His maternal uncle, the Bishop of Ermland, having provided him with a
lay canonry in the Cathedral of Frauenburg, he had leisure to devote
himself to Science. Reviewing the suggestions of the ancient Greeks, he
was struck by the simplification that would be introduced by reviving
the idea that the annual motion should be attributed to the earth itself
instead of having a separate annual epicycle for each planet and for the
sun. Of the seventy odd circles or epicycles required by the latest form
of the Ptolemaic system, Copernicus succeeded in dispensing with rather
more than half, but he still required thirty-four, which was the exact
number assumed before the time of Aristotle. His considerations were
almost entirely mathematical, his only invasion into physics being in
defence of the "moving earth" against the stock objection that if the
earth moved, loose objects would fly off, and towers fall. He did not
break sufficiently away from the old tradition of uniform circular
motion. Ptolemy's efforts at exactness were baulked, as we have seen, by
the supposed necessity of all the orbit planes passing through the
earth, and if Copernicus had simply transferred this responsibility to
the sun he would have done better. But he would not sacrifice the old
fetish, and so, the orbit of the earth being clearly not circular with
respect to the sun, he made all his planetary planes pass through the
centre of the earth's orbit, instead of through the sun, thus
handicapping himself in the same way though not in the same degree as
Ptolemy. His thirty-four circles or epicycles comprised four for the
earth, three for the moon, seven for Mercury (on account of his highly
eccentric orbit) and five each for the other planets.

It is rather an exaggeration to call the present accepted system the
Copernican system, as it is really due to Kepler, half a century after
the death of Copernicus, but much credit is due to the latter for his
successful attempt to provide a real alternative for the Ptolemaic