, c. 39 (322).
[12]Plutarch:Op. cit., Lib. II (V. 299-300).
[12]Plutarch:Op. cit., Lib. II (V. 299-300).
[13]Archimedes:Arenarius, c. 1. Delambre:Astr. Anc., I, 102.
[13]Archimedes:Arenarius, c. 1. Delambre:Astr. Anc., I, 102.
[14]This is the only account of his system. Even the age in which he flourished is so little known that there have been many disputes whether he was the original inventor of this system or followed some other. He was probably a contemporary of Cleanthes the Stoic in the 3rd century B.C. He is mentioned also by Ptolemy, Diogenes Laërtius and Vitruvius. (Schiaparelli:Die Vorlaufer des Copernicus im Alterthum, 75. See also Heath:Op. cit.)
[14]This is the only account of his system. Even the age in which he flourished is so little known that there have been many disputes whether he was the original inventor of this system or followed some other. He was probably a contemporary of Cleanthes the Stoic in the 3rd century B.C. He is mentioned also by Ptolemy, Diogenes Laërtius and Vitruvius. (Schiaparelli:Die Vorlaufer des Copernicus im Alterthum, 75. See also Heath:Op. cit.)
[15]Plutarch:Op. cit.: Bk. III, c. 2 (V, 317-318).
[15]Plutarch:Op. cit.: Bk. III, c. 2 (V, 317-318).
[16]The Stoic contemporary of Aristarchus, author of the famous Stoic hymn. See Diogenes Laërtius:De Vitis.
[16]The Stoic contemporary of Aristarchus, author of the famous Stoic hymn. See Diogenes Laërtius:De Vitis.
[17]Plutarch:De Facie in Orbe Lunæ, (V, 410).
[17]Plutarch:De Facie in Orbe Lunæ, (V, 410).
[18]Young: 109.
[18]Young: 109.
[19]Milton:Paradise Lost, Bk. VIII, ll. 82-85.
[19]Milton:Paradise Lost, Bk. VIII, ll. 82-85.
[20]Vitruvius:De Architectura, Lib. IX, c. 4 (220).
[20]Vitruvius:De Architectura, Lib. IX, c. 4 (220).
[21]Martianus Capella:De Nuptiis, Lib. VIII, (668).
[21]Martianus Capella:De Nuptiis, Lib. VIII, (668).
[22]Ptolemy:Almagest, Lib. I, c. 7, (1, 21-25). Translated inAppendix B.
[22]Ptolemy:Almagest, Lib. I, c. 7, (1, 21-25). Translated inAppendix B.
[23]Whewell: I, 239.
[23]Whewell: I, 239.
[24]Whewell: I, 294.
[24]Whewell: I, 294.
[25]Berry: 79.
[25]Berry: 79.
[26]His bookDe Motu Stellarum, translated into Latin by Plato Tiburtinus (fl. 1116) was published at Nuremberg (1557) by Melancthon with annotations by Regiomontanus.Ency. Brit.11th. Edit.
[26]His bookDe Motu Stellarum, translated into Latin by Plato Tiburtinus (fl. 1116) was published at Nuremberg (1557) by Melancthon with annotations by Regiomontanus.Ency. Brit.11th. Edit.
[27]Vaughan: I, 281.
[27]Vaughan: I, 281.
[28]Graux: 318.
[28]Graux: 318.
[29]Graux: 319.
[29]Graux: 319.
[30]Rashdall: II, pt. I, 77.
[30]Rashdall: II, pt. I, 77.
[31]Dict. of Nat. Biog.
[31]Dict. of Nat. Biog.
[32]MSS. of it are extremely numerous. It was the second astronomical book to be printed, the first edition appearing at Ferrara in 1472. 65 editions appeared before 1647. It was translated into Italian, French, German, and Spanish, and had many commentators.Dict. of Nat. Biog.
[32]MSS. of it are extremely numerous. It was the second astronomical book to be printed, the first edition appearing at Ferrara in 1472. 65 editions appeared before 1647. It was translated into Italian, French, German, and Spanish, and had many commentators.Dict. of Nat. Biog.
[33]Whewell: I, 277.
[33]Whewell: I, 277.
[34]Blavatski: II, 29, note.
[34]Blavatski: II, 29, note.
[35]Philo Judæus:Quis Rerum Divinarum Hæres.(IV, 7).
[35]Philo Judæus:Quis Rerum Divinarum Hæres.(IV, 7).
[36]Clement of Alexandria:Stromatum, Lib. V, c. 14, (III, 67).
[36]Clement of Alexandria:Stromatum, Lib. V, c. 14, (III, 67).
[37]Origen:De Principiis, Lib. I, c. 7, (XI, 171).
[37]Origen:De Principiis, Lib. I, c. 7, (XI, 171).
[38]Lactantius:Divinarum Institutionum, Lib. III, c. 3 (VI, 355).
[38]Lactantius:Divinarum Institutionum, Lib. III, c. 3 (VI, 355).
[39]Ibid: Lib. III, c. 24, (VI, 425-428).
[39]Ibid: Lib. III, c. 24, (VI, 425-428).
[40]Taylor:Mediæval Mind, I, 74.
[40]Taylor:Mediæval Mind, I, 74.
[41]By the will of God the earth remains motionless and stands throughout the age.
[41]By the will of God the earth remains motionless and stands throughout the age.
[42]Augustine:De Civitate Dei, Lib. XVI, c. 9, (41, p. 437).
[42]Augustine:De Civitate Dei, Lib. XVI, c. 9, (41, p. 437).
[43]Augustine:De Genesi, II, c. 9, (v. 34, p. 270). (White's translation).
[43]Augustine:De Genesi, II, c. 9, (v. 34, p. 270). (White's translation).
[44]Augustine:Civitate Dei, Lib. V, c. 5, (v. 41, p. 145).
[44]Augustine:Civitate Dei, Lib. V, c. 5, (v. 41, p. 145).
[45]Philastrius:De Hæresibus, c. 133, (v. 12, p. 1264).
[45]Philastrius:De Hæresibus, c. 133, (v. 12, p. 1264).
[46]Pseudo-Dionysius:De Cœlesti Ierarchia, (v. 122, p. 10354).
[46]Pseudo-Dionysius:De Cœlesti Ierarchia, (v. 122, p. 10354).
[47]Milman: VIII, p. 228-9. See theParadiso.
[47]Milman: VIII, p. 228-9. See theParadiso.
[48]Isidore of Seville:De Ordine Creaturarum, c. 5, sec. 3, (v. 83, p. 923).
[48]Isidore of Seville:De Ordine Creaturarum, c. 5, sec. 3, (v. 83, p. 923).
[49]Lombard:Sententia, Bk. II, Dist. I, sec. 8, (v. 192, p. 655).
[49]Lombard:Sententia, Bk. II, Dist. I, sec. 8, (v. 192, p. 655).
[50]Aquinas:Summa Theologica, pt. I, qu. 70, art. 2. (Op. Om. Caietani, V, 179).
[50]Aquinas:Summa Theologica, pt. I, qu. 70, art. 2. (Op. Om. Caietani, V, 179).
[51]Roger Bacon:Opus Tertium, 295, 30-31.
[51]Roger Bacon:Opus Tertium, 295, 30-31.
[52]Ibid: 289.
[52]Ibid: 289.
[53]Ibid: 282.
[53]Ibid: 282.
[54]Delambre:Moyen Age, 365.
[54]Delambre:Moyen Age, 365.
[55]Prowe: II, 67-70.
[55]Prowe: II, 67-70.
[56]Delambre:Moyen Age, 262-272.
[56]Delambre:Moyen Age, 262-272.
[57]Delambre:Moyen Age, 272.
[57]Delambre:Moyen Age, 272.
[58]It has been claimed that Regiomontanus knew of the earth's motion around the sun a hundred years before Copernicus; but a German writer has definitely disproved this claim by tracing it to its source in Schöner'sOpusculum Geographicum(1553) which states only that he believed in the earth's axial rotation. Ziegler: 62.
[58]It has been claimed that Regiomontanus knew of the earth's motion around the sun a hundred years before Copernicus; but a German writer has definitely disproved this claim by tracing it to its source in Schöner'sOpusculum Geographicum(1553) which states only that he believed in the earth's axial rotation. Ziegler: 62.
[59]Ibid: 62.
[59]Ibid: 62.
[60]Delambre:Op. cit.: 365.
[60]Delambre:Op. cit.: 365.
[61]Janssen:Hist. of Ger., I, 5.
[61]Janssen:Hist. of Ger., I, 5.
[62]Cath. Ency.: "Cusanus."
[62]Cath. Ency.: "Cusanus."
[63]From Cues near Treves.
[63]From Cues near Treves.
[64]Cusanus:De Docta Ignorantia, Bk. II, c. 11-12: "Centrum igitur mundi, coincideret cum circumferentiam, nam si centrum haberet et circumferentiam, et sic intra se haberet suum initium et finem et esset ad aliquid aliud ipse mundus terminatus, et extra mundum esset aluid et locus, quæ omnia veritate carent. Cum igitur non sit possibile, mundum claudi intra centrum corporale et circumferentiam, non intelligitur mundus, cuius centrum et circumferentia sunt Deus: et cum hic non sit mundus infinitus, tamen non potest concipi finitus, cum terminis careat, intra quos claudatur. Terra igitur, quæ centrum esse nequit, motu omni carere non potest, nam eam moveri taliter etiam necesse est, quod per infinitum minus moveri posset. Sicut igitur terra non est centram mundi.... Unde licet terra quasi stella sit, propinquior polo centrali, tamen movetur, et non describit minimum circulum in motu, ut est ostensum.... Terræ igitur figura est mobilis et sphærica et eius motus circularis, sed perfectior esse posset. Et quia maximum in perfectionibus motibus, et figuris in mundo non est, ut ex iam dictis patent: tunc non est verum quod terra ista sit vilissima et infima, nam quamvis videatur centralior, quo'ad mundum, est tamen etiam, eadem ratione polo propinquior, ut est dictum." (pp. 38-39).
[64]Cusanus:De Docta Ignorantia, Bk. II, c. 11-12: "Centrum igitur mundi, coincideret cum circumferentiam, nam si centrum haberet et circumferentiam, et sic intra se haberet suum initium et finem et esset ad aliquid aliud ipse mundus terminatus, et extra mundum esset aluid et locus, quæ omnia veritate carent. Cum igitur non sit possibile, mundum claudi intra centrum corporale et circumferentiam, non intelligitur mundus, cuius centrum et circumferentia sunt Deus: et cum hic non sit mundus infinitus, tamen non potest concipi finitus, cum terminis careat, intra quos claudatur. Terra igitur, quæ centrum esse nequit, motu omni carere non potest, nam eam moveri taliter etiam necesse est, quod per infinitum minus moveri posset. Sicut igitur terra non est centram mundi.... Unde licet terra quasi stella sit, propinquior polo centrali, tamen movetur, et non describit minimum circulum in motu, ut est ostensum.... Terræ igitur figura est mobilis et sphærica et eius motus circularis, sed perfectior esse posset. Et quia maximum in perfectionibus motibus, et figuris in mundo non est, ut ex iam dictis patent: tunc non est verum quod terra ista sit vilissima et infima, nam quamvis videatur centralior, quo'ad mundum, est tamen etiam, eadem ratione polo propinquior, ut est dictum." (pp. 38-39).
[65]Riccioli:Alm. Nov., II, 292.
[65]Riccioli:Alm. Nov., II, 292.
[66]Cusanus:Opera, 549: Excitationum, Lib. VII, ex sermone:Debitores sumus: "Est enim oratio, omnibus creaturis potentior. Nam angeli seu intelligentiæ, movent orbes, Solem et stellas: sed oratio potentior, quia impedit motum, sicut oratio Josuæ, fecit sistere Solem."
[66]Cusanus:Opera, 549: Excitationum, Lib. VII, ex sermone:Debitores sumus: "Est enim oratio, omnibus creaturis potentior. Nam angeli seu intelligentiæ, movent orbes, Solem et stellas: sed oratio potentior, quia impedit motum, sicut oratio Josuæ, fecit sistere Solem."
[67]Di Bruno: 284, 286a; Walsh:An Early Allusion, 2-3.
[67]Di Bruno: 284, 286a; Walsh:An Early Allusion, 2-3.
[68]Nicolaus Coppernicus(Berlin, 1883-4; 3 vol.; Pt. I, Biography, Pt. II, Sources), by Dr. Leopold Prowe gives an exhaustive account of all the known details in regard to Copernicus collected from earlier biographers and tested most painstakingly by the documentary evidence Dr. Prowe and his fellow-workers unearthed during a lifetime devoted to this subject. (Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie.) The manuscript authority Dr. Prowe cites (Prowe: I, 19-27 and footnotes), requires the double p in Copernicus's name, as Copernicus himself invariably used the two p's in the Latinized formCoppernicwithout the terminationus, and usually when this termination was added. Also official records and the letters from his friends usually give the double p; though the name is found in many variants—Koppernig, Copperinck, etc. His signatures in his books, his name in the letter he published in 1509, and the Latin form of it used by his friends all bear testimony to his use of the double p. But custom has for so many centuries sanctioned the simpler spelling, that it seems unwise not to conform in this instance to the time-honored usage.
[68]Nicolaus Coppernicus(Berlin, 1883-4; 3 vol.; Pt. I, Biography, Pt. II, Sources), by Dr. Leopold Prowe gives an exhaustive account of all the known details in regard to Copernicus collected from earlier biographers and tested most painstakingly by the documentary evidence Dr. Prowe and his fellow-workers unearthed during a lifetime devoted to this subject. (Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie.) The manuscript authority Dr. Prowe cites (Prowe: I, 19-27 and footnotes), requires the double p in Copernicus's name, as Copernicus himself invariably used the two p's in the Latinized formCoppernicwithout the terminationus, and usually when this termination was added. Also official records and the letters from his friends usually give the double p; though the name is found in many variants—Koppernig, Copperinck, etc. His signatures in his books, his name in the letter he published in 1509, and the Latin form of it used by his friends all bear testimony to his use of the double p. But custom has for so many centuries sanctioned the simpler spelling, that it seems unwise not to conform in this instance to the time-honored usage.
[69]Prowe: I, 85.
[69]Prowe: I, 85.
[70]Ency. Brit.: "Thorn."
[70]Ency. Brit.: "Thorn."
[71]Prowe: I, 47-53.
[71]Prowe: I, 47-53.
[72]These facts would seem to justify the Poles today in claiming Copernicus as their fellow-countryman by right of his father's nationality and that of his native city. Dr. Prowe, however, claims him as a "Prussian" both because of his long residence in the Prussian-Polish bishopric of Ermeland, and because of Copernicus's own reference to Prussia as "unser lieber Vaterland." (Prowe: II, 197.)
[72]These facts would seem to justify the Poles today in claiming Copernicus as their fellow-countryman by right of his father's nationality and that of his native city. Dr. Prowe, however, claims him as a "Prussian" both because of his long residence in the Prussian-Polish bishopric of Ermeland, and because of Copernicus's own reference to Prussia as "unser lieber Vaterland." (Prowe: II, 197.)
[73]Prowe: I, 73-82.
[73]Prowe: I, 73-82.
[74]Ibid: I, 111.
[74]Ibid: I, 111.
[75]Ibid: I, 124-129.
[75]Ibid: I, 124-129.
[76]Ibid: I, 137.
[76]Ibid: I, 137.
[77]Ibid: I, 141-143.
[77]Ibid: I, 141-143.
[78]Rheticus:Narratio Prima, 448 (Thorn edit.).
[78]Rheticus:Narratio Prima, 448 (Thorn edit.).
[79]Prowe: I, 154.
[79]Prowe: I, 154.
[80]Ibid: I, 169.
[80]Ibid: I, 169.
[81]Ibid: I, 174.
[81]Ibid: I, 174.
[82]Ibid: I, 175. This insured him an annual income which amounted to a sum equalling about $2250 today. Later he received a sinecure appointment besides at Breslau. (Holden inPop. Sci., 111.)
[82]Ibid: I, 175. This insured him an annual income which amounted to a sum equalling about $2250 today. Later he received a sinecure appointment besides at Breslau. (Holden inPop. Sci., 111.)
[83]Prowe: I, 224.
[83]Prowe: I, 224.
[84]Ibid: I, 308.
[84]Ibid: I, 308.
[85]Ibid: I, 240 and note. Little is known about him today, except that he was primarily an observer, and was highly esteemed by his immediate successors; see Gilbert:De Magnete.
[85]Ibid: I, 240 and note. Little is known about him today, except that he was primarily an observer, and was highly esteemed by his immediate successors; see Gilbert:De Magnete.
[86]Clerke inEncy. Brit., "Novara."
[86]Clerke inEncy. Brit., "Novara."
[87]Prowe: I, 249.
[87]Prowe: I, 249.
[88]Prowe: I, 279.
[88]Prowe: I, 279.
[89]Ibid, 294.
[89]Ibid, 294.
[90]Ibid: I, 319.
[90]Ibid: I, 319.
[91]Prowe: I, 335-380.
[91]Prowe: I, 335-380.
[92]Ibid: II, 75-110, 116, 124.
[92]Ibid: II, 75-110, 116, 124.
[93]Ibid: II, 204-8.
[93]Ibid: II, 204-8.
[94]Ibid: II, 110.
[94]Ibid: II, 110.
[95]Ibid: II, 144.
[95]Ibid: II, 144.
[96]Ibid: II, 146.
[96]Ibid: II, 146.
[97]Ibid: II, 293-319.
[97]Ibid: II, 293-319.
[98]Ibid: II, 464-472.
[98]Ibid: II, 464-472.
[99]Ibid: II, 170-187.
[99]Ibid: II, 170-187.
[100]Holden inPop. Sci., 109.
[100]Holden inPop. Sci., 109.
[101]Prowe: II, 67-70.
[101]Prowe: II, 67-70.
[102]Copernicus:De Revolutionibus, Thorn edit., 444. The last two words of the full title:De Revolutionibus Orbium Cœlestiumare not on the original MS. and are believed to have been added by Osiander. Prowe: II, 541, note.
[102]Copernicus:De Revolutionibus, Thorn edit., 444. The last two words of the full title:De Revolutionibus Orbium Cœlestiumare not on the original MS. and are believed to have been added by Osiander. Prowe: II, 541, note.
[103]Ibid: II, 490-1.
[103]Ibid: II, 490-1.
[104]Copernicus: Dedication, 4. (Thorn edit.)
[104]Copernicus: Dedication, 4. (Thorn edit.)
[105]Prowe: II, 503-508.
[105]Prowe: II, 503-508.
[106]Ibid: II, 64.
[106]Ibid: II, 64.
[107]Ibid: II, 58-9.
[107]Ibid: II, 58-9.
[108]Rheticus:Narratio Prima.
[108]Rheticus:Narratio Prima.
[109]Prowe: II, 56.
[109]Prowe: II, 56.
[110]Copernicus: Dedication, 5-6. SeeAppendix B.
[110]Copernicus: Dedication, 5-6. SeeAppendix B.
[111]For a translation of this dedication in full, seeAppendix B.In the original MS. occurs a reference (struck out) to Aristarchus of Samos as holding the theory of the earth's motion. (Prowe: II, 507, note.) The finding of this passage proves that Copernicus had at least heard of Aristarchus, but his apparent indifference is the more strange since an account of his teaching occurs in the same book of Plutarch from which Copernicus learned about Philolaus. But the chief source of our knowledge about Aristarchus is through Archimedes, and the editio princeps of his works did not appear till 1544, a year after the death of Copernicus. C.R. Eastman inPop. Sci.68:325.
[111]For a translation of this dedication in full, seeAppendix B.
In the original MS. occurs a reference (struck out) to Aristarchus of Samos as holding the theory of the earth's motion. (Prowe: II, 507, note.) The finding of this passage proves that Copernicus had at least heard of Aristarchus, but his apparent indifference is the more strange since an account of his teaching occurs in the same book of Plutarch from which Copernicus learned about Philolaus. But the chief source of our knowledge about Aristarchus is through Archimedes, and the editio princeps of his works did not appear till 1544, a year after the death of Copernicus. C.R. Eastman inPop. Sci.68:325.
[112]Delambre:Astr. Mod.pp. xi-xii.
[112]Delambre:Astr. Mod.pp. xi-xii.
[113]As the earth moves, the position in the heavens of a fixed star seen from the earth should differ slightly from its position observed six months later when the earth is on the opposite side of its orbit. The distance to the fixed stars is so vast, however, that this final proof of the earth's motion was not attained till 1838 when Bessel (1784-1846) observed stellar parallax from Königsberg. Berry: 123-24.
[113]As the earth moves, the position in the heavens of a fixed star seen from the earth should differ slightly from its position observed six months later when the earth is on the opposite side of its orbit. The distance to the fixed stars is so vast, however, that this final proof of the earth's motion was not attained till 1838 when Bessel (1784-1846) observed stellar parallax from Königsberg. Berry: 123-24.
[114]Commentariolusin Prowe: III, 202.
[114]Commentariolusin Prowe: III, 202.
[115]Holden inPop. Sci., 117.
[115]Holden inPop. Sci., 117.
[116]Delambre:Astr. Mod., p. xi.
[116]Delambre:Astr. Mod., p. xi.
[117]Snyder: 165.
[117]Snyder: 165.
[118]Copernicus: Dedication, 3.
[118]Copernicus: Dedication, 3.
[119]Prowe: II, 362-7.
[119]Prowe: II, 362-7.
[120]Ibid: II, 406.
[120]Ibid: II, 406.
[121]Ibid: II, 501.
[121]Ibid: II, 501.
[122]Ibid: II, 517-20.
[122]Ibid: II, 517-20.
[123]Four other editions have since appeared; at Basel, 1566, Amsterdam 1617, Warsaw 1847, and Thorn 1873. For further details, see Prowe: II, 543-7, and Thorn edition pp. xii-xx. The edition cited in this study is the Thorn one of 1873.
[123]Four other editions have since appeared; at Basel, 1566, Amsterdam 1617, Warsaw 1847, and Thorn 1873. For further details, see Prowe: II, 543-7, and Thorn edition pp. xii-xx. The edition cited in this study is the Thorn one of 1873.
[124]Prowe: II, 553-4.
[124]Prowe: II, 553-4.
[125]Copernicus:De Revolutionibus, I. "To the reader on the hypotheses of this book."
[125]Copernicus:De Revolutionibus, I. "To the reader on the hypotheses of this book."
[126]"For it is not necessary that these hypotheses be true, nor even probable, but this alone is sufficient, if they show reasoning fitting the observations."
[126]"For it is not necessary that these hypotheses be true, nor even probable, but this alone is sufficient, if they show reasoning fitting the observations."
[127]Kepler:Apologia Tychonis contra UrsuminOp. Om.: I, 244-246.
[127]Kepler:Apologia Tychonis contra UrsuminOp. Om.: I, 244-246.
[128]Prowe: II, 251, note.
[128]Prowe: II, 251, note.
[129]Ibid: II, 537-9.
[129]Ibid: II, 537-9.
[130]Ibid: II, 273.
[130]Ibid: II, 273.
[131]Ibid: II, 286-7.
[131]Ibid: II, 286-7.
[132]A second copy was found at Upsala shortly afterwards, though for centuries its existence was unknown save for two slight references to such a book, one by Gemma Frisius, the other by Tycho Brahe. Prowe: II, 284.
[132]A second copy was found at Upsala shortly afterwards, though for centuries its existence was unknown save for two slight references to such a book, one by Gemma Frisius, the other by Tycho Brahe. Prowe: II, 284.
[133]Ibid: II, 273-4.
[133]Ibid: II, 273-4.
[134]Prowe: II, 274, note.
[134]Prowe: II, 274, note.
[135]Prowe: II, 426-440.
[135]Prowe: II, 426-440.
[136]Ibid: II, 387-405.
[136]Ibid: II, 387-405.
[137]Ibid: II, 391.
[137]Ibid: II, 391.
[138]Holden inPop. Sci., 119.
[138]Holden inPop. Sci., 119.
[139]Prowe: II, 233-244.
[139]Prowe: II, 233-244.
[140]Burckhardt: 8.
[140]Burckhardt: 8.
[141]The two standard lives of Tycho Brahe are theVita Tychonis Braheiby Gassendi (1655) till recently the sole source of information, and Dreyer'sTycho Brahe(1890) based not only on Gassendi but on the documentary evidence disclosed by the researches of the 19th century. For Tycho's works I have used theOpera Omniapublished at Frankfort in 1648. The Danish Royal Scientific Society has issued a reprint (1901) of the rare 1573 edition of theDe Nova Stella.
[141]The two standard lives of Tycho Brahe are theVita Tychonis Braheiby Gassendi (1655) till recently the sole source of information, and Dreyer'sTycho Brahe(1890) based not only on Gassendi but on the documentary evidence disclosed by the researches of the 19th century. For Tycho's works I have used theOpera Omniapublished at Frankfort in 1648. The Danish Royal Scientific Society has issued a reprint (1901) of the rare 1573 edition of theDe Nova Stella.
[142]Bridges: 206.
[142]Bridges: 206.
[143]Dreyer: 11-84.
[143]Dreyer: 11-84.
[144]Gassendi: 2.
[144]Gassendi: 2.
[145]Dreyer: 13.
[145]Dreyer: 13.
[146]Gassendi: 9-10.
[146]Gassendi: 9-10.
[147]Dreyer: 38-44.
[147]Dreyer: 38-44.
[148]Ibid: 84.
[148]Ibid: 84.
[149]Ibid: 234-5.
[149]Ibid: 234-5.
[150]Kepler:Tabulæ Rudolphinæ. Title page.
[150]Kepler:Tabulæ Rudolphinæ. Title page.
[151]Dreyer: 317-363.
[151]Dreyer: 317-363.
[152]As stated in his Book on the Comet of 1577 (pub. 1588).
[152]As stated in his Book on the Comet of 1577 (pub. 1588).
[153]Dreyer: 168-9.
[153]Dreyer: 168-9.
[154]Schiaparelli in Snyder: 165.
[154]Schiaparelli in Snyder: 165.
[155]Brahe:Op. Om., pt. I, p. 337.
[155]Brahe:Op. Om., pt. I, p. 337.
[156]Ibid: 409-410.
[156]Ibid: 409-410.