Remarks upon the Observations Made upon a Chronological Index of Sir Isaac Newton, Translated into French by the Observator, and Publish'd at Paris

I. Remarks upon the Observations made upon a Chronological Index of Sir Isaac Newton, translated into French by the Observator, and publish'd at Paris. On Thursday November 11, 1725. A small Tract in print was deliver'd to me, as a Present, from Mr. William Cavelier, Jun. a Bookseller at Paris, a Person unknown to me, entituled, Abregé de Chronologie de M. le Chevalier Newton, fait per lui même, & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglois. And the Bookseller hath premised an Advertisement, in which he endevoureth to defend himself for printing it without my Leave, saying, that he had writ three Letters to me for my Leave, and in the Third had told me, that he would take my Silence for a Consent; and that he had also charged one of his Friends in London to speak to me, and procure my express Answer; and that having long expected my Answer, he thought that he might take my Silence for a Sort of Consent, and so procured a Privilege, and printed it, and then received my Answer from his Friend, which was as follows. I Remember that I wrote a Chronological Index for a particular Friend, on condition that it should not be communicated. As I have not seen the Manuscript which you have under my Name, I know not whether it be the same. That which I wrote was not at all done with Design to publish it. I intend not to meddle with that which hath been given you under my Name, nor to give any Consent to the publishing of it, I am, Your very humble Servant, Isaac Newton. London, May 27, 1725, St. Vet. The Privilege was granted May 21, and register'd May 25 Old Style, my Letter was dated May 27, and the Chronological Index, or Abridgement as he calls it, was printed before the Arrival of my Letter, and kept ever since to be publish'd at a convenient Time. The Bookseller knew that I had not seen the Translation of the Abridgement, and without seeing it could not in reason give my Consent to the Impression. He knew that the Translator was unknown to me, and was against me; and therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my Consent, nor be ask'd to do it. He knew that the Translator had written a Confutation of the Paper translated, and that this Confutation under the Title of Observations, was to be printed at the End of it, and he told me nothing of all this, nor so much as the Name of the Observator, and yet asked my Consent to the publishing; as if any Man could be so foolish as to consent to the publishing of an unseen Translation of his Papers, made by an unknown Person, with a Confutation annexed, and unanswered at their first Appearance in Publick. After the Recital of my Letter, he adds, that the Author of the Translation, and of the Observations upon it, pretends to have an entire Certainty that this Index, or Abridgement of Chronology, is the same same with the Writing own'd by me in my Letter, and is persuaded that the Manuscript, which hath been communicated to him, hath been copied from that of this Friend, that is, from that of the particular Friend above-mention'd in my Letter. And therefore the Manuscript, which hath been communicated to him, is that of Abbé Conti, a noble Venetian now at Paris. He, being about seven Years ago in England, gave me notice, that the Friend above-mention'd desir'd to speak with me. And this Friend then desir'd a Copy of what I had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect and confus'd, but in a few Days I could draw up an Abstract thereof, if it might be kept secret. And some Time after I had done this, and presented it, this Friend desir'd that Signor Conti might have a Copy of it. He was the only Person who had a Copy, and he knew that it was a Secret, and that it was at the Desire of this Friend, and by my Leave, that he had a Copy, and he kept it secret, while he staid in England; and yet, without either this Friend's Leave or mine, he dispers'd Copies of it in France, and got an Antiquary to translate it into French, and to confute it; and the Antiquary hath got a Printer to print the Translation and the Confutation; and the Printer hath endeavour'd to get my Leave to print the Translation, without sending me a Copy thereof to be perus'd, or telling me the Name of the Translator, or letting me know that his Design was to print it with a Confutation unanswer'd and unknown to me. The Translator near the End of his Observations (Page 90) saith, I believe that I have said enough concerning the Epoch of the Argonauts, and the Length of Generations to make People cautious about the rest. For these are the two Foundations of all this new System System of Chronology. What he faith, concerning the Epoch of the Argonauts, is founded on the Supposition that I place the Equinox in the time of the Argonautic Expedition, fifteen Degrees from the first Star of Aries, Pag. 75, 79. I place it in the Middle of the Constellation, and the Middle is not fifteen Degrees from the first Star of Aries. The Observator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron (Pap. 70, 71, 79.) and that the Solstices and Equinoxes were then in the Middle of the Constellations (Pag. 65, 69, 75.) and that Eudoxus, in his Enoptron or Speculum cited by Hipparchus, followed this Opinion, Pag. 62, 63, 65, 69, 79. And * Hipparchus names the Stars, through which the Colures passed in this old Sphere, according to Eudoxus, and faith expressly that Eudoxus drew one of these Colures through the Middle of Cancer and the Middle of Capricorn, and the other through the Middle of Chela and the Back of Aries. And the Colurus, passing through the Back of Aries, passes through the Middle of Aries, and is but eight Degrees from the first Star of Aries. I follow Eudoxus, and, by doing so, place the Equinoctial Colure about 7gr. 36' from the first Star of Aries. But the Observator represents, that I place it fifteen Degrees from the first Star of Aries, and thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic Expedition 532 Years earlier than I do. Let him rectify his Mistake, and the Argonautic Expedition will be where I place it. As for the Length of Generations, the Observator faith, that I reckon them one with another at 18 or 20 Years a piece (Pag. 52, 55.) which is another * See Hipparchus publish'd by Petavius, Vol. 3. Pag. 116, 117, 119, 120. Mistake. Mistake. I agree with the Antients in reckoning three Generations, at about an hundred Years. But the Reigns of Kings I do not equal to Generations, as the antient Greeks and Egyptians did; but I reckon them only at about 18 or 20 Years a piece one with another, when ten or twelve Kings, or more, are taken in continual Succession. So the first 24 Kings of France (Pharamond, &c.) reigned 458 Years, which is one with another 19 Years a piece. The next 24 Kings of France (Ludovicus Balbus, &c.) reigned 451 Years, which is one with another 18½ Years a piece. The next 15 Kings (Philippus Valesius, &c.) reigned 315 Years, which is one with another 21 Years a piece. And all the 63 Kings of France reigned 1224 Years, which is 19½ Years a piece. And, if the long Reign of Lewis XIV. be added, the 64 Kings of France will reign but 20 Years a piece. And they, that examine the Matter, will find it so in other Kingdoms: And I shorten the Duration of the antient Kingdoms of Greece, in the same Proportion that I shorten the Reigns of their Kings, and thereby place the Argonautic Expedition about 44 Years, and the Taking of Troy about 76 Years after the Death of Solomon, and find Sesostris contemporary to Seso. So then the Observator hath mistaken my Meaning, in the two main Arguments on which the Whole is founded, and hath undertaken to translate and to confute a Paper which he did not understand, and been zealous to print it without my Consent; tho' he thought it good for nothing, but to get himself a little Credit, by translating it to be confuted, and confuting his own Translation. The Observator faith, that I suppose that the Egyptians began, about 900 Years before Christ, to form their Religion, and deify Men for their inventing of Arts; Arts, notwithstanding that it appears by the Scriptures, that their Idolatry and Arts were as old as the Days of Moses and Jacob, Pag. 82, 83. But he is again mistaken. I deny not that the Kingdom of the lower Egypt, called Mizraim, had a Religion of their own, till they were invaded and subdued by the Shepherds, who were of another Religion: but I say, that, when the Thebans expelled the Shepherds, they set up the Worship of their own Kings and Princes. I say also, that Arts were brought into Europe principally by the Phanicians and Curetes, in the Time of Cadmus and David, about 1041 Years before Christ; and do not deny that they were in Phanicia, Egypt, and Idumea, before they came into Europe. The Observator saith also, that, 884 Years before Christ, I place the Beginning of the canicular Cycle of the Egyptians upon the vernal Equinox, although that Cycle never begins in Spring, Pag. 84, 85. But he is again mistaken. I meddle not with that Cycle, but speak of the Egyptian Year of 365 Days. The Observator represents, that I have a great Work to come out: but I never told him so. When I lived at Cambridge, I us'd sometimes to refresh myself with History and Chronology for a While, when I was weary with other Studies: but I never told him, that I was preparing a Work of this Kind for the Press. Abbè Conti came into England in Spring 1715, and, while he staid in England, he pretended to be my Friend, but assisted Mr. Leibnitz in engaging me in new Disputes, and hath since acted in the same Manner in France. The Part he acted here may be understood by the Character given of him in the Acta Eruditorum for the Year 1721, Pag. 90. where the Editor, excusing himself from repeating some Disputes putes which had been publish'd in those Acta, subjoins: Suffecerit itaque annotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de conti nobilem Venetum (de quo admiratione digna sibi praescripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnizius) cum ex Gallia in Angliam trajeisset, mediatoris vices in se suspicere voluisse, atque literas Newtoni ad Leibnitium deferrit curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. And how Mr. Leibnitz by this Mediation, endeavour'd to engage me, against my Will, in new Disputes, about occult Qualities, universal Gravity, the Sensorium of God, Space, Time, Vacuum, Atoms, the Perfection of the World, Supramundane Intelligence, and Mathematical Problems, is mention'd in the Preface to the second Edition of the Commercium Epistolicum. And what he hath been doing in Italy, may be understood by the Disputes raised there by one of his Friends, who denies many of my Optical Experiments, though they have been all tried in France with Success. But I hope that these Things, and the perpetual Motion, will be the last Efforts of this Kind. II. De Camphora. Auctore Dno. Carolo Neuman, Chym. Prof. Reg. Berolin. S. R. S. Cum jam plures, quorum aliqui ipsas quoque Indias peragrarunt, de Camphora tam copiose scripserint, ut nihil eorum, quae ad integram historiam Camphorae dilucidandam pertinere videri poterant, intermisferint, siquidem & originem vocis explicarunt, & synonyma cuncta collegerunt, arboarem, unde petitur Camphora, & loca, in quibus arbores hujusmodi proveniunt, indagarunt, modum quo