INDUCTION OF COPERNICUS. 267 



co's time. The Dogmatism of the stationary period, which identified 

 the cause of philosophical and religious truth, had not yet distinctly 

 felt itself attacked by the advance of physical knowledge ; and there- 

 fore had not begun to look with alarm ou such movements. Still, the 

 claims of Scripture and of ecclesiastical authority were asserted as para- 

 mount on all subjects; and it was obvious that many persons would 

 be disquieted or offended with the .new interpretation of many scrip- 

 tural expressions, which the true theory would make necessary. This 

 evil Copernicus appears to have foreseen ; and this and other causes* 

 long withheld him from publication. He was himself an ecclesiastic ; 

 and, by the patronage of his maternal uncle, was prebendary of the 

 church of St. John at Thorn, and a canon of the church of Fraueu- 

 burg, in the diocese of Ermeland. 6 He had been a student at Bologna, 

 and had taught mathematics at Rome in the year 1500 ; and he after- 

 wards pursued his studies and observations at his residence near the 

 mouth of the Vistula. 7 His discovery of his system must have occurred 

 before 1507, for in 1543 he informs Pope Paulus the Third, in his dedi- 

 cation, that he had kept his book by him for four times the nine years 

 recommended by Horace, and then only published it at the earnest en- 

 treaty of his friend Cardinal Schomberg, whose letter is prefixed to 

 the work. " Though I know," he says, " that the thoughts of a phi- 

 losopher do not depend on the judgment of the many, his study being 

 to seek out truth in all things as far as that is permitted by God to 

 human reason: yet when I considered," he adds, "how absurd my 

 doctrine would appear, I long hesitated whether I should publish my 

 book, or whether it were not better to follow the example of the Pytha- 

 goreans and others, who delivered their doctrines only by tradition 

 and to friends." It will be observed that he speaks here of the oppo- 

 sition of the established school of Astronomers, not of Divines. The 

 latter, indeed, he appears to consider as a less formidable danger. " It 

 perchance," he says at the end of his preface, "there be f-iaraiokoyoi, 

 vain babblers, who knowing nothing of mathematics, yet assume the 

 right of judging on account of some place of Scripture perversely 

 wrested to their purpose, and who blame and attack my undertaking; 

 I heed them not, and look upon their judgments as rash and con- 

 temptible." He then goes on to show that the globular figure of the 

 earth (which was, of course, at that time, an undisputed point among 

 astronomers), had been opposed on similar grounds by Lactantius, who, 



6 Kheticus, Far. p. 94. * Riccioli. 



