Lactantius’ allusion to Archimedes, at a later date, is perhaps derived from Cicero, but it is none the less interesting as indicating a belief that such a globe had existed. In his characteristic vein he refers to the mechanical device, finding therein a support for his theological arguments. “Was Archimedes of Sicily able to contrive a likeness and representation of the universe in hollow brass,” he inquires, “in which he so arranged the sun and moon, that they effected, as it were every day, motions unequal and resembling the revolutions of the heavens, and that sphere, while it revolved, exhibited not only the approaches and with drawings of the sun or the increase and waning of the moon, but also the unequal course of the stars, whether fixed or wandering? Was it then impossible for God to plan and create the original, when the skill of man was able to represent them by imitation? Would the stoic, therefore, if he should have seen the figures of the stars painted and fashioned in that brass, say that they moved by their own design, and not by the genius of the artificer?”[35] Günther notes that at the beginning of the seventh book of the collection of Pappus, geometrician of Alexandria, may be found a reference to those skilled in mechanical devices in which it is stated that “Mechanicians are those who understand how to construct celestial globes and to represent the heavens and the course of the stars moving in circles by means of like circular movements of water.”[36] It has been thought that in this passage we have a reference to a globe such as was probably constructed by Archimedes, although the reference is not to any particular example. It seems not improbable that the globe of Archimedes was made to revolve by an hydraulic contrivance, and that it resembled a planetarium or orrery.[37] That the science of hydrostatics had been developed by Archimedes’ time to a high degree is very certain.