1
On thursday Novem. 11th at a meeting of the R.S. A Pamphlet sal small Tract was delivered to me as a present from Mr Gulielm
William Chevalier the sonn a bookseller at Paris, a person unknown to me, conteining a chronolo
gicall index, entituled Abrege de Chronologie de M. Chavalier Newton, fait par lui meme &
traduit sur le Manuscrit Anglais. And the Bookseller hath def premised an adver
tisement for in wchwhich he endeavours to defending himself for printing it without my leave saying that he had writ
three letters to me for my leave & in the third had told me that he would take my silence
for a consent, & that he had also charged one of his friedsfriends at London to speak to me &
procure my precise answer. And that having long expected my answer, he thought
that he might take my silence for consent a sort of consent, & so resolved to proceed
to the press, & for that end procured a Privilege & printed it, & then received my answer
from his friend wchwhich was as follows.
I remember that I wrote a Chronologic 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 is the same. That wchwhich I wrote
was not at all done with desigedesigne to publish it. I designe not to medle wthwith the printing
of that wchwhich hath been given you under my name, nor to give any consent to
the publishing of it. I am yoryour very humble servant Isaac Newton. London. 27 May
1725. St. vetStylo vetero.
This was the 6t of Iune new style & the Privilege was Registred the day before. I granted Iune 1st & registred Iune 8 & the chronological Index printed of before he received my letter of Iune 6t, & yet not five months aft the time of election of a new President was at hand. The
Bookseller knew that the translation was made by my enemy I had not seen the translation
of this Chronological
he knew that the traslatortranslator was unknown to me & was my enemy adversary & therefore knew
that it was not fit that I should give my consent nor be asked to doe it, thhe knew
that the translator had printed a confutation confutation written a confutation of the pap
& told me nothing of this. A all this & yet asked my consent to print it.
After the recital of my letter he adds: Mr Newton allows that he did write
a chronological Index for a particualparticular friend. And perhaps this acknowledgment
induced him to print my letter. He adds further that the author of the translation &
of the observations upon it pretends to have an entire certantycertainty that this Idex o
Abridgement2 or Index1Index or Abridgement of Chronology is the same thing with the writing owned by Mr Newton; & the
same author is perswaded that the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated
to him hath been copied from that of this friend, that is from from the MS of the particular
friend above mentioned for whome I wrote it & whom the author of the translation
calls in the beginning of his Observations calls a great Princess. And therefore the MS wchwhich hath been communicated to him is that of SenrSenior Conti copied from that of P this Princess. F A few days after
I had given it to this Princess, her R. Highness asked my leave that Senior Conti might
have a copy. He knew that it was a secredt & that it was by her intercession & my leave that he had a
copy & yet without my leave either her leave or mine he dispersed copies all over France, & got an antiquary
to translate & confute it, & the antiquary has got a Printer to print them the trans
lation with the confutation. And the Printer wrote to me for my consent to the printing & pretends pretends that he had my consent my consent because I
did not delayed to answer his letters till he began to print, & by my silence & silence gave consent to the printing it with a confutation
at its first appearing in publick. as if any man could be so foolish as to consent to the printing of his papers with a confutation
appearance in publick.
The translator neare the end of his Observations tells us pag. 90, I
beleive that I have said enough concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts & the value of
generations, so that I may reserve what might be said against the rest. For these are
the two foundations of all this new systeme of Chronology. What he saith concernconcerning
the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts is foren to this purpose founded on the fo to this purpose supposition that I place the Equinox in the time of the Argonautic ExpExpedition 15 degrees
from the first start of Aries. Which is a mistake. In the time of the middle of the
first star of Aries nor Argonautic Expedition I place the Equinox in the time of the Argonautic Expedition not 15 degrees
after the first starr of Aries nor 15 degrees before the last star called ultima caudæ
For but chwhich passeth through the middles of the starrs constellations of Aries & Libra & is at
right angles wthwith the Colurus wchwhich passeth through the middles of the constellations of
♋ & ♑. And I do in such a manner as was done by the Eudoxus who was contemporary to Meton & Thucidides & Xerxes King of Persia. And as for the value of generations, he saith that I value them one wthwith
another at 18 or 20 yeares a piece: (pag 52) wchwhich is another mistake. For I value agree with the
ancients in valuing three generations at about an hundred years. But the reigns of
kings I do not equal to generations as the ancient Greeks & Egyptians did, but I value
them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece, when ten or twelve kings a piece or above are taken
together in continuall succession. So then the Translator has mistaken my meaning in the
two main arguments on wchwhich the whole is founded, & has undertaken to translate & con
fute a paper wchwhich he did not understand, & been zealous to publish it though he thought it good for
nothing but to expose me.
The Privilege was granted May 21 & registred May 25 & the Letter dated May 27 st. n.stylo novo & the Index Chronological or
Index or abridgment printed off before the arrival of My Letter at Paris, & kept
ever since to be sent hither at published at the time of the election of yoryour Offices
approaching.
Senior Conti a Venetian nobleman of Venice then in England wrote to me to
at Hampton court desired to speak with me, & introduced me to her. She desired a
copy of what I written had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect &
not fit to be communicated & confused if but if she pleased I would draw an in few days I could draw up an extract
thereof if it might be kept private. And some time after I had done this she desired,
that Senior Conti might have a copy of it. He knew that it was a secret & that it was by
her intercession & my leave that he had a copy, & yet without either her leave or mine he dispersed copies in France & got an Antiquary to translate & confute it, & the Antiquary has got a printer to print the translation wthwith yethe confutation
And the printer wrote to me thrice for my consent to the printing, & pretends that he had
my consent because I did not answer his letters till before he printed, & by my silence gave
consent: as if any man would consent to the printing of his papers with a confu
tation at the end of them at their first publishing, appearing in publick without seeing the confutation
&
p. 75, 79,And I do it in such a manner
as was done by Eudoxus, who flourished in the times of the Persian Empire wh before the
precession of the Equinox was discovered, & names the c in describing the ancient sphere
chwhich the Coluri passed.
1 The translator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron p. 70, 71, 79.
2 & that the Colures of solstices & Equinoxes were then in the 15th degres of the Constellations (p. 65, 69, 75
4 & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or Speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion (p. 62, 63, 65 69, 79
3 & that this recconing was long preserved amongst the Greeks for deter regulating the time
of their publick feasts & sacrifices, p. 64 5 but in his Calendar made for the
use of country people he & Meton placed the solstices & equinoxes in the
eighth degrees of the signes & made no other alteration in the rustic Calender
then to add his Cycle of 19 years with the intercalations belonging thereto
for making the solstices return on the same day time of the year (p 65 ) The Cal
And I follow Eudoxus in & Hipparchus in drawing the And Eudoxus tells
us & Hipparchus names the first starrs through wchwhich the Colures passed in the old Sphere of Chiron
And I And that Meton observed the height of the sonsun in the solsticsolstice in the 432 yeare before the birth of Christ, p.64 And Hipparchus names the starrs through wchwhich the Colures passed in the
ancient Sphere of Chiron described by Hipparchus Eudoxus. And I find that these
Colures passed through the middles of the Constellations of ♈ ♎ ♋ & ♑
not 15gr but 7gr. 23′ the first star of ♈. & from all this inferr that these were the Colures in the time of the Argo
nautic Expedition & had gone back from the 15th to the 8th degrees of those
signes Constellations in the days of Meton; & because they go back one degree in 72 years &
seven degrees in 504, that the Argonautic Expedition was therefore 504 years ancieterancienter
then the rustic Calendar days of Meton, or there about & by consequence about 45 or 50 yeers after
the
15 degrees after the first star of Aries & by consequence that the Trojan war
was 500 Argonautic Expedition was about 532 years older then I put make
it.
But he is mistaken. [The Colure is but 7gr. 24 from the first star of Aries] The first & last star of Aries are not 30 degrees distant from one another The translator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron p. 70, 71,
79, & that the Solstices were then in the middls middles of the Constellations p. 65
69, 75, & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or Speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion p.62, 63, 65, 69, 79
And Hipparchus names the starrs through wchwhich the Coluri passed in this old sphere &
that of the solst & his thereby places the Colure of the solstices was about 7gr 24′ from the first
starr of Aries, & I follow theim. But the translator represents that I place this
Colure 15 degrees from the first starr of Aries & thence makes deduces that I should have made the Argonautic
Expedition 532 years ancienter then I do.
He represents that I have a great work to come out,
When I lived at Cambridge, untill the times of the Convention Parliament, History & Chronology were one of the studies wthwith which I
refresht my self when I was weary of other studies: but I made nothing of that kind
ready for the press.
He represents that I make the canicular cycle of the Egyptians begin in spring 884
years before the birth of Christ, though it never began in spring. But I meddle not with the Egypti
an canicular Cycle. I speak of the Egyptian year of 365 days.
2
When Senior Conti came first into England, wchwhich was in spring 1715 Mr wrote to Mr
Leibnitz that he was
His first step was to insinuate himself into my acquaintance, & in a while I
found him active I he began to be active at work in engaging me in disputes & some
times finding persons to assa defend me. And because I do not trust him he has now
found out one to oppose me.☉ ☉ & to soffen soften the business had lately writ a Poem upon me under the colour of a
friend But I hope that this & the perpetual motion will
be the two last efforts of the Leibnitzians friends of Mr Leibnitz.
23
An account of the Observations upon the
Chronology
of S
r I. Newton.
On thursday Novemb. 11th 1725 O. St.Old Style a small Tract in print printed in French was delivered to me
as a present from Mr William Chevelier junior a Bookseller at Paris a person un
known to me, entituled; Abrege de Chronology de M. Chevalier Newton fait perpar lui meme,
& traduit sur le Manuscript Anglois. And the Bookseller hath premised an advertisment
to defend himself for printing it without my leave, saying that he had writ three let
ters to me for my leave, & in the third had told me that he would take my silence
for a consent; & that he had also charged one of his friends in London to speak to
me & procure my express answer; & that having long expected my answer, he
thought that he might take my silence for a sort of consent; & so procured a
Privilege, & printed it, & then received my answer from his friend, wchwhich was as follows.
I remember that I wrote a Chronological Index for a particular friend on
account condition that it should not be communicated. As I have not seen the
Manuscript wchwhich you have under my name, I know not whether it be the same. That
wchwhich I wrote was not at all done with designe to publish it. I intend not to meddle wthwith
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. 27 May.
1725 st. vetstylo vetero.
The Privilege was granted May 21 & registred May 25 old style & my
letter dated May 27, & the Chronological Index or Abridgement, as he calls it,
printed before the arrival of my letter at Paris, & kept ever since to be pub
lished at a convenient time. The Bookseller knew that I had not seen the
translation of the Abridgement & without seing it could not in reason give my
consent to the impression. He knew that the translator was unknown to me, & was
against me, & therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my
consent nor be asked to do it. He knew that the translator had written a confu
tation of the paper translated, & that this paper cof confutation under the title of
Observations was to be printed at the end of it; & he told me nothing of all this, nor
so much as the name of the Observator; & 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
& unanswered, at their first appearance in publick.
After the recital of my Letter he adds that the author of the translation
& of the Observations upon it, pretends to have an entire certainty that this Index
or Abridgement of Chronology is the same with the writing owned by me in my
letter, & is persuaded that the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him, hath
been copied from that of this friend, that is, from that of the particular friend above
mentioned in my letter. And therefore the manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated
to him is that of Abbe Conti, a Venetian now at Paris of a noble family. He being about
seven years ago in England gave me notice that the friend above mentioned desired
to speak with me. And this friend then desired a copy of what I had written about
Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect & confused: but in a few days I could
draw up an extract thereof if it might be kept secret: And sometime after I had
done this & presented it, this friend desired that Abbe Conti might have a copy
of it. He was the only person who had a copy, & he knew that it was a secret, &
that it was at the desire of this friend & by my leave that he had a copy, & he
kept it secret while he staid in England: & yet without either this friends leave
or mine he dispersed copies of it in France, & got an Antiquary to translate it
into French & to confute it, & the Antiquary hath got a Printer to print the trans
lationlation & the confutation, & the Printer hath endeavoured to get my leave to print
the translation without sending me a copy thereof to be perused, or telling me the
name of the translator, or letting me know his designe was to print it with
a confutation unanswered & unknown to me.
The Translator neare the end of his Observation (pag. 90) saith: I believe
that I have said enough concerning the Epoque of the Argonauts & the length of
Generations to make people cautious about the rest. For those are the two foun
dations of all this new systeme of chronology.
What he saith concerning the Epoque 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 starr of Aries, pag. 75, 79. I place it in the middle
of the constellation & the middle of the constellation is not fifteen degrees from the
first starr of Aries. The Observator grants that the Constellations were formed
by Chiron (pag. 70, 71, 79,) & that the solstices & Equinoxes were then in the mid
dles of the Constellations (pag. 65, 69, 75,) & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or
speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion, pag. 62, 63, 65, 69, 79. And
Hipparchus names the starrs through which the Colures passed in this old sphere
according to Eudoxus, & thereby places the equinoctial Colure about 7degr.36′
from the first star of Aries: & I follow Hipparchus & Eudoxus. But the
Observator represents that I place the Colure fifteen degrees from the first
star of Aries, & thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic expe
dition 532 years earlier then I do. Let him rectify his mistake, & the
Argonautic expedition will be where I place it.
And as for the length of generations, he saith that I reccon them one with
another at 18 or 20 years a piece (pag. 52, 59:) wchwhich is another mistake. I
agree with the ancients in recconing three generations at about an hundred
years. But the reigns of kings I do not equal to generations as the ancient Greeks
& Egyptians did: but I reccon them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece when
ten or twelve kings or more are taken togather in continual successions. So the
first 24 kings of France (Pharamund &c) reigned 458 years, wchwhich is one with
another 19 years a piece. The next 24 kings of France (Ludovicus Balbus &c)
reigned 451 years, wchwhich is one with another 18 years a piece. The next 15 kings (Philippus Valesius &c) reigned 315 years wchwhich is one with another 21 years a piece. And all the 63 kings of France reigned 1224 years wchwhich is 19 years a piece. And if the long reign of Lewis XIV be added, all the 64 kings of France will reign but 20 years a piece. And they that examin the matter will find it so in other kingdoms. And I shorten the duration of the ancient kingdoms of France Greece in the same proportion that I shorten the reigns of their kings & thereby place the return of the Heraclides into Peleponesus about 154 years, the taking of Troy about 76 years, & the Argonautic expedition about 44 years after the death of Solomon, & find Sesostris contemporary to Sesac, & Cadmus & Europa to David.
So then the Observator hath mistaken my meaning in the two main arguments on wchwhich the whole is founded, & hath undertaken to translate & confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand, & 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, & confuting his own translation.
The Observator saith that I suppose that the Egyptians began about 900 years before Christ to form their religion, & deify men for their inventions of arts: notwithstanding that it appears by the scriptures that their idolatry & arts were as old as the days of Moses & Iacob, 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 & subdued by the shepherds who were of another religion4 religion: but I say that when the Thetans (a third people) invaded & expelled the shepherds they set up the worship of their own kings & princes. I say also that arts were brought into Europe principally by the Phenicians & Curetes in the days of Cadmus & David about 1041 years before Christ; & do not deny that they were in Phœnicia Egypt & Idumæa 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 I 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 used sometimes to refresh my self with history & 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 publick.
Abbe Conti came into England in Spring 1715, & while he staid in England, he pretended to be my friend, but assisted Mr Leibnits in engageing me in new disputes & hath since acted in the same manner in France. The part he acted here may be understood by the account given of him in the Acta Eruditorum for the year 1721 pag. 90, where the Editor excusing himself from repeating some disputes which had been published in those Acta subjoyns: Suffecerit itaqꝫque annotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti, nobilem Venetum, (de quo admiratione digna sibi præscripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnitius,) cum ex Gallia in Angliam trajecisset, Mediatoris vices in sa suscipere voluisse, atqꝫque literas Newtoni ad Leibnitium deferri curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. And how Mr Leibnitz by this mediation endeavoured to engage me against my will in new disputes about occult qualities, universal gravity, the sensorium of God, space, time, vacuūum, atomes, the perfection of the world, supramundane intelligence, & mathematical problemes, is mentioned 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, & the perpetual motion, will be the last efforts of this kind.
5
Remarques upon yethe Abrege de Chronologie de M. le Chevalier Newton Isaac Newton fait par lui meme & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglois. & upon the Observations made there upon. A
On thursday last, Novem. 211th, at a meeting of the Royal Society, a small Treatis was delivered to me as a present from Mr William Chevelier the son, a bookseller at Paris, a person unknown to me, entituled Abrege de Chronologie de M. Chevalier Newton fait par lui meme & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglay. And the Bookseller hath premised an Advertisement in wchwhich he endeavours to defend himself for printing it without my leave, saying that he had writ three letters to me for my leave & in the third had told me that he would take my silence for a consent; & that he had also charged one of his friends in London to speak to me & procure my precise answer: & that having long expected my answer, he thought that he might take my silence for a sort of consent; & so procured a Privilege, & printed it, & then received my answer from his friend, wchwhich 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 is the same. That wchwhich I wrote was not at all done with designe to publish it. I intend not to meddle with that wchwhich 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. 27 May 1725 st. vetstylo vetero.
This Letter was writ the 6t of Iune
The Privilege was printed granted May 241st & registred May 25t & my Letter dated May 27th Old style, & the chronological Index or Abridgement printed off before the arrival of my Letter at Paris, & kept ever since to be published at the time of your election of Officers approaching. The Bookseller knew that I had not seen this translation of the Chrono logical Index & without seeing it could not in reason give my consent to the impression. He knew that the translator was unknown to me & was my adversary, & therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my consent, nor be asked to do it. He knew that the translator had written a confutation of the paper translated, & that this confutation under the title of Observations was to be printed at the end of it; & he told me nothing of all this, & yet asked my consent to print it: as if any man could be so foolish as to consent to the printing of his papers with a confutation annexed & unanswered at their first appearance in public.
After the recitall of my Letter he adds: Mr Newton allows that he did write a chronological Index for a particular friend. And perhaps this acknowledgement induced him to print my Letter. He adds further that the author of the translation & of the observations upon it pretends to have had an entire certainty that this Index or Abridgment of Chronology is the same thing with the writing owned by Mr Newton; & the same author is perswaded that the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him hath been copied from that of his friend, that is, from the Manuscript of this particular friend above mentioned for whom I wrote it, & whom the author of the translation in the beginning of his Observations (pag. 49) calls a great Princess. And therefore the Manuscript which hath been communicated to him, is that of Senior Conti a nobleman of Venice then in England lately now at Paris. He being lately in England wrote to me that this Princess desired to speak with me, & introduced me to her Highness; who then desired a copy of what I had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect & confused: but in6 in a few days I could draw up an extract thereof if it might be kept private. And sometime after I had done this & presented it, her Highness desired that Senior Conti might have a copy of it. He knew that it was a secret, & that it was by the intercession of the Princess & my leave that he had a copy: & yet without either her leave or mine he dispersed copies of it in France, & got an Antiquary to translate it into french & confute it, & the Antiquary has got a Printer to print the translation & the confutation, & the Printer has endeavoured to get my leave to print the translation without sending me a copy thereof to peruse it, or letting me know that his designe was to print it with a confutation unanswered & unknown to me.
The translator neare the end of his Observations (pag. 90) saith: I believe that I have said enough concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts, & the value of generations, sto that I may reserve what may be said against make people cautious about t the rest. For these are the two foundations of all this new systeme of Chronologie. What he saith concerning the Epoqꝫque 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 starr of Aries .(p. 75, 79.) Which is a mistake. ☉ ☉ The first & last starr of Aries are not 30 degrees distant from one another. The Observator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron (p. 70, 71, 79,) & that the solstices were then in the middles of the signes Constellations (p. 65, 69, 75,) & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion p. 62, 68, 65, 69, 79. And Hipparchus names the starrs through which the Colure passed in this old sphere, & thereby places the equinoxial Colure about 7gr. 36′ from the first star of Aries, & I follow Eudoxus Hipparchus & Eudoxus. But the Observator represents that I place this Colure fifteen degrees from the first starr of Aries & & thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic expedition 532 years ancienter then I do I place the Equinox at that time not in the fifteen degrees after the first starr of Aries nor fifteen degrees before the last star called ultima caudæ, but in the Colure wchwhich passeth through the middles of the constellations of Aries & Libra, & is at right angles with the Colure which passeth through the middles of the constellations of Cancer & Capricorn. And I do it in such a manner as was done by Eudoxus who flourished in the times of the Persian Empire almost three hundred years before the precession of the Equinox was known, & in describing the ancient sphere names the fixt starrs through which the Colures passed. And as for the value of Generations he saith that I value them one with another at 18 or 20 years a piece (pag 52, 55) wchwhich is another mistake. For I agree with the ancients in valuing three generations at about an hundred years. But the reigns of kings I do not equal to generations as the ancient Greeks & Egyptians did; but I value them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece when ten or twelve kings or above are taken together in continual succession. So then the Translator And they that examin this will ffind it true. So then the Observator hath mistaken my meaning in the two main arguments on wchwhich the whole is founded, & has undertaken to translate & confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand, & been zealous to publish it without my consent though he thought it good for nothing but to discredit me be refuted discredit me.
The Observator represents that I have a great work to come out; but I never told him so. When I lived at Cambridge, I used sometimes to refresh my self with History & chronology for a while when I was weary of other studies: but I made nothing of that kind fit for the press.
Remarques sur les Observations sur la Chronologie De M. Newton.
Response aux Observations sur le Chronologie De M. Newton
His mediatorship began by pressing & obliging me to answer Mr Leibnitz's letter of concerning
How he acted the part of a mediator may be ssen in the Prefac
How under the colour of a mediator he endeavoured to engage me in new disputes about occult qualities, universal gravity, the sensorium of God, space, time vacuum, attoms, the perfection of the world, supramundane intelligencintelligence &c may be seen & yet Mathematical Problems & with difficulty got me to answer Mr Lei the Letters of Mr Leibnitz may be seen in the Preface to the last second edition of the Commercium Epistolicum.
7
On thursday last, Novem. 11th, at a meeting of the Royal Society, a small Tract was delivered to me as a present from Mr William Chevalier the son, a bookseller at Paris, a person unknown to me, entituled: Abrege de Chronologie de M. Chevalier Newton, fait par lui meme, & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglayois. And the Bookseller hath premised an Advertisement in wchwhich he endeavours to defend himself for printing it without my leave, saying that he had writ three letters to me for my leave, & in the third had told me that he would take my silence for a consent; & that he had also charged one of his friends in London to speak to me & procure my precise answer: & that having long expected my answer, he thought that he might take my silence for a sort of consent; & so procured a Privilege, & printed it, & 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 wchwhich I wrote was not at all done with designe to publish it. I intend not to meddle with that wchwhich hath been given you under my name, nor to give any consent to the publishing of it. I am yoryour very humble servant Isaac Newton. London. 27 May 1725. st. vetstylo vetero.
The Prilege Privilege was granted May 21st & registred May 25t & my Letter dated May 27th Old style, & the Chronological Index, or Abridgement, as he calls it, printed before the arrival of my Letter at Paris, & kept ever since to be published at the time of yoryour election of Officers. The bookseller knew that I had not seen the translation of the Abridgement, & without seeing it could not in reason give my consent to the impression. He knew that the translator was unknown to me & was my adversary: & therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my consent nor be asked to do it. He knew that the translator had written a confutation of the paper translated, & that this confutation under the title of Observations was to be printed at the end of it; & he told me nothing of all this, & yet asked my consent to print it: as if amy man could be so foolish as to consent to the printing of an unseen translation of his papers with a confutation annexed & unanswered at their first appearance in publick.
After the recital of my Letter he adds: Mr Newton allows that he did write a chronological Index for a particular friend. And perhaps this concession induced him to print my Letter. He adds further that the author of the translation & of the observations upon it, pretends to have an entire certainty that this Index or Abridgment of Chronology is the same thing with the writing owned by Mr Newton; & the same author is perswaded that the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him hath been copied from that of this friend, that is, from the Manuscript of the particular friend above mentioned for whom I wrote it, [& whom the author of the translation in the beginning of his Observations (pag. 49) calls a great Princess.] And therefore the Manuscript which hath been communicated to him, is that of Senior Conti a nobleman of Venice now at Paris. He being about seven years ago in England wrote to me that this Princess friend desired to speake with me, & introduced me to her Highness, who this friend then desired a copy of what I had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect & confused: but in a few days I could draw up an Extract thereof if it might be kept secret. And sometime after I had done this & presented it, Her Highness this friend the desired that Senior Conti might have a copy of it. He was the only person who had a copy & knew that it was secret, & that it was by the intercession at the desire of this Princess friend & by my leave that he had a copy: & yet without either her my friends leave or mine, he dispersed copies of it in Franece, & got an antiquary to translate it into French, & to confute it, & the Antiquary hath got a Printer to print the8 the translation & the confutation, & the Printer hath endeavoured to get my leave to print the translation without sending me a copy thereof to be perused it, or letting me know that his designe was to print it with a confutation unanswered & unknown to me.
The translator neare the end of his Observations (pag. 90) saith: I believe that I have said enough concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts, & the value length of generations, sto that I may what may be said against make people cautious about the rest. For these are the two foundations of all this new systeme of Chronology. What he saith concerning the Epoqꝫque 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 starr of Aries. p. 75, 79 Which is a mistake. The first & last starr of Aries are not thirty degrees from one another. The Observator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron (p. 70, 71, 79,) & that the solstices were then in the middles of the Constellations (p. 65, 69, 75) & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion, where I place it. p.62, 63, 65, 69, 79. And Hipparchus names the starrs through which the Colures passed in this old sphere, according to Eudoxus & thereby places the Equinoctial Colure about 7gr. 36′ from the first star of Aries, & I follow Hipparchus & Eudoxus. But the Observator represents that I place this Colure fifteen degrees from the first starr of Aries, & thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic Expedition 532 years earlier then I do. ☉ ☉ Let him rectify his mistake & the Argonautic Expedition will fall whe be where I place it. // And as for the value length of Generations he saith that I value reccon them one with another at 18 or 20 years a piece (pag. 52, 55): wchwhich is another mistake. For I agree with the ancients in valuing recconing three generations at about an hundred years. But the reigns of kings I do not equal to generations as the ancient Greeks & Egyptians did; but I value reccon them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece when ten or twelve kings or above more are taken together in continual succession ✝ & I shorten the duration of kingdoms in the same proportion to that I shorten the reigns of kings. * * So the first twenty four kings of France, Pharamond & reigned 458 years wchwhich is one with another 19 years a piece. The next twenty four kings reigned of France yea Ludovicus Balbus &c &c reigned 451 years wchwhich is one with another 18 years a piece; the last next fifteen kings beginning with Philippus Valesius &c & ending wthwith Lewis XIVth reigned 315 years wchwhich is one with another 21 years a piece; & all the 63 Kings of France from the yeare 418 to untill the year 1643 reigned1224 years wchwhich is 19 years a piece. And if the long reign of Lewis 14th be added, the 64 kings will reign but 20 yeare a piece And they that examin the matter will find it so in other kingdoms. And I shorten the duration of the ancient kingdoms of Greece in the same proportion that I shorten the reigns of their kings
And from the beginning of the reign of Hugh Capet A.C. 987 to the end of the reign of Lewis 14 1710 (to take his one example) were 30 reigns & 723 reigns wchwhich is but 24 years to a reign. And they that examin this will find it true. // So then the Observator hath mistaken my meaning in the two main arguments on which the whole is founded; & has undertaken to translate & confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand, & been zealous to publish it without my consent, though he thought it good for nothing but to get himself a little credit.
The Observator represents that I have a great work to come out; but I never told him so. When I lived at Cambridge I used sometimes to refresh my self with history & Chronology for a while when I was weary of other studies: but I made nothing of that kind fit for the Press never told him or seignior Conti that I had made any work was making any work of this kind ready for the Press.
While Senior Conti staid in England.
Senior Conti came into England in Spring 1715, & while he staid in England he pretended to be my friend but carried on the intreagues of Mr Leibnitz & his friends under the colour of friendship to me in engaging me in disputes such disputes as I endeavoured to avoid. as far as he was able, & hath since acted in the same manner in France: all wchwhich will be better understood by the character given of him in the Acta Eruditorum f for the year 1721 pag 90, as follows: where the editor excusing himself from repeating what ✝ ✝ had been published before in those Acta concerning the author of the differential method subjoyns: Suffecerit itaqꝫque annotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti, nobilem Venetum (de quo admiratione digna sibi præscripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnitius) cum ex Gallia in Angliam trajecisset, Mediatoris vices in se suscipere, voluisse atqꝫque literas Newtoni ad Leibnitium defferri curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. That is, he assisted Mr Leibnitz in engaging me under
Senior Conti came into England in Spring 1715, & while he staid in England he pretended to be my friend but assisted Mr Leibnitz in engaging me in new disputes, & 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 for repeating some disputes wchwhich had been published in those Acta, subjoyns: where the Editor of the Acta excusing himself from repeating what some the disputes wchwhich had been said before published before in those Acta, subjoyns Suffecerit itaqꝫque annotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti, nobilem Venetum (de quo admiratione digna sibi prædicta esse præscripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnitius) cum ex GalliaGallia in Angliam trajecisset, Mediatoris vices in se suscipere voluisse, atqꝫque literas Newtoni ad Leibnitium deferri curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. And what he has been doing in Italy may be understood partly by his sending thither Mr Sterling, a person then unknown to me, to be ready to defend me there if I would afterwards have contributed to his maintenance there, & partly by the disputes since rasised there by one of his friends who denies many of my Optical Experiments though they have been all tryed in France with success. But I hope that these things & the perpetual motion will be the last efforts of this kinds
9
Response aux Observations sur le ChonologieChronologie de M. Newton.
On thursday Novem. 11th, 1725, a small Tract in print was delivered to me as a present from Mr William Chevelier the son junior a bookseller at Paris a person unknown to me, entituled, Abrege de Chronologie de M. Chevalier Newton, fait par lui meme, & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglois. And the Bookseller hath premised an advertisement in wchwhich he endeavoureth to defend himself for printing it without my leave, saying he had writ three letters to me for my leave, & in the third had told me that he would take my silence for a consent; & that he had also charged one of his friends in London to speak to me & procure my preciseexpress answer; & that having long expected my answer, he thought that he might take my silence for a sort of consent; & so procured a Privilege, & printed it, & then received my answer from his friend, wchwhich 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 wchwhich you have under my name, I know not whether it be the same. That wchwhich I wrote was not at all done with designe to publish it. I intend not to meddle with that wchwhich hath been given you under my name, nor to give any consent to the publishing of it. I am yoryour very humble servant Isaac Newton. London 27 May 1725. st. vetstylo vetero.
The Privilege was granted May 21st, & registred May 25t, & my Letter dated May 27th Old style, & the Chronological Index, or Abridgement as he calls it, printed before the arrival of my Letter at Paris, & kept ever since to be published at a convenient time. The bookseller knew that I had not seen the translation of the Abridgment, & without seeing it could not in reason give my consent to the impression. He knew that the translator was unknown to me & was against me: & therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my consent, nor be asked to do it. He knew that the translator had written a confutation of the paper translated, & that this confutation under the title of Observations was to be printed at the end of it, & he told me nothing of all this nor so much as the name of the Observator & yet asked my consent to the publishing: as if any man could be so foolish as to consent to the printing of an unseen translation of his papers with a confutation by a nameless person by a namel annexed & unanswered by a nameless person at their first appearance in publick.
After the first recital of my Letter he adds that the author of the translation & of the observations upon it, pretends to have an entire certainty that this Index or abridgement of Chronology is the same with the writing owned by me in my Letter, & is perswaded that the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him hath been copied from that of this friend, that is, from the Manuscript of the particular friend above mentioned in my Letter. And therefore the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him is that of Seignior Abbe Conti a noble Venetian now at Paris. He being about seven years ago in England, gave me notice that the friend above mentioned desired to speak with me. And this friend then desired a copy of what I had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect & confused: but in a few days I could draw up an extract thereof if it might be kept secret. And sometime after I had done this & presented it, this friend desired that SeigneurAbbe Conti might have a copy of it. He was the only person who had a copy, & he knew that it was a secret & that it was at the desire of this friend & by my leave that he had a copy, & he kept it secret while he staid in England: & yet without either this friends leave or mine, he dispersed copies of it in France, & got an antiquary to translate it into French, & to confute it, & the Antiquary hath got a Printer to print the translation & the confutation, & the Printer hath endeavoured to get my leave to print the translation without sending me there a coppy thereof to be perused, or telling me the name of the translator, or letting me know that his designe was to print it with a confutation unanswered & unknown to me.
The translator neare the end of his Observations (pag.90) saith: I believe that I have said enough concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts & the length of generations to make people cautious about the rest. For these are the two foundations of all this new systeme of Chronology. What he saith concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts is founded on the supposition that I place the Equinox of the Argonautic Expedition10 expedition fifteen degrees from the first starr of Aries, p. 75, 79. Which is a mistake The first & last starr of Aries are not 30 degrees from one another as they should be that the middle of the Constellation may be fifteen degrees from each. The Observator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron (pag. 70, 71, 79) & that the solstices & Equinoxes were then in the middles of the Constellations (pag. 65, 69, 75) & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion, p. 62, 63, 65, 69, 79. And Hipparchus aa See Hipparchus published by Petavius Vol. 3. p. 116, 117, 119, 120. names the starrs through which the Colures passed in this old sphere according to Eudoxus, & thereby places the Equinoctial Colure about 7gr 36′ from the first starr of Aries; & I follow Hipparchus & Eudoxus. But the Observator represents that I place this Colure fifteen degrees from the first starr of Aries, & thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic Expedition 532 years earlier then I do. Let him rectify his mistake, & the Argonautic Expedition will be where I place it.
And as for the length of generations, he saith that I reccon them one with another at 18 or 20 years a piece (pag. 52, 55:) wchwhich is another mistake. I agree wthwith the ancients in recconing three generations at about an hundred years. But the reigns of Kings I do not equal to generations, as the ancient Greeks & Egyptians did: but I reccon them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece when ten or twelve kings or more are taken together in continual succession. So the first 24 Kings of France (Pharmund &c) reigned 458 years, wchwhich is one with another 19 years a piece. The next 24 Kings of France (Ludovicus Balbus &c) reigned 451 years, wchwhich is one with another 18 years. The next 15 Kings (Philippus Valesius &c) reigned 315 years, wchwhich is one with another 21 years a piece. And all the 63 Kings of France reigned 1224 years, wchwhich is 19 years a piece. And if the long reign of Lewis XIV be added, the 64 kings will reign but 20 years a piece. And they that examin the matter will find it so in other kingdoms. And I shorten the duration of the ancient Kingdoms of Greece in the same proportion that I shorten the reigns of their Kings, ‡ ‡ & thereby place the argonautic Expedition about 45 years, & the taking of Troy about 77 years after the death of Solomon.
So then the Observator hath mistaken my meaning in the two main arguments on wchwhich the whole is founded; & hath undertaken to translate & confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand, & been zealous to print it without my consent, though he thought it good for nothing but to get imself a little credit by translating it & confuting his own translation.
The Observator saith that I represent suppose that the Egyptians began about 900 years before Christ to form their religion & deify men for their invention of arts, notwithstanding it appears by scriptures that their idolatry & arts were as old as the days of Moses & Iacob, 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 of their own till they were subdued by the shepherds subdued them who were of another religion: & I say that when the shephers Thebans expelled the Shepherds, they set up the worship of their own Kings; And I say also & that Arts were brought into Europe principally by Cadmus & the Phenicians & Curetes in the days of David & Cadmus about 1041 years before Christ; & do not deny that they were in Phœnicia Egypt & Idumæa before they came into Europe. The Observator represents that I ascribe the invention of Arts to the Gods of Egypt about 900 years before the birth of Christ, pag. 82, 83. But he is again mistaken And I say also that Arts were brought into Europe principally by Cadmus & the Phenicians & the Curetes in the reign of King David about 1041 years before Christ, & do not deny that they were in Phenicia & Egypt & Idumea before they came into Europe.
He 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 used sometimes to refresh my self with history & 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 publick.
Seignior Abbe Conti came into England in Spring 1715, & while he staid in England he pretended to be my friend but assisted Mr Leibnitz in engaging me in new disputes, & hath & 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 Eruditorium for the year 1721 pag. 90, where the Editor excusing himself from repeating some disputes wchwhich had been published in those Acta, subjoynes: Suffecerit itaqꝫque annotasse Abbatum quendam Italum de Conti, nobilem Venetum (de quo admiratione digna sibi præscripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnitius) cùm ex Gallia in Angliam trajecisset, Mediatoris vices in se suscipere voluisse, atqꝫque literas Newtoni ad Leibnitium deferri curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. And what he has been doing in Italy may be understood partly by his sending thither2 Mr Sterling1 thither [a person then unknown to me to be ready to defend me there if I would have contributed to his maintenance maintenance] & partly by the disputes which since raised there by one of his friends who denies many of my optical experiments tho they have been all tried in France with successe. But I hope that these things, & the perpetual motion, will be the last efforts of this kind for embroiling me
11
Response aux ObsevationsObservations sur le Chronologie de M. Newton.
On thursday Novem. 11th 1725, a small Tract in print was delivered to me as a present from Mr William Chevalier junior a bookseller at Paris, a person unknown to me, entituled, Abrege de ChrologieChronologie de M. Chevalier Newton, fait par lui meme, & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglois. And the Bookseller hath premised an advertisement in wchwhich he endeavoureth to defend himself for printing it without my leave, saying that he had writ three letters to me for my leave, & in the third had told me that he would take my silence for a consent; & that he had also charged one of his friends in London to speak to me & procure my express answer; & that having long expected my answer, he thought that he might take my silence for a sort of consent; & so procured a privilege & printed it, & then received my answer from his friend, wchwhich was as follows.
I remember that I wrote a Chronological Index for a particular friend on condition that it should be kept secret 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 wchwhich I wrote was not at all done wthwith designe to publish it. I intend not to meddle with that wchwhich 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. 27 May, 1725, st. vetstylo vetero.
The Privilege was granted May 21 & registred May 25 old style & my Letter dated May 27, & the Chronological Index, printed or aAbridgement as he calls it, printed before the arrival of my Letter at Paris, & kept ever since to be published at a convenient time. The Bookseller knew that I had not seen the translation of the Abridgment & without seeing it could not in reason give my consent to the impression. He knew that the translator was unkown to me, & was against me: & therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my consent, nor be asked to do it. He knew that the translator had written a confutation of the paper translated, & that this confutation under the title of Observations was to be printed at the end of it; & he told me nothing of all this, nor so much as the name of the Observator, & 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 & unanswered at their first appearance in publick.
After the recital of my Letter he adds that the author of the translation & of the Observations upon it, pretends to have an entire certainty that this Index or Abridgement of Chronology is the same with the writing owned by me in my Letter, & is perswaded that the Manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him, hath been copied from that of this friend, that is, from that of the particular friend above mentioned in my Letter. And therefore the Manuscript which hath been communicated to him is that of Abbe Conti a noble Venetian now at Paris. He being about seven years ago in England gave me notice that the friend above mentioned desired to speak with me. And this friend then desired a copy of what I had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect & confused, 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 & presented it, this friend desired that signior Conti might have a copy of it. He was the only person who had a copy, & he knew that it was a secret, & that it was at the desire of this friend & by my leave that he had a copy & thathe kept it secret while he staid in England: & yet without either this friends leave or mine he dispersed copies of it in France, & got an antiquary to translate it into French, & to confute it, & the Antiquary hath got a Printer to print the translation & the confutation, & the Printer hath got endeavoured to get my leave to print the translation without sending me a copy thereof to be perused, or telling the name of the translator; or letting me know what his designe was to print it with a confutation unanswered & unknown to me.
The translator neare the end of his Observations (pag. 90) saith: I beleive that I have said enough concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts & the length of generations to make people cautious about the rest. For these are the two foundations of all this new systeme of Chronology. What he saith concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonautisc Expedition 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 middle constellation & the middle is not fifteen degrees from the first & last starrs of Aries. The observator grants that the Constellations were formed by Chiron (pag. 70, 71), 79) & that the solstices & Equinoxes were then in the middles of the Constellations (pag. 65, 69, 75) & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or Speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion, pag. 62, 63, 65, 69, 79. And Hipparchus aa See Hipparchus published by Py Petavius, vol. 3. p. 116, 117, 119, 120. names the starrs through which the Colures passed in this old sphere according to Eudoxus, & thereby places the Equinoctial Colure about 7degr. 36′ from the first starr of Aries; & I follow Hipparchus & Eudoxus. But the Observator represents that I place the Colure fifteen degrees from the first starr of Aries., Let him & thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic Expedition 532 years earlier then I do. Let him rectify his mistake, & the Argonautic Expedition will be where I place it.
As for the length of generations, he saith that I reccon them one with another at 18 or 20 years a piece (pag. 52, 55:) wchwhich is another mistake. I agree with the ancients in recconing thre generations at about an hundred years. But the reigns of kings I do not equall to generations as the ancient Greeks & Egyptians did: but I reccon them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece12 a piece one with another when ten or twelve kings or more are taken in continual succession. So the first 24 Kings of France (Pharamund &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 18 years a piece. The next 15 Kings (Philippus Valesius &c) reigned 315 years, wchwhich is one with another 21 years a piece. And all the 63 Kings of France reigned 1224 years which is 19 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 examin the matter will find it so in other Kingdoms. And I shorten the duration of the ancient Kingdoms of Greece in the same proportion that I shorten the reigns of King their Kings, & thereby place the Argonautic Expedition about 44 years, & the taking of Troy about 76 years after the death of Solomon.
So then the Observator hath undertaken to translate & confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand mistaken my meaning in the two main arguments on wchwhich the whole is founded, & hath undertaken to translate & to confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand & 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 & confuting his own translation.
The Observator saith that I suppose that the Egyptians began about 900 years before Christ to form their religion & deify men for their inventions of arts, notwithstanding that it appears by the scriptures that their idolatry & arts were as old as the days of Moses & Iacob, 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 & subdued by the shepherds who were of of another religion: but I say that when the Thebans expelled the Shepherds they set up the worship of their own Kings & princes. I say also that arts were brought into Europe principally by the Phenicians & Curetes in the time of Cadmus & David about 1041 years before Christ; & do not deny that they were in Phenicia Egypt & 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 wthwith that cycle, but speak of the Egyptian year of 365 years.
The Observator represents that I have a great work to come out: but I never told him so. When I lived at Cambridge, I used sometimes to refresh my self with history & 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.
Abbé Conti came into England in spring 1715, & while he staid in England he pretended to be my friend, but assisted Mr Leibnitz in engageing me in new disputes, & 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 which had been published in those Acta, subjoyns: Suffecerit itaqꝫque annotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti, nobilem Venetum (de quo admiratione digna sibi præscripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnitius) cum ex Gallia in Angliam trajecisset, Mediatoris vices in se suscipere voluisse, atqꝫque litteras Newtoni ad Leibnitium deferri curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. And how under the Colour of a mediator he Mr Leibnitz by his mediation endeavoured 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, & mathematical problemes, & this mediator with difficulty got me to answer the letters of Mr Leibnitz, is mentioned in the second Preface to the second edition of the Commercium Epistolicum. And what he has been doing in Italy may be understood by the disputes raised there by one of his friends who denyes many of my optical experiments though they have been all tried in France with success. But I hope that these things, & the perpetual motion, will be the last efforts of this kind.
Dr Arbothnot in Cork street in Burlington Gardens.
13
Response aux Observations sur le Chronologie de M. Newton.
On thursday Novemb. 11th 1725 a small Tract in print was delivered to me as a present from Mr William Chevelier junior a Bookseller at Paris, a person unknown to me, entituled, Abrege de Chronologie de M. Chevalier Newton, fait perpar lui meme, & traduit sur le Manuscript Anglois. And the Bookseller hath premised an advertisement to defend himself for printing it without my leave, saying that he had writ three letters to me for my leave, & in the third had told me that he would take my silence for a consent; & that he had also chraarged one of his friends in London to speak to me & procure my express answer; & that having long expected my answer, he thought that he might take my silence for a sort of consent; & so procured a Privilege, & printed it, & then received my answer from his friend, wchwhich was as follows.
I remember that I wrote a Chronological Index for a particular friend on condition that it should be kept secret not be communicated. As I have not seen the Manuscript under my which you have under my name, I know not whether it be the same. That which I wrote was not at all done wthwith designe 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 YorYour very humble servant Isaac Newton. London, 27 May 1725, st. vetstylo vetero.
The Privilege was granted May 21 & registred May 25 old style, & my letter dated May 27, & the Chronological Index, or Abridgement, as he calls it, printed before the arrival of my Letter at Paris; & kept secret ever since to be published at a convenient time. The bookseller knew that I had not seen the translation of the Abridgement, & without seeing it could not in reason give my consent to the impression. He knew that the translator was unknown to me, & was against me: & therefore he knew that it was not fit that I should give my consent, nor be asked to do it. He knew that the translator had written a confutation of the paper translated, & that this confutation under the title of observations was to be printed at the end of it; & he told me nothing of all this, nor so much as the name of the Observator; & 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 & unanswered at their first appearance in publik.
After the recital of my Letter, he adds that the author of the translation & of the Observations upon it, pretends to have an entire certainty that this Index or Abridgement of Chronology is the same with the writing owned by me in my letter, & is perswaded that the Manuscript which hath been communicated to him is that of Abbe Conti hath been copied from that of this friend, that is from that of the particular friend above mentioned in my Letter. And therefore the manuscript wchwhich hath been communicated to him is that of Abbe Conti a noble Venetian now at Paris. He being about seven years ago in England gave me notice that the friend above mentioned desired to speak with me. And this friend then d desired a copy of what I had written about Chronology. I replied that it was imperfect & confused, but in a few days I could draw up an extract thereof if it might be kept secret. And sometime after I had done this & presented it, this friend desired that Abbe Conti might have a coppy of it. He was the only person who had a copy, & he knew that it was a secret, & he knew that it was at the desire of this friend & by my leave that he had a copy, & he kept it secret while he staid in England: & yet without either this friends leave or mine he dispersed copies of it in France, & got an Antiquary to translate it into French & to confute it, & the Antiquary hath got a Printer to print the translation translation & the confutation, & the Printer hath endeavoured to get my leave to print the translation without sending me a copy thereof to be perused, or telling me the name of the translator; or letting me know that his designe was to print it with a confutation unanswered & unknown to me.
The Translator neare the end of his Observations (pag. 90) saith: I believe that I have said enough concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts & the length of Generations to make people cautious about the rest. For these are the two foundations of all this new systeme of Chronology.
What he saith concerning the Epoqꝫque of the Argonauts is founded on 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 & the middle of the constellation is not fifteen degrees from the first star of Aries. The Observator grants that the Contellations were formed by Chiron (pag. 70, 71, 79,) & that the solstices & equinoxes were then in the middles of the Constellations (pag. 65, 69, 75.) & that Eudoxus in his Enoptron or Speculum cited by Hipparchus followed this opinion, p. 62, 63, 65, 69, 79. And Hipparchus aa See Hipparchus published by Petavius, vol. 3 p. 116, 117, 119, 120. names the starrs through wchwhich the colures passed in this old sphere according to Eudoxus, & thereby places the Equinoctial Colure about 7degr 36′ from the first star of Aries: & I follow Hipparchus & Eudoxus. But the Observator represents that I place the Colure fifteen degrees from the first starr of Aries & thence deduces that I should have made the Argonautic expedition 532 years earlier then I do. Let him rectify his mistake, & the Argonautic epeditionexpedition will be where I place it.
And as for the length of generations, he saith that I reccon them one with another at 18 or 20 years a piece (pag. 52, 59:) wchwhich is another mistake. I agree with the ancients in recconing three generations at about an hundred yeares. But the reigns of kings I do not equal to generations as the ancient Greeks & Egyptians did: but I reccon them only at about 18 or 20 years a piece when ten or twelve kings or more are tagentaken together in continual succession. So the first 24 Kings of France (Pharamund &c) reigned 458 years, wchwhich 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 18 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, wchwhich is 19 years a piece. And if the long reign of Lewis XIV be added, all the 64 Kings of France will reign but 20 years a piece. And they that examen the matter, will find it so in other kingdoms. And I shorten the duration of the ancient kingdoms of Greece in the same proportion that I shorten the reigns of their Kings, & thereby place the Argonautic Expedition about 44 years & the taking of Troy about 76 years after the death of Solomon, & make find the reign of Sesostris contemporary to that of Sesac. ✝ ✝ And as for generations, I say that Hippocrates was 17 generations by the fathers side from Hercules inclusively, & reccon those generations at 28 or 30 years a piece, they being by the chiefe of the family so as to be remembred, & by consequence for the most part by the eldest sons. But he makes the Argonautic Expedition 534 years older then I do, & by consequence this recconing these 17 generations must take up above 60 years to a generation. Which is very much too long for the course of nature. & that of Cadmus to that of David & find Sesostris contemporary to Sesak & Cadmus & Europa to David
So then the Observator hath mistaken my meaning in the two main arguments on wchwhich the whole is founded, & hath undertaken to translate & confute a paper wchwhich he did not understand, & been zealous to print it without my consent: tho he though he thought it good for nothing but to get himself a little credit by translating it to be confuted & confuting his own translation.
The observator saith that I suppose that the Egyptians began about 900 years before Christ to form their religion & deify men for their inventions of arts, notwithstanding that it appears by the scriptures that their idolatry & arts were as old as the days of Ioshua Moses & Iacob, pag. 82, 83. But he is again mistaken. I deny not that the kingdom of the lower Egypt called Misraim had a religion of their own till they were invaded & subdued by the shepherds who were of another religion: but I say that when the Thebans (a third people) invaded & expelled the shepherds, they set up the worship of their own kings & princes. I say also that arts were brought into Egypt Europe principally by the Phenicians & Curetes in the days of Cadmus14 Cadmus & David about 1041 years before Christ; & do not deny that they were in Phœnicia Egypt & Idumæa 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 have a great work to come out never told him so. When I lived at Cambridge, I used sometimes to refresh my self with history & chronology for a while when I was weary of with other studies: but I never told him that I was preparing a work of this kind for the publick.
Abbe Conti came into England in Spring 1715, & while he staid in England he pretended to be my friend, but assisted Mr Leibnitz in engaging me in new disputes, & hath since acted in the same manner in France. The part he acted here may be understood by the character account given of him in the Acta Eruditorum for the year 1721 pag. 90, where the Editor excusing himself from repeating some disputes wchwhich had been published in those Acta, subjoyns: Suffecerit itaqꝫque annotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti, nobilem Venetum, (de quo admiratione digna sibi præscripta esse ab Hermanno fatetur Leibnitius,) cum ex Gallia in Angliam trajecisset, Mediatoris vices in se suscipere voluisse, atqꝫque litteras Newtoni ad Leibnitium deferri curasse, Leibnitianas cum Newtono communicasse. And how Mr Leibnitz by this pretended mediation endeavoured to engage me against my will in new disputes about occult qualities, universal gravity, the sensorium of God, space, time, vacuum, atomes, the perfection of the world, supramundane intelligence, & mathematical problemes, is mentioned 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 denyes many of my Optical experiments, tho they have been all tried in France with success. But I hope that these things, & the perpetual motion, will be the last efforts of this kind.
15
Cronologie de Monsieur le Chevalier Newton qui a este traduit en Anglois francois par un scavant je ce Pays avec des Remarques je vouldroit bine scavoir si Monsieur le Chevallier Newton na Rien a y Corriger ayant envie de l'imprimer.
Chronologie abridged. 6
Pag. 2. lin 8. For Philosophe Heraclite write Isocrates.
Pag. 3. lin 8, 9, 10, 11. Write. And where he left off, Polybius began & carried on the history.
Pag. 4 lin. 101 for un write le.
Ib. lin. 21. for environ write above.
Pag. 6. lin. 9 for & Titelive convient que write & so doth Servius
Ib. lin 13, 14 write Tiglathpilesar.
Pag. 8 lin. 29 write seulment 18 or 20 ye ans
Pag.9. lin. 19, 20 for plus long write not much above.
Chronique Abregée.
pag. 2i0. lin. 10 lege Thamus ou Thammuz:
ib. lin. 14 lege Bæon, Apachnas, Apophis, Ianias, Assis &c
Pag. 12 lin 22 Pro Tath-Mosis scribe Tethmosis.
P. 21. lin 25 Dele Occidentale.
P. 23. lin. 1. Pro Egypte scribe Syrie.
P. 26. lin. 1. scribe Dij magni majorum gentium.
Ib. lin. 21 scribe & de son fils Antée, ou d'Atlas,
Ib lin. ult. ep. 21 lin.1 pro Osiris & Bosiris scribe O Siris & Bou Siris
P. 28. l. 21. scribe de Zerah & Cissia
Ib. lin 23 & 29 scribe Osarsiph pro Osar Syph
Pag. 30. lin. 1. pro Scorpius scribe Chelæ.
Ib. lin. 6, 7, 8, 9. write in English – Meton in the year of Nabonassar 316 observed the summer solstice in the eigth degree of Cancer & therefore the solstice had then gone back seven degrees. It goes back one degree in about seventy 72 years.
Pag.31. lin 10, 11. write in English – and Hippocrates was the 18th from Æsculapius by the fathers side, & the 19th from Hercules by the mothers side
Pag. 33. l. 8. Pro Troye scribe Thebes.
Ib. lin 16 Pro Tubal-Canaan scribe Baal-Canaan
Ib. lin 24 Pro Osar-Syph scribe Osarsyph.
Pag. 34. lin 2, 3. Pro cent ans, and cinqꝫque cent ans, & mille ans, write mille ans, and cinqꝫque mille ans, and dix mille ans.
Ib. lin. 27 Pro Syprie write Syrie.
Ib. lin. 25, 26, 27 write. Anno ante Christum 995 Teucer batit Salamis, dans l'Isle de Chypre. Hadad ou Benhadad, Roy de Syrie meurt, & on lui batit un Temple a Damas où l'on établit son cult & des fêtes en son honour. Ib. lin. ult. for 884 write 887
Pag. 35. lin 2 dele – les galeries &
Ib. lin. 9. After – de 360 jours, add, & said that they were added when those five princes were born
Ib. lin. 19. After ce jour la, add. And this circle continued there till Cambyses spoiled the temples of Egypt
17
Pag.36. lin. 28. write. de la primiere année de Nabonassar, c'est a dire, l'an 884 avant I.C. And if it began upon the day next after the Vernal Equinox, it might be three or four years earlier. C'est par là qu' nous avons –
Pag. 37. lin. 3. blot out si cela est & write perpar cela.
Ib. l. 7 for 884 write 886
Ib. l. 8 for d'Ogygie (de Cadis) write (de Cadis ou Cales.
Ib. l. 22 write, and that this age should end when the men then living should groew hoary & dropt into the grave; & therefore it was but of an ordinary length. And Herodotus has told us that
Pag. 39. lin 11, 12 blot out de ces generations ou plutot. de cés reigns
Ib. lin. 18. for 40 write 140.
Ib. lin. 23. for 803 write 808.
Ib. lin. 24 – & begins the third great Pyramid
Ib. lin. 28. for 803 write 804.
Pag.40. lin 13 read – in the upper Egypt.
Ib. lin 15 for Sesonchis write Anysis or Amosis at Anysis or Hænes.
Pag. 41. lin. 10 for Ana-Kindarax write Anakyndaraxis
Pag. 42. lin. 15, 16. read The government of Egypt committed to twelve Princes.
Pag 43. lin 5 for onze write 15.
Pag.44. lin 2 for Cylon write Creon.
Pag. 46. lin. 7 for 565 write 563.
318
And what he has been doing in Italy may be understood by his sending Mr Sterling thither without my approbation Mr Sterling a person then unknown to me to be ready to defend me there if I would have contributed to his maintenance, there & by the disputes since raised there by one of his friends who denies many of my Optical experiments though they have been all tried in France with success.
The Observator represents that place I ascribe the first invention of Arts to the Gods of Egypt about 900 years before the birth of Christ pag. 82, 83 but he is mistaken. I say that arts were brought into Europe by Cadmus & his Phenicians in the reign of David about 1041 years before Christ, & do not deny that they were in Phenicia & Egypt & Idumaea before they came into Europe
He saith also that 884 years before Christ I place the beginning of the Canicular cycle upon the vernal equinox although that cycle never beginns 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.
He saith that I place the beginning of the religion of Egypt about 900 years before the birth of Christ but he is whereas they had a religion in the days of Abraham, but he misrepresents things. The lower Egypt called Mizraim had a religion in the days of Abraham & Iacob. The shepherds set up their own religion there till the days of Samuel & David. And the Thebans & Ethiopians Egypt who expelled the shepherds set up their own religion when th & the worship of their own kings & Princes when they expelled the shepherds
He saith that I suppose that the Ægyptians began about 900 years before the Christian Æra began to form their religion & to deify men for the invention whereas the of arts though their idolatry & arts were as old as the days of Moses & Iacob & Moses. pag 92, 93 but he misrepresents things. I allow deny not that the lower Egypt called Mizraim had a religion of their own till the shepherds invaded them, who were of & set another religion. of their own. And & say that the when the Thebans expelled the shepherds they set up the worship of their own kings I say also that Arts were brought into EropeEurope principally by Cadmus & the PheniansPhenicians & Curetes in the reign of David about 1041 years before XtChrist & do not deny that they
4Dr Mead
9MrPitfield
2Sr Hans Sloane
8Mr Folkes
5Dr Iurin
10Mr Machin
1LdLord Peasley
3Dr Stanley
6Dr Halley
7Dr Harwood
The Observator represents
987. 1710/30)723 (24
19
And saith that expressly that Eudoxus drew one of these Colures passed through the middle of middle Cancer & the middle of Capricorn & the other through the middle of Chelæ & through the back of Aries. which is in the middle between the & by consequence through the middle of Aries And I follow Eudoxus & by doing so place his EquinctialEquinoctial Colure about 7degr 36′ from the first star of Aries. But the Observator –
Remarques upon the Observations made upon the a Chronologyical Index of Sr I. N. & published at Paris translated into French by the Observator & published at Paris.
Remarques upon
20
When Senior Conti came first into England (which was in Spring He 1715 he insintedinsinuated himself into wrote to M Leibnitz that he was my acquaintance & for what end is apparent by the account wchwhich hath bebeen given of him in the Acta Eruditorum for the year 1721 pag. 90, where after mentioning the disputes that have been wthwith Mr Leibnits, he adds: Suffecerit adisse adnotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti cum Newtono communicasse.
His first step was to get into my acquaintance. Soon after he began to be at work in engageing me in disputes & somtimes finding persons to defend me. And now he has found one to oppose me. lately he found out one in Italy to oppose me ☉ ☉ whether he had sent one before to defend me. And now he has found out one another in France, to oppose me. But I hope that these & the perpetual motion will be the last efforts of these friends of Mr Leibnitz & Senior Conti. & now he hath found out another But I hope that this & the pepetual motion will be the last efforts of the friends of Mr Leibnitz.
But I hope that the divulging of this abrigment, the disputes of Seignior Rizetti & the perpetual motion, & the the sending of Mr Sterling behind into Italy be to be ready to defend me will be the last efforts of the Leibnitians
– But I hope that the divulging of this abridgment, Chronological Index, the sending of Mr Sterling into Italy to be ready to defend me, the disputes of raised against me there by his friend & by Senior Rizzetti, & the perpetual motion, will be the last efforts of the friends of Mr Leibnitz to imbroil me.
While Sein. Conti he staid in England he carried on the intreagues of Mr Leibnitz & his friends under the colour of Friendship to me as far as he was able; as may be understood by this account given of hi comparing his divulging the Index Chronologicus his behaviour since in France with the following acctaccount given of him in the Acta erutitorum for the year 1721 pag 90, wchwhich is as follows: Suffecerit adnotasse Abbatem quendam Italum de Conti – cum Newtono communicasse