Page images
PDF
EPUB

the total durations, which is the leaft certain, the mean of the other five means, gives the fun's parallax = 8,557.

It, therefore, inconteftibly follows, that the fun's parallax, as far as can be determined from the observations made on the late tranfit of Venus, is 8",56.

Art. 52. An Efay towards folving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances. By the late Rev. Mr. Bayes, F. R. S. Communicated by Mr. Price, in a Letter to John Canton, M. A. F. R. S.

The queftion here folved, is of the utmost importance, as it will form a folid foundation for all our reafonings concerning paft facts, and what is likely to happen hereafter. The problem is this:

Given the number of times in which an unknown event has happened and failed: required the chance that the probability of its happening in a fingle trial lies fomewhere between any two degrees of probability that can be defired.'

As we have not room to follow this able Mathematician thro' the laborious task of folving this interefting problem, we shall only obferve, that the subject is purfued in a very confpicuous manner, and highly merits the attention of Mathematicians.

Art. 55. A Difcourfe on the Parallax of the Sun. By the Rev. Thomas Hornfby, M. A. Savilian Profeflor of Aftronomy in the University of Oxford, and F. R. S.

After giving an hiftorical account of the methods ufed by the moft able Aftronomers for determining the fun's parallax, and the refult of thefe methods, which made it 9,92, before the late tranfit of Venus; Mr. Hornsby proceeds to deduce the parallax from the various obfervations made in different parts of the world on that phenomenon; and from a result of a comparifon of the beft obfervations made in places whofe longitudes are as accurately afcertained as the prefent ftate of Aftronomy will permit, the fun's parallax on the day of the tranfit, appears to be 8,692; but in this comparifon the obfervations made by Mr. Pingré at Rodrigues are rejected.,

[ocr errors]

The Profeffor then compares the above obfervations with thofe made by Mr. Pingré at Rodrigues, and the mean of those comparisons gives the fun's parallax 9,732. And in this quantity of the fun's parallax, adds Mr. Hornfby, we must either acquiefce, or remain as ignorant of the true quantity of it, as we were before, till we can have recourse to the next tranfit, on June 3, 1769, when the planet Venus will again pafs over the fun's difc, having fomething more than 10 minutes of north

latitude;

fatitude; and will be fo favourably circumftanced, that if the errors in obferving each contact, do not exceed 4 or 5′′, the quantity of the fun's parallax may be determined within lefs than one hundredth part of the whole.'

As the difference of these two refults are owing wholly to the obfervations made in places to the north of the Equinoctial, compared with those made by Mr. Pingré, at the island of Rodrigues, it will follow, that if there fhould be an error in the latter, the parallax itfelf will alfo be erròneous, and the difference refulting from the above comparisons, will be likewife more or less, according to the nature and tendency of this errer. Mr. Short, in a paper already mentioned in this article, obferves, that in the memoir of Mr. Pingré, the time of the internal contact at the egrefs at Rodrigues, is fet down at oh. 36 min. 49 fec. But in the fame volume there is an account of Mr. Pingré's obfervation, fent to the Royal Academy before his arrival in Europe, and the time of the internal contact is therein fet down at o h. 34 min. 47 fec. Alfo in a letter from him to the Royal Society, on his arrival at Lisbon, dated the 6th of March, 1762, and inferted in the Philofophical Tranfactions, vol. LII. Part I. the time of the internal contact at oh. 34 min. 47 fec. true time. This is alfo repeated in another letter to the Royal Society, dated the 14th of March, 1762. If therefore we take o h. 34 min. 47 fec. for the true time, which, from feveral powerful reafons urged by Mr. Short, feems to be the real truth, we fhall find that the refult of the comparison will give the fun's parallax=8",62, agreeing very well with that refulting from thofe made on the north fide of the Equinoctial, compared with the obfervations made by Mr. Mafon at the Cape of Good Hope.

Art. 56. A Difcourfe on the Locus for three and four Lines, celebrated among the ancient Geometers. By Henry Pemberton, M. D. F. R.S. Lond. et R. A. Berol. S. In a Letter to the Reverend Thomas Birch, D. D. Secretary to the Royal Society.

This is one of the moft curious and elegant papers we ever remember to have seen on this interesting fubject, the very nature of which will not admit of any abridgment, without a number of figures: fuffice it, therefore, in this place, that we recommend it to the perufal of thofe who are defirous of being acquainted with thefe fubjects; and we will venture to promife, they will not think the time they employ in perufing it, fpent in vain.

The

The Origin of Language and Nations, hieroglifically, etymologically, and topographically defined and fixed, after the Method of an English, Celtic, Greek, and Latin English Lexicon. Together with an historical Preface, an hieroglyfical Definition of Characters, a Celtic general Grammar, and various other Matters of Antiquity, treated in a Method entirely new. By Rowland' Jones, Efq; of the Inner Temple. 8vo. 10s. 6d. bound. DodЛley.

WE

E look upon the work before us, to be as fingular a production as moft our age and country have produced. At the fame time alfo, we are obliged to confess, that we are not fufficiently verfed in the Celtic, ancient Phrygian or Welch language, to determine the merit of this very laborious performance. We muft, therefore, content ourfelves with giving fome account of the Author's general defign, and a fpecimen of its execution.

With regard to the former, we cannot define it better, perhaps, than in the words of the Author; wherein he intimates the advantages he prefumes it may be of to mankind; fubmitting it to the public in general, whether the illuftrating, defining, and fixing the ancient language, origin, and antiquities of the prifocial Cumbri, the gallant Galli, and the primæval Celtes, with natural precifion, will not accumulate honour, glory, and dignity upon the Cumbri-Galli-Celtes, aid the operations of the human understanding, and tend towards the advancement of learning in general, or, at leaft, to the restoration of of ancient knowlege. Our Author farther hopes alfo, that as the confufion of language was productive of great diforders, difputes, and difunion amongst mankind, this attempt to restore their ancient language, may be the means of reconciling and uniting them. This is, indeed, a circumftance more devoutly to be wifhed than hoped for. It must be confeffed, however, it would be a fine bone for the Critics, if the Welsh fhould, after all, turn out to have been the first, and prove to be the laft, of human languages, agreeable to the preconceptions of the retrospective and anticipative views of Mr. Rowland Jones. How would our Philofophers and Philologifts be confounded also, to find that they have been racking their brains to discover an univerfal language, when they had, all the while, one in their hands that they were unable to read!

There is fomething very curious, we cannot fay quite fo fatisfactory, in our Author's Celtic Grammar, and his obfervaformation and meaning of letters; our Readers, ly be more entertained, and full as much

improved,

improved, by what he advances on the origin of speech in general.

As in the courfe of this work, fays he, I have fhewn the original plan, and conftruction of human fpeech, to be intelligent, regular, and rational, as the nature and qualities of fubftances, modes and relations of general fubjects, are reprefented by general figns, either figuratively or orderly, as the refpective invifible qualities center in hieroglyfical objects, and thofe again abftracted and divided by circumftantial negative or privative particles, agreeable to the order of nature, in its formation out of the first elements, I fhall here only obferve in general, that it has been the opinion of the wifeft part of mankind, that Adam was furnished with a scheme of language by God himself; that this feems to be implied by that paffage of Scripture, wherein God is faid to have brought the beafts and birds before Adam, to fee, or perhaps to overfee, what he would call them, and by Adam's giving names to the feveral parts of nature, agreeable to the property and qualities thereof, and as the Deity appears to have made ufe of a form of fpeech, previous to the formation of Adam, in giving names to the feveral parts of the creation, which indeed feem to comprehend the genera of human speech, and as man is faid to have been made after God's own image, and in his own likeness, I think that language ought not to be confidered as mere arbitrary founds, or any thing less than a part, at least, of that living foul, which God is faid to have breathed into man; and though the organs of parrots and other birds, are capable of articulate founds, they utter them only when they are taught, and that without any conception of what they exprefs; elfe their progrefs in language would have advanced, fo far as was neceflary for their own prefervation and conveniency; nor can the fagacity of the owl, whose optics are adapted to fee beft in the dark, or the inftinct of other brute animals, wherein they ape human nature, be any objection to the divine origin of language; neither is it conceivable that the human foul, a portion of the universal spirit, could of itself modify or frame abftract ideas, or their figns, or those of mixed modes and relations, without a previous modification or interpofition of the Deity; and thofe primary figns tranfmitted from Adam amongst his pofterity, and preferved at all times in fome corner of the world, whereby fuch as once loft their language at Babel, might again recover a rational scheme of speech. It is also remarkable, that man of all animals in the expreffion of joy and admiration makes ufe of the o, which fignifies eternity; but other animals feem to found the letter a, fignifying the earth; man alfo is upright, with his countenance towards heaven; but beafts look downwards upon the earth, as if their ut

moft

moft joy and pleasure centered there. Befides all nature, according to the Pfalmift, declares this handy work of Providence, even the dull fheep, though perhaps infenfibly, calls out ba, which fignifies an earthly animal.'

The judicious Reader will, from this fpecimen of the preface, form fome idea of what he may expect from the work; a fhort fpecimen of which we shall give on the word Babel.

• BABEL was called fo from ba-bi-el, beings calling like bas, or fheep; it does not appear clearly, whether there was a total deletion of the old language, or a temporary impediment of fpeech, occafioned by thunder and lightning, or other terrible appearance, wherein the Divine Majesty was pleased to vifit those doers of iniquity, who had profeffedly undertaken to build this tower, in order to prevent their being fcattered abroad upon the face of the earth, contrary to God's exprefs command, as in Genefis ix. ver. 7. and Gen. xi. ver. 4 and 8. wherein Mofes confiders the building of Babel as a violation of God's command; hence this cannot be called an indifferent act. It seems probable, that the elements, at least, of the original language were preferved, as the names and appellations of perfons and places previous to the confufion, as well as those subsequent, are defined in this Lexicon; unless the Celtic nation had no concern in the Babylonian affair; but it is likely that this language, as it thus defines the prediluvian as well as the postdiluvian names, and gives the etymology of languages preferable to any other, must have exifted before the confufion of languages; and if all the world then spoke in one language, this must be it; nor can it be true that the Phoenicians were firft poffeffed of letters, or that Cadmus carried them from the Phoenicians into Greece; but it seems most likely, that he had them from the Druids, Etrurians, or Umbri of Italy, the ancestors of the Celtes, where he had been in queft of his fifter nation Europa; befides, it remains a doubt, what country Cadmus was of; tho' supposed to be an Egyptian, from his naming the city he built in Bocotia Thebes, after the name of the Egyptian Thebais.'

On the whole, we have nothing to fay to the hiftorical part of this work, as the Author feems, in moft cafes, to have adhered to proper authority; nor do we entirely condemn his etymologies: the fcheme, however, of reconciling the prefent Orthoepy, or the pronunciation of words to the original fenfe annexed to fimilar founds, we conceive to be, for the moft part, chimerical. Nay, tho' the Writer of this article hath ftill fome Welfh blood in his veins, he doth really think, that Monf. Bergier's pretenfions*, in favour of the Hebrew,

See Appendix to the laft volume of the Review.

as

« PreviousContinue »