The chronology of belief presented in Chapter 2 leaves out a number of famous figures often quoted in flat earth research. Why? It is our opinion that many of the pre-medieval and early medieval works cited by flat earth research have been misinterpreted and construed to be belief in a flat earth. The Ethical Atheist was clearly guilty of this in the original version of this eBook. This Chapter examines the following debates:
- What are Antipodes?!
- "Purged Science" or "Lost Works"?
- Medieval Maps: Symbolic or Cartographic?
- What Does the Bible Say?
- Cosmas Indicopleustes and Lactantius: Influential or "fringe writers"?
A misunderstanding of Antipodes may be the primary reason that many contemporary authors misinterpret historic quotations as proof of a flat earth belief. This was certainly true in our original version of this eBook!
What are Antipodes? Pode is Greek for feet. When Pythagoras began postulating that the earth was round, he suggested that there might be people living on the other side. He coined the term antipodes, meaning feet pointed in a direction that was opposite. Some Early Church Fathers were opposed to the possible existence of human beings "with their feet turned towards ours". The reason is that it conflicted with fundamental Christian dogma of the unity of the human race, and the consequent universality of original sin and redemption. [36] (Also, see quotes from St. Augustine regarding Antipodes, below.)
Antipodes which were inhabited presented scriptural problems in a number of ways. First, there would have been no way for animals or humans of Noah's Ark to get to the Ark or to have dispersed again after the flood. Second, all people are said to be descendants of Adam and Eve. If there were people on the other side of the earth, how did they get there? Third, how could they have been reached with the Word of God? In Romans [10:18], "Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world." So, according to Scripture and the Church, inhabited Antipodes could not exist! (Note: Some early pagan writers who considered the earth spherical also thought that there were no people living below the equator.)
Besides the medieval arguments regarding antipodes, Greek and Roman scientists also generally agreed that the equator was so hot as to be impassable.
The italicized "inhabited" antipodes above is very important because opposition to "inhabited" antipodes does not necessarily mean opposition to a spherical earth. Herein lies the source of the debate. Contemporary writers often use antipodal arguments in attempting to show proof of flat earth thinking. However, those arguing the other side state that you can have a spherical earth AND even land on the other side of the world without having antipodes (or people "with their feet turned towards ours"). We believe the later to be true, though at times it is not clear whether some were arguing against Antipodes in general, or just inhabited Antipodes. We have decided to take the following approach in this research: Do NOT interpret arguments against antipodes as arguments for a flat earth, unless they specifically ridicule the idea of a spherical earth. We have made our conclusion... You make yours.Opinion on these questions differed throughout the Middle Ages, though by the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, partially as a result of medieval travelers crossing the equator and finding it both passable and habitable, thinking swung around to the idea that the Antipodes were inhabited. Once medieval explorers discovered that the idea of an impassable equator was a myth (by crossing it in their journeys in Asia) the 'impassable equator' belief began to lose favor, though skepticism about an inhabited Antipodes clung on in some quarters for a few more centuries.We are not foolish enough to insist that our interpretation is the only one. As with most of history, there are a lot of different interpretations. However, in the detailed analysis of quotations in Chapter 5, we will explain our rationale for including or not including a given writer in the flat earth camp.
"Purged Science" or "Lost Works"?
Many of the outstanding scientific accomplishments from the ancient Greeks were little known during early medieval times and some, sadly, where forever lost. What follows is likely to upset some readers, but we have attempted to represent both sides of this debate: "Was this "Purged Science" by the Church or "Lost Works" due to societal upheaval and translation problems?"
There is general agreement that some authors were highly critical of the Greeks and their 'pagan' teachings. In our view, the smoking gun in this department is Tertullian (160-220 CE). But, does this necessarily translate into flat earth beliefs? We don't believe so. However, we do believe that this attitude resulted in opposition in other areas such as planetary motion and an earth-centric universe which are not the topic of this eBook.
It is important to have a basic understanding of this hotly debated topic because it is often brought up in arguments about flat earth thinking. Surely, you have heard the term 'Dark Ages'? Most likely it was described as a period of shameful human history with efforts to purge science from civilization, a way to keep the common man ignorant while increasing the power and authority of the Church. It may have even included descriptions of the torture and murders that occurred during the Inquisition. This type of definition is far removed from the original definition of Dark Ages...
The term 'Dark Ages' was originally coined to simply mean that there were not a lot of surviving scholarly works from this period. Dark implied that the lack of original writing did not allow historians to see into this period very well. Over time, this definition has gradually evolved into a much more derogatory meaning. To avoid any confusion or hostilities, we simply will not use the term at all.
PURGED SCIENCE?On one side of the debate, many have argued that there was a highly organized and concerted effort by the Church to rid the world of works from the pagan Greeks and Romans. They argue that some in the Church were skeptical of any 'pagan' knowledge which seemed to cast doubt on any aspect of the Bible. There is certainly evidence that some were indeed attempting to ignore or even purge these teachings. This side also points to how long these works were supposedly 'lost'. As an example, they point to Ptolemy's (90-168 CE) Geographica which not only promoted a spherical earth, but detailed the grid system of latitude and longitude that is still used today. (It included coordinates for eight thousand places on earth.) This masterpiece was not 'recovered' in the west until the 15th century, well over a thousand years later. From a distant observer's position, the fact that some works were 'lost' for over a thousand years seems to indicate at least a lack of interest in bringing them forward. There are also the writings of people such as Tertullian, St. John Chrysostom and Severian of Gabala.
Tertullian (160-220 CE) represents a 'smoking gun' in his disdain for 'pagan' philosophy. Even titles of his work are fairly revealing like De praescriptione haereticorum (On the Prescription Against Heretics), Chapter 7 - "Pagan philosophy the parent of heresies - The connection between deflections from Christian Faith and the old systems of pagan philosophy." It's hard to say how influential he was in his disdain for pagan works, but we see likely remnants of his influence later with St. John Chrysostom (344-408 CE), Severian of Gabala (??-408 CE) and St. Augustine (354-430 CE).
"What has Athens to do with Jerusalem, the Academy with the Church? What between heretics and Christians? ... We have no need for curiosity since Jesus Christ, nor for inquiry since the Gospel". "Tell me, what is the sense of this itch for idle speculation? What does it prove, this useless affection of a fastidious curiosity, notwithstanding the strong confidence of its assertions? It is highly appropriate that Thales, while his eyes were roaming the heavens in astronomical observation, should have tumbled into a well. This mishap may well serve to illustrate the fate of all who occupy themselves with the stupidities of philosophy."
- Tertullian (160-220 CE) [57], [58]"And as for the writings of the Greeks, they are all put out and vanished, but this man's shine brighter day by day. ...since then the (doctrines) of Pythagoras and of Plato, which seemed before to prevail, have ceased to be spoken of, and most men do not know them even by name." "Pythagoras... practiced there ten thousand kinds of sorcery.... but by his magic tricks he deceived the foolish. And neglecting to teach men anything useful."
- St. John Chrysostom (344-408 CE) [77], [78]"...so poor is all the useful knowledge which is gathered from the books of the heathen when compared with the knowledge of Holy Scripture, For whatever man may have learnt from other sources, if it is hurtful, it is there condemned; if it is useful, it is therein contained... he will find there in much greater abundance things that are to be found nowhere else, but can be learnt only in the wonderful sublimity and wonderful simplicity of the Scriptures."
- St. Augustine (354-430 CE), De Doctrina Christiana, Bk 2, Chap 42,
"Sacred Scripture Compared with Profane Authors" [91]
This side of the debate concludes that in the early Medieval ages of Europe, Christianity was successful in purging much of the true geographic knowledge. In its place, followers of Christianity developed theological maps detailing heaven and hell, resting places for souls and an irritating neglect of the "unknown, uninhabitable" world. Continuing, "It's amazing what a setback occurred due the Christian teachers who (according to Dreyer - [15] ) 'were unfortunately devoid of sympathy for anything that emanated from the heathen Greek and Roman world' ". "A fierce onslaught had commenced on the results of Greek thought. A narrow-minded literal interpretation of every syllable in the Scriptures was insisted on by leaders in the Church, and anything which could not be reconciled therewith was rejected with horror and scorn." [15] He, and others, claim that the Fathers of the Church turned time back a thousand years, erasing knowledge that was known back to Pythagoras in 500 B.C. - such as a spherical earth, and also the widely known latitude and longitude coordinates which were used to locate any point on the Earth.
LOST WORKS?
The other side of the debate acknowledges that these works were temporarily lost or inaccessible. However, they claim that there was not a conspiracy by the Church to 'purge' these works. They state that quite the opposite was true - the knowledge of the Greek and Roman world was held in the highest of esteem and medieval churchmen went to great lengths to revive it and understand it. Men traveled to the Muslim world and taught themselves Arabic and Hebrew precisely so they could make translations of Muslim and Jewish editions of Greek and Roman works lost to the West and then brought these translations back to Europe where they revolutionized scholarship and science.
As an example, this side points to Gerard of Cremona (ca. 1114-1187), an Italian scholar who was so interested in Greek science that he learned Arabic to be able to translate preserved works from Arabic (since no Latin translations existed at that time). He spent much of his life in Toledo, which had been a Muslim center of learning. It was an ideal environment, with many Arabic works present and learned Arabs available for consultation. The number of works attributed to his translations range from 68 to 92, including Almagest (Ptolemy), Elements, Al-Khwarizmi's work, Galen, the Hippocratic writers, and the physical works of Aristotle.[82], [99]
These are not the actions of people who were 'devoid of sympathy' (referring to Dreyer) for Greek and Roman knowledge. Ptolemy's Geographica is an example. It was not recovered in the west until the early fifteenth century, when a Latin translation became available.
For further examples of how critical the Church was in the survival of many "classical" manuscripts, see "Scribes and Scholars: A guide to the transmission of Greek and Latin Literature" by L.D. Reynolds and N.G. Wilson
Regarding Tertullian and St. John Chrysostom, this side's defense is that these few figures clearly lost the debate in their desire to purge pagan teachings to those who agreed with St. Augustine. They claim that his position does not ridicule the pagans, but dismisses these pursuits for religious reasons. (Note that this is contradictory to the quote from De Doctrina Christiana provided in "Purged Science?" above.)
"There is another form of temptation, even more fraught with danger. This is the disease of curiosity. ... It is this which drives us to try to discover the secrets of nature, those secrets that are beyond our understanding, which can avail us nothing and which men should not wish to learn..."
- St. Augustine (354-430 CE)
Those on this side of the debate find it is easy to see how scientific works of the Greeks could be lost for so long. The argument goes as follows:Perhaps in an age of instant information, where books are printed in runs of thousands or even millions, where every municipality has a library, where written information is almost everywhere you look, where the vast majority of the population are literate and where books are so cheap that you often read them and then throw them away, this idea is hard to believe.Elizabeth Eisenstein's book on the print revolution further conveys the magnitude and nature of the change. [89] She argues that unlike the print era, copying in the scribal era was a laborious process and it was almost impossible to get exactly similar copies of the original manuscripts. "Due to limited number of copies, each manuscript was unique and had to be guarded in public places, usually chained to bookshelves, or stowed away in vaults and other safe places, so it was not lost or destroyed." Eisenstein notes that what chiefly distinguished the print era from the preprint was the accumulation of knowledge made possible through the preservative powers of print. "In the preprint era due to the scarcity of manuscripts it was not possible for the general public to have recourse to the accumulated knowledge of the past." [90]Imagine a world where you might have to travel for days to find a library and where it usually didn't have the book you wanted when you got there. And where you usually didn't know where to look for that book when you found it (no inter-library loans or online catalogues). Imagine a world where books are produced a letter at a time through laborious hard work which took weeks or months to bring about a single copy. And where the materials for a single book represented a entire flock of sheep or a whole herd of cows and so books were hugely expensive to produce. And where books were prone to destruction by commonplace accidents through fire or mildew.
In such a world there were few copies of any books at any given time, and in times of upheaval not only did people have other things on their mind than producing or preserving books but books and whole libraries could be scattered and destroyed easily. This is exactly what happened in the period of the fall of the Western Roman Empire. Literacy levels dropped, the institutions which produced and preserved books declined or disappeared, precarious networks of knowledge broke down and, as a result, enormous amounts of knowledge which we take for granted were lost - some of it forever.
What we have of ancient knowledge is bequeathed to us largely by the efforts of ancient and medieval churchmen and what was lost and then recovered was usually recovered by medieval churchmen as well. Some devoted their lives to the quest for lost knowledge, traveling for months on end to distant places where they thought lost books may be found and teaching themselves Arabic and Hebrew specifically to bring these books back from the edge of extinction. It was very easy for a book to slip off the endangered list and into oblivion in such a world. [82]
Continuing with the flat earth debates, this side often concedes that the words of Tertullian, St. John Chrysostom and Severian of Gabala do show disdain for the 'pagan' teachings of the Greeks. However, they do NOT show any evidence of flat earth thinking.
OUR CONCLUSION
We do see Tertullian as a 'smoking gun' in his disdain for 'pagan' philosophy. We believe that he was influential during his time, but as to magnitude of his influence, we have not made a conclusion. We also believe that he influenced subsequent figures like St. John Chrysostom, Severian of Gabala and St. Augustine. We abhor their opposition to freethought and scientific advances. However, it is clear which side won as later works show a rapid disappearance of this disdain for the pagan Greeks. Further, it is really another argument which is not relevant to a flat earth discussion because being anti-pagan doesn't necessarily imply flat earth thinking. To make such an implication, one would have to prove that the environment was so anti-pagan that writers feared for their lives if they wrote of a spherical earth. While we believe that the Church opposed spherical views at times on theological/religious grounds, we're not sure that people feared writing. This fear was likely present in other areas of science such as astronomy, but there doesn't appear to be sufficient evidence to make this argument in the flat earth debate. It could be they people were just reluctant to discuss it so as to avoid a conflict - just as we are reluctant to discuss evolution or geology with religious individuals today.
Medieval Maps: Symbolic or Cartographic?
Another topic often debated in flat earth arguments relates to maps during the medieval ages. It is not disputed that many of these maps were far more simplistic than Ptolemy globes (which included latitude and longitude and vast open seas). However, what is disputed is the meaning or historical interpretation of these maps. In the references section at the end, you will find many links to medieval map sites under "other interesting resources" and even more references in Chapter 8 - "Entertaining Maps Relevant to the Discussion". They are very entertaining and we suggest you take a look for yourself and make your own conclusions. In sharp contrast to ancient Greek maps, many medieval maps were limited to three tightly grouped continents: Asia, Africa and Europe. Tiny areas of water surround the edge of these maps, then they end. These maps often depict Biblical concepts, events and places.
SYMBOLIC?
Many argue that these maps are not meant to be cartographic representations of the known earth. They are not even meant to be maps of the entire world, but only of the inhabited portion. Further, they are merely symbolic and were used as a conceptual tool by the Church to explain Biblical concepts. The medieval T-O maps show a representation of the world and how it stands in relation to theological and Biblical events and places. Thus, Jerusalem, the supposed site of the Fall of Man and his Redemption through the Crucifixion and Resurrection, stands at the centre of a T-O map, while the 'three continents' of Europe, Asia and Africa are usually marked with the names of the three sons of Noah who were said to have colonized each of them. Other maps often showed heaven and hell or resting places for souls. These maps were around for centuries. During these times, many writers also state that man cannot pass the equator because it is surrounded by a wall of fire that reaches almost to the sky, or other such depictions. Many also describe horrific monsters who are said to live on the other side. This definitely implies a belief in a spherical earth because without an equator, you cannot have the 'other side' and without the 'other side' you cannot have horrific monsters living there.
It would have been impossible to navigate with maps like Isidore's T-O depictions. The 'Symbolic' argument continues by noting that while these depicted the Church view, other types of route maps and portolan (nautical) charts were used. As Tony Campbell, Map Librarian of the British Map Library put it so well: "The medieval mappaemundi (world maps in the Christian tradition) are the cosmographies of thinking landsmen. By contrast, the portolan charts preserve the Mediterranean sailors firsthand experience of their own sea, as well as their expanding knowledge of the Atlantic Ocean" (Campbell 1987, 372). [62]
CARTOGRAPHIC?
The other side of the argument is that these maps really were indicative of the view of the earth promoted by the Church. Proponents of this side of the debate point out that the T-O maps of Isidore and others do indeed only show three continents in a wheel alignment without any acknowledgment of the remainder of the globe. Isidore reportedly said, "It is quite evident that the two parts Europe and Africa occupy half the world and Asia alone occupies the other half." [63] They point to the fact that Jerusalem is at the center, the three continents are named after Noah's sons, the Garden of Eden is often present with representations that is is no longer accessible due to original sin. The maps describe 'Paradise' as a place planted with every kind of wood and fruit-bearing tree, having also the tree of life. There is neither cold nor heat but a continual spring temperature. From the middle of the Garden a spring gushes forth to water the whole grove and, dividing up, it provides the source of four rivers. Approach to this place was barred to man after his sin, for now it is hedged about on all sides by a sword-like flame, that is to say that it is surrounded by a wall of fire that reaches almost to the sky.
It is obvious that there could be no knowledge of the other side of the globe regarding whether other continents existed or it was all open sea. But, as this side argues, why not depict it in some manner? The argument continues that if these were only supposed to be symbolic in nature, why did elements of non-symbolic portolan charts eventually begin to find their way into the symbolic maps ('mappa mundi')? In the end, the more cartographic elements came to dominate and only a few elements of the older symbolic representations remained. This side also notes that the true nature of the shape of the earth was gradually forced into the symbolic maps of the Church.
OUR CONCLUSION
At first, we believed these maps supported a view of flat earth thinking in medieval times. This view has also been promoted by Boorstin in The Discoverers [63] and White in The Warfare Of Science With Theology [14] . However, our view has significantly changed since the first version of this eBook. It has been persuasively argued that many of these maps do NOT represent a literal medieval understanding of the shape or geographical nature of the earth. The mixture of literal and symbolic representations of the world may seem odd to us, but it appears to be commonplace in the medieval world. The monstrous races that were imagined to live on the other side of the fiery equator also imply a belief in the 'other side' (though their descriptions of monsters do not reflect favorably on their authors!) In addition, Isidore even admitted the possible existence of Antipodean lands in later sections of his works. This leads us to believe that he not only believed the earth was a sphere, but that it was likely that other continents existed. The fact that he went so far as to speculate on whether these other lands were inhabited seems proof of his beliefs. These facts seem to indicate that Isidore, the creator of the T-O maps, did indeed mean them symbolic not cartographic. This is our conclusion. You make yours.
For more on monstrous races, see Friedman's "The Monstrous Races in Medieval Art and Thought" [94] and the fantastic "Grotesque Marvellous Monstrous Images" (from 1485 to 1853) collected by Ian McCormick. [95]
Some arguing in defense of medieval Church leaders state that medieval interpretations of the Bible were very complex. They claim that medieval Biblical exegesis did not include a literal interpretation of the Bible and its many flat earth references. They state that medieval Fathers saw no less than four levels of meaning in any Scriptural passage. They further claim that medieval scholars sought to reconcile ancient Greek and Roman 'authority' with Biblical 'authority' and went to great lengths to do so.
On the other side of the debate, there's very convincing evidence in the Bible supporting the claim that its authors viewed the world as flat (see section on the Bible in Chapter 5).
Regarding the "four levels of meaning in any Scriptural passage", we must comment. It sure is a shame that "God" didn't provide us with a clearer, more understandable description of the world and universe that he created, isn't it? One that didn't need constant reconciliation with the findings of science... One that didn't need to be explained as metaphors and have many levels of interpretation. It seems that if he created the universe and created us, as Christians claim, that he could clearly and unambiguously communicate his construction in a way that could not be confused! As one of the Ethical Atheist's readers recently stated, "But why couldn't 'God' have written a scientifically testable version of the Bible which would provide real and testable claims." Maybe he would be so kind as to give us a second Bible that was a tech-guide to the universe and speak through Stephen Hawking? Then, we could quit wasting all of our time with scientific inquiry and idle curiosity. We could simply refer to the Book of Hawking [392:619] to understand what happened during the big bang or if there even was one.
In other areas of debate, it is even more clear that numerous Church leaders adhered to a strict literal interpretation of the Bible. For example, proponents of a non-geocentric universe were persecuted. Now, this isn't necessarily relevant in a flat earth discussion, but it indicative of the religious environment that existed during these times.
Cosmas Indicopleustes and Lactantius: Influential or "Fringe Writers"?
Cosmas Indicopleustes and Lactantius represent the extreme in flat earth beliefs in the pre-medieval and early medieval times. They are, in fact, referenced by both sides of the flat earth debate.
INFLUENTIAL?
It's very clear and undisputed that Cosmas and Lactantius were flat earthers through and through. They vigorously promoted the flat earth view. Many contemporary authors (e.g. White, Dreyer, Boorstin, Draper, etc.) have used this in defending their position that flat earth thinking experienced a reemergence.
FRINGE WRITERS?
The other side also references Cosmas and Lactantius. This side is primarily represented by some contemporary historians and religious writers (Jeffrey Burton Russell, Rudolf Simek, Catholic authors, and many religious sites you will see referenced in Chapter 4). They concede that Cosmas and Lactantius promoted a flat earth view, but call them 'fringe writers'. The argument continues that they were NOT influential in any way. They state that one can easily deduce their lack of influence by the lack of references to Cosmas and Lactantius in later scholarly works. In contrast, there are many references to promoters of a spherical earth such as the Venerable Bede. They also argue that that the vigor of Cosmas' denunciation suggests that the idea of a spherical earth was pretty common currency. To counter the more widely held spherical view, he was forcefully promoting his flat earth.
OUR CONCLUSION
Cosmas Indicopleustes and Lactantius are 'smoking guns' of the flat earth views. However, we agree that their views represent a distinct minority. We also agree that they were not very influential on later educated and scholarly authors. And, finally, it is clear that their views did NOT prevail.
The above paragraph represents our conclusion. However, we feel compelled to note that we find it difficult to say for sure how much their works may have influenced the uneducated layman. As examples, jump to the present and look at speeches and written works by idiots like Falwell, Robertson, and Swaggart. Almost everyone we know regards them as nuts or 'fringe writers' with 'little influence'. They are not influential among scientific scholars, nor are their works referenced in the scientific community. Yet, Falwell, Robertson, and Swaggart are very influential to their followers who number in the millions. Even Falwell's statements about terrorist attacks against the U.S. on 9/11/2001 are a good example. He's been condemned by everyone for these statements - even religious groups. Yet, I often hear statements very similar to his promoted by the very people who condemned him. And others, knowingly or not, have their opinions influenced by his babble. We believe future historians will look back and call him an idiot promoting a fringe view, but there's still huge masses of people who share this view.
We are not saying that Cosmas and Lactantius were as influential as Falwell, Robertson, and Swaggart. We are simply proposing that there's a possibility that their flat earth views had some following.
What is your conclusion?