(80) Cum igitur dicebatur: 'Duarum circumferentiarum inequaliter a se distantium impossibile est idem esse centrum'; dico quod verum est, si circumferentie sunt regulares sine gibbo vel gibbis; et cum dicitur in minori quod circumferentia aque et circumferentia terre sunt huiusmodi, dico quod non est verum, nisi per gibbum qui est in terra; et ideo ratio non procedit. |
(80) When it was said therefore, 'Two circumferences unequally distant from each other, cannot have a common centre,' I say that this is true, if the circumferences are regular, and without a hump or humps. And when it is said, in the minor, that the circumferences of water and of earth are such, I say that it is not true unless we allow, for the hump on the earth; and so the argument does not run. |
|
(81) Ad secundum, cum dicebatur: 'Nobiliori corpori debetur nobilior locus', dico quod verum est secundum propriam naturam, et concedo minorem; sed cum concluditur quo ideo aqua debet esse in altiori loco, dico quod verum est secundum propriam naturam utriusque corporis, sed per superheminentem causam, ut superius dictum est, accidit in hac parte terram esse superiorem; et sic ratio deficiebat in prima propositione. |
(81) As to the second, when it is said: 'The nobler place is due to the nobler body,' I say that it is true as far as concerns their proper nature; and I grant the minor; but when the conclusion is drawn, that water should therefore be in a more exalted position, I say that it is true so far as the proper nature of each body is concerned, but by reason of a more eminent cause, as said above, it happens that in this part the earth is higher; and thus the argument was defective in the first proposition. |
|
(82) Ad tertium, cum dicitur: 'Omnis oppinio que contradicit sensui est mala oppinio', dico quod ista ratio procedit ex falsa ymaginatione; ymaginatur enim naute quod ideo non videant terram in pelago existentes de navi, quia mare sit altius quam ipsa terra; sed hoc non est; ymo esset contrarium, magis enim viderent. Sed est hoc, quia frangitur radius rectus rei visibilis inter rem et oculum a convexo aque; nam cum aquam formam rotundam habere oporteat ubique circa centrum, necesse est in aliqua distantia ipsam efficere obstantiam alicuius convexi. |
(82) As to the third, when it said: 'Any idea which contradicts the senses is a false idea,' I say that the argument proceeds upon a fallacious imagination. For the sailors suppose that the reason why they cannot see the land when they are on deck is that the sea is higher than the land; but it is not so; nay, the contrary result would follow, for they would see more. But it happens because the direct ray from the visible thing is intercepted, between the thing and the eye, by the convexity of the water. For since the water must needs have a spherical form in every direction around its centre, it must necessarily, at any considerable distance, interpose the obstacle of a certain convexity. |
|
(83) Ad quartum, cum arguebatur: 'Si terra non esset inferior' etc., dico quod illa ratio fundatur in falso, et ideo nihil est. Credunt enim vulgares et physicorum documentorum ignari quod aqua ascendat ad cacumina montium et etiam ad locum fontium in forma aque; sed istud est valde puerile, nam aque generantur ibi, ut per Phylosophum patet in Metauris suis, ascendente materia in forma vaporis. |
(83) As to the fourth, when it was argued: 'If the earth were not lower', and the rest, I say that the argument is founded upon falsity, and is therefore nought. For the vulgar, and such as have no knowledge of physical arguments, believe that water rises to the summits of the mountains and also to the place of springs, in the form of water; but that is quite puerile, for waters are generated there (as the Philosopher shows in his Meteorics) by matter which ascends in the form of vapour. |
|
(84) Ad quintum, cum dicitur quod aqua est corpus imitabile orbis lune, et per hoc concluditur quod debeat esse ecentrica, cum orbis lune sit ecentricus, dico quod ista ratio non habet necessitatem; quia licet unum adimitetur aliud in uno, non propter hoc est necesse quod imitetur in omnibus. Videmus ignem imitari circulationem celi, et tamen non imitatur ipsum in non moveri recte, nec in non habere contrarium sue qualitati; et ideo ratio non procedit. |
(84) As to the fifth, when it is said that water is a body that imitates the orbit of the moon, and therefrom the conclusion is drawn that it must needs be excentric, since the orbit of the moon is excentric, I say that that argument carries no necessity; for though one thing should imitate another in one respect, it is not therefore necessary that it should imitate it in every respect. We see that fire imitates the circulation of the heavens, and yet it does not imitate it in not moving in a straight line, or in not having any contrary to its quality; and so the argument does not run. |
|
(85) Et sic ad argumenta. |
(85) So much, then, for the arguments. |
|
(86) Sic igitur determinatur determinatio et tractatus de forma et situ duorum elementorum, ut superius propositum fuit. |
(86) Thus, then, the determination and treatment is brought to a conclusion concerning the form and position of the two elements, as above proposed. |
|
(87) [XXIV]. Determinata est hec phylosophia dominante invicto domino, domino Cane Grandi de Scala pro Imperio sacrosancto Romano, per me Dantem Alagherium, phylosophorum minimum, in inclita urbe Verona, in sacello Helene gloriose, coram universo clero Veronensi, preter quosdam qui, nimia caritate ardentes, aliorum rogamina non admittunt, et per humilitatis virtutem Spiritus Sancti pauperes, ne aliorum excellentiam probare videantur, sermonibus eorum interesse refugiunt. |
(87) This philosophic question was determined under the rule of the unconquered lord, Lord Can Grande della Scala, representing the sacred Roman empire, by me, Dante Aligheri, least of philosophers, in the illustrious city of Verona, in the sanctuary of the glorious Helen, in the presence of all the clergy of Verona, except certain who, burning with excess of charity, will not accept the invitations of others; and who, in the virtue of humility, poor pensioners of the Holy Spirit, lest they should seem to endorse the excellence of others, refuse to be present at their discourses. |
|
(88) Et hoc factum est in anno a nativitate Domini nostri Iesu Christi millesimo trecentesimo vigesimo, in die Solis, quem prefatus noster Salvator per gloriosam suam nativitatem ac per admirabilem suam resurrectionem nobis innuit venerandum; qui quidem dies fuit septimus a Ianuariis idibus, et decimus tertius ante kalendas Februarias. |
(88) And this was accomplished in the one thousand three hundred and twentieth year, from the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, on Sunday, which our aforesaid Saviour made venerable to us by his glorious nativity and by his wondrous resurrection, which day was the seventh from the Ides of January, and the fourteenth before the Kalends of February. |
|
|