Diotimos Reading Desk

Tap the page, move to the top or bottom edge, swipe down, or press Tab to reveal reading controls. Use the arrow keys or swipe sideways to turn pages.

← ExitThe Summary of Physics Restored

Reading language

To Students of the Light of Natural Philosophy

Lucis Physicæ Studiosis S.

GREETINGS TO STUDENTS OF THE LIGHT OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY.

Recently, students of Nature’s secrets, I withdrew of my own accord from public responsibilities and the stormy shoals of the court, and took refuge in the peaceful shallows of domestic tranquillity. The poet’s words often came to my rejoicing mind: Indeed, I have now set myself free and escaped my chains. I felt my old reflection upon the things of Nature returning—the reflection that had once grown up with me from my earliest years. I gladly offered myself to it as it approached at this timely moment, so that Nature might repay the splendour of Fortune, which I had freely renounced, with a present gift of her own light, and also so that I might clear myself of a public charge. For it seemed that the laws of my country and the duties of public office already had an accusation prepared against me as a deserter. To prevent them from condemning me by their votes as one proscribed on that charge, I fled to the sacred protection of the hidden laws of the Universe, which deserves the name of our common homeland, so that this protection might preserve my innocence from slander. For shame will prevent political laws from passing a harsh sentence upon a man who has put the anxieties of civic affairs behind him and devoted himself to the study and service of the commonwealth of the world.

As my mind turned over Nature’s empire, laws, order, governance, harmony, effects, causes, and, finally, her immense resources, wonder first seized it. For minds of a liberal cast, wonder is as much a spur to acquiring knowledge as it is evidence of ignorance. It carries the mind upwards, and through that movement kindles the desire to gain knowledge of what one is ashamed not to know. Growing warm through such exercise, my mind brought many decrees of ancient and dominant philosophy back to the anvil and refused to assent to them. For at first Nature seemed to offer from afar, as though from a distant borderland of truth, a different light, dim and uncertain through the clouds. At length, as its radiance grew stronger, the dullness of the clouds was overcome and disclosed a surer light. Bathed in it, my mind became clearer and more confident in bringing Nature’s secrets to light.

The first errors of the ancients to confront me concerned the principles of Nature; they were also the worst and the roots of the rest. As I reflected more deeply on first matter and universal form, from which the other things proceeded, and on the number of the elements, their qualities, opposition, position, and interchange, the matter appeared to me otherwise than in the received opinion. Neither the weight of the more authoritative philosophers nor their arguments, as uncertain as they were ingenious, could turn my mind away from Nature’s light, to which it had wholly bound itself. Thus wonder drew my mind into a love of knowledge. Love, which uses fiery rays for weapons, carried my kindled mind into Nature’s more sacred approaches. Yet I long hesitated over whether I ought to share with you, disciples of philosophy, the secrets drawn from there. I suspected that the undertaking might be unwelcome to you and full of dangerous hazard for me. For I felt myself warned by the years, which are the best counsellors, to learn prudence from another’s misfortune. I had seen clearly enough how many writers had suffered shipwreck in their reputation; how sparing minds are in approving the labours of others and how ready to condemn them; how bold they are in fashioning and cherishing phantoms, how obstinate in removing truth from view; and, finally, how difficult, and often damaging, it is to uproot the entrenched roots of accepted opinions and plant new ones.

At last love of truth and of you, candid champions of the light of natural philosophy, prevailed. The same love that had prompted the search for truth also prompted its publication. Let me obtain this one thing from you so that you may sit as fairer judges: shake off the names of Plato, Aristotle, and the great leaders of the philosophers; set aside the authority of these eminent men; preserve intact in your own keeping the trust that they have bound to themselves. When you unroll their writings, add “No evil eye!” lest the popular spell of an illustrious name creep into your minds. Far be it from me to ask that the slightest thing be taken from their fame or the greatness of their minds. I have always held them worthy of reverence like divine powers. I judge every accumulation of praise and glory unequal to the glory of such philosophers. They took up Philosophy, crying in her cradle, and increased her strength so far beyond her years that those lofty souls left posterity scarcely any hope of striving further. Yet the first age of Philosophy, newly born and not yet mature, did not permit every fold and winding of Nature to be unfolded and her most hidden secrets to be thoroughly disclosed with precision and without error—even in their own judgement.

The fertile minds of their successors advanced discoveries, brought hidden things to light, cultivated rough ground, and gave support to what was entangled. In this way the sciences were brought through the centuries to a mature age. In this way a long succession of years gave them their height, so far as the powers of human intelligence have yet allowed. Perhaps more still remains to be sought than has been possessed. Philosophy does not become worn out with age like a garment, but stronger. The same years that win credit for errors also take it away. Do not condemn an innocent person by a hasty judgment before the case has been adequately examined. If moving the sacred boundary stones of Philosophy seems a crime, do not grow angry and immediately pronounce me sacrilegious. Consider instead whether those boundaries are presented to you as advanced rather than removed; whether her rights have been restored rather than corrupted; whether her majesty has been increased rather than diminished. Perhaps she herself, in return for the benefit, will then refuse neither her advocacy against the tricks of the Sophists nor her protection against the savagery of envy and ignorance.

Barking like beasts, the former wastes away at another’s good fortune, the latter rages in its own blindness. Both wantonly break into the more carefully tended gardens of the sciences and the more delightful plantings of Philosophy, laying waste the praiseworthy labours of more fortunate minds. They will set their terrors before me in vain. I shall look down upon their attempts so long as the divine presence of truth is before my sight, under whose protection I may walk in safety. Receive these first offerings of my leisure in the spirit in which they are offered to you. If they please you little, or you possess other and better things, brush this little gift of ours with a gentle bite, as though caressing it. It will be welcome for this very reason: that it has stirred you towards better things.

5.S. abbreviates salutem, the conventional greeting. Curia can denote a court or governing assembly; the passage itself does not specify an office or a date of retirement. Its movement from public duties to the ‘commonwealth of the world’ makes natural inquiry a form of service rather than merely a private escape.

6.The verse is quoted without the poet’s name or a work reference. The Latin reproduces the wording printed here, including cathenas. Its image of release belongs to the author’s account of retirement.

7.Princeps philosophia is the leading or dominant philosophy against which the preface argues. ‘Back to the anvil’ is the author’s image of reconsideration and reworking. Wonder, light, and love describe an intellectual and affective progress without replacing the stated subject, Nature, with a solely psychological allegory.

8.The printed clause alia mihi … visa est is grammatically awkward. The English follows its clear contrast between the author’s view and received opinion without silently supplying a new Latin noun. Larvae are phantoms or masks, here opposed to truth, rather than insect larvae. The love armed with fiery rays evokes Cupid while also continuing the preface’s language of illumination.

9.Praefiscini is a conventional expression intended to avert an evil eye or harmful fascination. The author turns it playfully against the spell cast by a celebrated name. The phrase has been translated rather than dropped. This paragraph expressly preserves respect for Plato and Aristotle while contesting the sufficiency of their authority.

10.The source prints phisophorum for the expected philosophorum. The Latin retains the printer’s shortened form; the English gives the unambiguous sense. Philosophy is personified as a child whose later growth can exceed the work of her first guardians.

11.The Latin sentence continues directly from the previous unit. Its boundary stones and restored rights explain restituta in the title: the author claims to repair and extend philosophy’s proper domain. The appeal to progress remains within his own religious natural philosophy; it should not be recast as a declaration of modern scientific method.

12.‘The former’ and ‘the latter’ refer to envy and ignorance in the previous unit. The printed construction quandiu conspectum veritatis numen is elliptical; the English supplies a minimal sense from the surrounding promise of truth’s protection. Libamina are first offerings or libations. The final ‘gentle bite’ is the author’s deliberately playful image for mild criticism, following his account of hostile attacks.