I. CONCLUSION

[I.] If the celestial Phenomena alone be considered, they are saved in Astronomical and Mathematical rigor under either Hypothesis — that is, both under the one which supposes the immobility of the Earth, and under the one which supposes the Diurnal and Annual motion of the Earth; nor have any arguments hitherto been devised, deduced from the appearances in the heaven, which demonstrate the truth of the one and the falsity of the other.

This is clear to one surveying the Arguments and their solutions, which were indicated in chapters 33 and 34, and more fully discussed from ch. 5 to 32 of this Section — if one selects those derived from the celestial motions and the other things which appear in the heaven. For all those arguments, on either side, have been satisfied — more indeed or less — yet in such a way that the solutions have their own probability, or at least cannot be convicted of falsity. And by that occasion it will be established that there are many arguments which, at first sight and unforeseen, could terrify the defender of the other hypothesis, and yet, looked into, have no force or a very tiny one — not so much as the followers of either school have hitherto boasted. Nay, not a few [arguments] adduced against the Immobility of the Earth are sophistical and full of fallacy, and yet are seriously inculcated by the Copernicans — of which sort are those at ch. 33, nos. 3, 12, 15, 48, 49 — or else rest on doubtful experiments or slippery suppositions, as those we indicated in the same chapter, nos. 20, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 45. Just as, on the contrary, many [arguments] hurled against the motion of the Earth go to nothing, because they have arisen from ignorance of the Copernican hypothesis — not examined even by Tycho, Clavius, Scheiner, and other great men with such profundity as was needful. But when the Copernicans boast that the motion of the Earth and the rest [stationariness] of the Sun has been demonstrated, that is either a solemn falsehood, or must be understood of a mere hypothesis — that is, [in the sense] that, if the Earth’s motion be posited, etc., the Phenomena of the heaven can be saved, and indeed sometimes with greater elegance according to some reasoning, and by a more probable reasoning. Indeed Copernicus himself and Galileo, and not a few of the Copernicans, concede that all the phenomena of the heaven are equally saved under either hypothesis.

II. CONCLUSION

[II.] If the certain and manifest Physical experiments in elementary bodies be considered, all are saved under either of the aforesaid Hypotheses, according to Physico-mathematical rigor — except those which pertain to the impact of Heavy and Light [bodies] naturally descending or ascending, or to the impact or velocity of projectiles [fired] now toward the poles of the world, now toward the East, now toward the West. For these, in Physico-mathematical rigor, cannot be saved except on the sole hypothesis of an Earth at rest.

The former part is likewise established to one running through the Arguments drawn from the motions of elementary things, with their solutions, indicated in chs. 33 and 34. But the latter part [is established] from Fr. Grimaldi’s and our demonstrations, indicated in ch. 34, numbers 1, 2, 19, and 20 — but clearly extended in their own places. Which [demonstrations], in so celebrated a controversy, as they are not to be made little of among fair estimators of things, so it is needful to render [them] as accepted by God, who favors our labors according to His munificence. And so, although Ptolemy in book 1 [of his work] had — confusedly — scented out other experiments, or perhaps these very ones, in the Magna Constructio [Almagest], ch. 7, he skillfully pronounced that the Hypothesis of a moving Earth can be overthrown from these [physical considerations] rather than from Astronomical ones, when he said:

[Margin: Ptolemy’s prudent judgment concerning the force of the arguments against the motion of the Earth.]

“For it escapes these [men] — namely the movers of the Earth — that, as far as it pertains to the appearances in the stars indeed, perhaps nothing stands in the way, if someone should more simply consider these things to be so; but from the accidents [phenomena] which happen around us and in the air, it will appear exceedingly ridiculous.”

III. CONCLUSION

[III.] If, besides, the Physical Evidence alone be considered (which indeed in Physical matters alone has force), there are several arguments Physically evident for the Immobility of the Earth; but none for its motion.

The former part will be clear to one reading through the arguments indicated in ch. 34, numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, 17, 19, 20, 23, 63 — to which are also reduced those we touched in the same place, nos. 8 and 9. But I said that it [this evidence] has force in Physical science, to which Astronomy is subaltern, so long as Mathematical [considerations] do not resist them; nor indeed is it necessary that they have Mathematical evidence, when that cannot be had. The latter, negative, part is established from all the arguments for the motion of the Earth drawn from sensible experiment; for so far are they from containing Physical evidence, that they rather tend against the evidence of the senses, or the Physical [evidence]; while the rest proceed from mere congruences in a hypothesis concerning a thing not impossible, and having some desirable features.

IV. CONCLUSION

[IV.] If, the demonstrative and evident Arguments being set aside, those be considered which contain mere probability in themselves, not a few of this kind exist for either hypothesis — so many and such that, according to each person’s bent, they could incline the intellect toward either hypothesis. Were it not that the sacred Authority of the Divine Scriptures stood in the way — which standing in the way, all that probability ceases.

This conclusion likewise is sufficiently clear, the weightier arguments being considered which were made for the motion of the Earth in ch. 33 — for instance those at nos. 9, 11, 29, 30, 32, 43, and any of that kind; and those against the motion of the Earth in ch. 34, for example those at nos. 32, 54, 68, 70. I said “in themselves,” because in the understanding of those who have assented to the Arguments (of which we spoke in Conclusions 2 and 3) as demonstrative and evident against the motion of the Earth, no arguments for the motion of the earth will meanwhile be able actually to generate probability; and much less so if the authority of divine Scripture stand in the way.

V. CONCLUSION

[Margin: PRINCIPAL CONCLUSION.]

[V.] Reason alone and the Intrinsic Arguments being regarded, and all Authority set aside [circumscribed], that Hypothesis is to be absolutely asserted as true which supposes the Immobility or Rest of the Earth; and that Hypothesis is false, and repugnant to Physical — nay even to Physico-mathematical — demonstrations, which attributes to the Earth either the Diurnal motion alone, or the Diurnal and Annual motion [together].

This conclusion follows from the 2nd and 3rd Conclusion.

VI. CONCLUSION

[VI.] For one wishing either to defend or to attack either of the aforesaid Hypotheses — all the arguments hitherto devised being led out into the battle-line — no amount of skill in Physical or Theological matters suffices, unless he be also most expert in Astronomy, and not lightly imbued with Geometry and Arithmetic, and with not a few of the subaltern Mathematical [sciences].

For it is clear, from the things indicated in chs. 33 and 34, that again and again the principles or conclusions of the more recondite Astronomy are required in the Arguments and their solutions; and I say the same of Geometry and Arithmetic, etc. Otherwise we know that not only have mere Physicists not understood — nor will understand — even the terms of the arguments, but also that some, who [merely] greeted the Mathematical [sciences] from the threshold, have fallen into manifest errors. Which [things I say] by way of Counsel and admonition, not however indi-…

[…continues on p. 479 (PDF 514) with the catchword “rectè” (indi-rectè).]

(printed p. 479 — Chapter XXXV concludes: Conclusion VI ends with Riccioli crediting his achievement to God, and Conclusion VII asks that Copernicans acknowledge the Theologians’ competence to judge these hypotheses, answering Kepler’s taunt that immobilists cling to a fixed Earth “like polyps to a rock.” Chapter XXXVI then opens, adducing the authorities of Sacred Scripture for the Sun’s motion and the Earth’s immobility, prefaced by Riccioli’s Tridentine obligations and Augustine’s warnings against making Scripture ridiculous by defending claims that certain reason disproves.)

[Header: DE SYSTEMATE TERRÆ MOTÆ — 479]

…[not however] indirectly, for the sake of ostentation, let these things be said. For if in this argument we have furnished anything not unworthy of learned men, we render it as received from God alone — the Giver of Life, Talent, Judgment, Industry, and of all other opportunities — and we ascribe nothing, or very little, to our own weakness.

VII. CONCLUSION

[VII.] It is just that henceforth the followers of the Copernican hypothesis, if there be any, acknowledge in Theologians and Churchmen sufficient skill for passing judgment on these hypotheses; and [acknowledge] that the Copernican hypothesis is reproved not from excessive or mere reverence toward the Ecclesiastical decrees or the Sacred letters, but also from a deeper inspection of either hypothesis, and from reasons thence deduced with the utmost circumspection.

To what these things pertain, those know who everywhere wrangle with the Copernicans, and repeatedly feel an ill-advised piety, and a certain religious timidity, thrust upon them by [the Copernicans’] words or writings — as though, constrained by this alone, and not philosophizing with a free mind, we had clung immovably to the hypothesis of an Unmoved Earth, like polyps to a rock. For thus Kepler, especially in the introduction to the Commentaries on Mars [the Astronomia Nova]:

“But there are far more of those who are moved by piety, so as not to assent to Copernicus, fearing lest a lie be charged upon the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scriptures, if we should say that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still.”

Things similar to which from him we shall read below, in ch. 38, no. 3.