204 Miscellanies. 



♦ 



ASTRONOMY. 



1 . First observation of spots on the sun. — An account was read 

 to the Royal Society of London, on the 24th of May last, of a 

 number of unpublished astronomical papers of Thomas Harriot, 

 found in the library of the Earl of Egremont, by which it appears 

 that Harriot observed the spots on the sun, and the satellites of Ju- 

 piter, in the same year (1610) in which they were first observed by 

 Galileo. Harriot's observations on the spots fill seventy four half 

 sheets of foolscap, the first being dated 1610. The writing is clear 

 and the drawings well defined. His first observations on the satel- 

 lites of Jupiter are dated 17th of October, 1610; they are clearly 



written on thirteen half sheets of foolscap. 



Baron de Zach had access to these papers in 1784, and inferred 

 from the examination of them, tliat Harriot observed these phenom- 

 ena before Galileo ; but Professor Rigaud of the university of Ox- 

 ford, who furnishes the present statement to the Royal Society, con- 

 cludes that there is no proof whatever of such a priority, even on 

 Baron de Zach's own showing, for he admits that Galileo discovered 

 the satellites on the 7th of January, 1610, nearly eight months before 

 the date of Harriot's paper. Harriot made no pretensions to priority 

 in the discoveries in question. — Lond. Phil. Mag. Nov. 1832. 



2. Rotation of the planet Venus. — According to Bianchini, this 

 planet revolves on its axis in twenty three days, eight hours, or very 

 nearly. Cassini makes it twenty three hours, fifteen minutes ; and 

 Schroeter twenty three hours, twenty one minutes. Sir W. Herschel 

 considered the time of rotation to be doubtful, but thought it could 

 not be so much as twenty four days. A paper was read before the 

 Astronomical Society of London, March 9th, by the Rev. Mr. Hus- 

 sey, in which the arguments of these observers are carefully exam- 

 ine*, and in which the author concludes that we are justified in pla- 

 cing confidence in the observations of Bianchini, from the favorable 

 circumstances in which they were made, the minuteness with which 

 they were detailed, from their correctness having been ascertained 

 by several bystanders, from the superior nature of the instruments 

 employed by him, from the measurements being micrometrical, and 



from 



Idem, 



