348 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[2nd §, No48., May 3. °56, 
simpler sort. As, in truth, was seen in the crown of the 
Lyceum, which was by common consent to be given to 
the most worthy-citizen. For this, the larger and better 
part would fain have offered to PHooton ; who was both 
in other respects worthy, and had defended the tomb of 
Aristotle against Demades and his rabble.* 
“But some of the elder, and more worldly wise, among 
whom were PuHrancinust and Hypersoreus,{ said 
among themselves: ‘ Will it not be better to give the 
crown to ANoNnETUS, who, being rich, and the friend of 
ARTEMISIA, will procure us much good? Did not ArTE- 
MISIA give a prize to THeopEcTus? and if we choose 
ANONETUs, will she not send us trees for our groves, and 
chairs for our old men, and also Persian mitres? Con- 
trarywise, if we give the crown to PHocton, we shall do 
what is right indeed, but utterly unprofitable; and be 
praised only of the simpler sort of men.’ 
“Thus saying, the elder men appeared to themselves 
wise, and told the scholars it was seemly to be unani- 
mous; so that many consented in the evening to that 
which in the morning they had grievously condemned. 
So the cunningress of the few prevailed against the sim- 
pew of the many, which loveth mostly to be generous. 
ome, however, murmured and thought it base; for this 
ANoNETUS, though eminent in wealth, and in the favour 
of ARTHMISIA, was, in the matters of the Lyceum, that 
which his name declares.” > * * ‘3 
[Cetera desunt, ] 
THE MOON CONTROVERSY. 
As the learned editor of the Museum of science 
and art, in adverting to the moon controversy, 
admits that “the point requires more clear expo- 
sition than it has yet received,” I shall set aside 
certain scruples which have hitherto withheld me, 
and hazard some brief remarks on this notable 
theme. I am the more disposed thereto, it being 
my intention to treat it chiefly as a phraseological 
question. 
I must first show how the point in debate has 
been stated by some of the most eminent modern 
astronomers : 
“La lune tourne yéritablement sur elle-méme d’un 
mouvement uniforme en vingt-sept jours et demi; mais 
comme la durée de sa rotation est égale& celle de sa révo- 
lution autour de nous, elle nous présente totijours la méme 
face.” — M. de LA Lanps, 1762. 
“Le disque lunaire présente un grand nombre de taches 
invariables que l’on a observées et décrites avec soin. 
Elles nous montrent que cet astre dirige toujours vers 
nous 4 peu prés le méme hémispheére; il tourne done sur 
lui-méme, dans un temps égal & celui de sa révolution 
autour de la terre.””—Le marquis de Lapiacn, 1824. 
“The lunar summer and winter arise, in fact, from the 
rotation of the moon on its own axis, the period of which 
rotation is exactly equal to its sidereal revolution about 
the earth.” — Sir John F. W. Herscuet, 1833. 
The earth makes three hundred and sixty-five 
rotations on its axis in the course of one revo~ 
* This is an allusion to Lord Powis’s successful defence 
of the Welsh Bishopricks. 
+ Dr. French, late Master of Jesus College. 
t A distinguished living Head, easily recognised by all 
Cantabs. 
lution round the sun. The rotation on its axis is 
therefore a distinct motion from its reyolution in 
its orbit. 
The rotation of the moon on its axis is exactly 
equal, as astronomers assure us, to the period of 
its revolution round the earth. What proves the 
rotation to be a distinct motion? I cannot so 
consider it, and therefore doubt the propriety of 
describing it in the same terms. I should be in- 
clined to express it thus: The moon has no other 
rotation on its axis than that which is the conse- 
quence of the reyolution of a sphere which always 
presents the same face to the centre of its orbit. 
If the moon had no rotation on its axis, a line 
drawn from its centre through a given meridian 
line on its circumference would always point to- 
wards the same fixed star. The reverse is the 
fact —and it proves the fallacy of the novel con- 
ceit of non-rotation. 
A comparison of the above extracts must con- 
firm the startling remark of doctor Lardner. La 
Lande states that the moon always presents the 
same face to us, because the period of its rotation 
is equal to that of its revolution round the earth ; 
Laplace infers its rotation, and the coincidence of 
its rotation and revolution, because it always pre- 
sents the same face to us; and Herschel, while 
he admits the remarkable coincidence of the two 
periods, treats the point incidentally, in a specu- 
lation on the physical constitution of the moon. 
A fact so curious should have been cireumstan- 
tially described : it was suited to the philosophic 
enius of a Herschel. _ 
An illustration of this question has been given 
by a reference to the Peak of Teneriffe. I cannot 
perceive its aptness. Every object on the surface 
of the earth rotates — but not on its own axis. 
Here is my homely demonstration of the points 
in dispute — an experimental demonstration. 
Take an orange; pass through it a wire in the 
plane of its imaginary equator; move the orange 
round a circle with the wire parallel to one side of 
the room. It will make the revolution in its orbit 
without any rotation on its axis. Then move the 
orange round the circle with one end of the wire 
pointed to its centre. When it has made one 
revolution in its orbit it will have made one rota- 
tion on its axis. It is the inevitable consequence 
of such orbicular motion. Botton Corney, 
The Terrace, Barnes, 28th April, 
NOTES ON THE FLEUR-DE-LiS. 
(Continued from p. 330.) 
1622. Lionel, L. Cranfield, E, of Middlesex, on a pale 
az., 3 F's.-d.-L., or. 
Ps 1622. John, Ld. Digby, E. of Bristol, a F.-d.-L. arg., 
C. 
This seems the first instance of a single F.-d.-L., &c., 
