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. IX.

Of the subiect of Predictions.

BVt some are woont to oppose them thus: Of things wee see done, because some are necessa∣rie, some casuall, and some in our free power. The Astrolo∣gers must needes say, that their predictions hold either in ne∣cessarie things, or in casuall e∣uents, or in those things which are in our power. If they say in necessarie things, then are their predicti∣ons in vaine, for that which hapneth necessarily, wee cannot auoid, but will we, nill we, it wil come to passe: whereas predictions are then onely auailable, when by them we can escape. Secondly, if they say in casuall euents, then they do professe an impossibilitie. For casual euēts are vncertain, but of vncertainties which may happen this way, or that way, there can bee no certaine or sure prediction. It remaineth therfore that their predictions be in things, which are in our power: which also is impossible. For that which is in my po∣wer

whether it shall happen or no, neither hath any further cause at the first, that can no man foretell: the Astrologers therefore haue no certaine subiect for their predictions. The same reason as serued Tullie a∣gainst the Wisards of his time, may likewise fit vs a∣gainst these, whom we now deale with, in the secōd de Diuinat. thence we reason thus: Astrologie auaileth neither where Sence, Arte, Philosophie, or ciuill poli∣cie is vsed, therefore it auaileth no where, nor in anie subiect. First, for Sence: To iudge colours we haue our eyes: to iudge sounds, our eares: for smelles, our nose, and such like. Neither were an Astrologer, if he were blind, able to iudge of colors: or if he were deafe, of sounds, were he neuer so skilfull. As for matters of Art, who wold leaue the Physitian, to know of him what physicke he should take, or what diet he should keepe, or what veine he should open, what humour he were to purge, and how much, and with what dosis, in what forme of purge, whether with pilles, potions, or bole, and such like? The squaring of circles, the dou∣bling of cubes, and such like, haue alwayes beene left to the Geometrician. For Arithmetike, who euer went to him to learne to adde or subtract? For Musike, to learne to frame his voice, to know how to diuide the Monochord, or whether Diatessaron be a concord, or a discord? For Astronomie, to know of him whether the earth or Sun were greater? whether the interposition of the earth, be the cause of the eclipse of the Moone? For Philosophie, who euer went to them to know his dutie toward his friend or fo, kiffe or kin, prince or sub∣iect? How he was to frame a syllogisme, what were the elements, whereof all things are made? What Prince

for gouerning his realm did euer vse them, rather then wise and sage Councellours? If the question be of the best forme of gouernement, what lawes, what fashi∣ons are fittest, who in these causes conferreth with the Astrologer, and not rather with the States-man? If for answer to these and the like obiections they shall tell vs that their predictions are in another maner of sub∣iect, as in particular actions of men, depending vpon their natiuitie, who doth not see how they seeke shifts and euasions, such as at this time my leisure can not stand vpon? For particulars, can they tell vs whe∣ther Peter was euer at Rome: where King Arthur died; and how, and where he was buried, and such like?