1 The weight of testimony inclines to the latter. The mere titles of the works which have been written on the subject would fill a volume.

2 At a wedding feast, as mentioned by him in B. ix. c. 58. She was then the wife of Caligula.

3 Related in B. ix. c. 5.

4 Here at Tusdrita, he saw L. Coisicius, who it was said had been changed from a woman into a man. See B. vii. c. 3. Phlegon Trallianus and Ausonius also refer to the story.

5 See B. xvi. c. 2, and B. xxxi. c. 19.

6 Plinii Ep. B. vi. Ep. 16.

7 Twenty-fourth August.

8 “Fortes fortuna juvat.”

9 B. iii. Ep. 5.

10 Nero Claudius Drusus, the son of Livia, afterwards the wife of Augustus. He was the father of the Emperor Claudius, and died in Germany of the effects of an accident.

11 “Studiosus.” This work has perished.

12 “De Dubia Sermone.” A few scattered fragments of it still survive.

13 23rd of August.

14 For astrological presages.

15 At midwinter, this hour would answer at Rome to our midnight.

16 At midwinter, this would be between six and seven in the evening.

17 “Electorum Commentarii.”

18 B. viii. c. 34. His acrimony may however, in this instance, have outstripped his discretion. Though indebted to them for by far the largest amount of his information on almost every subject, he seems to have had a strong aversion to the Greeks, and repeatedly charges them with lying, viciousness, boasting, and vanity. See B. ii. c. 112; B. iii. c. 6; B. v. c. 1; B. xv. c. 5; B. xix. c. 26; B. xxviii. c. 29; B. xxxvii. c. 74.

19 Of Vespasian and Titus for certain; and probably of Nero, who appointed him “procurator Cæsaris” in Spain.

20 Even on that point he contradicts himself in the next Book. See B. viii. c. 19, and 64, in reference to the lion and the horse.

21 See B. vii. c. 51.

22 “Summa vitæ felicitas.” B. vii. c. 54.

23 B. vii. c. 53.

24 He loses no opportunity of inveighing against luxury and sensuality.

25 The question as to a future existence he calls “Manium ambages,” “quiddities about the Manes.” B. vii. c. 56.

26 See B. vii. c. 53.

27 We have already seen that in his earlier years he was warned in a vision by Drusus to write the history of the wars in Germany; but there is a vast difference between paying attention to the suggestions of a dream, and believing in the immortality of the soul, or the existence of disembodied spirits.

28 B. vii. c. 53.

29 B. vii. c. 58, 59, 60.

30 Mankind must surely have agreed before this in making the instruments employed in shaving.

31 “Discours Premier sur l’Histoire Naturelle.”

32 Biographie Universelle. Vol. 35. Art. Pline.

33 This, however, is not the fault of Pliny, but the result of imperfect tradition. To have described every object minutely that he has named, and of which he has given the peculiar properties, would have swollen his book to a most enormous size, almost indeed beyond conception.

34 Lemaire informs us, in his title-page, that the two first books of the Natural History are edited by M. Alexandre, in his edition.

35 “Jucundissime;” it is not easy to find an epithet in our language which will correctly express the meaning of the original, affectionate and familiar, at the same time that it is sufficiently dignified and respectful.

36 Lamb’s trans.; Carm. i. 4. of the original.

37 “Conterraneus;” we have no word in English which expresses the idea intended by the original, and which is, at the same time, a military term. There is indeed some reason to doubt, whether the word now inserted in the text was the one employed by the author: see the remarks of M. Alexandre, in Lem. i. 3; also an observation in Cigalino’s dissertation on the native country of Pliny; Valpy, 8.

38 “Permutatis prioribus sætabis;” Carm. xii. 14; xxv. 7; see the notes in Lamb’s trans. pp. 135 & 149.

39 These names in the original are Varaniolus and Fabullus, which are supposed to have been changed from Veranius and Fabius, as terms of familiarity and endearment; see Poinsinet, i. 24, and Lemaire, i. 4.

40 The narrative of Suetonius may serve to illustrate the observation of Pliny: “Triumphavit (Titus) cum patre, censuramque gessit una. Eidem collega et in tribunicia potestate, et in septem consulatibus fuit. Receptaque ad se prope omnium officiorum cura, cum patris nomine et epistolas ipse dictaret, et edicta conscriberet, orationesque in Senatu recitaret etiam quæstoris vice, præfecturam quoque prætorii suscepit, nunquam ad id tempus, nisi ab Equite Romano, administratum.” (viii. 5.)

41 “Perfricui faciem.” This appears to have been a proverbial expression among the Romans; Cicero, Tusc. Quæs. iii. 41, employs “os perfricuisti,” and Martial, xi. 27. 7, “perfricuit frontem,” in the same sense.

42 Suetonius speaks of Domitian’s taste for poetry, as a part of his habitual dissimulation, viii. 2; see also the notes of Poinsinet, i. 26, and of Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 351.

43 “Non eras in hoc albo;” see the note of Alexandre, in Lemaire, i. 8. A passage in Quintilian, xii. 4, may serve to illustrate this use of the term ‘album’; “... quorum alii se ad album ac rubricas transtulerunt....”

44 It appears that the passage in which Cicero makes this quotation from Lucilius, is not in the part of his treatise De Republica which was lately discovered by Angelus Maius; Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 9. Cicero refers to this remark of Lucilius in two of his other works, although with a variation in the expression and in the individuals specified; De Orat. ii. 6, and De Fin. i. 3.

45 “Qui primus condidit styli nasum.”

46 “Sed hæc ego mihi nunc patrocinia ademi nuncupatione.”

47 “Pecunias deponerent.” Ajasson, i. 11, remarks on these words, “Qui videri volebant ambitu alienissimi, pecuniam apud sanctum aliquem virum deponebant, qua scilicet multarentur, si unquam hujus criminis manifesti fierent.”

48 This expression is not found in any of the works of Cicero which are now extant, nor, indeed, is it certain that it was anything more than a remark made in conversation.

49 “Provocatio,” calling forth.

50 Horace, Epist. ii. 1. 143; Ovid, Fast. iv. 746 and v. 121, and Tibullus, i. 1. 26 and ii. 5. 37, refer to the offerings of milk made by the country people to their rural deities.

51 “... id est, artium et doctrinarum omnium circulus;” Alexandre in Lem. i. 14.

52 These words are not found in any of the books of Livy now extant; we may conclude that they were introduced into the latter part of his work.

53 “Quem nunc primum historiæ Plinianæ librum vocamus, hic non numeratur, quod sit operis index.” Hardouin in Lem. i. 16.

54 Nothing is known of Domitius Piso, either as an author or an individual.

55 The names of these authors will be found, arranged by Hardouin alphabetically, with a brief account of them and their works, in Lem. i. 157 et seq.; we have nearly the same list in Valpy, p. 4903.

56 “Musinamur.” We learn from Hardouin, Lem. i. 17, that there is some doubt as to the word employed by our author, whether it was musinamur or muginamur; I should be disposed to adopt the former, as being, according to the remark of Turnebus, “verbum a Musis deductum.”

57 “A fine Aufidii Bassi;” as Alexandre remarks, “Finis autem Aufidii Bassi intelligendus est non mors ejus, sed tempus ad quod suas ipse perduxerat historias. Quodnam illud ignoramus.” Lem. i. 18. For an account of Aufidius Bassus we are referred to the catalogue of Hardouin, but his name does not appear there. Quintilian (x. 1) informs us, that he wrote an account of the Germanic war.

58 “Jam pridem peracta sancitur.”

59 This sentiment is not found in that portion of the treatise which has been lately published by Angelus Maius. Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 19.

60 The following is probably the passage in the Offices to which Pliny refers: “Panæcius igitur, qui sine controversia de officiis accuratissime disputavit, quemque nos, correctione quadam exhibita, potissimum secuti sumus....” (iii. 2.)

61 “Cum præsertim sors fiat ex usura.” The commentators and translators have differed respecting the interpretation of this passage; I have given what appears to me the obvious meaning of the words.

62 “Lac gallinaceum;” “Proverbium de re singulari et admodum rara,” according to Hardouin, who quotes a parallel passage from Petronius; Lemaire, i. 21.

63 The titles in the original are given in Greek; I have inserted in the text the words which most nearly resemble them, and which have been employed by modern authors.

64 “Lucubratio.”

65 The pun in the original cannot be preserved in the translation; the English reader may conceive the name Bibaculus to correspond to our surname Jolly.

66 “Sesculysses” and “Flextabula;” literally, Ulysses and a Half, and Bend-table.

67 Βιβλιοθήκη.

68 “Cymbalum mundi” and “publicæ famæ tympanum.”

69 “Pendenti titulo;” as Hardouin explains it, “qui nondum absolutum opus significaret, verum adhuc pendere, velut imperfectum.” Lemaire, i. 26.

70 “Homeromastigæ.”

71 “Dialectici.” By this term our author probably meant to designate those critics who were disposed to dwell upon minute verbal distinctions; “dialecticarum captionum amantes,” according to Hardouin; Lem. i. 28.

72 “Quod argutiarum amantissimi, et quod æmulatio inter illos acerbissima.” Alexandre in Lemaire, i. 28.

73 Pliny the younger, in one of his letters (iii. 5), where he enumerates all his uncle’s publications, informs us, that he wrote “a piece of criticism in eight books, concerning ambiguity of expression.” Melmoth’s Pliny, i. 136.

74 The ancients had very exaggerated notions respecting the period of the elephant’s pregnancy; our author, in a subsequent part of his work (viii. 10), says, “Decem annis gestare vulgus existimat; Aristoteles biennio.”

75 His real name was Tyrtamus, but in consequence of the beauty of his style, he acquired the appellation by which he is generally known from the word θεῖος φράσις. Cicero on various occasions refers to him; Brutus, 121; Orator, 17, et alibi.

76 “Suspendio jam quærere mortem oportere homines vitæque renunciare, cum tantum licentiæ, vel feminæ, vel imperiti homines sumant, ut in doctissimos scribant;” Hardouin in Lemaire, i. 29. We learn from Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 33, that the name of this female was Leontium; “... sed meretricula etiam Leontium contra Theophrastum scribere ausa sit.”

77 A. Gellius (vii. 4) refers to this work and gives an extract from 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,

The second,

The third

In the Fasti of Ovid, we have examples of the two latter of these significations:—

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.

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,—

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:—

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 note142, 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. 51¹⁄₂ 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:—

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.