p 67 He was the first to distinguish between 'general and special geography', the former of which he subdivides into an 'absolute', or, properly speaking, 'terrestrial' part, and a 'relative or planetary' portion, according to the mode of considering our planet either with reference to its surface in its different zones, or to its relations to the sun and moon. It redounds to the glory of Varenius that his work on 'General and Comparative Geography' should in so high a degree have arrested the attention of Newton. The imperfect state of many of the auxiliary sciences from which this writer was obliged to draw his materials prevented his work from corresponding to the greatness of the design, and it was reserved for the present age, and for my own country, to see the delineation of comparative geography, drawn in its full extent, and in all its relations with the history of man, by the skillful hand of Carl Ritter.*
[Footnote] *Carl Ritter's 'Erdkunde im Verhältniss zur Natur und zur
Geschichte des Menschen, oder allgemeine vergleichende Geographie'
(Geography in relation to Nature and the History of Man, or general
Comparative Geography).
The enumeration of the most important results of the astronomical and physical sciences which in the history of the Cosmos radiate toward one common focus, may perhaps, to a certain degree, justify the designation I have given to my work, and, considered within the circumscribed limits I have proposed to myself, the undertaking may be esteemed less adventurous than the title. The introduction of new terms, especially with reference to the general results of a science which p 68 ought to be accessible to all, has always been greatly in opposition to my own practice; and whenever I have enlarged upon the established nomenclature, it has only been in the specialities of descriptive botany and zoology, where the introduction of hitherto unknown objects rendered new names necessary. The denominations of physical descriptions of the universe, or physical cosmography, which I use indiscriminantely, have been modeled upon those of 'physical descriptions of the earth', that is to say, 'physical geography', terms that have long been in common use. Descartes, whose genius was one of the most powerful manifested in any age, has left us a few fragments of a great work, which he intended publishing under the title of 'Monde', and for which he had prepared hiimself by special studies, including even that of human anatomy. The uncommon, but definite expression of the 'science of the Cosmos' recalls to the mind of the inhabitant of the earth that we are treating of a more widely-extended horizon — of the assemblage of all things with which space is filled, from the remotest nebulae to the climatic distribution of those delicate tissues of vegetable matter which spread a variegated covering over the surface of our rocks.
The influence of narrow-minded views peculiar to the earlier ages of civilization led in all languages to a confusion of ideas in the synonymic use of the words 'earth' and 'world', while the common expressions 'voyages round the world', 'map of the world', and 'new world', afford further illustrations of the same confusion. The more noble and precisely-defined expressions of 'system of the world', 'the planetary world', and 'creation and age of the world', relate either to the totality of the substances by which space is filled, or to the origin of the whole universe.
It was natural that, in the midst of the extreme variability of phenomena presented by the surface of our globe, and the aerial ocean by which it is surrounded, man should have been impressed by the aspect of the vault of heaven, and the uniform and regular movements of the sun and planets. Thus the word Cosmos, which primitively, in the Homeric ages, indicated an idea of order and harmony, was subsequently adopted in scientific language, where it was gradually applied to the order observed in the movements of the heavenly bodies, to the whole universe, and then finally to the world in which this harmony was reflected to us. According to the assertion of Philolaus, whose fragmentary works have been so ably commented upon by Böckh, and conformably to the general testimony p 69 of antiquity, Pythagoras was the first who used the word Cosmos to designate the order that reigns in the universe, or entire world.*
[footnote] *[Greek word], in the most ancient, and at the same time most precise, definition of the word, signified 'ornament' (as an adornment for a man, a woman, or a horse); taken figuratively for [Greek word], it implied the order or adornment of a discourse. According to the testimony of all the ancients, it was Pythagoras who first used the word to designate the order in the universe, and the universe itself. Pythagoras left no writings; but ancient attestation to the truth of this assertion is to be found in several passages of the fragmentary works of Philolaus (Stob., 'Eclog.', p. 360 and 460, Heeren), p. 62, 90, in Bockh's German edition. I do not, according to the example of Nake, cite Timof Locris, since his authenticity is doubtful. Plutarch ('De plac. Phil.', ii., I) says, in the most express manner, that Pythatoras gave the name of Cosmos to the universe on account of the order which reigned throughout it; so likewise does Galen ('Hist. Phil.', p. 429). This word, together with its novel signification, passed from the schools of philosophy into the language of poets and prose writers. Plato designates the heavenly bodies by the name of 'Uranos', but the order pervading the regions of space he too terms the Cosmos, and in his 'Timus' (p. 30 a.) he says 'that the world is an animal endowed with a soul' [Greek words]. Compare Anaxag. Claz., ed. Schaubach, p. III, and Plut. ('De plac. Phil.', in Aristotle ('De Caelo', I, 9), 'Cosmos' signifies "the universe and the order pervading it," but it is likewise considered as divided in space into two parts — the sublunary world, and the world above the moon. ('Meteor.', I., w, 1, and I., 3, 13, p. 339, 'a', and 340, 'b', Bekk.) The definition of Cosmos, which I have already cited is taken from Pseudo-Aristoteles 'de Mundo', cap. ii. (p. 391); the passage referred to is as follows: [Greek words]. Most of the passages occurring in Greek writers on the word 'Cosmos' may be found collected together in the controversy between Richard Bentley and Charles Boyle ('Opuscula Philologica', 1781, p. 347, 445; 'Dissertation upon the Epistles of Phalaris', 1817, p. 254); on the historical existence of Zaleucus, legislator of Leucris, in Nake's excellent work, 'Sched. Crit.', 1812, p. 9, 15; and, finally in Theophilus Schmidt, 'ad Cleom. Cycl. Theor.', met. I., 1, p. ix., 1 and 99. Taken in a more limited sense, the word Cosmos is also used in the plural (Plut., 1, 5), either to designate the stars (Stob., 1, p. 514; Plut., 11, 13) or the innumerable systems scattered like islands through the immensity of space, and each composed of a sun and a moon. (Anax. Claz., 'Fragm.', p. 89, 93, 120; Brandis, 'Gesch. der Griechisch-Römischen Philosophie', b. i., s. 252 (History of the Greco-Roman Philosophy). Each of these groups forming thus a 'Cosmos', the universe, [Greek words], the word must be understood in a wider sense (Plut., ii., 1). It was not until long after the time of the Ptolemies that the word was applied to the earth. Bockh has made known inscriptions in praise of Trajan and Adrian ('Corpus Inscr. Graec.', I, n. 334 and 1036), in which [Greek word] occurs for [Greek word] in the same manner as we still use the term 'world' to signify the earth alone. We have already mentioned the singular division of the regions of space p 70 [Footnote continues] into three parts, the 'Olympus, Cosmos' and 'Ouranos' (Stob., i., p. 488; Philolaus, p. 95, 303); this division applies to the different regions surrounding that mysterious focus of the universe, the [Greek words] of the Pythagoreans. In the fragmentary passage in which this division is found, the term [Greek word] designates the innermost region, situated between the moon and earth; this is the domain of changing things. The middle region, where the planets circulate in an invariable and harmonious order, is, in accordance with the special conceptions entertained of the universe, exclusively termed 'Cosmos', while the word 'Olympus' is used to express the exterior or igneous region. Bopp, the profound philologist, has remarked that we may deduce, as Pott has done, 'Etymol. Forschungen', th.i., s. 39 and 252 ('Etymol. Researches'), the word [Greek word] from the Sanscrit root 'sud', 'purificari', by assuming two conditions; first that the Greek letter 'kappa' in [Greek word] comes from the palatial 'epsilon', which Bopp represents by 's' and Pott by 'ç' (in the same manner as [Greek word], 'decem, taihun' in Gothic, comes from the Indian word 'dasan'), and, next, that the Indian 'd'' corresponds, as a general rule, with the Greek 'theta' ('Vergleichende Grammatik' 99 — Comparative Grammar), which shows the relation of [Greek word] (for [Greek word]) with the Sanscrit root 'sud', whence is also derived [Greek word]. Another Indian term for the world is 'gagat' (pronounced 'dschagat'), which is, properly speaking the present participle of the verb 'gagami' (I go), the root of which is 'ga.' In restricting ourselves to the circle of Hellenic etymologies, we find ('Etymol. M.', p. 532, 12) that [Greek word] is intimately associated with [Greek word] or rather with [Greek word], whence we have [Greek word] or [Greek word] Welcker ('Eine Kretische Col in Theben', s. 23 — A Cretan Colony in Thebes) combines with this the name [Greek word] , as in Hesychius [Greek word] signifies a Cretan suit of arms. When the scientific language of Greece was introduced among the Romans, the word 'mundus', which at first had only the primary meaning of [Greek word] (female ornament), was applied to designate the entire universe. Ennius seems to have been the first who ventured upon this innovation. In one of the fragments of this poet, preserved by Macrobius, on the occasion of his quarrel with Virgil, we find the word used in its novel mode of acceptation: "Mundus caeli vastus constitit silentio" (Sat., vi., 2). Cicero also says, "Quem nos lucentem mundum vocamus" (Timæus, 'S.de univer.', cap. x.) The Sanscrit root 'mand' from which Pott derives the Latin 'mundus' ('Etym. Forsch.', th. i., s. 240), combines the double signification of shining and adorning. 'Loka' designates in Sanscrit the world and people in general, in the same manner as the French word 'monde', and is derived according to Bopp, from 'lok' (to see and shine); it is the same with the Slavonic root 'swjet', which means both 'light' and 'world.' (Grimm, 'Deutsche Gramm.', b. iii., s. 394 — German Grammar.) The word 'welt', which the Germans make use of at the present day, and which was 'weralt' in old German, 'worold' in old Saxon, and 'weruld' in Anglo-Saxon, was, according to James Grimm's interpretation, a period of time, an age ('saeculum') rather than a term used for the world in space. The Etruscans figured to themselves 'mundus' as an inverted dome, symmetrically opposed to the celestial vault (Otfried Muller's 'Etrusken', th. ii., s. 96, etc.). Taken in a still more limited sense, the word appears to have signified among the Goths the terrestrial surface girded by seas ('marei, meri',) the 'merigard', literally, 'garden of seas.'
From the Italian school of philosophy, the expression passed, in this signification, into the language of those early poets p 71 of nature, Parmenides and Empedocles, and from thence into the works of prose writers. We will not here enter into a discussion of the manner in which, according to the Pythagorean views, Philolaus distinguishes between Olympus, Uranus, or the heavens, and Cosmos, or how the same word, used in a plural sense, could be applied to certain heavenly bodies (the planets) revolving round one central focus of the world, or to groups of stars. In this work I use the word Cosmos in conformity with the Hellenic usage of the term subsequently to the time of Pythagorus, and in accordance with the precise definition given of it in the treatise entitled 'De Mundo', which was long erroneously attributed to Aristotle. It is the assemblage of all things in heaven and earth, the universality of created things constituting the perceptible world. If scientific terms had not long been diverted from their true verbal signification, the present work ought rather to have borne the title of 'Cosmography', divided into 'Uranography' and 'Geography.' The Romans, in their feeble essays on philosophy, imitated the Greeks by applying to the universe the term 'mundus', which, in its primary meaning, indicated nothing more than ornament, and did not even imply order or regularity in the disposition of parts. It is probable that the introduction into the language of Latium of this technical term as an equivalent for Cosmos, in its double signification, is due to Ennius,* who was a follower of the Italian school, and the translator of the writings of Epicharmus and some of his pupils on the Pythagorean philosophy.
[footnote] *See, on Ennius, the ingenious researches of Leopold Krahner, in his 'Grundlinien zur Geschichte des Verfalls der Romischen Staats-Reigion', 1837, s. 41-45 (Outlines of the History of the Decay of the Established Religion among the Romans). In all probability, Ennius did not quote from writings of Epicharmus himself, but from poems composed in the name of that philosopher, and in accordance with his views.
We would first distinguish between the physical 'history' and the physical 'description' of the world. The former, conceived in the most general sense of the word, ought, if materials for writing it existed, to trace the variations experienced by the universe in the course of ages from the new stars which have suddenly appeared and disappeared in the vault of heaven, from nebulæ dissolving or condensing — to the first stratum of cryptogamic vegetation on the still imperfectly cooled surface of the earth, or on a reef of coral uplifted from the depths of ocean. 'The physical description of the world' presents a picture of all that exists in space — of the siimultaneous action of p 72 natural forces, together with the phenomena which they produce.
But if we would correctly comprehend nature, we must not entirely or absolutely separate the consideration of the present state of things from that of the successive phases through which they have passed. We can not form a just conception of their nature without looking back on the mode of their formation. It is not organic matter alone that is continually undergoing change, and being dissolved to form new combinations. The globe itself reveals at every phase of its existence the mystery of its former conditions.