{ "id": "60d446d271d8e0b8c9783753cbba9e021846f2b2", "text": "ference of upper and lower superficies. Now that I have upon this occasion mention'd equisetum, give me leave to mind you of what I have already publish'd to the world; That I have found, on the banks of the river Tanar in Piedmont, plenty of the fragments of the stalks of equisetum perfectly petrified, with little or no increase of bulk, so exactly like the plant, that all the fibre did all along clearly appear. The colour of these petrified stalks was white.\n\nAn Accomp of two Books:\n\nI. Les dix Livres d'Architecture de VITRUVIE, corrigés, & traduits nouvellement en François, avec des Notes & des Figures; par Claude Perrault, de l'Academie Royale des Sciences, & Medecin de la Faculté de Paris. Imprimé à Paris, 1673. in fol.\n\nThe Ingenious and Learned Author of this Version of Vitruvius, and of the Notes upon him, considering with himself, that one of the Obstacles to the advancement of Architecture was the want of being able to draw the Precepts of that Art out of its true and genuine source, by reason of the great obscurity of Vitruvius, who is the only Writer of the Antients that we have upon this subject; did undertake, by a Translation into the French tongue, and by Notes upon the difficult places, and also by illustrating all with Figures, to render this Author more clear and useful to those, that embrace the profession and practice of that Noble Art.\n\nThis Interpreter found, that in effect most of the matters contained in Vitruvius being so little understood as they are, had need of an Explication more clear and more exact than the Text we have remaining; forasmuch as the Author did not, in his opinion, so much endeavour to make it clear as succinct, in the confidence he had that the Figures, added by him would sufficiently explain the matter, and thereby supply what seems to be wanting in the Discourse.\n\nThese Figures, saith M. Perrault, were lost by the negligence of the first Transcribers, that could not design, and that probably also did not judge them altogether so necessary; because the con-\ntemptation of those Figures having instructed them of the things themselves spoken of in the Text, it seem'd to them intelligible enough; in like manner as it commonly happens, that we do well enough understand what is said, though obscurely, when the things are clear themselves. And thus it could hardly be avoided, but that those who afterwards made Copies of those Exemplars that were destitute of Figures, would commit many faults, transcribing things which they understood nothing of. Nor is it to be wondered, that even now the most perspicacious Readers of this Author, who not only want the Figures, but in a manner the Text itself, meet with so much difficulty in finding good sense in very many places, in which the change or transposition of a word, or only of a point, hath been able utterly to spoil the Discourse, which was the more liable to an almost irreparable corruption, because the matter of it was more dispos'd for it than any other.\n\nNow concerning the difficulty that is met with in the Translation of this Vitruvius, that proceeds, in our Interpreters Judgment, from hence, that 'tis not easy to find in one and the same person the several different abilities requisite to succeed therein: Forasmuch as the skill of good Literature, and the diligent application to the study of Criticism, and the inquiry into the signification of Terms of Art, that are with great judgement to be collected out of many ancient Authors, are seldom joined with that genius, which in Architecture, as well as in all other noble Arts, is somewhat like to that different instinct, which Nature alone infuses to every Animal, and which makes them succeed in certain things with a facility, that is denied to those, who are not born for it.\n\nHence it is, faith our Interpreter, that those who since 160 years have laboured in the Traduction of this Author, (among whom the chief are, J. Jocondus, Cesar Cisuranus, J. Bapt. Caporali, Guil. Philander, Daniel Barbaro, Bernardinus Baldus, J. Martin Secretary to the Cardinal de Lenoncour, and J. Goujon Architect of Francis I. and Henry II. Kings in France,) have not given satisfaction. And for the same reason, (he is pleased to add,) there may be cause to believe, that this new Version may not produce a much better effect, and that the addition of that little light to what so many great men have to little purpose hitherto endeavoured to give to Vitruvius, may be of little moment in respect of the many difficulties that remain: Yet he dispairs not but that it may be of some\nsome use, even to those that are Masters of the Latin Tongue; and\nthat many, that might be able to understand all that is here ex-\nplain'd if they applyed their minds to it as he, (the Interpreter)\nhath done, will be very glad not to be obliged to give themselves\nthat trouble. As for those, that are not skilied in Latin nor Greek,\n(who are those for whom chiefly this Version is made,) the Interpre-\nter is of opinion, that they will find in it a facility not to be met\nwith in the former Versions, in which most of the Translators have\nnot taken the pains of explaining the phrases nor the difficult\nwords, but only turn'd them into the terminations of their lan-\nguage; others have put into the very Text the explication of the\nwords, which makes it doubtful, whether these interpretations\nbelong to the Text, or whether the Translatour have added them.\nBut this Interpreter hath put this kind of explications in the Mar-\ngin, where are also found the Greek and Latin words, that could\nbe rendred by French words in the Text. Mean while, he hath\nbeen constrain'd sometimes to retain the Latin and Greek words\nin the Text, when they could not be made French but by long cir-\ncumlocutions; which yet are explain'd in the Margin periphra-\nstically. But the main thing observ'd in this Translation, are\nthe Notes, giving the explication judged necessary for understand-\ning the Text, which the bare and literal signification of the words\nthat are in the margent would not sufficiently make out. Great\ncare seems to have been used to change nothing in the Text, nor\neven in those things that make the reading of it not so pleasing,\nand that are not of any use for understanding the matter treated\nof. Mean time the Interpreter hath not scrupled to express the\ngenius of the Latin Tongue in the true genius of the French, yet\nwith a careful endeavour faithfully to deliver the Author's sense,\nthough not always word for word; which latter yet he is sollici-\ntous to do, when the obscurity of the matter obliges him to it,\nleaving it to the sagacious Reader to discover the sense, or to sup-\nply it by changing somewhat or other. Often he proposes his\nconjectures upon such passages that are manifestly corrupted;\nwhich yet he doth so, as he never puts into the Version the corre-\nctions, which his conjectures caused him to make, without gi-\nving advertisement thereof in his Notes. His Corrections are\nmany, he not thinking that an injury to the good opinion men are\nto entertain of the ability of so great a man as Vitruvius, since,\nwithout being positive, our Interpreter only proposes the doubts he hath of the Authors mistaking sometimes; it not being to be expected, that he who undertakes to explain an Author should be bound to make his Panegyrick, nor maintain all he hath written.\n\nIn short, the importance of our Interpreters Notes consists in these two things: Either they explain passages only remarkable for their obscurity, and for the trouble which Learn'd men have taken to clear them; or they are about other things likewise obscure and difficult, but such as contain precepts necessary and useful to Architecture.\n\nThe Figures, which serve for illustration, are done with no ordinary care and elegancy; amongst which there are, the Representation of the Parisian Observatory, erected by that King for making Celestial and other Natural Observations; Models of two new Engines for raising heavy burdens, so contriv'd as to avoid Rubbing, invented by the Interpreter himself; the one by a Roler, the other by a Lever, p. 280. 324. An Engin for raising water very high and incessantly, and that in great quantity, without employing any external force; A Scheme of the Organ of the Antients; as also of their Catapultæ, and Baliste, the former casting Javelots, the latter Stones. All Three described by this Interpreter with much learning. The Models of these Engins and many more, both Antient and Modern, Monsieur Perrault saith are to be found in the Royal Library at Paris, where those of the Philosophical French Academy keep their ordinary Assemblies.\n\nII. Anthonii le Grand Dissertatio de Carentia Sensus & Cognitionis in BRUTIS: Londini, apud Joh. Martyn, R. Soc. Typographum, ad Insigne Campanæ in Cameterio D. Pauli, 1671.\n\nTHE Author of this Tract having consider'd with himself, what it is that hath induc'd men to believe, that Brutes have knowledge; which inducements he ascribes to the industry, vivacity, and strange works of sundry of them: And having exploded the Aristotelian definition of the Soul, as extravagant, and unintelligible;\nunintelligible; and examin'd the opinions of Gassendi and Honora-\nto Fabri of the nature of the same; he doth, at length, consonant-\nly to the Cartesian principle, place the Life of Animals in the con-\ntinued motion of the Blood. And then having explain'd, where-\nin the nature of Knowledge properly consists, and shew'd, that\nall true knowledge includes Conscience, he comes to the result,\nThat the Soul of Brutes, whatever it be fancied to be, is destitute\nof knowledge, strictly so call'd; and that Matter is incapable of\nperception; as also that Cogitation cannot be truly affirm'd of\nExtension, neither as an Essential part, nor as a propriety, nor\nas a mode thereof: Refuting Mr. Hobbes, that undertakes\nto maintain, Cogitation to be a corporeal motion; and like-\nwise shewing against Gassendi, that 'tis repugnant, Sense should\narise from unseizable things.\n\nThis done, he shews, that God can make Engins that shall imi-\ntate the actions of Brutes; where he compares a living Dogg with\nan Automatium, made by Art; and withal discovers the error of\nthose, who from the external form of the parts in Brutes judge\nthem to have knowledge like Men; shewing at the same time the\ndifference between Man and Brutes; which he places chiefly in\ntwo particulars: One is, that Brutes are not endow'd with the fa-\nculty of speaking, so as by signs to manifest their thoughts, and\nto answer appositly to such things as are asked of them. The o-\nther is, that, though the motions of such Engins be regulated, and\nexceed, in certainty, the motions even of the wisest men; yet they\ncome short of Man, in many of those things in which they should\nimitate him most.\n\nHere our Author enlarges his discourse by representing, that all\nMotions in Brutes may be explain'd by a Mechanical principle;\nthat by a meer mechanical operation the Blood is carried about the\nwhole body; that, as the Life of an Animal, so the Concection of\nthe food dependeth only from a corporeal principle, as also San-\nguification, Nutrition, Respiration; and that Muscular motion is\nmade by means of the Animal spirits; the force of which he ex-\nplains; and also, from whence they have that great power, whereby\nthey move the whole body.\n\nHaving dispatch't so far, he endeavors to make it out, from\nwhence that great diversity of motions ariseth in Animals, if they\nhave no Soul: where he proveth, that even in Man there are many\nmotions.\nmotions, made without the advertency of the Soul, and sometimes even against the will of the Soul.\n\nThen he proceeds to teach, How Sense may be ascribed to Brutes; but yet adds, that Sense consists not in the motion of Corporeal organs, but in Perception; and that corporeal motion may be had without Sense; and that those do greatly mistake, who from outward actions conclude, that Brutes do sense, as we do. Where he discusses Dr. Willis's opinion concerning the Soul and Knowledge of Brutes.\n\nHaving thus discoursed, that Brutes are destitute of Sense and Perception, and that no knowledge at all is to be found in their operations, and consequently that the well-contrived structure of the parts, and the exact direction of the Animal spirits through certain and determinate passages, may and must perform all their actions; He descends to particulars, and labors to make it manifest, that all the Actions of Animals may be explain'd mechanically. Where he shews, how Bees make their cells so elegantly; whence comes the diversity of actions in Brutes; their kindness and aversion; their generation; their care of themselves; their seeming doubtfulness, craft, (especially that in Foxes,) docility in Doggs, Elephants, &c. their understanding of human speech, and seeming faculty of speaking to one another, &c. Where many things occur that seem to deserve our consideration.\n\nERRATA.\nPag.269.l.17.r.above for, above 3. p.273.l.22.del.of rencontre.\n\nLONDON,\nPrinted for John Martyn Printer to the Royal Society. 1675.", "source": "olmocr", "added": "2026-01-12", "created": "2026-01-12", "metadata": { "Source-File": "/home/jic823/projects/def-jic823/royalsociety/pdfs/101637.pdf", "olmocr-version": "0.3.4", "pdf-total-pages": 7, "total-input-tokens": 10884, "total-output-tokens": 3250, "total-fallback-pages": 0 }, "attributes": { "pdf_page_numbers": [ [ 0, 0, 1 ], [ 0, 2040, 2 ], [ 2040, 4574, 3 ], [ 4574, 7107, 4 ], [ 7107, 9143, 5 ], [ 9143, 11543, 6 ], [ 11543, 13064, 7 ] ], "primary_language": [ "en", "en", "en", "en", "en", "en", "en" ], "is_rotation_valid": [ true, true, true, true, true, true, true ], "rotation_correction": [ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 ], "is_table": [ false, false, false, false, false, false, false ], "is_diagram": [ false, false, false, false, false, false, false ] }, "jstor_metadata": { "identifier": "jstor-101637", "title": "An Accompt of Two Books", "authors": "Claude Perrauit, Anthonii le Grand, Joh. Martyn", "year": 1675, "volume": "10", "journal": "Philosophical Transactions (1665-1678)", "page_count": 7, "jstor_url": "https://www.jstor.org/stable/101637" } }