A treatise against iudicial astrologie Dedicated to the right Honorable Sir Thomas Egerton Knight, Lord Keeper of the great Seale, and one of her Maiesties most honorable priuie Councell. VVritten by Iohn Chamber, one of the prebendaries of her Maiesties free Chappell of VVindsor, and fellow of Eaton College.

CHAP. XVIII.

That the Astrologers need no farther confutation, then such as may be drawne out of their owne art, since their elections, and predictions can no way stand together.

BVt these Astrologers, as it seemeth, though they be full of fictions, yet were they neuer good poets; for they haue not wel learned that poe∣ticall axiome, mendacem memorem, nor that of Horace, Sibi conuenientia finge: for if they had, then once hauing deliuered that our euents, actions, end, and enterprises do necessari∣ly depend vpon the natiuitie, they would neuer haue obtruded to vs their doctrine of elections, they might easilie see how ill these two could stand together, for if our natiuitie, do necessitate as it were, and force our actions, what place can there be left for elections, ex∣cept it be such elections as is sometime vsed among children, chuse whether you will haue this or none. If the stars in our natiuitie dispose of our actions, and future euents, then must our actions of force fall out thereafter. Otherwise how can they truely be said to dispose? Againe if our actions be in our owne electi∣on to make them better or worse, by chusing a fit or vnfit day for them, how can the stars be said to rule and guide them? for if the stars rule them, they are not in our election, and if they be in our election, the stars do not rule them. We see therefore that these men can not be better confuted then by themselues. Their po∣sitions

haue no coherence, nor hang any better toge∣ther then a rope of sand. Belike here must that great saying take place, Sapiens dominabitur astris: but who shalbe their Sapiens or wise man then? sure the Astrolo∣ger only for ought that I see; for he seing by his natiui∣tie, that such an action, vpon such a day cannot fal wel out, & vpon such a day must fall well out, may change the day, & therwith the successe of his enterprise, or a∣ction at his pleasure: this euery man cannot doe, for lack of Astrologie, & therefore all the world be like are fooles sauing the Astrologer. I will not here stand long to discourse of their Egyptian, and dismall dayes, nor of their deriuation, whether they come of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and mala, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and mala: Egyptian sure they must needs be, because they are of those opprobria Egypti, which so long as we retaine, we are still in Egypt. Difference of times we grant, that somtimes they are cleare and quiet, some∣time cloudy and troublesome, according to that,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The time sometime a stepdame is, both fierce, and fell, and eke The same sometime a mother is exceeding kind and meeke.

Time was no stepdame to Croesus till he came at Ha∣lys, but when he cried, O Solon, Solon, then the case was altered. Otherwise we are to confesse, that as God is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, so is he not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,' that is no accep∣ter either of times or persons. Genes. 1. ver. 18. God saw that the day was good, and shall we say that they are infortunate, or dismall? This heathenish supersti∣tion is disallowed by the preacher, forbidden by the Apostle, and exploded by S. Augustine. Eccles. 11. ver. 4,

he that obserueth, and waiteth for winde and weather, shall neuer make good haruest, and therefore we are there warned to put the seed in the ground earely and late, because we know not whether is most like to take: what was the cause why the Apostle feared the Galath. what would become of them, but their superstitious obseruing of monthes, times, and yeares. S August. willing to shew them how they entangle themselues, not being able to reconcile their elections and con∣stellations, hath said both very fitly, and fatherly to them, de ciu. dei. lib. 5. cap. 7, his words are as follow: Now what an intolerable thing is it, that by choise of dayes, they seeke to change their old destinies with new? For example, one had it not in his natiuitie, to haue a worthy sonne, but rather a base child, and ther∣fore like a profound clarke, he made choise of a good hower to lie with his wife. By this meanes he framed himselfe a new destiny, which he had not before, and by this new destiny that became destiny to him, which was neuer his destiny by natiuitie. O madnesse of all madnesse! we must take heed what day we marry one. Belike least for lacke of heed and choise, we should light vpon a dismale day. But by this meanes what is become of our birth constellation? can a mā by choise of a day alter his destiny, & cānot another power alter that which he hath chosen? Farther, if onlie men, not all other things be ruled by constellations, wherefore do they for planting and sowing make choise of these dayes, & of other dayes for gelding their catell, brea∣king their coltes, couering their mares and such like.

But to leaue Augustine, euen Ptolemy confesseth, that if thy natiuitie be against thy enterprise, the elections

of dayes will be to small purpose. Of this point Miran∣dula discoursed more at large. lib. 2. aduersus Astrologos, but in effect the same you shall finde more briefly in S. Augustine in the place aboue cited. To this cōfuting them out of their owne principles must be added that of Alpetragius, teaching, that if there be a motion in heauen yet vnknowne, thē there is a body yet vnknown too for that motion: which opinion may also bee con∣firmed by those motions, which haue of late bin diui∣sed by our moderne Mathematiques, which they say their predecessours neuer knew. Now for the sight and order of the planets, how doe they agree? while they that follow the Egyptians, place the moone next & immediatly vnder the Sun, as doth also both Plato & Aristotle. For Aristotle in his booke de coelo, & Plato in Timaeo placeth the Moone next to the Sun, still vnder∣standing the Moone to be the lowest of al the planets. Ptolemy, the Chaldeans, and the latter men place the Sun in the middest of the planets, thinking that place meetest for it, as King ouer the rest. Geber and Theon in their cōmentaries vpon Ptolemy, hold that the Sun is nere the Moone. Andreas Sūmarius holdeth Saturne, Iupiter and Mars to be higher then the rest: but which of them among themselues is highest or lowest, nei∣ther is knowne (saith he) nor can be knowne. Moses Egyptius saith, there is no certaintie, what is the order and site of the planets, especially of the three vpper∣most of the number of spheares aboue the planets, what doutfull worke haue they made, some holding the eight sphear, in which are the fixed stares, to be the vttermost: others imagining a ninth orbe to compasse the eight which is inuisible: some also suppose ther is a

tenth spheare vtmost of all. The authours of the first o∣pinion were the Egyptians, and the Chaldeans: which Plato and Aristotle after embraced and Hipparcus, and Ptolemy: the same was lastly maintained by Leo Hebrae∣us, & Proclus the Platonike. The second opinion follow most of our modernes, as Alphonsus, who first made sup∣putations of planets by this sphear, thinking it to be the vttermost. Of the same minde were Leopoldus, Ma∣hala, and Campanus, and Albertus, all fathering this opi∣nion vpon Ptolemy, but falsely: for with him is no ninth sphere, much lesse any tenth, as you may perceiue both by the second booke of the Almagest, & the first book of Apotelesmata. For since Ptolemy vseth both the mo∣uable signes, called the images, or the figures of the eightsphear, and the immouable signes, referring to them the places of the planets, is sufficient proofe, that he dreamed of nothing, without the eight spheare. For those foure famous points, to wit, of the two tropicks, & two equinoctial he calleth the immouable signes, which are fixed and fastned in the eight spheare, not in the ninth; for these be his words in the second booke of the Almagest; I will a buse the names of the signes, applying them to the partes of the Zodiak, as if they began at the tropick and equinoctiall pointes, so the twelfth part from the vernall equinoctiall toward the sommer tropick, I will call Aries, the second twelfth part, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I will call Taurus, and so forth, ac∣cording to the order of the twelue signes deliuered by vs. And in the first booke of his Apotelesmata, he deter∣mineth the partes of the Zodiake, to which he referreth the planets, by the Solstitiall, and Equinoctiall points, but be there, or be there not any ninth spheare, all the

Astrologie of our age must needes downe. For if these celestiall influences proceede from all parts of heauens, it will follow, that they can prognosticate nothing, which make no account of the whole Orbe, as if the bare places where no starres are, had no force or power. But if these celestiall influences to change things here, proceede only from such starres as are in∣dued with euident light and beams, then must they of force grant, that no force descendeth from the ninth Sphere hither, which either hath no light at all, or such as cannot be perceiued. Wherefore either the whole Sphere is to be obserued, which they do not, or that ninth Sphere, if there be any such, is to be con∣temned, of which mind is Guido Bonatus, affirming that whatsoeuer is aboue the eight Sphere, belongeth not to the Astrologer. Farther, we are to note how they iarre not onely in motions, & reuolutions of the Pla∣nets, but euen of the Sun it selfe, how diuersely and contrarie they write. Before Hipparchus time they held that the Sunnes reuolution, which is a yeare, contei∣ned only 350. dayes, and a quarter of a day. Hipparchus thought the addition aboue euen dayes was lesse then a quarter. Ptolemey thinketh that lesse to bee the 300. part of a day. Albateguinus saith, it wanted of a quarter the 106. part of a day. Thebit saith, that the yeare con∣taineth 365. dayes, 6. houres, 10. minutes, 12. degr. Philolaus said that the naturall yeare consisted of 364. dayes and a halfe. Others in a matter of such vncer∣taintie, though they came neere enough, if they made the yere of 365 dayes, which opinion Saint Augustine seemed not much to mislike, who in his Commentary super Genesim, to the 365. daies addeth the whole quar∣ter

day. When we see these great men thus varie and dissent, wee need maruell lesse at the Arcadians, ma∣king yeeres of three moneths long: and at the Acarna∣nians, who vsed yeares of sixe moneths; and Greekes hauing yeares of 354. dayes. As they dissent much in the quantitie of the yeare: so is there as il agreement in the beginning of it. But that this point cannot be determined of, Ptolemie proueth in the second booke of his Apotelesmata for this reason, because in a circle no man can find a beginning simply. Wherfore in the Zodiak are imagined foure beginnings by coniecture, the two Solstitial, and the two Equinoctiall pointes. The Egyptians began their yeare at the vernall Equi∣noctial, the Romans at the winter Tropicke: others at the first of Libra. Plutarch in his Problems liketh Numa for beginning it at the winter Tropicke. If any, to de∣termine this controuersie, shall say that we are to heed the creation of the world, he shal rather increase, then diminish the controuersie. For among the Hebrewes, where this were to be learned, is no certaintie to be found, some of them holding that the creation was in the Srping; others in Autumne: of which opinion are many, for concerning the celebrating of the Passeo∣uer in the first moneth, that they say was spoken in re∣spect of the solemnities. Farther, it is written in Exo∣dus, that the feast of Tabernacles was in the end of the yeare, which feast we know, was kept in the end of the yeare. More might be brought to this purpose, which for breuities sake at this time I purposely omit, seeing that Saint Hierome both otherwhere, & vpon Ezechiel, calleth October the first moneth, and Ianuarie the fourth. I will not heere inlarge how they varie about

the distances of Mercurie from the Sunne, of the diffe∣rence of Signes, and those which they call images, or Figures, of which in truth there can no reckening bee made, since they are nothing in nature, but the deuises of men, which might haue made them otherwise, if they would, these which are now vsed, being deuised or related by Aratus, who (as testifieth Cicero) writ of A∣strologie, and had none himselfe.