For the Monthly Magazine. SICAL INSTRUMENTS. Τ IT appears, fir, to me to be an univer fal rule, that every art, fcience, or invention among men, owes its origin to fome external fact. This ferves as a foundation which the human mind afterwards builds upon. To a few letters cut upon a tree, we are faid to owe the art of printing; to a foldier fcraping his fufil, the art of engraving in mezzotinto. Newton is thought to have been indebted for his vaJuable theory to the fall of an apple; and the ftrokes of a fmith's hammer are fuppofed to have given rife to mufic. This laft fuppofition has however been justly called in question; and, indeed, the number of claimants to the honour of this invention (among whom are reckoned gods and philofophers) tends not a little to increate our doubts upon the fubject. With out further preface, it feems to me highly probable, that the lyre (which is the paTent of ftringed musical inftruments) is indebted for its origin to the bow. For with refpect to external appearance, if we regard the form of fome of the ancient lyres, and make due allowance for the number of ftrings, which we know were added in fucceffion, we shall not perceive any great diverfity between them. But it was not, fir, from confidering the external form of the two inftruments that I was led to this fpeculation, it was from reading the following paffage in the Odyffey. Ως δ' ότ' αντιρ φόρμιγγος Ως απ' όλες σπεδης τανυσε μέγα τοξον Οδυσσεύς, Lib. 406. The comparison between Ulyffes bending his bow, and a mufician skilfully ftringing his tyre, would alone have been a fufficient inducement to a contemplative reader to reflect upon the fubject: but when the poet adds, that the hero twangs the string, which finely founds like the fwallow's note, he is furnished with a more powerful inducement. My thoughts being in this train, I was much pleafed to meet with a paffage in Plutarch, which appeared to me almolt conclufive. Ου γαρ ό μεν Σκύθης όταν πινη, πολλακις εφαπίείαι το τόξου, και παραψαλλει την νευραν, εκλυόμενον ύπο της μέθης ανακαλυψεις τον θυμον ; Præcept. Sanitat. fect. 18. MONTHLY MAG, No. 56. "Does not the Scythian, when he drinks, frequently handle the bow and ftrike the fring, in order to recover his fenfes which had been diffolved by inebriety?" Here we have a Scythian concert of the twangs of the bow, and, however uncouth and diffonant, it proves all that I want, viz. that the bow was used in times of remoteft antiquity as a musical inftrument. But before I conclude, I fhall produce, in confirmation of my opinion, an extract from Mr. Park's Travels into Africa :"We were amused by an itinerant finging man, who told a number of diverting ftories, and played some sweet airs, by blowing his breath upon a bow firing, and firiking it at the fame time with a flick." To a mufical ear the found of a well-ftrung bow is not without fweetnefs, and a va riety of tunes may be produced by stopping with the fingers of the left hand. In regard to the improvement of the bow, both by the variation of figure and addition of ftrings, I can only fay, that when once an idea is obtained, nothing is more eafy than to improve upon it; and we know that the most ancient lyres had very few ftrings. Mr. Bruce gives the figure of an Egyptian lyre which had only two ftrings; and the monochord (which had also a neck) is fuppofed to have been invented by Pythagoras. That the ftringed instruments of modern times, fuch as the guitar, violin, &c. were derived from the ancient lyre, or harp, is, I believe, undifputed; but I res fer the reader, who is defirous of further information, to Walker's Hiftorical Memoirs of the Irifh Bards (fee particularly page 73). I am fenfible, fir, that much more might be faid upon this fubje&t; but I am equally fenfible, that too much as well as too little might be faid upon any subject. I fhall leave it therefore to the inveftigation of others, and am, your most obedient fervant, THO. NORTHMORE May Fair, Jan. 18, 1800. As to the reading of Thetis for Tethys in the firft Georgic, I find on examining that it is the reading of the Medicean. Yet whatever be the authority, and I think it high indeed, of that MS. fuch a reading would not fupport itself whatever MSS. might be in its favour." As to the other paffage-nibil ifte nec aufus nec potuit" in the admirable epifode, or rather epic hiftory of Nifus and Euryalus (for it is more than an epifode, as it does forward the main action) it could not be a double negative unless we were changed to non. It would then mean "he dared every thing-there was nothing which he not dared." I meditate an edition of Virgil as small as the very fmall and accurate Plantin edition of 1589, one of the smallest and moft correct books I know. With respect to the Comet, it is very agreeable, and for the intereft of aftronomy to have thofe appearances announced as early as poffible. I obferved the article copied into the papers. But unhappily, the ftar, figma, is by no means fufficiently explicit. Of what conftellation? whether Corona Borealis, Hercules, Bootes, Cyg. mus, Leo, Aquarius, Capricornus, or Sagittarius, or Scorpio, or fome others which are all lettered to and beyond. It is almost always neceffary to name the co Fellation as well as the letter. And there can be little room for doubting whether aftronomers of fuch eminence had done this in the original. As the article ftood, it conveyed no other information, in effect, than that a Couret was on the 26th of December somewhere visible in our northern heavens. It is true there are fome lettered ftars diftinguished by capitals, and which may be known (though not ufually or conveniently fo indicated) by the letter only. But in the most modern charts I have feen, I know none of the fe that go down to S, and they are not of the Greek alphabet. Nearly of all celestial phenomena, whoever would apprize the public of the appearance of a Comet, had need of being exact and full in copying the defignation given of its pofi tion. exifting abuses; and, as your pages have already been occafionally employed in pointing out a few of the peculiarities, and exposing fome of the inconfiftencies that diftinguish and difgrace the various claffes of profeffing Chriftians; it may not perhaps be improper or unneceflary to notice an inconfiftency, of which, though not, as I remember, remarked upon in your miscellany, it is to be feared Chriftians of every fe&t and denomination are more or lefs guilty. I allude to that illiberal and uncharitable mode of paffing cenfure, by which Chriftians of one perfuafion, without observing a proper diftinction and regard relative to the difference of perfons and characters, too often afperse those of another; and whos on account of the appofite fentiments that prevail between them with respect to fubjects of religion, reckon all of that perfuafion equally culpable. The Methodist vilifies indifcriminately the Churchman, the Churchman the Methodist, the Calvini both, and the Unitarian all. Each imagines himself poffeffed of the true knowledge of the Chriftian doctrine, and there-fore thinks himfelf privileged, and at li berty, fhould he find any, among those who diffent from him in opinion, that are vi cious and profane, wantonly to indulge in unprovoked aggreffions, and to traduce alt as ignorant of the nature and the power of Chriftianity. This blind zeal for the honour of a par ticular feet, or the observance of a favourite tenet, has, in all ages, and in every part of the Chriftian world, been productive to mankind of error, confufion, and. mifery. In the times of ignorance and fu perftition to how many was a difference in opinion the occafion of hatred, perfecu tion, and death! And, in the prefent enlightened period of the world, how many zealots are there ftill unwilling to forget the petty ridiculous diftinctions of party, and whofe prejudices and littleness of mind forbid them to be candid enough to confefs that men of piety and virtue can anywhere exift, except within the narrow precincts of their own fet. But, though there may happen occafional difagreements among Chriftians with refpect to the circumstantials of religion, why fhould there be any about the eflentials of it; and why should they forfeit the brighteft gem that adorns the Chriftian, charity? - I have been led into these reflections from a most uncharitable and unmerited invective I lately heard from a diffenting affected that the clergy of the church of England, England would, upon occafion, to fuit the temper and prevailing tase of their au dience, depart from doctrines they had formerly advanced, and change their principles with the change of times. which we find that the capacious mind of the great Condorcet has condefcended to make the first elements of the fcience of calculation eafy and familiar, even to infant minds; and if his attempt be defective, let it be remembered, "that it was written by him in that afylum where he concealed himself from his executioners; it was from thence he fent it fheet by sheet finished when he was obliged to go and feek another afylum, an afylum beyond the reach of wicked and furious perfecttors—the grave!” Public affertions of this nature, when they fall in with the difpofitions of the ignerant and the prejudiced, are pregnant with confequences the most inifchievous to fociety, and the trueft interests of Chrifto his wife, and that the laft was fcarcely tianity. I fhall not pretend, Mr. Editor, to defend the character of every member, or of every minifter, of the established church at all times; but I firmly believe, and am well affured, the conduct of the feveral members and minifters that compofe the establishment, is, aggregately conidered, as irreproachable as that of any fect whatever. And I would ask this very liberal and charitable gentleman, when he made the affertion, where was the fpirit of Christianity, that breathes nothing but concord, charity, and peace to all mankind! I am your's Ravenftonedale, Feb. J. ROBINSON. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, fure to every friend of ufetul fcience, to have feen in your Magazine for Septem. ber, page 677, a man fo eminent as Dr. BEDDOES, Come forth and urge the frequent complaint of the defective knowledge of arithmetic, and diftafte for the whole of mathematical feience, which young men bring with them from our claffical Schools. If gentlemen of talents and fcience would join their efforts in pointing out the importance of thefe ftudies, and Exemplify them to be what they really are, the fources of all human knowledge, and that they ftrongly bias even young minds towards a habit of corre& reasoning, juft thinking, of drawing proper inferences, and making wife determinations, we should in all probability foon fee mathematical knowledge more diffused and held in greater admiration. Such laudable efforts would have a strong tendency to induce parents and guardians, and even youth themselves, to prefer these manly endowments of the mind to those fuperficial and enervating accomplishments fo prevalent in this age, and which are more calculated to qualify the ions of the fuperior orders of fociety to her me tops and fidlers, than the wife legifs of a free people. I have read the French treatife upon Arithmetic alluded to by Dr. Beddoes, in In order to give a specimen of the manner of this celebrated philofopher's explaining the elements of numbers, I have tranflated a fmall portion of the treatife in question. After having explained the nature of the four first rules in arithmetic, he leads his pupil almoft imperceptibly into the knowledge of fractions by illuftrating the value of those remainders which frequently arife after the procefs of divifion. "When you divided," fays Condorcet to his pupil," 1634 integers equally among 8 perfons, you found that each perfon had 204 of them, and that there re mained 2. Suppofe thefe 2 infegers to be fuch things as may be divided into feveral thofe things into 8, you may then give one If one entire thing be divided into a certain number of equal parts in fuch a manner that the fum of all these parts be the thing itfelf, one of fuch parts is expreffed by adding th to the name of the number of parts into which the thing is fuppofed to be divided; if it be fuppofed to be divided into 100 parts, each part is called an hundredib, if it be divided into 238 parts, each part is called a twa hundred thirtyeighth. So thefe expressions two eighths, fhew that two things have been divided into eight parts, and that two of these parts are meant to be taken. For this reafon teneighths fhew that ten whole or entire things have been divided into eight parts, and that ten of thefe parts are meant to be taken; but 8 of thele form one entire 10 2 thing; therefore taking ten fuch parts is taking one entire thing and two eighths more, thus +-Laftly obferve, that is the fame value as of the two integers which remained. After having performed the operation of divifion, it is not fufficient to point out the remainder fimply by faying, for example, If I divide 1634 by 8, I have 204 for a quotient and two remaining; and if I divide 164 by 9, I have 18 for a quotient and two remaining; but you fhould fay in the first cafe remaining, and in the fecond cafe remaining, because though there equally remains two integers in each Cafe, yet in the one example two integers are to be divided into eight parts, and in the other, two integers are to be divided into nine parts.' J. WARBURTON. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, Ter to animadvert, in the fourth HE Abbé Barruel has thought proVolume of his "Hiftory of Jacobinifm," upon the fpirit and tendency of Profeffor Kant's Philofophical Principles, or what is generally called the Critical Philofophy; to reprefent this fyftem as dangerous to the moral, religious, and political conftitution of Europe; and to denounce the difciples of that venerable man as "a fpecies of Jacobins.As this writer has taken the liberty to mention my name, as well as that of my learned countryman Mr. Nitfch, in the work before-mentioned, it is incumbent upon us to demand his proofs of fo bold and virulent an affertion. For my part, I fhould not have fuffered this unprovoked adverfary to enjoy the apparent triumph of ftanding unrefuted for upwards of a twelvemonth, had I been fooner informed, that he had done me the honour to take notice of a book I wrote in 1797, entitled "Elements of the Cri. tical Philofophy, &c." 8vo. (Lendon, Longman and Rees.) Apprehenfive that for want of room in your valuable mifcellany you cannot infert the particulars of this controverfy, I fhall in this place only oblerve, that I am ready to prove to the world the following points: ift. That it was unjust to afcribe imhoral motives to Profeffor Kant; to confound his fyftem with thofe of others; and to impute a mifchievous tendency to his writings. 2d. That the Abbé Barruel is a cafuift rather than a logician, and consequently unqualified to write upon philofophical fubjects.-The former propofition I hope to demonftrate from the original corre fpondence between the late Frederic William II. King of Pruffia, and the aged profeffor, whofe answer was fatisfactory to his fovereign: the latter I fhall endeavour to illuftrate by oppofing the words of Kant, from the German original, to Mr. Barruel's unconnected quotations taken from an imperfect and anonymous French tranflation. I fhall thus demonftrate, that the Abbé was totally unacKant's Philofophy; and that he has alquainted with the fpirit and tendency of lowed himself to be grofsly led into error by a French commentator, whofe conceptions of the fundamental principles, upon which the Critical Syftem is established, were likewife erroneous. Had the Abbé defended the great cause of Chriftianity and Social Order, with fources; had he proved, that the school arguments clearly deduced from their of Kant is incompatible with the religious and civil eftablishments of the present day; I fhould have filently borne his reproaches nay, even have made with him a common caufe. But, as I am firmly perfuaded that he is mistaken, and convinced that he has contributed to prejudice the world against my venerable teacher, for whom neither time nor distance can diminish my grateful refpect, I have ventured, and even thought it my duty to confute affertions, which every unprejudiced reader will confider as unfounded and illiberal. Whatever my opinions were, when I composed the Elements of the Critical Philofophy, Ifolemnly difclaim every perfonal inference that might be drawn from a book, in which the general principles of another author are avowedly fubmitted to the examination of the learned-not with a view to diffeminate them in political circles, or to propagate them in popular pamphlets, but to exhibit the truth or fallacy of thofe principles to competent judges. I trust I have faid enough, to conciliate the opinion of thofe who might have been prejudiced against the philofophic fyftem of a man who, for more than half a century, has ranked high in the estimation of Europe; whofe irreproachable manners are admired by all who have the happiness to know him, and whofe whole life has been one feries of virtuous actions. I am, Sir, your's, &c. London, Jan. 15. A, F. M. WILLICH. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, A SI find that various recipes have been given by Dr. Anderfon in his Recreations of Agriculture, &c. and by the Highland Society, for deftroying the Gooseberry Caterpillar; allow me, through the medium of your very extenfive publication, to give the public what appeared to me fimpler and more eafy than either of the above methods, though coming from fach respectable authorities. During fix weeks every fummer I allow myself an excurfion through different parts Whenever any gooseberry-trees are affected by the caterpillar, the gardener ftrews a fmall quantity of hot lime all under and around the tree, he then covers the bush with the aforefaid cone, and filling a common fumigating bellows with tobacco and fulphur, in equal quantities, with a bit of charcoal, or any other piece of fire-wood, thruits the pipe of the bellows through a fmall hole of the painted cloth at the bottom of the cone, when a few moments are fufficient to fuffocate all the caterpillars; they are finished by falling on the hot lime, and ferve as a manure to the tree. Neither leaves nor fruit are in the smallest degree injured; and the caterpillar does not for fome years return again to the fumigated tree. Mr. Todd faid, it was pertely effectual as to the deftruction of the A correfpondents refpecting points of S you are frequently'confulted by your antiquary learning, fuch as the origin of It is probably well known to you, that of late years all bodily and many mental complaints have been termed nervous, and that most indifpofitions, from the most serious of the bed-ridden class, down to the common tea-table dont know-howishness, have been refolved into certain operations of the nerves. Now, fir, what I want to know is the origin of these nerves. Where did they first appear? Are they indigenous, or were they imported? Are they aborigines or ftrangers? If indigenous, when were they firft vifible? Are they innate ideas, or fuperinduced by reading and education? who was the first man that had nerves? Who firft convinced his fellow-creatures that they had nerves? If imported, from what country did they come, and in what fhape? Were they fmuggled over, or came they in the fair way of trade? If in the way of barter, what did we give in exchange? I apprehend it must have been mufcles and bones, but of that I have no direct proof, and therefore mention it with fubmiflion. My information is extremely fcanty, and I do not wish to build theories any more than I would build houfes without materials. A very worthy friend of mine has infpected the Custom-houfe entries for the laft fifty years (a period longer than nerves have been known), but cannot find them mentioned, and this, in lack of other 1 proof, |