<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg126.perseus-eng3:10</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg126.perseus-eng3:10</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg126.perseus-eng3" type="translation" xml:lang="eng"><div subtype="section" type="textpart" n="10"><p rend="indent">Dismiss the fixed stars and the other planets and consider the demonstrations of Aristarchus in his treatise, <title rend="italic">On Sizes and Distances</title>, that <q>the distance of the sun is more than 18 times and less than 20 times the distance of the moon,</q> that is its distance from us.<note anchored="true" resp="Loeb" place="unspecified">This is Proposition 7 of Aristarchus’s treatise, the full title of which is <title rend="italic">On the Sizes and Distances of the Sun and Moon</title>. The treatise is edited and translated by Sir Thomas Heath in his <title rend="italic">Aristarchus of Samos</title>, pp. 352 ff.</note> According to the highest estimate, however, the moon’s distance from us is said to be 56 times the radius of the earth.<note anchored="true" resp="Loeb" place="unspecified">This was not the highest estimate hitherto given, nor have I been able to identify its author. <foreign xml:lang="lat">cf.</foreign> on this matter and the subsequent calculations in this passage <title rend="italic">Class. Phil.</title> xlvi (1951), pp. 140-141. No attempt is made to give equivalents for stades in calculations, for it is uncertain what stade is meant in any one place. Schiaparelli assumes everywhere the Olympic stade of 185 metres (<title rend="italic" xml:lang="lat">Scritti sulla storia della astronomia antica</title>, i, p. 333, n. 3 and p. 342, n. 1); Heath argues that Eratosthenes used a stade of 157.5 metres and Ptolemy the royal stade of 210 metres (<title rend="italic">Aristarchus of Samos</title>, pp. 339 and 346); and Raingeard (p. 83 on 925 D 6) assumes without argument that Plutarch used the Attic stade of 177.6 metres.</note> Even according to the mean calculations this radius is 40,000 stades; and, if we reckon from this, the sun is more than 40,300,000 stades distant from the moon. She has migrated so far from the sun on account of her weight and has moved so close to the earth that, if properties<note anchored="true" resp="Loeb" place="unspecified">There is a play on the meaning of <foreign xml:lang="grc">τὰs οὐσίας</foreign>, <q>substances,</q> as <q>property</q> or <q>estates</q> and as <q>the real nature of things.</q> </note> are to be determined by locations, the lot, I mean the position, of earth lays an action against the moon and she is legally assignable by right of propinquity and kinship to the chattels real and personal of earth. We do not err at all, I think, if granting such altitude and extension to the things called <q>upper</q> we leave what is <q>down below</q> also <pb xml:id="v12.p.77"/> some room to move about in and so much latitude as there is from earth to moon. For as he is immoderate who calls only the outermost surface of the heaven <q>up</q> and all else <q>down,</q> so is he intolerable who restricts <q>down</q> to the earth or rather to the centre; but both there and here some extension must be granted since the magnitude of the universe permits it. The claim that everything away from the earth is <foreign xml:lang="lat">ipso facto</foreign> <q>up</q> and <q>on high</q> answered by a counter-claim that what is away from the circuit of the fixed stars is <foreign xml:lang="lat">ipso facto</foreign> <q>down.</q> </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>