Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book XII
Part 8, 1073a 24 - 1074b 14
... The first principle or primary being is not movable
either in itself or accidentally, but produces the primary eternal and single movement.
But since that which is moved must be moved by something, and the first mover
must be in itself unmovable, and eternal movement must be produced by something
eternal and a single movement by a single thing, and since we see that besides
the simple spatial movement of the universe, which we say the first and
unmovable substance produces, there are other spatial movements -- those of the
planets -- which are eternal (for a body which moves in a circle is eternal and
unresting; we have proved these points in the
physical treatises), each of these movements also must be caused by a substance
both unmovable in itself and eternal. For the nature of the stars is eternal
just because it is a certain kind of substance, and the mover is eternal and
prior to the moved, and that which is prior to a substance must be a substance.
Evidently, then, there must be substances which are of the same number as the
movements of the stars, and in their nature eternal, and in themselves
unmovable, and without magnitude, for the reason before mentioned. That the
movers are substances, then, and that one of these is first and another second
according to the same order as the movements of the stars, is evident. But in
the number of the movements we reach a problem which must be treated from the
standpoint of that one of the mathematical sciences which is most akin to
philosophy-viz. of astronomy; for this science
speculates about substance which is perceptible but eternal, but the other
mathematical sciences, i.e. arithmetic and geometry, treat of no substance.
That the movements are more numerous than the bodies that are moved is evident
to those who have given even moderate attention to the matter; for each of the
planets has more than one movement. But as to the actual number of these
movements, we now -- to give some notion of the subject -- quote what some of
the mathematicians say, that our thought may have some definite number to
grasp; but, for the rest, we must partly investigate for ourselves, Partly
learn from other investigators, and if those who study this subject form an
opinion contrary to what we have now stated, we must esteem both parties
indeed, but follow the more accurate.
Eudoxus supposed that the motion of the sun or of the moon involves, in either case, three spheres, of which the first is the sphere of the fixed stars, and the second moves in the circle which runs along the middle of the zodiac, and the third in the circle which is inclined across the breadth of the zodiac; but the circle in which the moon moves is inclined at a greater angle than that in which the sun moves. And the motion of the planets involves, in each case, four spheres, and of these also the first and second are the same as the first two mentioned above (for the sphere of the fixed stars is that which moves all the other spheres, and that which is placed beneath this and has its movement in the circle which bisects the zodiac is common to all), but the poles of the third sphere of each planet are in the circle which bisects the zodiac, and the motion of the fourth sphere is in the circle which is inclined at an angle to the equator of the third sphere; and the poles of the third sphere are different for each of the other planets, but those of Venus and Mercury are the same.
Callippus made the position of the
spheres the same as Eudoxus did, but while he
assigned the same number as Eudoxus did to Jupiter
and to Saturn, he thought two more spheres should be added to the sun and two
to the moon, if one is to explain the observed facts; and one more to each of
the other planets.
But it is necessary, if all the spheres combined are to explain the observed facts, that for each of the planets there should be other spheres (one fewer than those hitherto assigned) which counteract those already mentioned and bring back to the same position the outermost sphere of the star which in each case is situated below the star in question; for only thus can all the forces at work produce the observed motion of the planets. Since, then, the spheres involved in the movement of the planets themselves are -- eight for Saturn and Jupiter and twenty-five for the others, and of these only those involved in the movement of the lowest-situated planet need not be counteracted the spheres which counteract those of the outermost two planets will be six in number, and the spheres which counteract those of the next four planets will be sixteen; therefore the number of all the spheres -- both those which move the planets and those which counteract these -- will be fifty-five. And if one were not to add to the moon and to the sun the movements we mentioned, the whole set of spheres will be forty-seven in number.
Let this, then, be taken as the number of the spheres, so that the unmovable substances and principles also may probably be taken as just so many; the assertion of necessity must be left to more powerful thinkers. But if there can be no spatial movement which does not conduce to the moving of a star, and if further every being and every substance which is immune from change and in virtue of itself has attained to the best must be considered an end, there can be no other being apart from these we have named, but this must be the number of the substances. For if there are others, they will cause change as being a final cause of movement; but there cannot he other movements besides those mentioned. And it is reasonable to infer this from a consideration of the bodies that are moved; for if everything that moves is for the sake of that which is moved, and every movement belongs to something that is moved, no movement can be for the sake of itself or of another movement, but all the movements must be for the sake of the stars. For if there is to be a movement for the sake of a movement, this latter also will have to be for the sake of something else; so that since there cannot be an infinite regress, the end of every movement will be one of the divine bodies which move through the heaven.
(Evidently there is but one heaven. For if there are many heavens as there are many men, the moving principles, of which each heaven will have one, will be one in form but in number many. But all things that are many in number have matter; for one and the same definition, e.g. that of man, applies to many things, while Socrates is one. But the primary essence has not matter; for it is complete reality. So the unmovable first mover is one both in definition and in number; so too, therefore, is that which is moved always and continuously; therefore there is one heaven alone.) Our forefathers in the most remote ages have handed down to their posterity a tradition, in the form of a myth, that these bodies are gods, and that the divine encloses the whole of nature. The rest of the tradition has been added later in mythical form with a view to the persuasion of the multitude and to its legal and utilitarian expediency; they say these gods are in the form of men or like some of the other animals, and they say other things consequent on and similar to these which we have mentioned. But if one were to separate the first point from these additions and take it alone -- that they thought the first substances to be gods, one must regard this as an inspired utterance, and reflect that, while probably each art and each science has often been developed as far as possible and has again perished, these opinions, with others, have been preserved until the present like relics of the ancient treasure. Only thus far, then, is the opinion of our ancestors and of our earliest predecessors clear to us.