80 PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. [aNNO 1703. 



than the cominoii \v;»y. By this means I can easily and very exactly, with the 

 help of a fine thread, take the dcclinntion of a spot at any time of the day ; and 

 by my half second watcii, and a fine cross hair, which latter way I learnt from 

 my friend Mr. Fiamsteed, I can measure the distance of the spot from the sun's 

 eastern or western limb. 



This cross fine hair, I advise, from my own experience, should be set, not 

 at the exact focal distance from the eye-glass, as usually, but a little out of 

 that distance, nearer towards the object-glass ; because the sliadow of the hair, 

 will be thereby much narrower, and more strongly appear across the species of 

 the sun, received on the paper, which I take this occasion to note, not only 

 because 1 believe it has scarcely ever been before observed, but because it may 

 be of good use in taking the sun's altitude, measuring his diameter, &c. this 

 being a more easy, and perhaps a more exact way, than by looking through the 

 tube. 



One of the spots was first round and strong, afterwards long, and with a 

 nucleus. The very same spot I saw again on the sun's eastern side on July 5, 

 but very faint, small and long, so as to be but just discernible. On July 6 it 

 quite disappeared, both through my tubes, and on paper, which is better. The 

 other spots had these remarkable appearances and variations. On June 28, 

 viewing the sun towards evening, I espied a large strong dark spot, with two 

 or more glaring nubeculae behind it. These the next day were become four 

 strong dark spots, the foremost with a tail to it, conjoining the little spot next 

 it. On June 30 I saw spots, but it being a cloudy morning, and I absent from 

 my tubes in the afternoon, they were not exactly taken. July 4, between two 

 long spots appeared something like a round nubecula. 



Observations on the Invention and Progress of Printing, to the Year 1465* 



N^iSS, p. 1507. 



What Mr. Ellis says, Phil. Trans. N" 286, about the books printed at Haar- 

 lem by Laurence Koster, agreeing so well with the account given by Theodore 

 Schrevel and others, leaves us little-or no room to doubt whether the honour 

 of the invention be due to this or the other cities, whose writers have so eagerly 

 contended for it ; since none of them have pretended to show any book printed 

 «o early as A. D. 1430 or 1432, or near that time. But the difficulty lies either 

 in showing why the practice of this art should be at a stand from A. D. 1432 

 to the noted reviving of it at Mentz by John Fust and Peter Schoeffer, who 

 (as it has been commonly, but erroneously said) printed tiie first printed book 

 there, namely Tally's Offices, A. D. 1465 ; or else, in giving any tolerable 



