The history of Hariot's Praxis has attracted a great deal of attention for more than two centuries and has long been obscured by many misconceptions and erroneous statements. In the first place it has been always said from the days of Collins that it was edited by Walter Warner, and Wood adds that Warner was to have his pension continued by Algernon Percy, for that scientific labor. There is evidence that Warner, though employed on the work by Sir Thomas Aylesbury, was not the sole editor. See Aylesbury's Letter to the Earl on page 189.

The book led to a great deal of international or patriotic controversy, and with great injustice to Hariot was treated by the English advocates as his masterpiece in science. Wallis in 1685 in his History of Algebra, after much correspondence with Collins and others on the subject between 1667 and 1676, became Hariot's English champion. The controversy respecting the Methods of Hariot and of Descartes became as warm as that respecting the discoveries of Leibnitz and of Newton.

Wallis ranked Oughtred's Clavis and Hariot's Praxis very high, and because both were first printed in 1631, treated them as productions or inventions of that year, whereas Hariot's method, as we have seen, had been long practically before his disciples; and was, ten years after the author's death, given to the world avowedly as an' accessory' only, or preliminary treatise, that it 'might suitably serve as a necessary preparation or introduction to the study of Hariot's remaining works, the publication of which is now under serious consideration.' Unfortunately this excellent scheme fell through, probably in consequence of the death of the Earl of Northumberland, and perhaps partly because of the death of Nathaniel Torporley who had long been engaged in ' penning the doctrine' of Hariot's mathematical papers. They both died in 1632, shortly after the publication of the Praxis. Wallis's charge had a basis of truth, but it was narrow and petty. As an Algebraist he seems to have lost sight of the main point, that Descartes' great work was on Geometry and not on Algebra, and that Hariot's method, though first printed in 1631, was almost as old as Descartes himself. Montucla the French mathematician, near the close of the last century, in his History of Mathematics, summed up the controversy raised by Wallis including the minor one raised by Dr Zach in 1785, clearing Descartes of Wallis's charges and relegating Hariot to the respectability of a second-rate mathematician. If Montucla's verdict be based on mathematical reasoning as loose and slipshod as is his statement of the historical points of the case, to say nothing of his utter ignorance of Hariot's biography and true position as an English man of science, one feels justified in rejecting it as worthless : as one also is compelled to do the vapid conclusions drawn from Montucla which have since found their way into many recent biographical dictionaries and into many pretentious articles in learned encyclopdias respecting Hariot and his works. The truth seems to be that Hariot was unlucky and fell into oblivion accidentally. He was a man of immense industry and great mental power, but perhaps careless of his scientific and literary reputation. As has been seen, he always had many irons in the fire, and was overtaken by death in the prime of life, leaving, as his will shows, many things unfinished, and none of his papers in a state ready for publication. He was surrounded by the best of friends, but time and opportunity, as so often happens in the affairs of busy men, worked against him, and he was well nigh consigned to forgetfulness.

However, after a half century's slumber, when the great fire of London had destroyed his monument, and too late many scholars were minded to attempt the recovery and preservation of memorials of the past, John Collins the mathematician began soundings in the pool of oblivion for Hariot and his papers. He and his correspondents fished up a great deal of truth and history, but so mixed with error and conjecture that the results, though interesting, are misleading.

In the ' Correspondence of Scientific Men of the Seventeenth Century, Edited by Professor S.J. Rigaud, 2 volumes, Oxford 1841,' 8, are found the following instructive and amusing passages :

As for Geysius, he published an Algebra and Stereometria divers years before the first edition of the Clavis [of Oughtred, 1631] was extant in Mr. Harriot's method, out of which Alsted took what he published of algebra in his Encylopasdia printed in 1630, the year before the Clavis was first extant (see Christmannus and Raymarus). Mr. Harriot's method is now more used than Oughtred's, and himself in the esteem of Dr. Wallis not beneath Des Cartes. Dr. Hakewill, in his Apology, tells you Harriot was the first that squared the area of a spherical triangle; and I can tell you, by the perusal of some papers of Torporley's it appears that Harriot could make the sign of any arch at demand, and the converse, and apply a table of sines to solve all equations, and treated largely of figurate arithmetic. His papers fell into the hands of Sir Thomas Aylesbury, father to the Lord Chancellor's lady, where I hope they still are, unless they had the hard fate to be lent out, before the fire, and be burned, as some have said.

Collins to Wallis, no date, circa 1670, vol. ii, page 478.

As to Harriot, he was so learned, saith Dr. Pell, that had he published all he knew in algebra, he would have left little of the chief mysteries of that art unhandled. His papers fell into the hands of Sir Thomas Aylesbury, who was father to the late Lord Chancellor's [Clarendon] Lady,by which means they fell into the Lord Chancellor's hands, to whom application was made by the members of the Royal Society to obtain them: his lordship (then in the height of his dignity and employments) gave order for a search to be made, and in result the answer was, they could not be found. I am afraid the search was but perfunctory, and that, if his lordship (now at leisure) were solicited for them, he might write to his son the Lord Cornbury to make a diligent search for them. One Mr. Protheroe, in Wales, was executor to Mr. Harriot, and from him the Lord Vaughan, the Earl of Carbery's son, received more than a quire of Mr. Harriot's Analytics. The Lord Brounker has about two sheets of Harriot de Motu et Collisione Corporum, and more of his I know not of: there is nothing of Harriot's extant but that piece which Mons. Garibal hath.

Collint to Vernon, not dated but circa 1671, vol. i, page 153.

Upon this passage Professor Rigaud makes the following note, written at Oxford in 1841:

Harriot's will is not to be found, but Camden says that he left his property to Viscount Lisle and Sir Thomas Aylesbury. Lord Lisle's share of the papers appear to have been given up to his father-in-law, Henry earl of Northumberland, who had been Harriot's munificent patron, and they descended with the family property to the E. of Egremont, by whom a large portion has been given to the British Museum, and the remainder are still preserved at Petworth. Sir Thomas Aylesbury's share became the property of his son-in-law Lord Chancellor Clarendon, to whom the Royal Society applied, but, as it appears, without obtaining them. (See Birch, Hist. Royal Society, vol. ii, pp. 120, 116, 309.)-Vol. i, page 153.

Here seems to be the germ of Professor Wallis's charge of plagiarism against Descartes, written to Collins twelve years before it appeared in thefirst editionof his History of Algebra in English in 1685. It subsequently took a wider range, and was strenuously defended by Wallis when opposed:

That which I most valued in his [Des Cartes] method, and which pleased me best, was the way of bringing over the whole equations to one side, making it equal to nothing, and thereby forming his compound equations by the multiplication of simples, from thence also determining the number of roots, real or imaginary, in each. This artifice, on which all the rest of his doctrine is grounded, was that which most made me to set a value on him, presuming it had been properly his own; but afterwards I perceived that he had it from Hariot, whose Algebra was published after his death in the year 1631, six years before Des Cartes' Geometry in French in the year 1637 : and yet Des Cartes makes no mention at all of Harriot, whom he follows in designing his species by small letters, and the power: of them by the number of dimensions, without the characters of j, c, qq, &c.

Walla to Collins, Oxford, 12 April 1673, vol, ii, page 573.

And had I but known of any precedent, (as since in Harriot I find one, and I think but one √-dddddd,) I should not have scrupled to follow it; but I was then too young an algebraist to innovate without example. Since that time I have been more venturous, and I find now that others do not scruple to use it as well as I. [Just what Descartes did. He ' innovated' prior to 1637, when he took Hariot's well recognized notation in algebra to work out his problems in geometry for which Hariot himself would have thanked him.]

Wallis to Collins, May 6, 1673, vol. ii, page 578.

One Torporley, long since, left a manuscript treatise in Latin in Sion College, wherein is a much more copious table of figurate numbers, which I have caused to be transcribed, with what he says de combinationibus, to send to Mr. Strode.

On this passage, extracted from a letter from Collins to Baker, dated the 19th of August, 1676, Professor Rigaud has the following note, written in 1841, vol. ii, page 5 :

Nath. Torporley left his manuscripts to Sion College, where he spent the latter years of his life ; but the greater part of them was destroyed by the fire of London. Reading, in his catalogue of the library, mentions only one, " Corrector Analyticus," which is an attack on Warner for the manner in which he had edited Harriot's " Artis Analytic Praxis." This is a short tract, and incomplete. There is, however, another volume, A. 37-39, entitled, "Algebraica, Tabul Sinuum,&c." in which Torporley's hand may be certainly recognized. Wood, in the list of his works, speaks of "Congestor opus Mathematicam,- imperfect." A perfect copy of this treatise is in Lord Maccles-field's possession, and probably once belonged to Collins.

Perhaps the best comment that one can make on the wild and extraordinary statements contained in the above extracts is to ask the reader to read over Hariot's Will,given entire on pages 193-203, and especially this Item respecting his Mathematical and other Writings, and the Rev. Nathaniel Torporley, from which it will appear that all his valued papers were bequeathed with great care to the Earl of Northumberland, to be deposited in his library in a trunk with lock and key, after they had been looked over and perused, by Mr Torporley, and (the waste papers having been weeded out) the whole arranged by him ' to the end that after hee doth vnderstand them he may make use in penning such doctrine that belongs unto them for publique use.' This, of course, was to be done under the supervision of the four Executors, who were persons of no less distinction than Sir Robert Sidney Knight Viscount Lisle, John Protheroe Esquire, Thomas Aylesbury Esquire, and Thomas Buckner Mercer.

ITEM I ordayne and Constitute the aforesaid Nathaniel Thorperley first to be Overseer of my Mathematical Writings to be received of my Executors to peruse and order and to separate the Chiefe of them from my waste papers, to the end that after hee doth vnderstand them hee may make use in penninge such doctrine that belongs vnto them for publique vses as it shall be thought Convenient by my Executors and him selfe. And if it happen that some manner of Notacions or writings of the said papers shall not be understood by him then my desire is that it will please him to confer with Mr Warner or Mr Hughes Attendants on the afore said Earle Concerning the aforesaid double. And if hee be not resolued by either of them That then hee Conferre with ihe aforesaid John Protheroe Esquier or the aforesaid Thomas Alesbury Esquior. (I hopeing that some or other of the aforesaid fower last nominated can resolve him). And when hee hath had the use of the said papers soe longe as my Executors and hee have agreed for the use afore said That then he deliver them againe unto my Executors to be putt into a Convenient Truncke with a locke and key and to be placed in my Lord of Northumberlandes Library and the key thereof to be delivered into his Lordshipps hands. And if at anie tyme after my Executors or the afore said Nathaniell Thorperley shall agayne desire the use of some or all of the said Mathematicall papers That then it will please the said Earle to lett anie of the aforesaid to have them for theire use soe long as shall be thought Convenient, and afterwards to be restored agayne unto the Truncke in the afore said Earles Library. Secondly my will and desire is that the said Nathaniell Thorperley be alsoe Overseere of other written bookes and papers as my Executors and hee shall thincke Convenient.

This will, of extraordinary interest, has fallen to our lot to exhume, after many antiquaries and scholars had long sought it in vain. It was recently discovered in the Archdeaconry Court of London, just the place where one would least expect to find it. One has only to read the document to read the character of the man-good, learned,affectionate, charitable and just. He was carried off by a terrible disease, away from home, but among friends. He left his affairs and fame in loving hands. His will was proved on the 4th day after his death by two of the Executors, Sir Thomas Aylesbury and Mr Buckner, with the right reserved to the other two to act subsequently. It is found by papers in the British Museum that Sir John Protheroe did act, for there is a very long list of manuscripts, copied from Protheroe's list of papers delivered to Mr Torporley, which served as a receipt for them, and which was returned with the papers.

Mr Torporley then, it is manifest, had in hand the papers and returned them, but it is not apparent what amount of labor he bestowed upon them. They do not appear to be properly arranged, nor have the waste papers been weeded out. From Protheroe's list and other circumstances it is likely that nothing has been destroyed, except perhaps the Raleigh accounts and the Irish papers in the ' canvas baggs.' The papers were at Sion, and were placed in a trunk and delivered to the Earl, who left the Tower only sixteen days after Hariot's death. They subsequently found their way to Petworth, another seat of the Earl, where the trunk and half of the papers still remain, in the possession of the Earl of Leconsfield, a branch of the Northumberland family. They are briefly described in this manner by Mr Alfred J. Horwood in the Sixth Report of the Historical Manuscript Commission for 1877, page 319, folio.

A black leather box containing several hundred leaves of figures and calculations by Hariot. A large bundle of Hariot's papers. They are arranged in packets by Professor Rigaud. Spots on the Sun. Comets of 1607 and 1618. The Moon. Jupiter's Satellites. Projectiles, Centre of Gravity, Reflection of bodies. Triangles. Snell's Eratosthenes Batavus. Geometry. Calendar. Conic Sections. De Stella Martis. Drawings of Constellations, papers on Chemistry and Miscellaneous Calculations. Collections from Observations of Hannelius, Warner, Copernicus, Tycho Brahe. On the vernal and autumnal equinoxes, the solstices, orbit of the Earth, length of the year, &c. Algebra.

A similar collection, but not yet arranged, catalogued, numbered or bound, is carefully preserved in the Manuscript Department of the British Museum (Additional, 6782-6789), in eight thick Solander cases, probably as much in bulk as the Petworth papers. They were presented to the Museum by the Earl of Egremont in 1810. Why the two collections were separated does not appear. The Museum papers contain much that is waste, but much also that is of importance equal probably to those at Petworth. Mr Torporley was in effect appointed by Hariot his literary and scientific editor under the direction of the Executors. No papers were left ready for publication. It must have required great study and labor to master them sufficiently to pen for public use such doctrine or science as belonged to them. Torporley lived in Shropshire, but a few years after Hariot's death he retired from his rectorship and removed to London,taking rooms in 1630 at Sion College in London Wall, when that institution was first founded. It contained then as now a library for the use of the Clergy, and a few suites of apartments for those who desired to reside on the premises. It never was a College or place of instruction, but a sort of guild or Clergyman's Club. At this time Mr Torporley was about seventy years old. He died in his chambers at Sion College in April 1632, and was buried on the 17th of that month in the Church of St Alphage, close by. In a nuncupative will spoken the 14th ofApril, a copy of which is before the writer, he left his books and manuscripts to the Sion Col ege Library. A complete list of about 170 books and several manuscripts is preserved in the ' Donors' Book.' A few of the books are said to have been destroyed by the fire of London, but probably none of the manuscripts were lost.

Torporley's manuscripts, as has been stated, have often been referred to, and sometimes copied, but their true history and character is explained by Hariot'sWill. There are really but two manuscripts relating to Hariot. The more important one comprises 116 closely-written folio leaves, or 232 pages, all in Torporley's handwriting. It bears no title or designation. Hence various writers who have seen it, from Collins, Wood, and Dr Zach, have given it different names, such as, 'Ephemeris Chysometria,' 'Congestor opus Matbematicum,' etc. but it appears to be nothing more nor less than Torporley's attempt to pen out such doctrine as he found in Hariot's papers. The leaves are numbered, 1 to 16 containing a Treatise on Hariot's Theory of Numbers. Leaves 17 to 25 are tables of the divisors of odd numbers up to 20,300. On the verso of leaf 25 the Theory of Numbers is resumed, extending to the recto of 27. On the verso of leaf 27 begins the treatise on the properties of Triangles and ends on leaf 34. Leaves 35 to 55 comprise examples of Algebraical processes, and leaves 56 to 116 contain Tables (probably tabul sinuum ?) up to 180. On the second leaf the Author speaks of himself as working out, or working on Hariot's principles, and also as making use of the writings of Vieta. He adds:

' And since it is our principal design to explain the improvement in this science[the Properties of Numbers and Triangles] discovered by our friend Thomas Hariot; but he neither completely reformed it (which indeed was not necessary) nor gave a full account of it, but only strengthened it where it was defective, and by treating in his own way the points of the science which were heretofore more difficult, rendered them clear and easy.'

This manuscript was probably intended for another printed volume of Hariot's mathematical works, but owing to the deaths about the same time, 1632, of the venerable editor and the noble patron this work never bore a definite name and never saw the light of the press.

CORRECTOR ANALYTICUS Artis pofthumx THOM HARIOTI Vt Mathematici eximij, perraro Vt Philofophi Audentes, frequentius errantis Vt Hominis evanidi, infigniter Ad Fidedigniorem refutationem Philopfeudofophi Atomiftic;, per cum Reducis, et pr cteris eius Portentis feri corripiend, anathematyzandq Compendiu Antimonitorfi, et Speciminale exanthorati ia Senioris Na: Torporley. Vt Noverit Arbiter Caveat Emptor. non bene Rip Creditur, ipfe Aries etiam nunc Vellera ficcat. Virgil, Ecl. iii. 94,95,]

This Second Manuscript is a pretentious but small affair. It was manifestly written at Sion College after the Praxis appeared in 1631. It is only the preface or the opening of a growl of envy or disappointment. It shows clearly that Torporley himself was not the editor of the Algebra or Praxis. The above is the pedantic title-page, given line for line and verbatim.

The manuscript is in small quarto, and exclusive of the title (which, indeed, is the nub of the achievement) contains only nine pages, breaking off abruptly in the middle of a sentence. He criticises the editors of Hariot's Algebra, the executors Aylesbury and Protheroe, aided by Warner, who were all eminent mathematicians. He speaks of the administrators or editors as if more than one, and does not mention Warner, or lead us to believe that he was sole editor. Only a small portion of this projected criticism seems ever to have been written. It appears to have been begun in senile peevishness, containing only a few prefatory remarks and discussing some algebraical questions with the fancied errors of the editors. No mention is made of the'Atomic Theory,'as promised on the title-page, which is here done into English, and is as follows:-

THE ANALYTICAL CORRECTOR of the posthumous scientific writings of THOMAS HARRIOT. As an excellent Mathematician one who very seldom erred As a bold Philosopher one who occasionally erred, As a frail Man one who notably erred For the more trustworthy refutation of the pseudo-philosophic atomic theory, revived by him and, outside his other strange notions, deserving of reprehension and anathema. A Compendious Warning with specimens by the aged and retired-from-active-life Na: Torporley. So that The critic may know The buyer may beware. It is not safe to trust to the bank, The bell-wether himself is drying his fleece.

The ' Corrector Analyticus' may be found printed in full (but without the quaint titles) in 'The Historical Society of Science. A Collection of Letters illustrative of Science, edited by J. O. Halliwell,' London, 1841, 8, Appendix, pages 109-116. ForTorporley's curious paper entitled ' A Synopsis of the Controversie of Atoms,' see Brit. Mus. Mss, Birch 4458, 2.

Mr Torporley informs us, and the papers appear to bear him out in the statement, that Hariot wrote memoranda, problems, etc. on loose pieces of paper, and then arranged them in sets fastened together according to the subjects treated of. He adds, ' First then let me speak of Hariot's method, of which frequent mention will have to be made in the following pages; so that the reader may understand why some things are stated and some passed over: here I cannot but complain, that I find it a serious defect that his Commentators have so completely transformed it [the Praxis] that they not only do not retain his orderbut not evenhis language.' Again he writes, ' But not even those well-thought-out and necessary to be known matters, which have been delivered to us, have been handed down to posterity by his administrators with the fidelity and accuracy promised.' The suspicion is raised that Torporley's age and dilatoriness compelled the accomplished executors to take the editorial matter in hand themselves and hinc iliae lacrym.

On the back of the above title-page is another attempt of the same sort as follows, showing that this deed of pedantry was committed at Sion College:

CORRECTOR sive Not in Analyticam Novam, Novatam, Posthuma quatenus Fallacem, Defectivam, Extrariam cum Apodictica refutatione Atomorum Somnij, pr cteris Novatorum portentis corripiendi Ana- thematizandiq Ex Collegio Sion Londinenfi perfuncti Senis Artemq reponentis NT Extremu hoc munus morientis habetor : Σĸηρον προς κ 41;ντρονλ α κτρον λακτ 43;ζειν [Greek Text] nee bene Rip Creditur ipse Aries etia nunc Vellera ficcat.

There are one or two unimportant papers among the Torperley manuscripts that bear marks of having belonged to the Hariot papers, and there is a manuscript by Warner, entitled, 'Certayne Definitions of the Planisphere.' Any one curious in the history of Torperley may find in the Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, 1636, page 364, how his property was purloined by Mr Spencer, the first Librarian of Sion College. He was sued by Mistress Payne the administratrix and was compelled to disgorge 4.0 in money, eleven diamond rings, eight gold rings, two bracelets, etc. Then Archbishop Laud took away Spencer's librarianship, and let him drop.

Mr William Spence of Greenock published in Nov. 1814, a work entitled, ' Outlines of a Theory of Algebraical Equations deduced from the Principles of Harriott, and extended to the Fluxional or differential Calculus. By William Spence. London, for the Author, by Davis and Dickson, 1814, 8, iv and 80 pages. Privately printed, intended ' exclusively for the perusal of those gentlemen to whom it is addressed.' He says in his prefatory note that-

' As the principles are drawn from that theory of equations, by which Harriott has so far advanced the science of algebra.' The author says, page I,' Until the publication of Harriot's Artis Analytica Praxis, no extended theory of equations was given. Harriot considered algebraical equations merely as analytical expressions, detached wholly from the operations by which they might be individually produced ; and, carrying all the terms over to one side, he assumed the hypothesis, that, as in that state the equation was equal to nothing, it could always be reduced to as many simple factors as there were units in the index of its highest power.'

Between 1606 and 1609 a very interesting and historically instructive correspondence took place between Kepler and Hariot upon several important scientific subjects. Five of the letters are given in full in 'Joannis Keppleri Alio-rumque Epistol Mutu. [Frankfort] 1718,' folio, to which the reader is referred, but a brief abstract of them may not be out of place here. The letters are numbered from 222 to 226 and fill pages 373 to 382. The correspondence was begun by Kepler:

Letter 122, dated Prague, 11 October, 1606, from John Kepler

to Thomas Hariot,

Kepler had heard of Hariot's acquirements in Natural Philosophy from his friend John Eriksen. Would be glad to know Hariot's views as to the origin and essential differences of colours; also on the question of refraction of rays of light; and the causes of the Rainbow; and of haloes round the sun.

Letter 223, dated London, 11 December, 1606,from

Thomas Hariot to John Kepler,

Had received with pleasure Kepler's letter; but should not be able to answer it at length, being in indifferent health, so that it was not easy to write or even carefully to reflect. Sends a table of the results of experiments on equal bulks of various liquids and transparent solids (thirteen in number, including spring, rain, and salt water; Spanish and Rhenish wine; vinegar; spirits of wine; oils and glass). The angle of incidence is 30 in each case; also the specific gravity of each substance is given. Then he discusses the reason why refraction takes place. Promises to write on the Rainbow; but will merely say at present that it is to be explained by the reflection on the concave superficies and the refraction at the convex superficies of each separate drop.

Letter 224 is from John Kepler to Thomas Hariot, dated at Prague, 11 August, 1607.

Thanks Hariot for his table, which supplies matter for serious consideration. Asks questions as to how he defines the angles of incidence and refraction; and goes on to discuss the reasons of refraction. Agrees with Hariot as to his views about the Rainbow; but will be very glad to receive his treatises on Colours and the Rainbow.

Letter 225 is from Thomas Hariot to John Kepler, dated at Syon,

near London, 13 July (o.s.), 1608.

The departure of Eriksen and other matters do not allow leisure to write at length. The turpentine (oleum terebinth inum) was not the same as that experimented on by Kepler but a purer and lighter article (Sp. grav. '87). The angle of incidence is understood as defined by Alhazen and Vitellio [first published 1572]. Points out some errors in Vitellio's second table of refractions. As to the causes of refraction, Hariot believes in the theory of the vacuum; ' where we still stick in the mud '. Hopes God (Deum optimum maximum) will soon put an end to this. Wishes for Kepler's meteorological records for the last two years, and will send his own notes in return. Gilbert, author of a work on the magnet, had recently died, leaving in his brother's hands a book entitled ' De Globo et Mundo nostro sub lunari Philosophia nova contra Peripateticos, lib. 5." [A treatise, in five books, on Natural Philosophy, in answer to the Peripatetics.] The book is likely to be published before the end of the year. Hariot had read some chapters; and saw that Gilbert defends the doctrine of a vacuum. Not to leave a vacuum on this page (says Hariot), it is remarkable that though gold is both heavy and opaque, when beaten out into gold-leaf the light of a candle can be seen through it, though it appears of a green colour.

Letter 226, from John Kepler to Thomas Hariot, it dated from

Prague, September, 1609.

Excuses himself for not having replied sooner; having been very busy; but would not lose the present opportunity of writing. Discusses the questions of refraction and the vacuum. Commentaries on Mars entitled 'Astronomia Nova [Greek Text] or Physica Clestis,' have been published at Frankfort; has not a copy by him. Regrets to hear of the death of Gilbert. Hopes his work on Magnetism will also be published; and that Erikson will bring a copy with him. Promises to send a copy of his own meteorological observations; and hopes to receive Hariot's.

These studies in optics and this correspondence with the learned Kepler indicate Hariot's great advancement in natural philosophy as early as 1606 to 1609 and give an earnest of his inventive genius and scientific enterprise with his telescope in the astronomical discoveries which immediately followed in 1609 to 1613. Before awarding all the prizes for discoveries and inventions in mathematics, philosophy and natural science to claimants throughout the wide Republic of Letters, let modest Hariot be heard and examined. Let his papers and all his credentials be laid out before the high court of science, not in the light of today, but contemporaneously with those of Tycho, Kepler, Galileo, Snell, Vieta and Descartes. Hariot himself has claimed nothing, but Justice and Historical Truth are bound to assign him a niche appropriate to his merits.

To show that Hariot, like his friends Hakluyt and Purchas, was alive to everything geographical as well as mathematical going on, the following is given from the original manuscript among the Hariot papers in the British Museum (Add. 6789):

Three reasons to prove that there is a passage from the North' west into the South-sea. 1. The tydes in Port Nelson (where Sr. Tho : Button did winter, were constantly, 15, or, 18, foote ; wc is not found in any Bay Throughout the world but in such seas as lie open att both ends to the mayne Ocean. 2. Every strong Westerne winde did bring into the Harbor where he wintered, soe much water, that the Neap-tydes were equall to the Spring-tydes, notwtstanding yt the harbor was open only to ye E.N.E. 3. In comming out of the harbor, shaping his course directly North, about, 60, degrees, he found a stronge race of a tyde, set-ting dueEast and West, wc in probabilitie could be noe other thing, than the tyde comming from the West, and retourning from the East,

Among the manuscripts in the handwriting of Hariot in the British Museum (Add. 6789) are these samples of ingenious trifling. No evidence is forthcoming that he was ever a married man, but that he occasionally let himself down from pure mathematics and high philosophy and amused himself with anagrams is plain enough. Here are a few specimens on his own name.

ANAGRAMS ON THOMAS HARIOTUS

Tu homo artis has traho hosti mufa Homo has vt artis O trahit hos mufa Homo hasta vtris oh, os trahit mufa vitus oho trahit mifas rutis oho, trahis mutis Humo astra hosti oho, fum Charitas. If the pertingent Reader still craves more evidence of the extent of Hariot's friendships, and the universality of his acquirements, let him read the following pithy, quaint, and beautiful tribute paid to him by blind Old Homer's Chapman in 1616. It is found in the Preface to the Reader in the first complete edition of Homer'sworks translated by George Chapman, London [1616], fo.

No coference had with any one liuing in al the noueltiet I prefume I haue found. Only fome one or two places I haue fhewed to my worthy and moft learned friend, M. Harriots, for his cenfure how much mine owne weighed: whofe iudgement and knowledge in all kinds, I know to be incomparable, and bottomlefle ; yea, to be admired as much, as his moft blameles life, and the right facred expence of his time, is to be honoured and reuerenced. Which affirmation of his cleare vnmatchednefle in all manner of learning; I make in contempt of that naftie objection often thruft vpon me ; that he that will iudge, muft know more then he of whom he iudgeth ; for fo a man fhould know neither God nor himfelf. Another right learned, honeft, and entirely loued friend of mine, M. Robert Hews, I muft needs put into my confest conference touching Homer, though very little more than that I had with M. Harriots. Which two, I proteft, are all, and preferred to all.

It remains to say two words more about Baron Zach's' discovery' of the Hariot papers at Petworth in 1784. This remarkable story has been told many times, in many books, and in many languages. It has found its way into many modern dictionaries and grave encyclopdias, but it always appears with an unsatisfactory and suspicious flavor. Dr Zach's ' discovery' is found cropping up all over the continent, and everywhere is made paramount to Hariot's papers, while Oxford is blamed for not giving the young German his dues!

It seems that Dr Zach, a young man, was in England with Count Bruhl, who had married the dowager Lady Egremont. He thus had easy access to the old Percy Library at Petworth, in Sussex, where was stored, as we have seen by Hariot's will, the black trunk containing his mathematical writings as bequeathed to the 9th Earl of Northumberland. In 1785 Dr Zach announced with a truly scholastic flourish in Bode's Berlin Ephemeris for 1788 his remarkable 'discovery ' of the papers of Thomas Hariot previously known as an eminent Algebraist or Mathematician, but now elevated to the rank also of a first-class English Astronomer. The next year, 1786, is celebrated in the annals of English science from the circumstance of Oxford's having accepted a proposition from Dr Zach to publish his account of Hariot and his writings. The Royal Academy of Brussels in 1788 printed in its Memoirs Dr Zach's paper on the planet Uranus, with a long note relative to the discovery at Petworth.

The Berlin paper immediately upon publication was translated into English and extensively circulated in this country, conducing, it is suspected, more to the renown of Dr Zach than to that of Hariot. In 1793 Bode's Jahrbuch gave from the pen of Dr Zach an account of the Comets of 1607 and 1618, with Hariot's Observations thereon. But these observations were given with so many errors and misreadings, as shown by Professor Rigaud, that they were soon pronounced worthless, to the discredit of Hariot rather than of his eminent editor. But matters came to a crisis in 1794, nine years after the grand flourish of the first announcement at Berlin. Dr Zach sent to Oxford for publication his abstract of certain of the scientific papers, and the Earl of Egremont intrusted to the University Dr Zach's selection of the original papers. Zach's abstracts were merely sufficient to identify himself with the works of Hariot, but he had performed no real editorial labours, and had not 'pen'd the doctrine ' contained in them. Here were years of useful work to be done which the University dreamed not of, so the whole matter was referred to Professors Robertson and Powell, who both reported adversely in 1798, or before. In 1799 all the Hariot papers were returned to Petworth.

In the mean time the full translation of Dr Zach's account of his ' discovery,' with some curious additions, found its way into Dr Hutton's Dictionary of Mathematics, under Hariot, 1796, 2 volumes in quarto. This publication gave an air of solemn record and history to the transactions, insomuch that Oxford began to be blamed for withholding from the press Dr Zach's great work. Oxford preserved a becoming silence. In 1803 Dr Zach published at Gotha in his Monatliche Correspondenz a fragment of that remarkable letter from the Earl of Northumberland to Hariot (which letter we have shown to be Lower's, see p. 120). This publication, together with the reprint of the original Berlin paper by Zach in the second edition of Hutton's Dictionary in 1815 without alteration, seemed to bring the matter to a point. Oxford was obliged to rise and explain.

The whole question was inquired into. Professor Robertson's original report was brought out and sent to Dr David Brewster, who printed it in his Edinburgh Philosophical Journal for 1822, volume vi, page 314, in an article on the Hariot papers. In the meanwhile, in 1810, that portion of the Hariot papers that did not go to Oxford was presented to the British Museum by the Earl of Egremont. The division of the papers (on what principle it is difficult to guess) was unquestionably Dr Zach's. The value is no doubt much depreciated by the separation. Under all these circumstances no one can wonder at the Oxford decision, or that the papers were deemed not worthy of publication. Yet under other circumstances it is almost certain that the two collections when worked together will yield valuable materials for the life of Hariot and the history and progress of English science, discovery, and invention. To Professor S. F. Rigaud is due the credit for the most part of working out the crooked and entangled history of the Zachean fiasco, which has apparently depreciated the real value of these papers. Professor Rigaud's papers may be seen in the Royal Institution Journal, 1831, volume ii, pages 267-271, in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, iii, 125, and in the Appx to Bradley's Works. Now to pick up a few dropped stitches. Notices of Hariot by Camden, Aubrey, Hakewill, and others are omitted from press of matter. Gabriel Harvey in 1593, in his' Pierces Supererogation,' page 190, exclaims ' and what profounde Mathematician like Digges, Hariot, or Dee esteemeth not the pregnant Mechanician ?' MrJ.O.Halliwell's Collection of Letters referred to on page 174, though falling late under our eye, is most acceptable and thankfully used. Several letters of Sir William Lower are printed from the originals in the British Museum. And so is John Bulkley's dedication to Hariot of his work on the Quadrature of the Circle, dated Kal. Martii, 1591, the original manuscript of which is in Sion College. There is also an interesting letter from Hariot to the Earl dated Sion June 13, 1619, respecting the doctrine of reflections as communicated to Warner and Hues for the use of the Earl. But the most important letter is the following on page 71 from Sir Thomas Aylesbury, one of Hariot's executors, to the Earl of Northumberland, respecting some remuneration for the extra services of Warner in assisting him in passing Hariot's ' Artis Analytic Praxis ' through the press :

Rt. Ho. May it plese your lp. July 5, 1631.

I presumed heretofore to moue your lp on the behalf of Mr. W. for some consideration to be had of his extraordinary expense in attending the publication of Mr. H. book after the copy was finished. The same humble request I am induced to renew by reson of his present wants occasioned by that attendance.

For his literary labour and paines taken in forming the work and fitting it for the publik view, he looks for no other reward then your lps acceptance therof as an honest discharge of his duty. But his long attendance through vnexpected difficulties in seeking to get the book freely printed, and after that was vndertaken the friuolous delaies of the printers and slow preceding of the presse, wch no intreties of his or myne could remedy, drew him to a gretter expence then his meanes would here, including both your lps pencion and the arbitrary help of his frends. It is this extraordinary expense, wch he cannot recouer wch makes both him and me for him appele to your Lps goodnei and bounty for some tollerable mitigation thereof.

I purpose God willing to set forth other peeces of Mr. H. wherein by reson of my owne incombrances I must of necessitie desire the help of Mr. W. rather then of any other, whereto I find him redy enough because it tends to your lps service, and may the more freely trouble him, yf he receive some little encouragement from your lp towards the repairing of the detrement that lies still vpon him by his last imploiment. But for the future my intention it to haue the impression at my owne charge, and not depend on the curtesy of those mechaniks,making account that wch may seeme to be saued by the other way will not countervaile the trouble and tedious prolongation of the busines. But the copies being made perfect and faire written for the presse they shall be sufficiently bound to deliuer the books perfectly clen out of theire hands, and by this meanes the trouble and charge of attending the presse will be saued. Therfore my Lo. what you do now will be but for this once, and in such proportion as shall best like you to favour the humble motion of him who is

Allway most redy at your Lps commaund _ .

Endorsed in the handwriting of Warner,

Sr Th. A. letters about my busines.

[B. M. Birch, 4396, 87.]

Notwithstanding the plain initials T. A. Mr Halliwell erroneously attributes this letter to Torporley, who had been in his grave three months. The handwriting is not Torporley's but Warner's. The Earl died on the 5th of November following. T. A. unquestionably stands for Sir Thomas Aylesbury, who, as executor and good friend, had the matter in hand. Indeed Warner's endorsement settles the question of authorship.

Six shillings and eight pence were paid for Hariot's knell, and 4 were paid as his legacy to the parish for the poor, according to memoranda supplied by Mr Edwin Freshfleld from the Records of St Christopher's. See Will, page 200.

Hariot had a lease from Raleigh of' Pinford grounds,' at Sherburne, for fifty-eight years, but the King wanted it for Carr, so of course the title was found defective.

In conclusion, before laying down the pen with which has been exhumed and set up on a new pedestal one of England's worthiest of her many forgotten Worthies, let the holder crave the indulgence of the reader for the illogical, wordy and mixed style of this essay. He is perfectly aware of these shortcomings, but puts in the plea that while groping in the past as if blindfolded he has been decoyed on step by step by the unexpected recovery of new materials after the others were in type, so that as often as he had finished his labor of love new facts have turned up which he had not the heart to reject. So he has incorporated them one after another as best he could. The results are more inartistic and crude than he could have wished, but he hesitates not on that account to invite lovers of and believers in the Truth of History to the banquet he has prepared.

A well-dined Reader is not likely, the writer thinks, to quarrel with his dessert because he has to pick out, with some little patience, the dainty meats of the nuts he has to arrange and crack for himself. Repetition, and perhaps some contradiction, are acknowledged. But meandering thoughts and ill-digested narratives, though tedious, are not criminal. When these new materials have dried in the noon-day sun for a year and a day, the writer then, or at the expiration of the Horatian period, may bring them back to his anvil to be re-hammered. May they then prove as true as they now seem new, is the wish of the admirer of Thomas Hariot, the first historian of Virginia, the friend of Sir Walter Raleigh, the companion of Henry Percy, and the Benefactor of Mankind.

————————————————————————————————————- THE WILL of THOMAS HARIOT

Recorded in the Archdeaconry Court of London

IN THE NAME OF

GOD Amen ye nine and twentieth daie of june, in the yeare of or Lord God 1621 And in ye yeares of the reigne of or Soueraigne Lord James by the Grace of God of England Scotland Fraunce & Ireland Kinge Defender of the Faythe & (that is to saie) of England Fraunce & Ireland the nineteenth And of Scotland the fower & fiftieth I THOMAS HARRIOT of Syon in the County of Midd Gentleman being troubled in my bodie wth infirmities. But of pfecte minde & memorie Laude & prayse be giuen to Almightie God for the same doe make & ordayne this my last will and testamt. In manner and forme following (viz) First & principally I Comitte my Soule in to the hands of Almighty God my maker and of his sonne Jesus Christe my Redeemer of whose merritts by his grace wrought in mee by the holy Ghoste I doubte not but that I am made ptaker, to thend that I may enioye the Kingdome of heaven ppared for the electe. Item my will is that if I die in Londn that my bodie bee interred in the same pishe Churche of the house where I lye the we" I comitte to the discrecon of my Executors hereafter named, Excepte taking the advise and direccon of the right honorable my very good Lord the EARLE OF NORTHUMBERLAND if it bee his pleasure to haue me buryed at Ilseworth in ye County of Midd And if it be the pleasure of God that I die at Syon I doe ordayne that my buriall bee at ye said Churche of Ilseworth w'out question Item I will & bequeath vnto the aforesaid Earle One wooden Boxe full or neere full of drawne Mappes standing nowe at the Northeast windowe of that Roome wch is Called the plor at my house in Syon, And if it pleaseth his Lorpp to haue anie other Mappes or Chartes drawne by hand or printed Or anie Bookes or other thinges that I haue I desire my Extors that hee may haue them according to his pleasure at reasonable rates excepte my Mathematicall papers in anie other sorte then is here after menconed Excepting alsoe some other thinges giuen away in Legacies hereafter alsoe specified Item I bequeath vnto the right honorable Sr ROBERT SYDNEY KNIGHT VICOUNT LISLE, One Boxe of papers being nowe vppon the table in my Library at Syon, conteyning fiue quires of paper, more or lesse wch were written by the last Lord Harrington, and Coppyed out of some of my Mathematicall papers for his instrucon Alsoe I doe acknowledge that I haue two newe greate globes wch haue Cous of Leather the wch I borrowed of the said LORD LISLE And my will is that they bee restored vnto him againe Item I giue vnto JOHN PROTHEROE of Hawkesbrooke in the Countie of Carmarthen Esquier One furnace wth his apputnnce out of the North Clossett of my Library at Syon. Item I giue vnto NATHANIELL THORPERLEYof Salwarpe in the Countie of Worcester Clarke One other furnace wth his apputnnce out of the same Clossett. Item I glue vnto my servaunte CHRISTOPHER TOOKE one other furnace wth his apputennce out of the same Clossett Alsoe I glue to him an other furnace out of the South Clossett of my said Lybrarie Item I give and bequeath vnto Mris BUCKNER wife vnto THOMAS BUCKNER Mercer at whose house being in St Christophers pishe I nowe lye, and hereafter nominated one of my Executors the some of fiffteene poundes towards the repacons of some damages that I haue made, or for other vses as shee shall thincke Convenient' Item I giue vnto Mr JOHN BUCKNER theire eldest sonne the some of fiue poundes Item I giue & bequeath vnto my Cozen THOMAS YATES my sisters sonne fifty poundes towardes the paiemt. of his debte and not otherwise, But if his debt doe fall out to be lesse then fifty poundes then the residue to remayne to himselfe Item to JOHN HARRIOTT Late servaunte to Mr Doleman of Shawe neere Newbury n Barkeshire and being the sonne of my vnckle John Harriotte but nowe married and dwelling in Churche peene about a Myle westward from the said Shawe, I doe giue and bequeath fifty poundes Item I giue and bequeath vnto CHRISTOPHER TOOKE my foresaid servaunte one hundred poundes. Item I giue & bequeath vnto myservaunte JOHN SHELLER fiue poundes more then the forty shillinges wch I haue of his in Custodie,being money given vnto him at sevall tymes by my frends wch in all is seauen poundes to bee imployed for his vse according to the discrecon of my Executors for ye placing of him wth an other Master Item I giue and bequeath to JOANE my servaunte fiue poundes more then her wages. Item I giue and bequeath vnto my svaunte JANE wch serveth vnder the said JONE fortie shillinges more then her wages wch wages is twenty shillinges by yeare Item I giue and bequeath to my auncient svaunte CHRISTOPHER KELLETT a Lymning paynter dwelling neare PettyFraunce in Westminster fiue poundes Item to my aincient servaunte JOANE wife to Paule Chapman dwelling in Brayneford end I bequeath fortie shillinges. Item I giue vnto the aforesaid EARLE OF NORTHUMBERLAND my two pspectiue trunckes wherewth I vse espetially to see Venus horned like the Moone and the Spout in the Sonne The glasses of wch trunckes I desire to haue remooved into two other of the fayrest trunckes by my said servaunte CHRISTOPHER TOOKE Item I bequeath vnto euyone of my Executors hereafterwards to be named, One pspectiue truncke a peece of the best glasses, and ye fayrest trunckes, as my said servaunte Can best fitt to theire liking Item I giue vnto my said servaunte CHRISTOPHER TOOKE the residue of my Cases of pspectiue trunckes wth the other glasses of his owne making fitted for pspectiue trunckes (excepting two great longe trunckes Consisting of many ptes wch I giue vnto the said EARLE OF NORTHUMBERLAND to remayne in his Library for such vses as they may be put vnto, Alsoe I bequeath the dishes of iron Called by the spectacle makers tooles to grinde spectacles, and other pspectiue glasses for trunckes vnto my foresaid servaunte CHRISTOPHER TOOKE, Item Concerninge my debts, I doe acknowledg that at this psente I doe owe moneyes to Monseir Mayornes a Potycarie More to Mr Wheately a Potticary dwelling neare the Stockes at the East end of Cheapeside Item to my Brewer dwelling at Braynford end Item to Mr John Bill Staconer for Bookes The some of the debte to all fower before meneoned I thincke and Judge not to bee much more or lesse then forty poundes. Item I doe acknowledge to owe vnto Mr Christopher Ingram keeper of the house of Syon for the aforesaid EARLE OF NORTHUMBERLAND Three thousand sixe hundred of Billett wch I desire to be repayed vnto him Item I doe acknowledge that I haue some written Coppies to the number of twelue or fowerteene (more or lesse) lent vnto me by Thomas Allen of Gloster Hall in Oxford M' of Artes vnto whome I desire my Executors hereafter named to restore them safely according to the noate that hee shall deliu of them (I doubting whether I haue anie true noate of them my selfe) Item I make Constitute and ordayne theise fowre following my Executors Namely the aforesaid Sr ROBERT SIDNEY KNIGHT VISCOUNT LYSLE (if his Lopp may take soe many paynes in my behalfe) Also JOHN PROTHEROE of Hawkesbrooke in the County of Carmarthen Esquio' Alsoe THOMAS ALESBURY of Westminster Esquior Lastly THOMAS BUCKNER Mercer dwelling in St Xpofers pishe in Lond not farre from ye Royall Exchainge vnto wch Executors I giue full power & aucty to vse theire owne discrecons in paying theire Charges in my behalfe out of the rest of my good And if my Bookes wth other goods doe in value Come to more then I haue afore supposed First I desire them to bestowe soe much vppon ye poore not exceeding twenty poundes as they shall thincke Convenient somee pte whereof I giue vnto the poore of the hospitall in Christes Churche in Lond, Some pte vnto the said pishe of St Xpofors where I nowe lye, and some pte wch I would haue the greater) vnto the poore of the pshe of Isleworth neere Syon in the Countie of Midd Secondly out of the said residue of my good, my will is, That the said Executors take some pte thereof for theire owne vses according to theire discretions Lastly my will and desire is that they bestowe the value of the rest vppon Sr Thomas Bodleyes Library in Oxford, or imploy it to such Charitable & pious vses as they shall thincke best Item my will and desire is that Robert Hughes gentleman and nowe attendant vppon th'afore said EARLE OF NORTHUMBERLAND for matters of Learning bee an ouseer at the prizing of my Bookes, and some other thinges as my Executors and hee shall agree vnto Item I ordayne and Constitute the aforesaid NATHANIELL THORPERLEY first to be Ouseer of my Mathematicall Writinges to be receiued of my Executors to pvse and order and to sepate the Cheife of them from my waste papers, to the end that after hee doth vnderstand them hee may make vse in penninge such doctrine that belonges vnto them for publique vses as it shall be thought Convenient by my Executors and him selfe And if it happen that some manner of Notacons or writinges of the said papers shall not be vnderstood by him then my desire is that it will please him to Conferre wth Mr Warner or Mr Hughes Attendants on the aforesaid Earle Concerning the aforesaid doubte. And if hee be not resolued by either of them That then hee Conferre wth the aforesaid JOHN PROTHEROE Esquior or the aforesaid THOMAS ALESBURY Esquior. (I hoping that some or other of the aforesaid fower last nominated can resolue him) And when hee hath had the vse of the said papers see longe as my Executors and hee have agreed for the vse afore said That then he deliu them againe vnto my Executors to be putt into a Convenient Truncke with a locke & key and to be placed in my Lord of Northumberlandes Library and the key thereof to be delifted into his Lordpps hands And if at anie tyme after my Executors or the afore said NATHANIELL THORPERLEY shall agayne desire the vse of some or all of the said Mathematicall paps That then it will please the said Earle to lett anie of the aforesaid to haue them for theire vse soe long as shall be thought Convenient, and afterwards to be restored agayne vnto the Truncke in the afore said Earle's Library Secondly my will & desire is that the said NATHANIELL THORPERLEY be alsoe Ouseere of other written bookes & papers as my Executors and hee shall thincke Convenient. Item Whereas I haue diuers waste papers (of wch some are in a Canvas bagge) of my Accompte to Sr Walter Rawley for all wch I haue discharges or acquitances lying in some boxes or other my desire is that they may bee all burnte. Alsoe there is an other Canvas bagge of papers concerning Irishe Accompt (the psons whome they Concerne are dead many yeares since in the raigne of queene Elizabeth wch I desire alsoe may be burnte as likewise many Idle paps and Cancelled Deedes wch are good for noe vse Item I revoake all former wills by mee heretofore made saue onely this my pnte last will and Testament wch I will shalbe in all thinges effectually and truely pformed according to the tenor and true meaning of the same In witnes whereof I the afore said THOMAS HARRIOTT haue to this my psent last will & Testament put my hand & scale yeouen the daie and yeare first aboue written THO : HARRIOTTS.

Sealed a published and deliued by ye wthin named THOMAS HARRIOTT for and as his last will & Testamt the daie & yeares wthin written in the pfice of vs IMMANUELL BOWRNE WILL: FUTTER, Scr: & THO : ALFORD Svte to the said scr

Probatum fuit hfnoi Testum sexto die mensis Julij Anno Dni 1621. Coram venli viro RICHARDO CLARKE legum Dcore Surto Dni Offitis &c . jurio THOME AILESBURIE et THOME BUCKNER duorum Extorum &c quibus &c de bene &c saluo jure &c Resrvata tamen ptate similem Comissionem faciendi Dno ROBERTO SIDNEY militi et JOHANNI PROTHERO armigero alteris Extoribus &c Cum venerint eandem in debita Juris forma petituri. Pro Inveno ANDREE prox &c. Concordat cum Originali fca exaicoe pnos HEN: DURHAM Norium Pubcm RA: BYRDE

[From the certified copy filed in the Probate Registry in Somerset House, which has been collated with the copy registered, Arch. Lond. 1618-1626/7, Folio 71. The differences in spelling, punctuation etc. are numerous but unimportant.]

END