« FöregåendeFortsätt »
The next Essay is on the correction of fuents found by de fcending series. Though the finding of Auents by defcending series has been offen mentioned by the writers on fluxions, yet it appears not to have been brought into practice, in the rolution of problems, even in the treatises of Emerson and Simpfon. This neglect of the descending series is the more remarkable as their convergency, by the powers of the flowing quantity, always begins when the convergency of the ascending series, by the powers of the fame quantity, ceases. In this Eīlay the author evinces that fluents taken in descending series commonly want a correction; which being applied, those series become no less useful than ascending ones.
The fixth Effay treats of the transformation of certain feries to others of swifter convergency. It appears that the series obtained by this method of transformation always come out by pairs, of such peculiar relation to each other, that the terms of one being computed, those of the other may be easily derived from them; the advantage of which, in numerical calculations, is very obvious. We likewise find that the method of transformation explained by Mr. Hellins, is applicable to all series of which the terms are any geometrical progreffion whatever, divided by any geometrical progression.
The seventh and last Effay treats of the force of oscillating bodies on their centres of suspension. This subject was forft offered to the author's confideration while he was in the Royal Observatory at Greenwich, when some new clocks were fet up there, to be used in the astronomical observations. It had been found by experiment, that clocks kept time better when they were in strong cases firmly fixed against a wall, than when in common cafes slightly fixed to the wainscot of a room, or only resting on a floor. And as it was part of his business to keep an account of the going of these new clocks, the pendulums of which were much heavier than coinmon, he was induced to inquire with what force the pendulums acted on their centres of suspension, in a horizontal direction. It appears, from the last two problems in this Effay, that the force of bells, when rung in peal, must be great on their axes of motion, and consequently on the frames and walls that resist it. This subject, therefore, we think with Mr. Hellins, deserves more attention than has been hitherto paid to it,
We learn, from an advertisement, that the author has by him materials for another volume ; among which are new theorems for extracting the square and cube roots; an easy method of finding products and quotients to eleyen or twelve places of figures, by means of a common table of logarithms to seven places only; and some farther improvements in algebra and fluxions. As Mr. Hellins's inquiries evidently tend to enlarge the knowledge of
mathematics by useful problems, they cannot fail of proving highly acceptable to all who cultivate those sciences.
Art. V. Archæologia; or, Miscellaneous Tracts relating to Anti
quity. Published by the Society of Antiquaries of London. Vol. VIII. 4to. il. Is.
White. London, 1787.
[ Continued. ] * XVIII*. Some Observations on the Invention of Cards, and their
• Introduction into England. By Mr. Gough.' WE
E have already dwelt so long upon the history of cards,
that we cannot insist much upon the present memoire. Nor need we.
The whole is a vast collection of miscellaneous matter, that seems to have hardly any one purpose in view. And we shall only notice a couple of passages.
• If, in order to prove the antiquity of cards, we recur to the edicts prohibiting the use of them; we find the first record
of this kind among the French, to be dated Jan. 22, 1397, an ( ordinance of the Prevot de Paris, forbidding the manufactur« ing part of the people, from playing at tennis, bowls, dice,
cards, and quilles. John I. King of Castille, in an ediet dated
ten years before (1387), forbad dice and cards in his domi«nions. And · Abbe Rivé, who attributes the invention to « the Spaniards, finds them prohibited in the statutes of a new
order, called the order of the band, instituted by Alphonsus XI. about 1332.'
· The French cards,' says Mr. Gough, ' appear to have had « the same figures as our modern ones, the carreaux or dias monds, cours or hearts, trefles or clubs, and piques or spades.? The French therefore and the English agree, in differing from the Spanish, and in having hearts for pieces of money, and dia' monds or squares for cups. But, while we accord with the Spaniards, in calling one of our suits clubs, and another spades; the French have denominated them trefles and piques. Yet, what is more remarkable, we retain the English name for the Spanish symbol of one, and even the Spanish name for the Spanish symbol of the other; when we have discarded the Spanish symbols of both, and have concurred with the French in assuming the present. And the French appellations for these, happily serve to Thew us what they are; the club being a real trefle or clovergrass, and the spade the real head of a pique or halberd, We have taken the new symbols, but preserved the old names.
We played at cards, long before we adopted the new symbols. We were so much in the habit from our long use of cards, of de. nominating the visible club and sword before us. a spade and a club; that, even when they were superseded by the pique and
the trefle, we still adhered to our old appellations. The modes of speaking, and the forms of conversation, were so deeply imprinted upon our tongues and minds, that even ocular inspection could not correct them. And our fathers have thus left us a forcible addition of evidence, for the great antiquity of cardplaying among us.
(XIX. Observations on our ancient Churches. By the Rev. Mr.
Ledwich, F.S.A.'--Vicar of Aghabor in Ireland, we believe, and now publishing the Antiquities of Ireland in Numbers.
This is a disquisition so novel, fingular, and learned, that we cannot but give our readers an abstract of it, and some remarks
The Roman stile of architecture, he thinks, was not introduced into Britain by the Romans; though Tacitus expressly assures us, that Agricola taught the Britons to build houses, temples, and market-places. This is surely to oppose presumption to evidence. And the reason assigned for this presumption, that not a trace of such edifices exists’ at present; is as ridicu. lous as the other is extravagant. All the Roman arts of building were introduced into Britain with the buildings by the Romans.
The Saxons, he says, ' in their own country, worshipped (their gods in stone-circles, or amid the gloom of ponderous
trilithons; and there are abundant proofs of their doing the « fame here.' Mr. Ledwich here confounds the Saxons and the Britons, The stone-circles allude to those at Roll-right, Abury, &c.; and the ponderous trilithons' point dire&ly at Stone-henge. And the whole is in direct opposition to the evidence of Bede, who thus describes the only tempte of the Saxons that is noticed in our own island. Suggero, Rex,' says the priest now turned Christian, ' ut templa et altarià, quæ fine
fructu utilitatis - facravimus, ocius anathemati et igni contradamus.' The king asked, ' Quis aras et fana idolorum cum septis quibus erant circumdata, primus profanare deberet.' The priest offers himself, and sets out for the purpose, ( Nec dif
tulit ille, mox ut propriabat ad fanum, profanare illud, injecta
in eo lanceâ quam tenebat; multumque gavisus de agnitione ( veri Dei cultus, juffit fociis deftruere ac fuccendere fanum cum • omnibus feptis suis.' And this temple was plainly a regular and covered building, like the other temples of the times; and no ways distinguished in general from the churches in the days of Bede, but by its idolatrous use and its encircling mounds. Locus ille quondam idolorum,' adds Bede,' -vocatur hodie
Godmunddingaham,' now Godmundham, or the mound-house of the gods *.
Thus stumbling in the outset, Mr. Ledwich proceeds to point out the introduction of Roman architecture, by the converted Saxons. But then this was merely the style of those churches, • that acknowledged the doctrines and sovereignty of the Roc
man pontiff. They had-crypts under them for reliques; they were-supported by arches and columns; these arches and coa clumns were adorned with the images of saints and legendary
storieș ; their shape was-cruciform ; they had oratories in • the ailes; and they were glazed. This was the Roman style, as precisely delineated by Bede, Eddius, and Richard ! Prior of Hexham, and contradistinguished from the Britih. Churches built on this model, as that of Hexham was, were ! executed by artists' brought from Rome, Italy, and France:
what reason then can there be for calling them Saxon? Many learned antiquaries have lately relinquished this appellation,
and call them Roman; but they have not explained what they understood by a Roman work. It is not enough that the arch
is femicircular, and the form and proportion of the column re. gular; the feuillage should be allo Roman, to entitle it to this
distinction. The former by chance may be right, but the latter is not less characteristic. The Saxon may possibly be @
corruption of the Roman style, but there are strong inducements ! to think it had a very different origin.' All this may be true; but we fee not the consistency of parts with parts, or the ruling aim of the whole.
Mr. Ledwich goes to deduce one part of the Saxon style, the ornaments, from--the East. In a Syriac M. S. of 586 he finds them all. They were derived from the Jews to the Chriftians, he argues, and from the Romans to the Saxons. Such
then,' he infers, is the evidence, of the origin of the Saxon feuillage,'. But he pursues the subject, and discovers other ornaments to come from-Egypt. In the undercroft of Canterbury cathedral, which he says is universally allowed amid all
the conflagrations and repairs it (the cathedral] underwent; to have 5 remained unalterably the fame;' he notes the pre
valence of Egyptian hieroglyphical figures,' on the capitals. He finds the Ælurus or cat of Egypt, when it may be the cat of any other country; a hawk killing a serpent; common to all countries ; ' an ideal quadruped, killing some noxious bird or
ferpent ;' a 'gladiator or criminal engaged with a lion,' a man with a monstrous tail engaged with some wild beast, and no
* Hift. 11. 13.
more Egyptian than it is Tramontane ; ' a horseman with a cap
and trowse,' no Egyptian ; 'a theep, to which the Egyptian
Soutes and Thebaas paid divine honours,' certainly not a sheep, and most probably a horse ; ' an equestrian figure, com
mon on Roman coins,' and therefore no Egyptian, 'a pure Egyptian figure, a double-headed Anubis bestriding a double • headed crocodile ;' a double-headed figure without any appearance of the latrator Anubis' in it, bestriding an animal that has no appearance of the “ rictus crocodili' at either of its mouths; a man sitting on the head of another,' and holding
in one hand a fish and in the other a cup,' a symbol so little Egyptian, that Mr. Ledwich can only find the filh' to have been facred in Egypt ; ' a double-headed monster, which even Mr. Ledwich cannot make Egyptian, and which holds, like the preceding one, a fish and a cup in its hands; a bird destroying "a crocodile, -or perhaps fome serpent of the lizard kind, not Egyptian in Mr. Ledwich's view of it, and an unintelligible something in every other man's ; ' a fatyr resting on two deer,' no Egyptian; “two birds on a Roman masque, no Egyptians ;
a grotesque-playing on a violin,' and another grotesque “blowing a trumpetz' neither of them Egyptian. We have thus noticed all the figures that Mr. Ledwich has explained, though not all that he has delineated. “That there are Egyptian hieroglyphical figures,' he adds, we may appeal to Porphyry, to
Tertullian, Min. Felix, Pignorius, Montfaucon, and Cheffet." But, that they are not, we appeal to the eyes and commonsense of his readers and of ours.
Mr. Ledwich however advances to trace these Egyptian ornaments, from Egypt into the northern nations. The Egyptian mythology had crept anong the Romans, had spread among their provincials, and had been communicated to their northern conquerors. • This reasoning,' he remarks, '--gives the fo
lution of the appearance of hieroglyphics, on ancient northern 6 monuments.' 'Thus the Britons, who had imbibed from the Romans a taste for hieroglyphics in the capitals of their buildings, must have imparted it to their conquerors the Saxons. The Britons must equally with the Gauls have been infected with this taste, by their common masters the Romans. When
every part of Europe, Asia, and Africa, was-deeply infected*; when : enough has been said of these capitals,' even to found
a conjecture that this crypt was an Ireum, or Roman chapel ! sacred to Ilis.t;' the Britons were sure to be infected. And yet we have been told before, that the architecture of the
* P. 183.
ti P. 879-180.