Letters on England [37]
that of the circulation of the sap.
Hartsocher and Leuwenhoek disputed with each other the honour of
having first seen the vermiculi of which mankind are formed. This
Hartsocher also contested with Huygens the invention of a new method
of calculating the distance of a fixed star. It is not yet known to
what philosopher we owe the invention of the cycloid.
Be this as it will, it is by the help of this geometry of infinites
that Sir Isaac Newton attained to the most sublime discoveries. I
am now to speak of another work, which, though more adapted to the
capacity of the human mind, does nevertheless display some marks of
that creative genius with which Sir Isaac Newton was informed in all
his researches. The work I mean is a chronology of a new kind, for
what province soever he undertook he was sure to change the ideas
and opinions received by the rest of men.
Accustomed to unravel and disentangle chaos, he was resolved to
convey at least some light into that of the fables of antiquity
which are blended and confounded with history, and fix an uncertain
chronology. It is true that there is no family, city, or nation,
but endeavours to remove its original as far backward as possible.
Besides, the first historians were the most negligent in setting
down the eras: books were infinitely less common than they are at
this time, and, consequently, authors being not so obnoxious to
censure, they therefore imposed upon the world with greater
impunity; and, as it is evident that these have related a great
number of fictitious particulars, it is probable enough that they
also gave us several false eras.
It appeared in general to Sir Isaac that the world was five hundred
years younger than chronologers declare it to be. He grounds his
opinion on the ordinary course of Nature, and on the observations
which astronomers have made.
By the course of Nature we here understand the time that every
generation of men lives upon the earth. The Egyptians first
employed this vague and uncertain method of calculating when they
began to write the beginning of their history. These computed three
hundred and forty-one generations from Menes to Sethon; and, having
no fixed era, they supposed three generations to consist of a
hundred years. In this manner they computed eleven thousand three
hundred and forty years from Menes's reign to that of Sethon.
The Greeks before they counted by Olympiads followed the method of
the Egyptians, and even gave a little more extent to generations,
making each to consist of forty years.
Now, here, both the Egyptians and the Greeks made an erroneous
computation. It is true, indeed, that, according to the usual
course of Nature, three generations last about a hundred and twenty
years; but three reigns are far from taking up so many. It is very
evident that mankind in general live longer than kings are found to
reign, so that an author who should write a history in which there
were no dates fixed, and should know that nine kings had reigned
over a nation; such an historian would commit a great error should
he allow three hundred years to these nine monarchs. Every
generation takes about thirty-six years; every reign is, one with
the other, about twenty. Thirty kings of England have swayed the
sceptre from William the Conqueror to George I., the years of whose
reigns added together amount to six hundred and forty-eight years;
which, being divided equally among the thirty kings, give to every
one a reign of twenty-one years and a half very near. Sixty-three
kings of France have sat upon the throne; these have, one with
another, reigned about twenty years each. This is the usual course
of Nature. The ancients, therefore, were mistaken when they
supposed the durations in general of reigns to equal that of
generations. They, therefore, allowed too great a number of years,
and consequently some years must
Hartsocher and Leuwenhoek disputed with each other the honour of
having first seen the vermiculi of which mankind are formed. This
Hartsocher also contested with Huygens the invention of a new method
of calculating the distance of a fixed star. It is not yet known to
what philosopher we owe the invention of the cycloid.
Be this as it will, it is by the help of this geometry of infinites
that Sir Isaac Newton attained to the most sublime discoveries. I
am now to speak of another work, which, though more adapted to the
capacity of the human mind, does nevertheless display some marks of
that creative genius with which Sir Isaac Newton was informed in all
his researches. The work I mean is a chronology of a new kind, for
what province soever he undertook he was sure to change the ideas
and opinions received by the rest of men.
Accustomed to unravel and disentangle chaos, he was resolved to
convey at least some light into that of the fables of antiquity
which are blended and confounded with history, and fix an uncertain
chronology. It is true that there is no family, city, or nation,
but endeavours to remove its original as far backward as possible.
Besides, the first historians were the most negligent in setting
down the eras: books were infinitely less common than they are at
this time, and, consequently, authors being not so obnoxious to
censure, they therefore imposed upon the world with greater
impunity; and, as it is evident that these have related a great
number of fictitious particulars, it is probable enough that they
also gave us several false eras.
It appeared in general to Sir Isaac that the world was five hundred
years younger than chronologers declare it to be. He grounds his
opinion on the ordinary course of Nature, and on the observations
which astronomers have made.
By the course of Nature we here understand the time that every
generation of men lives upon the earth. The Egyptians first
employed this vague and uncertain method of calculating when they
began to write the beginning of their history. These computed three
hundred and forty-one generations from Menes to Sethon; and, having
no fixed era, they supposed three generations to consist of a
hundred years. In this manner they computed eleven thousand three
hundred and forty years from Menes's reign to that of Sethon.
The Greeks before they counted by Olympiads followed the method of
the Egyptians, and even gave a little more extent to generations,
making each to consist of forty years.
Now, here, both the Egyptians and the Greeks made an erroneous
computation. It is true, indeed, that, according to the usual
course of Nature, three generations last about a hundred and twenty
years; but three reigns are far from taking up so many. It is very
evident that mankind in general live longer than kings are found to
reign, so that an author who should write a history in which there
were no dates fixed, and should know that nine kings had reigned
over a nation; such an historian would commit a great error should
he allow three hundred years to these nine monarchs. Every
generation takes about thirty-six years; every reign is, one with
the other, about twenty. Thirty kings of England have swayed the
sceptre from William the Conqueror to George I., the years of whose
reigns added together amount to six hundred and forty-eight years;
which, being divided equally among the thirty kings, give to every
one a reign of twenty-one years and a half very near. Sixty-three
kings of France have sat upon the throne; these have, one with
another, reigned about twenty years each. This is the usual course
of Nature. The ancients, therefore, were mistaken when they
supposed the durations in general of reigns to equal that of
generations. They, therefore, allowed too great a number of years,
and consequently some years must