The difference is sometimes only one of function, sometimes also one of shape; and while the distinction of above and below is characteristic of all animate things, whether plants or animals, that of right and left is not found in plants.Further, inasmuch as length is prior to breadth, if above is the principle of length, right of breadth, and if the principle of that which is prior is itself prior, then above will be prior to right, or let us say, since 'prior'
is ambiguous, prior in order of generation.If, in addition, above is the region from which movement originates, right the region in which it starts, front the region to which it is directed, then on this ground too above has a certain original character as compared with the other forms of position.On these two grounds, then, they may fairly be criticized, first, for omitting the more fundamental principles, and secondly, for thinking that the two they mentioned were attributable equally to everything.
Since we have already determined that functions of this kind belong to things which possess, a principle of movement, and that the heaven is animate and possesses a principle of movement, clearly the heaven must also exhibit above and below, right and left.We need not be troubled by the question, arising from the spherical shape of the world, how there can be a distinction of right and left within it, all parts being alike and all for ever in motion.We must think of the world as of something in which right differs from left in shape as well as in other respects, which subsequently is included in a sphere.The difference of function will persist, but will appear not to by reason of the regularity of shape.In the same fashion must we conceive of the beginning of its movement.For even if it never began to move, yet it must possess a principle from which it would have begun to move if it had begun, and from which it would begin again if it came to a stand.Now by its length I mean the interval between its poles, one pole being above and the other below; for two hemispheres are specially distinguished from all others by the immobility of the poles.Further, by 'transverse' in the universe we commonly mean, not above and below, but a direction crossing the line of the poles, which, by implication, is length:
for transverse motion is motion crossing motion up and down.Of the poles, that which we see above us is the lower region, and that which we do not see is the upper.For right in anything is, as we say, the region in which locomotion originates, and the rotation of the heaven originates in the region from which the stars rise.So this will be the right, and the region where they set the left.If then they begin from the right and move round to the right, the upper must be the unseen pole.For if it is the pole we see, the movement will be leftward, which we deny to be the fact.Clearly then the invisible pole is above.And those who live in the other hemisphere are above and to the right, while we are below and to the left.This is just the opposite of the view of the Pythagoreans, who make us above and on the right side and those in the other hemisphere below and on the left side; the fact being the exact opposite.Relatively, however, to the secondary revolution, I mean that of the planets, we are above and on the right and they are below and on the left.For the principle of their movement has the reverse position, since the movement itself is the contrary of the other: hence it follows that we are at its beginning and they at its end.Here we may end our discussion of the distinctions of parts created by the three dimensions and of the consequent differences of position.
