SCIENCE OF THE COSMOS. 57 



time of Pythagoras, and in conformity with its definition by 

 the unknown author of the treatise, entitled " De Mundo/' 

 which was long erroneously attributed to Aristotle. If 

 scientific names had not long varied from their true linguistic 

 meaning, the present work might properly have been entitled 

 '* Cosmography!' divided into Uranography and Geo- 

 graphy. The desire of imitating the Greeks led the later 

 Eomans, in their feebler philosopliical essays, to give the 

 signification of universe to the word mundus, the primary 

 meaning of which was merely that of ornament, without 

 including order or regularity in the arrangement. of parts. 

 The introduction of this technical term, in the same double 

 signification as the Greek word Cosmos, was probably due 

 to Ennius( 28 ), who was a follower of the Italic school, and 

 translated the writings of Epicharmus, or one of his imita- 

 tors, on the Pythagorean Philosophy. A physical history 

 of the universe, in the extended sense of the word, ought, 

 if materials for writing it existed, to trace the variations 

 to which the Cosmos has been subjected in the course of 

 ages, from those new stars which have suddenly become 

 visible or have disappeared in the firmament, from nebulae 

 dissolving or condensing towards their centres, to the 

 first cryptogamic vegetation on the surface of the recently 

 cooled crust of the globe, or that which now clothes the 

 coral reef newly risen above the ocean. On the other 

 hand, the object of a physical description of the universe 

 is to present a view of all that co-exists in space, and of 

 the simultaneous action of natural forces, with the result- 

 ing phenomena. But if we wish to comprehend existing 

 nature well, we cannot separate entirely and absolutely the 

 consideration of the present state of things, from that of 



