February 1, 1887.] 



♦ KNOWLEDGE ♦ 



91 



later; the other has, it is believed, been used to test the 

 strength of some new chemical acids which the great 

 astronomer lias recently invented. 



The above is all I have been able to gather on the sub- 

 ject. Respectfully submitted, Antares. 



<B sieiip* 



By Richard A. Proctor. 



A PERSON who proposes to write lives of great men of 

 science, but who " does not pretend to know anything 

 about the subjects in which those men of science became 

 distinguished," a.sks me if I will not revise his "Life of 

 Copernicus " for the press. No, emphatically, I will not. 

 Nor will I revise a betting bookmaker's list of swindling 

 wagers. Nor have I any hints to offer in aid of any other 

 system of wrong-doing. 



My Bristol correspondent tells me I have wronged him, 

 for which I am sorry. He also implies that his one sole 

 object is to make me admit that the Bible is grander than 

 the solar system. I take it the Bible was a product, directly 

 or indirectly, of our earth, which is a part of the solar 

 .system. A product of a part cannot be greater than the 

 whole. But if my angry friend will write out an abstract 

 of the first two chapters of the Book of Proverbs, he will 

 not waste paper, and he may learn a lesson, which a careful 

 study of the Book of Job will strengthen. He will not 

 guess my meaning ; but I can't help that. 

 * * * 



An odd mistake appeared recently in an American paper. 

 A translation from a note by M. Camille Flammarion 

 ••ippeared with the stnxnge suffix, " From the Camilla (Ga.) 

 Flammarion" (Camilla is the name of a small town in 

 Cieorgia, and Flammarion is suppo.sed to be the name of 

 a local paper). There have been odder names, too. 

 * * * 



A CORRESPONDENT asks my opinion on the assumption 

 made by Kovesligethy that the solar system is travelling 

 towards the part of the star-sphere in R.A. 216°'0 and 

 N. Dec. 35 ^1, whereas in the Encyclopedia Britannica 

 I have assumed the direction of the sun's motion to 

 be towards R.A. 260° and N. Dec. 30°. In the first 

 place, my opinion is that the sun's motion in space 

 cannot be regarded as determined with any approach 

 to accuracy. In the large plate of proper motions at 

 the end of my " Universe of Suns" the varioas determina- 

 tions made by the elder Hei-schel, Argelander, Miidler, 

 O. Struve, and othere, are shown, and it ■will be observed 

 that the position I indicate in the Enct/clopcfdia Britannica 

 is a very fair me;in of all those widely difierent positions. I 

 cannot but fancy the 216° of Herr K.'s assumed apex 

 for the solar way must be a misprint for 246°, as none 

 of the determinations made by astronomers fall in Bootes, 

 as this value for the R.A., with 3.5° for the North Dec, would 

 set them. If, however, Herr K. has trusted in spectroscopic 

 evidence to determine the position of the point towards 

 which the solar system is ti-avelling, I can understand any 

 amount of error. For though, as I long since pointed out, 

 the spectroscopic evidence will probably be hereafter found 

 the most trustworthy we can have on this subject, it is at 

 present altogether too imperfect to be used in the discussion 

 of such a problem as this. I would refer my correspondent 

 to my " Essays on Astronomj-," in which the whole subject 

 is fully dealt with ; but that book is now out of print, and I 



cannot in the present depr&ssed state of afiairs go to the 

 expense of publishing a new edition. Perhaps when a 

 larger public is able to turn from business anxieties to 

 scientific studies I may do so. But it will probably be a 

 long time hence. 



The following letter, like the one last referred to, is of 

 somewhat ancient date, being now more than six months 

 old, I found it among a batch received when I was leaving 

 England in June 1885, and put awaj' so carefully as to have 

 escaped notice till now : 



If, as you suppose in your first paper in tlie April number of 

 Knowledge, the Jewish Passover was originally a feast in celebra- 

 tion of the passing of the sun over the equator at the vernal 

 equinox, how do you account for the fact that the time of its 

 celebration was determined without any reference to that astro- 

 nomical event ? This very year, for instance, the Passover, reckoned 

 as of old from the first new moon in April, fell on April 20, nearly a 

 month after the equinox. R. M. Spence. 



* * * 



There is no difficulty whatever in the point to which 

 Mr. Spence here refers. We know that primarily the 

 equinoxes were determined from the moon's motions, and 

 the religions festivals or fasts associated with astronomical 

 events had their origin in times when astronomical obser- 

 vations were, as yet, only rough. But apart from this, the 

 rules assigned for determining the days for such festivals and 

 fasts must be such as the unlearned can conveniently apply. 

 No one doubts that the week had its origin in the moon's 

 motions, or that originally it was really determined by the 

 moon's quarters, and so had to be corrected, as in later times 

 the year had to be. Yet now it goes on upon an easily 

 followed method, Sabbaths and Sundays having no con- 

 nection with the moon's movements. So naturally was it 

 with the two great annual movable festivals of the Jewish 

 calendar. 



* * * 



Mr. Spence added an interesting postscript ; — 



The following extract from a letter which I sent to the Scntsman 

 on December 29, 1883, may not be without interest to you : 



" On what historic grounds are we asked to regard December 25 

 as the anniversary of the Nativity ? Not on the authority 

 of Scripture, for it is silent. Not on the authority of the earlj' 

 Fathers, for about a natal day they, too, with one exception, 

 are silent ; and that one exception, Clement of Alexandria, when 

 he wrote his ' Stromateis ' (A.D. 190-202), had never heard of 

 December 25 as the day in question. He says (' Stromateis,' i. 21) : 

 ' There are those who have determined not only the year of our 

 Lord's birth, but also the day, and thej' say that it took place in 

 the 28th year of Augustus, and on the 25th day of Pachon ' 

 (May 20)." ' Others say that He was born on the 21th or 25th of 

 Pharmutha' (April 19 or 20). 'Not till the fourth century do we 

 hear of December 25. It was then ingeniouslj- adopted by the 

 Western Church, not on historic grounds, for they had none to go on, 

 but to make the appearance of ' The Sun of Righteousness ' coincide 

 with the resumed upward march of the natural sun, and to rival, 

 and ultimately displace, the Pagan festivals which celebrated that 

 physical event." 



* * * 



A CORRESPONDENT .sends me many interesting and curious 

 particulars relative to the names C'hrishna, Jeseus, the 

 mystic Yes, Chres, Chris, Christos, <tc., of which I may 

 hereafter make use. 



* * * 



A CORRESPONDENT in Americii (whence, by the way, I 

 have had many valuable hints) sends the following much 

 prettier (though practically the same) solution of the 

 problem of the sixteen whist-players : 



{1st set. Ann, Henry, Jane, Andrew. 



2nd „ JIary, John, Susan, Frank. 



.3rd „ George, Laura, Tom, Sarah. 



4th „ Charley, Clara, William, Kate. 



