[ *49 ] 
the curiofity of the public has, at different times, 
been excited by the controverfies relating to inocula- 
tion, the bate of that practice in Syria, where 
there were fo many European fettlements, fhould 
have remained unknown both in England and in 
France, which probably was the cafe, as the ad- 
vocates for inoculation have made no reference 
to it. 
Whether before the account tran knitted by Py- 
larini to the Royal Society, inoculation had not been 
mentioned by any of the travellers who had vifited 
thefe countries, I do not prefume to determine. In 
the books I have had occafion to perufe, there is no- 
thing to be found on the fubjedt. Among the tra- 
vellers the mold likely to have' mentioned it was. 
Rauwolf: vet, however rational it mav be to think 
that a practice of fuch a kind, had it then prevailed, 
could hardly have efcaped the notice of fo diligent 
an ohferver, it would be rafh to infer from his filence 
that it was not known to the Arabs in the fixteenth 
century. The jubly celebrated French botanib is 
equally blent, though in the beginning of the pre- 
fent century he vifited feveral places where inocu- 
lation was undoubtedly at that time both known and 
pradtifed. 
Having related in what manner I came to learn 
inoculation was known to the Arabs, 1 can arrogate 
no merit in the difcovery ; nor would I be thought 
to infmuate any refledlion on the accuracy of the in- 
defatigable M. Tournefort, to whofe labours the 
curious band fo much indebted. Cuftoms the mob 
common, in dibant countries, are often of all others 
