wy 
142 
of the investigator in the field. It is certain 
that such an enterprise would arouse enthusi- 
asm at home, and command respect abroad. 
Mr. B. J. Lossine has recently published a 
paper on the proposed celebration, eight years 
hence, of the four hundredth anniversary of 
the discovery of America. We refer to it now, 
not to discuss this project, but to call atten- 
tion to an historical question of such inter- 
est that it is worth a thorough investigation. 
Among mistakes which might almost be classed 
as popular superstitions must be placed the 
wide-spread notion that the rotundity of the 
earth was nearly unknown until comparatively 
recent times. Mr. Lossing goes so far as to 
say that the scholars in the time of Columbus 
ridiculed the idea of the earth being globular, 
and in this he only echoes the popular belief 
on the subject. Now, the fact is, that the 
form of the earth has been as well known as 
it is now from the earliest historic times, and 
has never been denied by a scientific writer 
on scientific grounds. ‘Through twenty cen- 
turies of discussion among rival systems and 
theories, this one has stood undisputed as the 
fundamental fact of astronomy. Nor has it 
ever been the subject of religious controversy, 
as the Copernican theory was. Under these 
circumstances, it 1s a question of interest, 
whether a state of things of which the astron- 
omers never heard existed in Spain four cen- 
turies ago; whether, in fact, there are books 
or documents of any kind showing that men 
as scholars believed the 
We suggest the 
who then ranked 
earth’s surface to be flat. 
subject to historical investigators. 
It must, of course, be understood that we 
are now speaking of professed scholars, in a 
position to be consulted by the authorities, 
and not of the ignorant masses. It is quite 
likely that Queen Isabella’s chambermaid may 
have ridiculed the idea of the earth being 
round, and that her spiritual confessor may 
have looked upon astronomical theories gener- 
ally as the work of men very dangerous to 
orthodox religion. But if the knowledge of 
- 
SCIENCE. 
[Vou. IIL, No. 53. 
an epoch is that of the majority, where shall — 
we stop? It might be found, that, at the 
present day, the majority of the human race 
believes the earth to be flat. We leave our 
readers to picture in their minds an encyclo- — 
pedia of the thirtieth century, in which it will 
be stated, that although the astronomers of the 
nineteenth century knew of the motion of the 
earth, yet their more numerous and influential 
contemporaries, the theologians, as represent- 
ed by one of their leaders named Brother Jas- 
per, believed it to be at rest. 
Tue acquittal of General Cesnola of the 
charge of libel, in the case so long before the 
courts, is probably satisfactory to the trustees 
of the Metropolitan museum of art, but is far 
from satisfactory from a scientific stand-point. 
So far as the trial related to libel, it made no 
difference to science which side won; but it 
does make a difference when it appears, that, by - 
legal twists and turns, the vital spot was not 
touched. As the result stands before the scien- 
tific world to-day, the curator, while acquitted of 
the charge of libel in his hot reply to a former 
business agent, is still, directly or indirectly, 
responsible for the manipulations of ancient 
sculptures in the museum under his charge. 
One good result may follow from the Cesnola 
trial. In future, fragmentary objects in mu- 
seums will probably either be left as found, or 
else so joined, that, while holding their relative 
positions, they will still show that they are frag- 
ments. The so-called restorations are too often 
the conceptions of the officers in charge; and, 
while Cesnola has followed a plan often sanc- 
tioned by supposed requirements of art, it is 
one which will never be permitted by science. 
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, 
*,* Correspondents are requested to beas brief as possible. The 
writer's name is in all cases required as proof of good faith. 
Tropical cyclones. 
In Mr. Davis’s paper on whirlwinds, cyclones, etc., 
in Science, vol. ii. pp. 758-761, I notice the use of 
the term ‘equatorial cyclone,’ which should be dis- 
continued, as I have already had occasion to state 
before.! There being no deflection of the winds from 
the normal to the isobars on the equator, there can 
be no cyclone there; and it is, I think, generally ad- 
1 Nature, vol. xix. p. 517. 
