Opinion of the. Ancients refpecting the Moon. 
much difficulty in an affeflment touching 
income only; that) many candid, and 
judicivus perfons, doubt abaut the practi- 
eability of the meailire; what muft the cafe 
be in an affeflment touching the fee-{imple 
of property, in the fame proportion? 
Where all would be borrowers, and none 
lenders, great indeed would be the difh- 
culty of acquiring money! This fubject 
affords a wide field of difcuffion; and 
many refle&tions fuggeft themfelves, which 
I reitrain, that I may not tranfgrefs the 
- bounds ufually affigned to each article in 
your ufeful publication. ‘The Monthly 
Magazine has an extenfive circulation, and 
may juitly be confidered asa work happily 
combining the wile dulct ; {cientific, with 
amufing information. If my memory do 
not deceive me, I have formerly feen a 
good paper or two, upon this fubject, in 
your Magazine; and, in the prefent ftate 
of the public mind, no inveftigation can 
be more interefting, than that, which is 
couneéted with the national finances; 
which, though impaired by mifmanage- 
ment, are far, we truft, from being ex- 
haufted.. I remain, Sir, your obedient 
and- humble fervant, 
Feb. 35.1798. CaRACTACUSs. 

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
HE perufal of “ The Parallel of the 
Ancients and Moderns,’ by M. 
Perrault, has induced me to colleé& the 
fentiments of ancient authors refpeét- 
ing the Moon. It is aftonifhing that, 
without the means of afcertaining conjec- 
tures which we at prefent have, they have 
difcovered, by the mental eye, whatever 
has fince been prefented to corporeal fight, 
through the medium of telefcopes. 
The penetration and fagacity of the 
ancients have been particularly diftin- 
guifhed ia their ideas upon the moon. 
The Chaldeans and Egyptians, who af- 
fected the imaginary honour of the moft 
extravagant antiquity, cultivated the 
fcience of aftronomy with peculiar dili- 
gence. The reliques of Chaldean aftro- 
nomy are extremely few; and the refults 
of their ftudy muit neceffarily have been 
Frequently erroneous and. indefinite; yet {till 
we find that the rays of real truth have 
fometimes beamed through the dark ob- 
{curity which enveloped them. In the 
Uranologion of Petavius, there is a quo- 
tation from Gemina, which indicates that 
they had difcerned that the motion of the 
moon was not uniform; and that they had 
attempted to align thofe particular parts 
267: 
of her orbit, in which it was more rapid 
or more flow. If any credibility may be’ 
repofed in the writings and quotations of: 
Arviftotle and Pliny, the Chaldeans were 
not unacquainted with the motions of» the 
moon’s nodes, and that of her apopée’s 
and they hal rationally inferred, from the’ 
occultation of fixed itars by the moons’ 
that this luminary was the caufe of ‘the 
eclipfes of the fun. From the Hebrews 
the moon received infinitely more adora-. 
tion than the fun, The feftivals en the’ 
firft day of the new moon, were folemnly: 
celebrated, as appears from an expreffion 
of David’s to Jonathan in-r Sam. c.:xx.’ 
v. 5. Apulcius celebrates themoon, as of 
the vivific feries, and confequently fupe-: 
rior to the fun, which was ‘of the harmo- 
nic. It is uncertain at what particular 
time aftronomical knowledge originated. 
among the Greeks. ‘Thales was the’ firft: 
who reafoned upon the principles of the’ 
{cience. Previous to the return of Thales 
from Egypt, the zames of the confteliations 
were .determined, and fome faint glim- 
merings of aftronomical knowledge perhaps 
fparkled for the inftant in thetimes of He~ 
fiod and Homer, but certainly no confi- 
derable advancement had been made. - 
Thales firft taught that ‘ the light of 
the moon was refleéted from. the fun.*”. 
This fentiment was adopted by Anaxago-~ 
ras, Pythagoras, and Empedocles*, his 
fucceffors, who, by means of this prin- 
ciple, accounted for the mildnefs of its: 
{plendour, and the imperceptibility” of: 
its heat. in ; 
Many ¢f the ancient Greek philofophers | 
and aftronomers, not only imagined’ the 
ftars to be funs, about which rolled pla-: 
nets of their own, fuch as compofe 
our folar fyftem ; they maintained 
that thefe myriads of planets were iz~ 
habited by beings, whofe natures “and” 
Pro-~ 
clus, in his commentary on Timzus, 
effences they could not defcribe. 
introduces three lines of a Fragment of 
Orpheus, which, in the moft perfect and- 

i ee 
* Agrorcursevas Tovey To Te EumredoxAcas;~ 
© syauAtoEs Tih TH NAS eos THY TEANINY } 
>? 
everbees tov evravle Quticnorem avTng 5°"! 
obey wre Deguov, wre AwumeovraDinverrecce pas" > 
[ACLS WOES NY EbKOS, eLarvews nous pagewg < 
Qwrav yeyevnevns. 
$6 Plutarch dé Facie in Orbe Luna,” tdinp.g2ge 
Again, < 
THYTE GEANnYHY Levdopat, “Yat AITO FR HAWS 
gurilerbas. ** Diog. Laer. in Anexime 1.269 
And, 
Vide © Plin. V2). 9. 
mio Scipionisy” &c, MM 
unequivocal 
ate ta 
6° Cieeroin Some 
