328 Dr. Moll on the Invention of Telescopes. 



and Metitis failed in their attempt of obtaining an exclusive 

 privilege. But certainly the instruments of the former were 

 liberally paid. Nine hundred florins, or 75., for an instru- 

 ment such as it can be expected to have been at that time, is 

 certainly a high price ; and even at the present time a very 

 respectable telescope could be obtained for that money. From 

 this circumstance, we would be rather inclined to argue, that 

 these instruments were not so roughly made as Italian authors, 

 and those who follow them, are willing to persuade us. Our 

 thrifty forefathers were too prudent and too economical to 

 throw away considerable sums of the public money on things 

 of bad manufacture arfd rough making. 



Italian writers generally represent the Dutch telescopes as 

 very imperfect. But how do these writers know this? Has 

 Nelli, or any other, ever seen one of the telescopes of that 

 time? If not, how can they judge of their performance? 

 There is not the least necessity, in order to value the tran- 

 scendent genius of a Galileo at its proper standard, to de- 

 preciate the merit of others ; and we may admire Galileo 

 without being unjust towards his contemporaries. 



It is very remarkable that the absurd wish of the States to 

 have an instrument which would enable them to see with two 

 eyes, should have led to the invention of an instrument which 

 has at present fallen into undeserved oblivion, It appears 

 from the official documents, that Lippershey, indeed, gratified 

 the wishes of the States, and that he produced an instrument 

 with which they could see with two eyes. There can be little 

 doubt but that this instrument was what was called afterwards 

 a binoculus. The invention of this instrument is generally 

 attributed to the Capucin friar, Rheita *, who describes it in 

 one of the most singular books which ever were written. 

 For terrestrial objects a well-arranged binoculus is perhaps 

 the most pleasant telescope, but some dexterity is wanted to 

 bring it to proper adjustment. It shows the objects con- 

 siderably brighter and more distinct than a common telescope 



* Oculus Enoch et Elise, sive Radius siclereo-mysticus planetarum, An- 

 twerpiac, 1645, fol. p. 338, 354. See also Dioptrique Oculaire par le Pere 

 Cherubiu Le GentiJ, Mtmohes de 1' Academic des Sciences, 1787. Smith's Optics, 

 p. 974. 



