Sophia Rare Books

  • Showing all 25 results

Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Offprint from Physical Review

Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Offprint from Physical Review, vol. 47, no. 10, May 15, 1935

EINSTEIN, Albert, PODOLSKY, Boris & ROSEN, Nathan First edition, very rare offprint, of the famous 'EPR paper', one of the most discussed and debated papers of modern physics, and the foundation for the new fields of quantum computing and cryptography. "In the May 15, 1935 issue of Physical Review Albert Einstein co-authored a paper with his two postdoctoral research associates at the Institute for Advanced Study, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen. The article was entitled 'Can Quantum Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?'. Generally referred to as 'EPR', this paper quickly became a centrepiece in the debate over the interpretation of the quantum theory, a debate that continues today. The paper features a striking case where two quantum systems interact in such a way as to link both their spatial coordinates in a certain direction and also their linear momenta (in the same direction). As a result of this 'entanglement', determining either position or momentum for one system would fix (respectively) the position or the momentum of the other. EPR use this case to argue that one cannot maintain both an intuitive condition of local action and the completeness of the quantum description by means of the wave function." (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). "The EPR paradox inspired many authors afterwards; in particular, discussion emerged on the revival of the hidden parameter idea by David Bohm and others after the early 1950's. John Bell's analysis of the situation in the 1960's showed that hidden variables resulted in an inequality (for the 'local condition') which could be tested by experiment and found not to be satisfied" (Pais, Twentieth Century Physics, I, p. 229). ABPC/RBH record only the Plotnick copy (Christie's, 4 October 2002, $4183). Provenance: This copy was acquired as part of the offprint collection of the Austro-Dutch physicist Paul Ehrenfest (1880-1933), one of Einstein's closest friends and colleagues. Einstein continued to send offprints to Ehrenfest's widow after his death two years before the present paper was published. Ehrenfest met Einstein for the first time in 1912 in Prague, where Einstein spent a year as full professor, and the two men remained close friends thereafter. In 1922, Einstein and Ehrenfest published a joint paper in Zeitschrift für Physik which attempted to explain the Stern-Gerlach experiment, the results of which had been published just weeks earlier. Their paper can be considered the first significant contribution to the quantum measurement problem and a precursor to the EPR paper. "By the 1920s, it had become clear to most physicists that classical mechanics could not fully describe the world of atoms, especially the notion of "quanta" first proposed by Planck and further developed by Albert Einstein to explain the photoelectric effect. Physics had to be rebuilt, leading to the emergence of quantum theory. "Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr and others who helped create the theory insisted that there was no meaningful way in which to discuss certain details of an atom's behavior: for example, one could never predict the precise moment when an atom would emit a quantum of light. But Einstein could never fully accept this innate uncertainty, once famously declaring, "God does not play dice." He wasn't alone in his discomfort: Erwin Schrödinger, inventor of the wave function, once declared of quantum mechanics, "I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it." "In a 1935 paper, Einstein, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen introduced a thought experiment to argue that quantum mechanics was not a complete physical theory. Known today as the "EPR paradox," the thought experiment was meant to demonstrate the innate conceptual difficulties of quantum theory. It said that the result of a measurement on one particle of an entangled quantum system can have an instantaneous effect on another particle, regardless of the distance of the two parts. "One of the principal features of quantum mechanics is the notion of uncertainty: not all the classical physical observable properties of a system can be simultaneously determined with exact precision, even in principle. Instead, there may be several sets of observable properties-position and momentum, for example-that cannot both be known at the same time. Another peculiar property of quantum mechanics is entanglement: if two photons, for example, become entangled -that is, they are allowed to interact initially so that they will subsequently be defined by a single wave function-then once they are separated, they will still share a wave function. So measuring one will determine the state of the other: for example, with a spin-zero entagled state, if one particle is measured to be in a spin-up state, the other is instantly forced to be in a spin-down state. "This is known as "nonlocal behavior;" Einstein dubbed it "spooky action at a distance." It appears to violate one of the central tenets of relativity: information can't be transmitted faster than the speed of light, because this would violate causality. "It's worth noting that Einstein wasn't attempting to disprove quantum mechanics; he acknowledged that it could, indeed, predict the outcomes of various experiments. He was merely troubled by the philosophical interpretations of the theory, and argued that, because of the EPR paradox, quantum mechanics could not be considered a complete theory of nature. Einstein postulated the existence of hidden variables: as yet unknown local properties of the system which should account for the discrepancy, so that no instantaneous spooky action would be necessary. Bohr disagreed vehemently with this view and defended the far stricter Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The two men often argued passionately about the subject, especially at the Solvay Conferences of 1927 and 1930; neither ever conceded defeat. "There have been numerous theoretical and experimental developments since Einstein and his colleagues published their o
Sketch of the Analytical Engine invented by Charles Babbage Esq. By L. F. Menabrea of Turin

Sketch of the Analytical Engine invented by Charles Babbage Esq. By L. F. Menabrea of Turin, Officer of the Military Engineers, with Notes by the Translator

LOVELACE, Lady Ada Augusta [MENABREA, Luigi] First edition, journal issue, of the best contemporary description of Babbage's Analytical Engine, the first programmable (mechanical) computer. It is a translation by Lovelace of a report by Menabrea of a series of lectures given by Babbage while he was in Turin. Lovelace added seven explanatory notes; as a result, the translation is three times as long as the original. Two of these notes are essentially programs for the Analytical Engine; their inclusion has given rise to the claim that Lovelace was the first computer programmer. "In the fall if 1841, after eight years of work, Babbage described his landmark Analytical Engine at a seminar in Turin. Although the Engine was never constructed, there is no doubt that in conception and design, it embodied all of the essential elements of what is recognized today as a general-purpose digital computer. L.F. Menabrea, an Italian military engineer who attended the seminar, reported the presentation the following year in an obscure Swiss serial, and Babbage urged Ada Lovelace to translate the report into English. In fact, Lovelace undertook a far larger task: adding to her translation a series of important explanatory 'Notes' substantially longer than Menabrea's article" (Grolier Extraordinary Women, p. 122). The collaboration "between Byron's celebrity daughter and Babbage is one of the more unusual in the history of science . Ada's translation of Menabrea's paper, with its lengthy explanatory notes, represents the most complete contemporary account in English of the intended design and operation of the first programmable digital computer. Babbage considered this paper a complete summary of the mathematical aspects of the machine, proving 'that the whole of the development and operations of Analysis are now capable of being executed by machinery.' As part of his contribution to the project, Babbage supplied Ada with algorithms for the solution of various problems. These he had worked out years ago, except for one involving Bernoulli numbers, which was new. Ada illustrated these algorithms in her notes in the form of charts detailing the stepwise sequence of events as the hypothetical machine would progress through a string of instructions input from punched cards" (Swade, p. 165). These procedures, and the procedures published in the original edition of Menabrea's paper, were the first published examples of computer 'programs.' "Ada also expanded upon Babbage's general views of the Analytical Engine as a symbol-manipulating device rather than a mere processor of numbers. She brought to the project a fine sense of style that resulted in the frequently quoted analogy, 'We may say most aptly that the Analytical Engine weaves algebraic patterns just as the Jacquard-loom weaves flowers and leaves.' She suggested that . 'Many persons who are not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because the business of the engine is to give its results in numerical notation, the nature of its processes must consequently be arithmetical and numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine its numerical quantities exactly as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and in fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly' (p. 713)" (OOC). Lady Lovelace signed these notes 'A.A.L.,' masking her class and gender in deference to the conventions of the time. ABPC/RBH list only the OOC copy (Christie's, 23 February 2005, lot 33, $10,800). In 1828, during his grand tour of Europe, Babbage had suggested a meeting of Italian scientists to the Grand Duke of Tuscany. On his return to England Babbage corresponded with the Duke, sending specimens of British manufactures and receiving on one occasion from the Duke a thermometer from the time of Galileo. In 1839 Babbage was invited to attend a meeting of Italian scientists at Pisa, but he was not ready and declined. "In 1840 a similar meeting was arranged in Turin. By then Babbage did feel ready, and accepted the invitation from [Giovanni] Plana (1781-1864) to present the Analytical Engine before the assembled philosophers of Italy . In the middle of August 1840, Babbage left England . "Babbage had persuaded his friend Professor MacCullagh of Dublin to abandon a climbing trip in the Tyrol to join him at the Turin meeting. There in Babbage's apartments for several mornings met Plana, Menabrea, Mosotti, MacCullagh, Plantamour, and other mathematicians and engineers of Italy. Babbage had taken with him drawings, models and sheets of his mechanical notations to help explain the principles and mode of operation of the Analytical Engine. The discussions in Turin were the only public presentation before a group of competent scientists during Babbage's lifetime of those extraordinary forebears of the modern digital computer. It is an eternal disgrace that no comparable opportunity was ever offered to Babbage in his own country . "The problems of understanding the principles of the Analytical Engines were by no means straightforward even for the assembly of formidable scientific talents which gathered in Babbage's apartments in Turin. The difficulty lay not as much in detail but rather in the basic concepts. Those men would certainly have been familiar with the use of punched cards in the Jacquard loom, and it may reasonably be assumed that the models would have been sufficient to explain the mechanical operation in so far as Babbage deemed necessary. Mosotti, for example, admitted the power of the mechanism to handle the relations of arithmetic, and even of algebraic relations, but he had great difficulty in comprehending how a machine could handle general conditional operations: that is to say what the machine does if its course of action must be determined by results arising from its own previous calculations. By a series of particular examples, Babbage gradually led his audience to understand and accept the general
De ortu & causis subterraneorum Lib. V. De natura eorum quae effluent ex terra Lib. IIII. De natura fossilium Lib. X. De veteribus & novis metallis Lib. II. Bermannus

De ortu & causis subterraneorum Lib. V. De natura eorum quae effluent ex terra Lib. IIII. De natura fossilium Lib. X. De veteribus & novis metallis Lib. II. Bermannus, sive de re metallica dialogus. Interpretatio Germanica vocum rei metallicae, addito Indice foecundissimo

AGRICOLA, Georgius An exceptionally fine copy, completely untouched in its original binding, of 'the first handbook of modern systematic mineralogy' (Grolier/Horblit 2a). "Georgius Agricola (latinized from the German 'Georg Bauer') became interested in the theoretical and practical aspects of mining, metallurgy and geology after being appointed town doctor of Joachimsthal, a silver-mining community on the east side of the Erzgebirge mountains in what is now Czechoslovakia. He published his first work on mining, Bermannns sive de re metallica dialogus, in 1530, and followed it sixteen years later with this collection of five treatises on geology and metallurgy, including the first work on physical geology ("De ortu & causis subterraneorum"); the first systematic mineralogy ("De natura fossilium"); a work on subterranean waters and gases ("De natura eorum quae effluunt ex terra"); a treatise on references to minerals and mining in classical history ("Dc veteribus et novis metallis"); and a reprint of Bermannnus. "De natura fossilium," after De re metallica, must be considered Agricola's most important work; in it he rejected the traditional arbitrary alphabetical listing of "fossils" (i.e., stony substances dug from the earth), and attempted to classify them according to their physical properties" (Norman). In De Natura Fossilium, Agricola rejected many myths associated with gems, and the system of classification that is inferred from his writings exhibits a degree of generalization not found in earlier handbooks. His work represented a major advance over previous writings on rocks and minerals in that it classified them, not alphabetically or by their supposed mystical powers, but by simple physical properties. Minerals are grouped into (1) earths, like clay, ochre, etc., (2) stones like gems, semi-precious and unusual as distinguished from rocks, (3) congealed juices like salt, vitriol, alum, etc., (4) metals and (5) compounds, being homogenous mixtures of simple substances and forming minerals like pyrite, galena, etc. Agricola applied physical properties such as solubility, fusibility, odor, taste, color, etc. to distinguish between mineral varieties. Although Agricola's work included no pictures, his descriptions of fossils are often instantly recognizable: "Lapis judaicus . usually occurs in the form of symmetrical acorns. Prominent lines run from the blunt to the pointed end and these are so regular they appear to have been made in a lathe and resemble the striae on a shell. The people who call this mineral pyren liken these lines to the bones of a fish that extend from the back down to the belly . When split open it is light inside and glistens like marble and in some cases the outside also has a high luster." Again: "Certain rocks, when split open, are found to contain shells; for example, the conchites beds of Megara and the rocks of France. . . Ostracites is a stone that takes its name from ostreum [oyster] which it resembles. There are two species, the larger found in the moat on the north side of Hildesheim . The smaller species is found not far from Hanover on a cliff near the village of Linda in an unctuous light green earth . It forms in strata that are conspicuous. When tapped with the finger it has the sound of a jug." Agricola noted the resemblance of many of his "fossils" to living organisms, but rarely stated that any of his fossils actually did represent once-living organisms. The question of whether fossils did represent once-living organisms was still debated in Agricola's time, and was not finally resolved until the early 18th century. Book I of De natura fossilium describes the characteristics of minerals such as color, brillance, taste, shape, hardness, etc. Book II describes the earths and Book III reviews the minerals made of congealed juices, and includes salt, soda, potash, saltpetre, alum, vitriol, orpiment, etc. Book IV treats camphor, bitumen, coal, amber, etc. Book V covers lodestone, bloodstone, gypsum, talc, asbestos, mica, geodes and various fossils, flourite and quartz. Book VI treats gems and other precious stones. Book VII in on rocks like marble, serpentine, onyx, alabaster, limestone, etc. Book VIII covers metals, while Book IX describes various furnace observations such as making brass, gilding, tinning and furnace products like slag, copper flowers, etc. Book X covers compounds that embrace the description of a number of recognizable silver, copper, lead, quicksilver, iron, tin, antimony and zinc minerals. "Agricola's first work on mining and mineralogy is his Bermannus, 1530. It is in the form of a conversation in which Bermannus, a miner (really named after his friend Lorenz Bermann, d. 1533) and two Italian physicians, Nicolaus Ancon and Johannes Naevius, discuss mines and minerals. At the end is a small glossary of German mining terms with Latin equivalents by Petrus Plateanus (a schoolmaster at Zwickau), which was much enlarged in later works of Agricola, when it was called Interpretatio Germanica vocum rei metallicae and supplemented by a Nomenclatura Latina Graecaque Germanice reddita, attached to the De Natura Fossilium (see below), and a Nomenclatura secunda. The Bermannus gathered together much unsystematic and empirical knowledge of the miners. It was reprinted in 1546 with an enlarged list of synonyms and four new works [the offered collection] . [The other three works in the collection are:] "De ortu et causis subterraneorum libri V. This is mostly on geology. It gives an approach to the modern theory of ore deposits and rejects the old idea - still believed by Boyle - that rock crystal is formed from water by intense frost (satis intelligimus ex sola aqua non gigni lapidem ullum), mentions Hecla as an active volcano and explains the origin of minerals and certain rocks as due to a petrifying juice (succus lapidescens). "De natura eorum qui effluent ex terra, libri IIII. This deals with water, mine gases, volcanic eruptions and exhalations. "De veteri
Disquisitiones mathematicae

Disquisitiones mathematicae, de controversiis et novitatibus astronomicis quas sub praesidio Christophori Scheiner, De Societate Iesv . publice disputandas posvit, propvgnavit . Ioannes Georgius Locher . Ingolstadt: Eder for Elisabeth Angermaria, 1614. [Bound after:] TANNER, Adam, praes. Astrologia Sacra: hoc est, Orationes et Quaestiones quinque, quibus explicatur, an et qua ratione fas sit homini christiano, de rebus occultis, praesertim futuris, ex astris iudicium ferre / Dictae & discussae . D. Otho Henricus Bachmair Monacensis, . & D. Fridericus Pirchinger, . Promotore Adamo Tannero, E Societate Jesu . Ingolstadt: Eder for Elisabeth Angermaria, 1615

SCHEINER, Christoph; TANNER, Adam First edition, in a beautiful contemporary binding, of Scheiner's very rare work containing the second earliest map of the moon - but the first to give topographical details - as well as the first illustrations of a telescope. It builds upon Scheiner's 1612 discovery of sunspots, made using a telescope he built himself, which led to his famous controversy with Galileo. This work discusses almost all the astronomical issues then current, especially those brought about by the newly invented telescope. There is an extensive argument against the notion of an infinite universe, illustrated by a striking full-page woodcut on p. 17 of 'Chaos infinitum ex atomis' surrounding the sphere of fixed stars. This is followed by a detailed examination of the Copernican heliocentric theory, as well as the Tychonic system, which he supported, and that of Fracastoro; the systems are illustrated by three large diagrams. Then follow discussions of the moon (including its 'secondary light'), the sun (with a full examination of sunspots), and the planets. On p. 58 is an extraordinary map of the moon, with craters and other features labelled and listed, including Mare Crisium, Mare Tranquilitatis, Mare Foecunditatis, Mare Nectaris and the crater Aristoteles. The only earlier maps of the moon are those published in Galileo's Sidereus Nuncius (1610), but these are "apparently but schematic views of what Galileo saw with his telescope, for none of the features recorded on them can be identified with certainty with any known formation" (Kopal, p. 62). This is followed by a chapter on Jupiter and its moons, with a series of Scheiner's own observations illustrated on p. 79. Saturn and the phases of Venus conclude the work. On pages 87 and 89 a telescope is illustrated in the process of observing Saturn and the phases of Venus; these are the first illustrations of a telescope in use. Another illustration of a telescope was published in Simon Mayr's Mundus jovialis (Nuremberg 1614), which appeared at about the same time as the Disquisitiones (there are two issues of Mayr's work, in the second of which Mayr responds to Scheiner's Disquisitiones), but in Mayr's work the telescope appears in a woodcut portrait of the author and is not shown in use. As was the custom, Scheiner wrote the dissertations for his students, including the present one, written for Johann Georg Locher. It was cited by Biancani in 1620, by Galileo in 1632 (in the Dialogo), by Mersenne in 1636, by Hevelius in 1647, and by Riccioli in 1651 (see Reeves, p. 205). ABPC/RBH list only the Streeter copy (bound in modern vellum) in the last 80 years (Christie's, 16 April 2007, lot 460). Bound before Scheiner's work is a dissertation on astronomy and against astrology written by Scheiner's Jesuit Superior at Ingolstadt University, Adam Tanner. Tanner discusses the usefulness of telescopic observations and the relation of theology to astrology and to astronomy. The second part includes a discussion of Galileo's discoveries announced in the Sidereus Nuncius. Scheiner worked with Tanner trying to make or obtain improved telescopes and, independently of Scheiner, Tanner observed sunspots in the autumn of 1611, having heard a rumour about Galileo's observations. But Scheiner always maintained that his own first observations of sunspots had been made in the spring and without knowledge of Galileo's. Tanner makes no mention of Scheiner's activities in the present work, and on p. 49 credits Galileo with the first observation of sunspots: "Assuredly the great astronomer Galileo, the first discoverer of these wonders of the skies, maintains that these spots which overshadow the sun ." "[Scheiner (1573-1650)] was appointed professor of Hebrew and mathematics at Ingolstadt in 1610. The following year Scheiner constructed a telescope with which he began to make observations, and in March 1611 he detected the presence of spots on the sun. His religious superiors did not wish him to publish under his own name, lest he be mistaken and bring discredit on the Society of Jesus; but he communicated his discovery to his friend Marc Welser in Augsburg. In 1612 Welser had Scheiner's letters printed under the title Tres epistolae de maculis solaribus, and he sent copies abroad, notably to Galileo and Kepler. Scheiner believed that the spots were small planets circling the sun; and in a second series of letters, which Welser published in the same year as De maculis solaribus . accuratior disquisitio, Scheiner discussed the individual motion of the spots, their period of revolution, and the appearance of brighter patches or faculae on the surface of the sun. Having observed the lower conjunction of Venus with the sun, Scheiner concluded that Venus and Mercury revolve around the sun . In Ingolstadt, Scheiner trained young mathematicians and organized public debates on current issues in astronomy. Two of these "disputations" were subsequently published. In the first, the Disquisitiones mathematicae de controversis et novitatibus astronomicis, Scheiner upheld the traditional view that the earth is at rest at the center of the universe but praised Galileo for his discoveries of the phases of Venus and the satellites of Jupiter" (DSB). The second of the disputations dealt with the construction of sundials. The opening section of the book (pp. 6-11), headed De praestantia, necessitate et utilitate mathematicae, "consists largely of lengthy quotation from Possevino on the value of mathematics for understanding Plato and Aristotle and its use in a number of practical arts . There follows material on the scientific status of mathematics and the proper objects of its various branches: "Mathematics demonstrates its conclusions scientifically, by axioms, definitions, postulates, and suppositions; whence it is clear that it is truly called a science" . The text was evidently written by Scheiner for a student to defend - a common practice in this period . For the attribution (certain from internal
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection

On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

DARWIN, Charles First edition, an unusually fine copy, untouched in its original binding, of "the most influential scientific work of the nineteenth century" (Horblit), "the most important biological work ever written" (Freeman), and "a turning point, not only in the history of science, but in the history of ideas in general" (DSB). "Darwin not only drew an entirely new picture of the workings of organic nature; he revolutionized our methods of thinking and our outlook on the natural order of things. The recognition that constant change is the order of the universe had been finally established and a vast step forward in the uniformity of nature had been taken" (Printing and the Mind of Man). Bern Dibner's Heralds of Science describes On the Origin of Species as "the most important single work in science." When the first edition was published on 24 November 1859, in a print run of 1,250 copies, it created an immediate sensation. Fifty-eight were distributed by Murray for review, promotion, and presentation, and Darwin reported that the balance was sold out on the first day of publication. Five further editions, each variously corrected and revised, appeared in Darwin's lifetime, as did eleven translations. The Origin was actually an 'abstract' of a larger work, tentatively titled Natural Selection, that Darwin never completed, although he salvaged much of the first part of the manuscript for The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication, published in 1868. "England became quieter and more prosperous in the 1850s, and by mid-decade the professionals were taking over, instituting exams and establishing a meritocracy. The changing social composition of science-typified by the rise of the freethinking biologist Thomas Henry Huxley-promised a better reception for Darwin. Huxley, the philosopher Herbert Spencer, and other outsiders were opting for a secular nature in the rationalist Westminster Review and deriding the influence of "parsondom." Darwin had himself lost the last shreds of his belief in Christianity with the tragic death of his oldest daughter, Annie, from typhoid in 1851 . "After speaking to Huxley and Hooker at Downe in April 1856, Darwin began writing a triple-volume book, tentatively called Natural Selection, which was designed to crush the opposition with a welter of facts. Darwin now had immense scientific and social authority, and his place in the parish was assured when he was sworn in as a justice of the peace in 1857. Encouraged by Lyell, Darwin continued writing through the birth of his 10th and last child, Charles Waring Darwin (born in 1856, when Emma was 48), who was developmentally disabled. Whereas in the 1830s Darwin had thought that species remained perfectly adapted until the environment changed, he now believed that every new variation was imperfect, and that perpetual struggle was the rule. He also explained the evolution of sterile worker bees in 1857. Those could not be selected because they did not breed, so he opted for "family" selection (kin selection, as it is known today): the whole colony benefited from their retention. "Darwin had finished a quarter of a million words by June 18, 1858. That day he received a letter from Alfred Russel Wallace, an English socialist and specimen collector working in the Malay Archipelago, sketching a similar-looking theory. Darwin, fearing loss of priority, accepted Lyell's and Hooker's solution: they read joint extracts from Darwin's and Wallace's works at the Linnean Society on July 1, 1858. Darwin was away, sick, grieving for his tiny son who had died from scarlet fever, and thus he missed the first public presentation of the theory of natural selection. It was an absenteeism that would mark his later years. "Darwin hastily began an "abstract" of Natural Selection, which grew into a more-accessible book, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Suffering from a terrible bout of nausea, Darwin, now 50, was secreted away at a spa on the desolate Yorkshire moors when the book was sold to the trade on November 22, 1859. He still feared the worst and sent copies to the experts with self-effacing letters ("how you will long to crucify me alive"). It was like "living in Hell," he said about those months. "The book did distress his Cambridge patrons, but they were marginal to science now. However, radical Dissenters were sympathetic, as were the rising London biologists and geologists, even if few actually adopted Darwin's cost-benefit approach to nature. The newspapers drew the one conclusion that Darwin had specifically avoided: that humans had evolved from apes, and that Darwin was denying mankind's immortality. A sensitive "Darwin, making no personal appearances, let Huxley, by now a good friend, manage that part of the debate. The pugnacious Huxley, who loved public argument as much as Darwin loathed it, had his own reasons for taking up the cause, and did so with enthusiasm. He wrote three reviews of Origin of Species, defended human evolution at the Oxford meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1860 (when Bishop Samuel Wilberforce jokingly asked whether the apes were on Huxley's grandmother's or grandfather's side), and published his own book on human evolution, Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature (1863). What Huxley championed was Darwin's evolutionary naturalism, his non-miraculous assumptions, which pushed biological science into previously taboo areas and increased the power of Huxley's professionals. And it was they who gained the Royal Society's Copley Medal for Darwin in 1864" (Britannica). "Chapter I covers animal husbandry and plant breeding, going back to ancient Egypt. Darwin discusses contemporary opinions on the origins of different breeds under cultivation to argue that many have been produced from common ancestors by selective breeding. As an illustration of artificial selection, he describes fancy pig
Institutio astronomica

Institutio astronomica, juxta hypotheses tam veterum quam recentiorum: cui accesserunt Galilei Galilei Nuntius Sidereus, et Johannis Kepleri Dioptrice

GASSENDI, Pierre; GALILEI, Galileo; KEPLER, Johannes First edition of this collection, comprising the first printing in England of each of these texts; this is the second edition of Gassendi (first, Paris 1647), the third of Galileo (after Venice and Frankfurt, 1610), and the second of Kepler (first, Augsburg 1611). "Galileo's 'Starry Messenger' contains some of the most important discoveries in scientific literature. Learning in the summer of 1609 that a device for making distant objects seem close and magnified had been brought to Venice from Holland, Galileo soon constructed a spy-glass of his own which he demonstrated to the notables of the Venetian Republic, thus earning a large increase in his salary as professor of mathematics at Padua. Within a few months he had a good telescope, magnifying to 30 diameters, and was in full flood of astronomical observation. Through his telescope Galileo saw the moon as a spherical, solid, mountainous body very like the earth - quite different from the crystalline sphere of conventional philosophy. He saw numberless stars hidden from the naked eye in the constellations and the Milky Way. Above all, he discovered four new 'planets', the satellites of Jupiter that he called (in honor of his patrons at Florence) the Medicean stars. Thus Galileo initiated modern observational astronomy and announced himself as a Copernican" (PMM 113). In Dioptrice, which Kepler completed within six months after he had received Galileo's Sidereus nuncius, he explained the theory of refraction by lenses, enlarged his system of geometrical and instrumental optics, and expounded the principle of the inverting telescope. "Kepler obtained a telescope in 1610, a gift from Ernst, Archbishop of Cologne, and in his Dioptrice (1611), Kepler discussed its theory. In this work he enlarged upon his ideas on refraction and wrote about the anatomy of the eye. He described, for the first time, the defect of spherical aberration and stated that it could be overcome by giving optical surfaces hyperboloidal forms" (King, The History of the Telescope, pp. 44-45). In the long Preface, Kepler comments on Galileo's recent discoveries made with the telescope and their importance in supporting the theories of Copernicus. "The preface declares, 'I offer you, friendly reader, a mathematical book, that is, a book that is not so easy to understand,' but his severely mathematical approach only serves to place the Dioptrice all the more firmly in the mainstream of seventeenth-century science" (DSB). Gassendi's Institutio Astronomica has been called the first modern textbook of astronomy; it introduced the cosmological systems of Ptolemy, Brahe and Copernicus. "It was printed in a single volume accompanied by Galileo's Sidereus nuncius, which supported Copernicus' system, and by Kepler's Dioptrice, which supported Galileo's observations. As Gassendi tells his readers, the presence of the Dioptrice in such a collection was meant to give mathematical authority to the new instrument by demonstrating 'the method to build [it]'. Besides providing evidence of the Dioptrice's authoritative status, Gassendi's popular volume alone ensured that Kepler's little treatise was widely known" (Van Helden et al., The Origins of the Telescope, pp. 287-288). Although this work appears not infrequently on the market, copies in unrestored contemporary bindings are rare. Provenance: Jesse Ramsden (his ink signature to title) (1735-1800), one of the pre-eminent mathematical instrument makers of the 18th century. "In 1775 he discovered what was later known as the 'Ramsden disk,' i.e. the exit pupil of a telescope. Vague ideas of the exit pupil were certainly current after the introduction of the Kepler eyepiece, but Ramsden was the first to explain it correctly" (Wilson, Reflecting Telescope Optics (2007), p. 15). Ramsden was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1786, and won its Copley Medal in 1795. A crater on the moon is named in his honour. Ramsden no doubt found the present volume a most useful compendium of information on astronomy and optics. "A Dutch lens-grinder, Hans Lipperhey, had applied in October 1608 to Count Maurice of Nassau for a patent on a device to make distant objects appear closer. Sarpi, whose extensive correspondence (maintained for theological and political reasons) kept him currently informed, learned of this device within a month. Somewhat skeptical, he applied for further information to Jacques Badovere (Giacomo Badoer), a former pupil of Galileo's then at Paris. In due course the report was confirmed. Galileo heard discussions of the news during a visit to Venice in July 1609, learned from Sarpi that the device was real, and probably heard of the simultaneous arrival at Padua of a foreigner who had brought one to Italy. He hastened back to Padua, found that the foreigner had left for Venice, and at once attempted to construct such a device himself. In this he quickly succeeded, sent word of it to Sarpi, and applied himself to the improvement of the instrument. Sarpi, who had meanwhile been selected by the Venetian government to assess the value of the device offered for sale to them by the stranger, discouraged its purchase. Late in August, Galileo arrived at Venice with a nine-power telescope, three times as effective as the other. The practical value of this instrument to a maritime power obtained for him a life-time appointment to the university, with an unprecedented salary for the chair of mathematics. The official document he received, however, did not conform to his understanding of the terms he had accepted. As a result, he pressed his application for a post at the Tuscan court, begun a year or two earlier. "Galileo's swift improvement of the telescope continued until, at the end of 1609, he had one of about thirty power. This was the practicable limit for a telescope of the Galilean type, with plano-convex objective and plano-concave eyepiece. He turned this new instrument to the skies early in January 1610, with startling results.
Chirurgia è Graeco in Latinum conversa

Chirurgia è Graeco in Latinum conversa, Vido Vidio Florentino interprete, cum nonnullis eiusdem Vidii com[m]entariis.

GUIDI, Guido (known as Vidus VIDIUS) [NICETAS] First edition, an exceptionally fine, large and fresh copy, completely unsophisticated, of one of the most beautiful scientific books of the Renaissance, which well deserves the praise lavished on it by Herrlinger, who calls it "a typographically exquisite specimen of Parisian printing craft" and "the most beautiful textbook of surgery to be printed in the 16th century" (History of Medical Illustration (1970), pp. 15, 143). It is a collection of Latin translations of treatises on ulcers, wounds, fractures, dislocations and their treatment by Hippocrates, Galen, Oribasius, and other ancient writers, with commentaries by Galen and by Guidi himself. The treatises were translated by Guidi (usually referred to by his Latinized name Vidus Vidius) from a tenth-century illustrated Byzantine Greek manuscript known as the Nicetas Codex, the earliest surviving surgical codex, which was itself based on a Greek manuscript of the first century BC. Chirurgia contains a series of exquisite woodcuts, many full-page, in the Hippocratic treatises on fractures and dislocations, as well as many smaller images scattered through the pages of Galen's treatise on bandaging and Oribasius' treatise on slings; most of these are based upon illustrations in the Nicetas Codex, but many are original. They have been claimed to be by the Italian mannerist Franceso Primaticcio, but it is now thought more likely that they are the work of the school of Francesco [Rosso] Salviati (cf. Hirst, 'Salviati Illustrateur de Vidius,' Revue de l'Art (1969), p. 19). The artist of the woodcuts has not yet been identified though there are three 'signatures': Denys Janot's 'F' artist, the monogrammist 'APF', and another with the Lorraine Cross; the latter suggests to Choulant and to Mortimer that Francois Jollat, the artist of the Estienne De Dissectione (1545), designed at least several of the plates. The origin of the designs has been traced back to the first century BCE; they were undoubtedly transmitted directly from Antiquity to Byzantium and so may be regarded as embodying the genuine Hippocratic tradition of surgical practice (Schne, Apollonius von Kitium, Leipzig, 1896). Guidi (1509-69), a grandson of the painter Domenico del Ghirlandaio, was physician to King Francis I of France and the first professor of medicine at the Collège Royale (1542-48), now the Collège de France. While in Paris he shared quarters with Benvenuto Cellini, who also accommodated the press that produced the present work. Guidi himself discovered the nerve, canal and artery that all bear his name (G-M, 380n). He remains in the eyes of modern critics the pioneer whose beautiful book blended aesthetics with the pursuit of knowledge, occupying an equal place in the history of art, literature, and science. We know of no similarly fine copy having appeared on the market since that offered by Quaritch in 1977 (Cat. 969, no. 120, $11,000). In most copies some of the larger woodcuts were trimmed by the binder, but this copy is exceptionally large with absolutely no cropping. Provenance: Mid-eighteenth century inscription "Ex libris Laurentii Napolioni" on front pastedown, manuscript notes on front free endpaper. We have not been able to identify the owner, but he must have had a notable library. The same ex libris appears, for example, in Bibliotheca Osleriana 3231 (Liber de morbo gallo, Venice, 1535), and in the copy of de Prézel's Dizionario del cittadino o sia ristretto istorico, teorico e pratico del commerzio (Nice, 1763) listed in the Bibliotheca Encyclopaedica (p. 118). Guidi was born in Florence in 1509 from a fortunate union of medicine and art by having a physician as his father and the grand-daughter of the famous Florentine painter Domenico Ghirlandaio as his mother. Her name was Costanza, and she had brought Dr. Giuliano Guidi a dowry of 700 florins. We know nothing of Guidi's life or studies as a young man, or from where (or indeed whether) he obtained a medical degree. "When he reached his early thirties his attention was drawn by his friend the bibliophile Cardinal Niccolo Ridolfi, commonly recognised as the foremost patron of literature in Italy at that time, to a collection of medical treatises in a Greek manuscript. They had been made by a Byzantine physician, Nicetas. Some of the manuscripts were accompanied by pictures for instructive purposes, notably 30 full sized plates illustrating the commentary of Apollonius of Kitium on the Hippocratic treatise on dislocations and many smaller pictures scattered through the pages of Galen's treatise on bandaging. They are pen and brush drawings illustrating the various manipulations and apparatus used in reducing dislocations and fractures, the dark brown figures in each case being surmounted by an archway of ornate and highly coloured Byzantine design. Their origin probably goes back to Alexandria or Cyprus where Apollonius wrote his commentary between the years 85 and 51 BC. It is likely that the illustrations were made during or shortly after his lifetime. The Galen illustrations date from the 2nd century AD" (Brockbank, pp. 270-271). In 1492 or 1495 Greek scholar Janus Lascaris (1445-1535) purchased the Nicetas Codex in Crete for Lorenzo de' Medici. By 1530 it belonged to Guilio de' Medici, Pope Clement VII, "who loaned it back to Lascaris for a proposed and never completed edition of the medical and surgical texts it contained. From a copy made by Lascaris, now in Paris in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Ferdinando Balami produced the first Latin translation of Galen's On Bones (1535). This copy, illuminated by Santorinos of Rhodes, entered the library of Cardinal Ridolfi, who arranged for yet a third copy to be prepared by Christoph Auer and sent as a present to Francis I in 1542. This volume, now also in the Bibliothèque Nationale, was taken to Paris by a young Florentine doctor Guido Guidi, who had prepared a Latin translation of the surgical texts" (Vivian Nutton in: Grafton et al (eds.),The Classica
De Omni Rerum Fossilium Genere

De Omni Rerum Fossilium Genere, Gemmis, Lapidibus, Metallis, et huiusmodi, libri aliquot, plerique nunc primum editi. Opera Conradi Gesneri: Quorum Catalogum sequens folium cominet

GESNER (or GESSNER), Conrad, et al. First edition and a fine copy in contemporary binding, very rare when complete, of this collection of eight treatises, the most important being De rerum fossilium [On fossil Objects], Gesner's last work, the earliest scientific attempt to classify the mineral kingdom, and the first illustrated book on fossils. "It presents a picture of the mineral kingdom as seen through the eyes of the greatest naturalist of his time" (Adams). Gesner's work contains numerous woodcuts after his own drawings, many of which are still preserved in Basel University Library. Gesner's book also famously contains the first printed illustration of a lead pencil (f. 104v). The other seven other works, by six authors, in this composite volume were all edited by Gesner. They include the first appearance of a catalogue of a mineral collection, that of Johannes Kentmann, "stated to have been the first man in Europe to make a collection of minerals." His catalogue contains entries for sixteen hundred specimens, making it a "conspectus of most of the minerals known at that time, with the localities from which they were derived as well as an exact equivalent in German of the various names by which they were known in Latin" (Adams, pp. 195-196). "On 28 July 1565 Conrad Gesner (1516-65), the greatest naturalist of his century, completed the book On fossil Objects. It is an appropriate date to choose as a starting point for [the] history of palaeontology. Gesner's book marked a crucial moment in the emergence of the science, for it incorporated three innovations of outstanding importance for the future . Gesner's concern for precise identification provides the context for the most important innovation . It was the first in which illustrations were used systematically to supplement a text on fossils. The importance of this can hardly be exaggerated . without illustrations no writer could be certain that he was applying a name in the same sense as his predecessors . The basis for [Gesner's] descriptive work was the formation of a collection of specimens. Published illustrations were, in effect, merely a convenient substitute for a museum . Agricola and other early writers may well have formed collections of their own, but Gesner's book is the first work on fossils that clearly refers to such a collection. Gesner expressed his gratitude to his friend the physician Johannes Kentmann of Torgau (1518-74) for sending him specimens to supplement his own, and he repaid the debt by placing the catalogue of Kentmann's collection at the front of the composite volume in which his own work was bound. The importance of the museum as an innovation in this branch of natural history is symbolised by the frontispiece of Kentmann's catalogue - the only illustration it contained. His little cabinet with its numbered drawers was termed significantly an 'ark' . [The third innovation is that Gesner's] is the first such work in which there is a clear expression of a programme of co-operative research on fossils. Gesner had already received specimens and drawings from Kentmann and several other correspondents, but his book was explicitly designed to elicit further information of the same kind" (Rudwick, pp. 1-11). ABPC/RBH list only two complete copies since Honeyman: Freilich (Sotheby's New York, January 11, 2001, lot 209, $87,000) and Macclesfield (Sotheby's, November 4, 2004, lot 890, £26,400 = $49,122). Provenance: Thomas Stewart Traill, M.D. (1781-1862), physician, chemist, meteorologist, zoologist and specialist in medical jurisprudence, FRSE from 1819 (engraved bookplate of on front pastedown and an inscription in brown ink "Purchased at the sale of Revd. George Loves Books and presented to Dr Thomas Stewart Traill of Tirlet, by his sincere friend, Wm. G. Watt" - i.e., William Graham Watt (1776-1866), 7th Laird of Skaill House, Breckness Estate). Traill Island in Greenland and Mount Traill in Nigeria are named after him. When John James Audubon arrived in Liverpool in July 1826 Traill helped him to find a publisher for The Birds of America; in gratitude Audubon named the Traill's flycatcher after him. "The short title of Gesner's book is deceptive: more fully it is A Book on fossil Objects, chiefly Stones and Gems, their Shapes and Appearance. This shows at once that the word 'fossil' has changed its meaning radically since Gesner's day. By origin the word meant simply 'dug up', and Gesner, like all his contemporaries and predecessors back to Aristotle, used it to describe any distinctive objects or materials dug up from the earth or lying on its surface . Gesner's book dealt with a number of objects that we would now recognise as the fossil remains of organisms, but they were described in the context of a wide variety of mineral ores, natural crystals, and useful rocks . In retrospect, we can see that the essential problem was that of determining which of this broad range of objects were organic and which were not . it was not until the early 19th century that the word 'fossil' became restricted to this end of the spectrum [i.e., organic remains] - though even today a relic of its former breath of meaning is still preserved in the use of the term 'fossil fuels' for coal and oil" (Rudwick, pp. 1-2). "Gesner deviates from almost all previous authors on minerals by presenting his description of minerals not as an alphabetical list, but in a true system of classification. In his numerous other writings on plants and animals, he always attempted to classify natural objects in an organized hierarchy. When his attention was turned to minerals, he faced a difficult problem. There was no well-defined and recognized form by which the natural objects from the earth could be classified. Furthermore, the fossilized remains of plants and animals were at the time not differentiated from true minerals. Gesner's solution to the problem was quaint and interesting. He writes in the dedicatory epistle that he was unwilling to adopt an alphabetical arrangement
Über die Erhaltungssätze in der Quantenmechanik [On the conservation laws of quantum mechanics]. Offprint from: Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse

Über die Erhaltungssätze in der Quantenmechanik [On the conservation laws of quantum mechanics]. Offprint from: Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse, 1927

WIGNER, Eugene Paul First edition, very rare offprint, of the invention of spatial parity as a quantum mechanical conserved quantity. "Wigner was invited to Göttingen in 1927 to become Hilbert's assistant. Hilbert, already interested in quantum mechanics, felt that he needed a physicist as an assistant to complement his own expertise. This was an important time for Wigner who produced papers of great depth and significance, introducing in his paper 'On the conservation laws of quantum mechanics' (1927) the new concept of parity" (mathshistory.standrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Wigner.html). "The concept of parity, which is very important for the understanding of spectra, has no analogy in classical theory comparable to the analogy between the orbital quantum number and the angular momentum" (Wigner, Group Theory and its Application to the Quantum Mechanics of Atomic Spectra (2012), p. 182). "Wigner was a member of the race of giants that reformulated the laws of nature after the quantum mechanics revolution of 1924-25. In a series of papers on atomic and molecular structure, written between 1926 and 1928, Wigner laid the foundations for both the application of group theory to quantum mechanics and for the role of symmetry in quantum mechanics" (David J. Gross, 'Symmetry in Physics: Wigner's legacy,' Physics Today, December 1995, pp. 46-50). Wigner was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963 "for his contributions to the theory of the atomic nucleus and the elementary particles, particularly through the discovery and application of fundamental symmetry principles." "Among Wigner's accomplishments was the recognition that symmetry principles explained patterns found in atomic and molecular spectra. Wigner's analysis of the application of mathematical group theory enabled physicists to understand relative stability or instability of nuclear isotopes having the same number of protons in the nucleus but different neutron numbers. Nearly a decade after he was awarded the Nobel Prize, Wigner's early group theory research was described as so farsighted that it was not immediately recognized for its importance as a pioneering advance in mathematical physics. Interestingly referenced in the Nobel Prize presentation to Wigner was his law of the conservation of parity developed at Göttingen in 1928. The parity law states that particles emitted during a physical process should emanate from the left and right in equal numbers or equivalently that a nuclear process should be indistinguishable from its mirror image. The parity concept was not challenged until 1956 when it was disproved in certain so-called 'weak decay' interactions in experiments by Tsung-Dao Lee of Columbia and Chen Ning Yang of Princeton. Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel Prize in 1957 for their empirical refutation of Wigner's parity theory in this special case. The theory however remained substantially intact and along with other of Wigner's discoveries useful as a further guide in nuclear research" (DSB). "It is scarcely possible to overemphasize the role played by symmetry principles in quantum mechanics" (C. N. Yang, Nobel Lecture, p. 394). No copies on OCLC or ABPC/RBH. Provenance: Felix Bloch (1905-83), Swiss-American physicist who shared the 1952 Nobel Prize for Physics with Edward Purcell for "their development of new ways and methods for nuclear magnetic precision measurements" ('Bloch' written in ink on front wrapper). In 1928, the year the present paper was published, Bloch was awarded his doctorate under Werner Heisenberg for a brilliant thesis which established the quantum theory of solids, using 'Bloch waves' to describe electrons in periodic lattices. The concept of parity refers to the behavior of classical and quantum systems under the 'inversion' operation, which takes a point in three dimensions with Cartesian coordinates x, y, z to the point with coordinates -x, -y, -z (more generally, this can be any 'linear transformation' that is not a rotation, for example the 'mirror reflection' that takes x, y, z to -x, y, z). Symmetry under inversion, or reflection, was used in classical physics, but was not of any great practical importance there. One reason for this derives from the fact that right-left symmetry is a discrete symmetry, unlike rotational symmetry which is continuous. In a famous paper in 1918, Emmy Noether showed that continuous symmetries always lead to conservation laws in classical physics - but a discrete symmetry does not. With the introduction of quantum mechanics, however, this difference between discrete and continuous symmetries disappears. Wigner was led to his study of parity by work of Otto Laporte in 1924. Laporte studied the structure of the spectrum of iron and found that there are two kinds of energy levels, which he called 'stroked' ('gestrichene') and 'unstroked' ('ungestrichene'). He discovered a selection rule (later called Laporte's rule) that the transitions occurred always from stroked to unstroked levels or vice versa, and never between stroked or between unstroked levels. A few months later similar observations on the spectrum of titanium were made by Henry Norris Russell. No convincing explanation of the existence of two types of levels was found within the framework of the old quantum theory. In 1927, Wigner analyzed Laporte's finding and showed that the two types of levels and the selection rule followed from the invariance of the electromagnetic forces in the atom under the operation of inversion of coordinates. This led him quickly to the idea of parity conservation in quantum mechanics. He wrote, 'But that was very easy. I knew the spectroscopic rules, and Laporte's rule was similar to the theory of inversion' (quoted in Collected Works, Vol. 7, p. 7). Wigner introduced the parity operator, and parity conservation, formally in the present paper, "a programmatic essay, entitled 'Über die Erhaltungssätze in der Quantenmechanik' ('On the conservation laws of quantum mechanics'), which Max Born presen
I. Ultraviolet dichroism and molecular structure in living cells. II. Electron microscopy of nuclear membranes. Lecture given at the Symposium on Submicroscopical Structure of Protoplasm

I. Ultraviolet dichroism and molecular structure in living cells. II. Electron microscopy of nuclear membranes. Lecture given at the Symposium on Submicroscopical Structure of Protoplasm, May 22-25, 1951, at the Naples Zoological Station. Offprint from: Pubblicazioni della Stazione Zoologica di Napoli, Vol. XXIII, Supplemento

WILKINS, Maurice Hugh Frederick First edition, extremely rare offprint, of this historic lecture by Wilkins which ignited the search by Crick and Watson for the structure of DNA. "The history of science is full of quirky minor accidents with major consequences. In 1951, Wilkins's boss, Professor Randall, was invited to a conference on macromolecules in Naples. At short notice he asked Wilkins to take his place and, in doing so, precipitated a meeting of incalculable importance. Wilkins went to Naples armed with taut enthusiasm for the prospects of his new type of research and with the best X-ray picture of DNA that he had so far taken. Dr James Watson, at this time touring European laboratories to find the best place to settle to study the biology of genes, was at the meeting. He was more or less on holiday, but thought that Randall might have something interesting to say, for he was a physicist of some note as well as one of the world's few experienced biophysicists. However, Watson was immediately and permanently fired by Wilkins's talk on the investigation of DNA structure and by the beautiful X-ray diffraction patterns revealed by his single slide. Watson said later that this contribution 'stood out from the rest like a beacon.' Watson was a biologist, and the meeting did not bring him to London. But it concentrated his thoughts, took him to Cambridge, underpinned his eventual collaboration with Crick and led to a continuing exchange of ideas and information between the Cambridge group and Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin in the MRC unit at King's College. The stage was set for great discoveries" (Wilkins Obituary, The Guardian, 7 October 2004). In his memoir What Mad Pursuit (pp. 67-68), Francis Crick writes: "One of the oddities of the whole episode is that neither Jim nor I were officially working on DNA at all. I was trying to write a thesis on the X-ray diffraction of polypeptides and proteins, while Jim had ostensibly come to Cambridge to help John Kendrew crystallize myoglobin. As a friend of Maurice Wilkins I had learned a lot about their work on DNA - which was officially recognized - while Jim had become intrigued by the diffraction problem after hearing Maurice talk in Naples." And in Double Helix (pp. 21 et seq.), Watson writes: "It was Wilkins who had first excited me about X-ray work on DNA. This happened at Naples when a small scientific meeting was held on the structures of the large molecules found in living cells . His [Maurice's] talk was far from vacuous and stood out sharply from the rest . Maurice's X-ray diffraction picture of DNA was to the point. It was flicked on the screen near the end of his talk . he stated that the picture showed much more detail than previous pictures and could, in fact, be considered as arising from a crystalline substance. And when the structure of DNA was known, we might be in a better position to understand how genes work. Suddenly I was excited about chemistry." Not on OCLC or COPAC, but there are two copies in the archives of King's College, London. No copies in auction records. In 1946 Wilkins moved, with John Randall (1905-84), to the new biophysics research unit at King's College, London, which was funded by the Medical Research Council (a UK government agency). "By the time Wilkins went to King's College, scientists at the Rockefeller Institute in New York had proved that genes were made of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Wilkins became fascinated by this substance, and he started doing research on it, at first indirectly, by trying to cause mutations in fruit flies with ultrasonic vibrations, then directly, by developing a special microscope for studying the amount of DNA in cells . Wilkins decided to leave the analysis of DNA in intact cells to the biologists; he believed that he could contribute more effectively by using his specialized skills to study the DNA molecule in isolation, outside the cell. "One of the techniques physicists had developed by that time was the analysis of dichroism patterns. Wilkins placed the specimen of DNA under the microscope and then subjected it to two colors of light simultaneously. One color was transmitted directly and the other was reflected. From the contrast of the colors, some information about the structure of DNA could be inferred. "These optical studies of DNA molecules eventually convinced Wilkins that DNA fibers would be ideal material for X-ray diffraction studies. While examining DNA gels prepared for his dichroism work, Wilkins observed, through a microscope, that each time he touched the gel with a glass rod and then removed it, a thin fiber of DNA was drawn out and suspended between the rod and the gel. The uniformity of the fibers suggested that the DNA molecules were arranged in some kind of regular pattern, and therefore they might be suitable for analysis by X-ray diffraction . "The first diffraction patterns of DNA obtained with their makeshift equipment were very encouraging. Before long, Wilkins and his colleagues got much sharper diffraction photographs of DNA. The sharpness showed that the DNA molecules were highly regular; the pattern indicated that they were helical. Wilkins had learned from John Bernal that it was important to keep the fibers moist to get good diffraction patters. This proved to be a key to obtaining experimental data that were useful in clarifying the structure of DNA . By 1951, then, Wilkins had come to realize that the X-ray diffraction pattern of DNA exhibited helical characteristics" (Magill, pp. 3995-6). "We can gather some clues as to the state of Wilkins' work on DNA and nucleoproteins in early 1951 from the paper he gave during a four-day meeting on 'Submicroscopical Structure of Protoplasm' (May 22-25, 1951) at the Naples Zoological Station. His paper opened with the following statement of aims: 'The properties of crystals reflect the properties of the molecules of which they are composed. Hence, when living matter is to be found in the crystalline state, the possibil
Ausszug auss der uralten Messekunst Archimedis vnd deroselben newlich in Latein aussgangener Ergentzung: betreffend Rechnung der cörperlichen Figuren

Ausszug auss der uralten Messekunst Archimedis vnd deroselben newlich in Latein aussgangener Ergentzung: betreffend Rechnung der cörperlichen Figuren, holen Gefessen vnd Weinfässer, sonderlich dess Oesterreichischen, so vnder allen anderen den artigisten Schick hat; Erklärung vnnd Bestättigung der oesterreichischen Weinvisier-ruthen, vnd deroselben sonderbaren gantz leichten vnd behenden Gebrauchs an den Landfässern: Erweitterung dessen auff die aussländische, so auch auff das Geschütz vnnd Kugeln: sampt einem sehr nutzlichen Anhang von Verleichung dess landtgebräuchigen Gewichts, Elen, Klaffter, Schuch, Wein- vnd Traidmaass, vnder einander, vnd mit andern aussländischen, auch alt römischen: allen vnnd jeden Obrigkeiten, Beampteten, Kriegsobristen, Handelsleuten, Büxen-Müntz-Baw-vnd Rechenmeistern, Weinvisierern, Hausswürthen, vnd meniglichen in vnd ausser Lands, fast dienstlich, sonderlich aber dem Kunst-vnnd Antiquitetliebenden Lesern annämlich

KEPLER, Johannes First edition, a considerably revised, rearranged and augmented version of Kepler's Nova Stereometria published the year before, a work which is "generally regarded as one of the significant works in the prehistory of the calculus" (Gingerich in DSB). "Desiring to outfit his new household with the produce of a particularly good wine harvest, Kepler installed some casks in his house. When he discovered that the wine merchant measured only the diagonal length of the barrels, ignoring their shape, Kepler set about computing their actual volumes. Abandoning the classical Archimedean procedures, he adopted a less rigorous but productive scheme in which he considered that the figures were composed of an infinite number of thin circular laminae or other cross sections. Captivated by the task, he extended it to other shapes, including the torus" (DSB). The Messekunst is not a simple translation of the Nova stereometria. The material is substantially reorganized, the Theorem-proof structure of the earlier work replaced by a more informal approach (that structure had proved unsuitable for a practical audience and sales of the Nova stereometria were disappointing). Most importantly, the Messekunst contains material not present in Nova stereometria: first, the solution to the difficult problem of finding the volume of wine in a partly empty barrel, which had been mentioned but not solved at the end of the earlier work; second, the explanation of the effectiveness of the 'gauging rod' used by Austrian wine merchants to measure the volume of their barrels, which had prompted Kepler's work on 'doliometry' in the first place; and finally, the Anhang (Appendix), on weights and measures from antiquity to Kepler's time, is present only in the Messekunst, as is the German/Latin glossary "that established the beginnings of German mathematical terminology" (Baron, p. 110). This copy of the Messekunst has the printed gauge slip on K1, not recorded by Caspar; it duplicates the figure printed within the text. The Messekunst is significantly rarer than the Nova stereometria in commerce: RBH lists three other copies of the former at auction in the last half-century, and nine of the latter. Kepler (1571-1630) became interested in stereometry as a result of a serendipitous event that took place in November 1613 in Linz, where Kepler was then living. Kepler purchased some barrels to lay in a supply of wine for his family and had them delivered to his house. When the wine dealer came to the house to measure the volume of wine the barrels contained, he used the standard gauger's technique which in effect meant approximating the barrel by a cylinder of the same height as the barrel but with cross-sectional area equal to the average of the area of the ends of the barrel and that of its middle bulge. Thus, the approximate formula for the volume of the barrel was V = ½ x height x (end-diameter2 + bulge-diameter2) V0, where V0 was the known volume of a cylinder of unit height and diameter. To simplify the calculation a gauging rod was used. This was a rod marked with a quadratic scale (i.e., 1 at the first mark, 4 at the second, 9 at the third, etc.); by laying it across the end of the barrel, then inserting it through the bung hole in the middle of the bulge, and reading off the numbers on the scale, the gauger could then calculate an approximation to the volume of wine in the barrel by using the above formula. Kepler was more than sceptical about the accuracy of this method of volume determination, especially how it could work for barrels of any shape and size, and he immediately decided to try to find a better mathematical method, and one that would also deal with the case of partly empty barrels, for which the gauger had no solution. By December 17, 1613 Kepler believed that he had reached his goal. He had composed a short six-page manuscript with about ten theorems, and with a dedication to Prince Maximilian of Liechtenstein and Baron Helmhard Jörger as a New Year gift. Around February 1, 1614 Kepler sent the manuscript to Markus Welser in Augsburg to have it printed, there being at that time no printer in Linz. On February 11, Welser replied that he had received the manuscript and had discussed publication with the Augsburg bookseller Hans Krüger. Although he accepted that Kepler's name was highly respected in academic circles, Krüger felt that the work would sell poorly, especially in Latin. Krüger accepted Welser's suggestion that the book be printed at Kepler's expense, but before a printer could be found Welser died on June 23. The manuscript remained with Krüger and may have been forgotten by Kepler had a new printer not arrived in Linz. In the spring of 1615, the printer Hans Blanck or (Planck) arrived in Linz from Erfurt and offered his services. Kepler remembered his manuscript, which was still in Augsburg, and demanded it back. He received it with much effort at the end of May (1615), but immediately realised that it was unsatisfactory. As well as being too brief, there was also a serious mistake in it, and he was forced to rewrite it. The new version of Stereometria grew considerably compared to the original, the Supplementum ad Archimedem was added, as well as the entire second part. But by July 15, after only six weeks, the work was done. The Stereometria doliorum, the first book printed in Linz, was available at the autumn 1615 book fair at Frankfurt. "In this work Kepler uses a wide range of methods including visual imagery, geometric transformation, analogy and tabulation but most of all the cutting of small sections varying in size and shape, parallel to no given direction and chosen at will in the most convenient form to meet the needs of a particular problem. Probably no one since Kepler has used infinitesimals quite so freely" (Baron, p. 110). Kepler's stereometrical work "exerted such a strong influence in the infinitesimal considerations which followed its appearance, and which culminated a half c
A treatise of algebra: both historical and practical. Shewing the original

A treatise of algebra: both historical and practical. Shewing the original, progress, and advancement thereof, from time to time; and by what steps it hath attained to the heighth at which now it is. With some additional treatises, I. Of the Cono-cuneus . . . II. Of angular sections; and other things relating thereunto, and to trigonometry. III. Of the angle of contact . . . IV. Of combinations, alternations, and aliquot parts

WALLIS, John First edition, an exceptional copy bound in contemporary red morocco gilt, of "Wallis' last great mathematical book" (DSB). It combined a full account of the contemporary knowledge of algebra and its history, "a feat never previously attempted by any author" (DSB); it also contained many topics we would not now expect to find in a book on algebra, notably the first publication of Newton's work on the binomial theorem (Ch. 85) and infinite series (Ch. 91), and the first attempt to give a graphical representation of complex numbers (Ch. 67), usually thought to date from the early 19th century. "Of the 100 chapters, the first fourteen trace the history of the subject up to the time of Viète, with emphasis on the development of mathematical notation. The subsequent practical introduction to algebra (chapters 15 - 63) was based almost entirely on Oughtred's Clavis mathematicae, Harriot's Artis analyticae praxis, and [J. H. Rahn's] An Introduction to Algebra (1668) . After an insertion concerning the application of algebra to geometry and geometrical interpretations of algebraic facts (chapters 64 - 72, including an attempt to give a representation of imaginary numbers), Wallis devoted the final twenty-eight chapters to . a discussion of the methods of exhaustion and of indivisibles, with reference to [Wallis'] Arithmetica infinitorum (1656)" (DSB), Wallis's most important work in which he arithmetized Cavalieri's method of indivisibles. Wallis here gives a detailed account of the Arithmetica and takes the opportunity (Ch. 79) to respond to Fermat's criticisms of it. "The Algebra also includes an exposition of the method of infinite series and the first printed account . . . of some of Newton's pioneering results. Wallis had long been afraid that foreigners might claim the glory of Newton's achievements by publishing some of his ideas as their own before Newton himself had done so. He therefore repeatedly warned his younger colleague at Cambridge not to delay but to leave perfection of his methods to later editions . . . Wallis helped shape over half a century of mathematics in England. He bore the greatest share of all the efforts made during this time to raise mathematics to the eminence it enjoyed on the Continent. The center of mathematical research and of the 'new science' in Galileo's time lay in Italy. It then shifted northward, especially to France and the Netherlands. Because of Wallis' preparative work and Newton's genius, it rested in Britain for a while, until through the influence of Leibniz, the Bernoullis, and Euler it moved back to the Continent" (DSB). "Among the most famous parts of this treatise is Wallis's discussion of the work ofThomas Harriot, especially his contention that René Descartes plagiarizedHarriot's symbolization procedurein algebra . . . After giving a list of Harriot's discoveries in algebra, Wallis notes that there is 'scarce anything in (pure) algebra in Descartes whichwas not before in Harriot.'Most historians did not believe Wallis, because Harriot's published work did not include a lot of what Wallis stated. But since the recent discoveries of Harriot's algebra manuscripts, there is certainly some reason to believe that Wallis was correct. There is certainly some similarity between Harriot's manuscripts and Descartes' algebraic work in his Geometry" (MAA). It is highly unusual to find a scientific book of such importance in such a magnificent binding. Provenance: The S. R. Christie-Miller - Britwell Court copy (pencil note on fly-leaf in the hand of); Charles Traylen, who purchased the book at the Britwell sale, Sotheby's, March 30, 1971. "Wallis had first stated his intention of writing a book on algebra in 1657 at the end of his Mathesis universalis, where he explained that he had hoped to include the 'doctrine of analysis, the perfection of arithmetic' but that he had already written more than he intended. Rather than give too short an account of 'analysis', or algebra, he thought it better to devote a separate volume to the subject, which he proposed to do. Given Wallis's prolific output on other topics it is perhaps not surprising that the volume did not materialize, and there was no further mention of it until some ten years later . we may suppose that the book was not begun in earnest until 1673 and that Wallis continued to work on it until he delivered it to Collins in 1677. The dating 1673 to 1677 is confirmed by a number of mathematical letters that Wallis wrote in response to queries from Collins in 1673 and 1676, and then included in A treatise of algebra. Newton's Epistola prior and Epistola posterior were written [to Leibniz] in June and October 1676, and the final third of A treatise of algebra, in which extracts from Newton's letters are embedded, may have been written in its entirety in the winter of 1676-77. [It was the publication of these letters by Wallis that fanned the embers of the priority dispute between Newton and Leibniz over the discovery of the calculus.] "Collins died in 1683 but by then the Royal Society had promised to underwrite the publication of A treatise of algebra and a deal had been negotiated with Richard Davis, an Oxford bookseller, who agreed to handle it if sufficient sales were guaranteed. Down payment on 100 copies seems to have been the necessary level of support, and the Royal Society undertook to buy 60 copies at 1½d per sheet and invited further subscriptions at the same rate. A Proposal to publish A treatise of algebra was circulated in 1683; it invited subscribers to send a deposit of five shillings before December 1683 and promised to print at a rate of two sheets a week from 1 August 1683. (The book eventually required four quires, or 96 sheets, of paper, and so cost twelve shillings to subscribers but sixteen shillings or more to later buyers.) The book was printed by John Playford in London, who possessed the necessary range of type, and it was eventually completed not in 1684, as had been hoped, bu
Helical structure of crystalline deoxypentose nucleic acid. Offprint from: Nature

Helical structure of crystalline deoxypentose nucleic acid. Offprint from: Nature, Vol. 172, No. 4382, October 24, 1953

WILKINS, M. H. F., SEEDS, W. E., STOKES, A. R. & WILSON, H. R. First edition, extremely rare separately-paginated offprint (journal pagination 759-762), in which Wilkins and his colleagues gave the first analytical demonstration of the general correctness of the double-helix structure of DNA put forward by Crick and Watson six months earlier. "After the publication in Nature by the two groups [Watson-Crick at Cambridge and Wilkins' group at King's College, London] in [April] 1953, Wilkins proved that the Watson-Crick model was unique - that is, no other model would give the same diffraction patterns. His data also allowed Wilkins to readjust and refine the Watson-Crick model" (Magill, p. 3997). "Exact information about the molecular configuration of deoxypentose nucleic acid may well serve as the basis for understanding its biological function. It has been shown by X-ray diffraction that molecules of deoxyribonucleic acid (in the form of sodium salt) exist probably in a helical configuration when in the paracrystalline state. Proof of the helical structure would be difficult to obtain from the two-dimensional view of the molecule provided by study of the paracrystalline material. The regularity of the molecule is so great, however, that it may be crystallized in fibres with a remarkably high degree of molecular order, and X-ray study of oriented crystalline deoxyribonucleic acid has enabled a three-dimensional view of the geometry of the molecule to be obtained. The purpose of this article is to describe in a preliminary way further three-dimensional data of this kind and to suggest that proof is now available that deoxyribonucleic acid consists of two helical intertwined polynucleotide chains and to show, as a result of molecular model building, that this structure may be of the type suggested by Watson and Crick. Franklin and Gosling have recently published two- and three-dimensional Patterson diagrams of crystalline calf deoxyribonucleic acid ['Evidence for 2-Chain Helix in Crystalline Structure of Sodium Deoxyribonucleate,' published in the same volume of Nature], and by means of these arrived at conclusions in many ways similar to ours . clearly all doubts about the basic geometry of deoxyribonucleic acid must be eliminated, for only then can the structural chemistry of its specific biological properties and the structure of nucleoprotein be approached on a sound basis" (p. 1). In this paper, Wilkins and his collaborators also showed that the DNAs from different biological sources were basically the same: "We have found no difference in the diffraction patterns of crystalline deoxyribonucleic acid from calf thymus, mouse sarcoma, human white blood cells, E. coli, pneumococcus and Paracentrotus sperm, although the ratio of the bases in the deoxyribonucleic acids varies considerably with species" (p. 2) - "this was important evidence for the generality of the DNA structure" (Magill, p. 3996). Wilkins was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1962 (shared equally with Crick and Watson) "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material." Not on OCLC, but COPAC lists one copy, at the Royal Society, and there are two in the archives of King's College, London. No copies in auction records. "X-ray crystallography provides a way of deducing the structure of a molecule by analysing the diffraction pattern produced when a beam of X-rays falls on a crystal in which the molecules are regularly arranged in three dimensions. The pattern is nothing like a conventional photograph: it shows a set of spots of varying intensity and inferring the structure from the pattern is not a direct process. This is because each spot corresponds to a diffracted wave from the molecules lying in a particular set of planes in the crystal. The molecular structure of the crystal could be reconstructed mathematically from a knowledge of the amplitudes and phases of the diffracted waves-amplitude means strength of the wave (which is measurable from the spot intensity); and phase means the positions of the peaks and troughs of the wave relative to some reference point, but the phase is lost in the recording" (Klug, pp. 4-5). "Wilkins was a senior member of the MRC Biophysics Unit at King's College, London, set up by (Sir) John Randall in 1946 after the War to carry out 'an interdisciplinary attack on the secrets of chromosomes and their environment'. Wilkins worked to develop special microscopes, but having heard of the greatly improved methods devised by Rudolf Signer at Berne for extracting long unbroken molecules of DNA, he obtained some of the material and found a way of drawing uniform fibres from a viscous solution of DNA. Examination under polarized light showed them to be well ordered, characteristic of long molecules oriented parallel to one another. He enlisted the help of a graduate student in the Unit, Raymond Gosling, who was studying ram sperm by X-ray diffraction. By keeping the fibres in a wet atmosphere, Gosling and Wilkins obtained the X- ray diffraction photograph that Wilkins later showed at Naples and which so excited Jim Watson" (ibid., pp. 7-8). "Francis and Jim had brought it [i.e., the Double Helix model] into being less than three years after I was given DNA by Signer, Raymond and I had obtained the first clear evidence that DNA was crystalline, and Alec Stokes had pointed out signs that DNA was helical. The structure gave a new sense of direction in our work: many very important possibilities for biological and medical research could grow out of the Double Helix. We were keen to develop our X-ray studies in order to help that growth. Francis and Jim agreed that we should be responsible for extending our work and putting the Double Helix on a more detailed and accurate X-ray diffraction basis. In that way we could get closer to the truth - science cannot give final truth, but it can move in that direction. The Double Helix was brilliant, but already alternat
Nov-Antiqua Sanctissimorum Patrum

Nov-Antiqua Sanctissimorum Patrum, & Probatorum Theologorum Doctrina, de Sacrae Scripturae testimoniis, in conclusionibus mere naturalibus, quae sensata experientia, & necessariis demonstrationibus evinci possum, temere non usurpandis: In gratiam Serenissima Christinae Lotharingae, Magna-Ducis Hetruriae, privatim ante complures annos, Italico idomate conscripta . Nunc vero juris publici facta, cum Latina versione ltalico textui simul adjuncta. Strasbourg: Elzevier, 1636. [Bound after:] Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche, intorno adue nuove Scienze. Attenenti all Mechanica & i Movimenti Locali . Con une Appendice del centro di gravita ad’alcuni Solidi

GALILEI, Galileo First edition of a great Galilean rarity, the Nov-Antiqua or 'Letter to Christina', with the first edition of his most important work, the Discorsi, together in a magnificent contemporary armorial binding executed for the Archbishop of Reims. The Nov-Antiqua is a "superb manifesto of the freedom of thought" (Koestler, p. 436). "Its purpose was to silence all theological objections to Copernicus. Its result was the precise opposite: it became the principal cause of the prohibition of Copernicus, and of Galileo's downfall . As a work of polemical literature, the Letter is a masterpiece" (ibid., pp. 434). "The edition was small and the book was rigorously suppressed in Catholic countries" (Drake, Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo, p. 171). This is the first printing of Galileo's radical letter to Christina of Lorraine, the mother of his Florentine patron Cosimo II de' Medici, who had posed a typical court question: how the truths of science and the Bible were to be reconciled when they were in apparent contradiction. Originally written in 1615 and circulated in manuscript, Galileo upholds the primacy of science and argues for its freedom from theological interference. "Galileo argued that neither the Bible nor nature could speak falsely and that the investigation of nature was the province of the scientist, while the reconciliation of scientific facts with the language of the Bible was that of the theologian" (Stillman Drake in DSB). The work concludes with an unequivocal argument for the truth of the Copernican system. The ideas expressed were instrumental in the Inquisition's prosecution of Galileo and condemnation of Copernicanism. It was finally published, outside Italy, by Matthias Bernegger in 1636, with an accompanying Latin translation. The Discorsi is Galileo's last and most important work, "the first modern textbook of physics, a foundation stone in the science of mechanics" (Grolier/Horblit); the 'two new sciences'were the engineering science of strength of materials and the mathematical science of kinematics. Subject matter includes, among other things, uniform and accelerated motion, parabolic trajectories, the constitution of matter, the nature of mathematics, the role of experiment and reason in science, the weight of air, the nature of sound and the speed of light. The Discorsi "underlies modern physics not only because it contains the elements of the mathematical treatment of motion, but also because most of the problems that came rather quickly to be seen as problems amenable to physical experiment and mathematical analysis were gathered together in this book with suggestive discussions of their possible solution" (DSB). The Discorsi was only fully appreciated after the publication of Newton's Principia in 1687. "Mathematicians and physicists of the later seventeenth century, Isaac Newton among them, rightly supposed that Galileo had begun a new era in the science of mechanics. It was upon his foundations that Huygens, Newton and others were able to erect the frame of the science of dynamics, and to extend its range (with the concept of universal gravitation) to the heavenly bodies" (PMM). ABPC/RBH lists only two complete copies of Nov-Antiqua in the last 40 years, both in poor condition and in later bindings. The Discorsi is more often seen on the market, but we can trace no copy in a contemporary armorial binding at auction since 1991. Provenance: Léonore d'Étampes de Valençay (1589-1651) (arms on covers). D'Étampes de Valençay was Bishop of Chartres from June 1620 to November 1641, and Archbishop of Reims from 1641 until his death in 1651. A renowned bibliophile, his great library of some 4000 volumes was sold in 1653; the present volume appears on p. 62 of the published catalogue; W. M. Moseley, English amateur astronomer active in the early 19th century (signature on title, bookplate on front paste-down and note on front free endpaper). In 1589, on the recommendation of Guidobaldo del Monte, Galileo (1564-1642) was appointed to the chair of mathematics at the University of Pisa. While in Pisa, in addition to carrying out his alleged demonstration at the Leaning Tower, he composed an untitled treatise on motion, now usually referred to as De motu, in which he attempted to destroy the Aristotelian dichotomy of natural versus forced motions. Its opening sections developed a theory of falling bodies derived from the buoyancy principle of Archimedes, an idea previously published by Giovanni Battista Benedetti in his Diversarum speculationum (1585). In the same treatise, Galileo derived the law governing equilibrium of weights on inclined planes and attempted to relate this law to speeds of descent. However, the results did not accord with experience-as Galileo noted and he withheld the treatise from publication. Galileo's position at Pisa was poorly paid, and he was out of favour with the faculty of philosophy owing to his opposition to Aristotelianism. At the end of his three-year contract he moved, once again with Guidobaldo's assistance, to the chair of mathematics at Padua, where there were several kindred spirits, notably including Paolo Sarpi. To supplement his university income Galileo gave private lessons on fortification, military engineering, mechanics, and the use of the quadrant for artillerists. "The knowledge of artillerists, which he presumably partook of to accomplish his lessons, became the basis for his emerging new science of motion, eventually published in the Discorsi in 1638. It was this fundamental knowledge that allowed Galileo and Guidobaldo del Monte to set up the experiment to demonstrate that the trajectory of a projectile follows a parabolic path, Galileo's first step toward formulating the law of fall" (Valleriani, p. 200). This experiment, which is described in the Discorsi, involved rolling an inked ball obliquely down an inclined plane in order to make visible the path of its trajectory. "Toward the end of 1602, Galileo wrote to Guidobald
Interferenz-Erscheinungen bei Röntgenstrahlen." - "Eine quantitative Prüfung der Theorie für den Interferenz-Erscheinungen bei Röntgenstrahlen." Offprint (containing both papers) from theSitzungsberichte der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Mathematisch-physikalische Klasse(1912)

Interferenz-Erscheinungen bei Röntgenstrahlen.” – “Eine quantitative Prüfung der Theorie für den Interferenz-Erscheinungen bei Röntgenstrahlen.” Offprint (containing both papers) from theSitzungsberichte der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Mathematisch-physikalische Klasse(1912)

LAUE, Max von, Walter FRIEDRICH & Paul KNIPPING First edition, very rare offprint issue, of Laue's Nobel Prize-winning report of "one of the most beautiful discoveries in physics" (Einstein). X-rays had been in wide use since their discovery in 1895 but their exact nature as electromagnetic waves of short wavelength was first elucidated by Laue and his collaborators in the present papers. Laue (1879-1960) had moved in 1909 from Berlin (where he was Planck's assistant) to Ludwig Maximillians University in Münich, where he was Arnold Sommerfeld's Privatdozent. In the spring of 1912 he was asked by Sommerfeld's doctoral student Paul Ewald a question about the arrangement of atoms in a crystal. In attempting to answer this question "Laue had the crucial idea of sending X-rays through crystals. At this time scientists were very far from having proven the supposition that the radiation that Röntgen had discovered in 1895 actually consisted of very short electromagnetic waves. Similarly, the physical composition of crystals was in dispute, although it was frequently stated that a regular structure of atoms was the characteristic property of crystals. Laue argued that if these suppositions were correct, then the behavior of X-radiation upon penetrating a crystal should be approximately the same as that of light upon striking a diffraction grating" (DSB), an instrument used for measuring the wavelength of light, inapplicable to X-rays because their wavelength is too short. Sommerfeld was initially skeptical but Laue persisted, enlisting the help of Sommerfeld's experimental assistant Walter Friedrich (b. 1883) in his spare time as well as that of the doctoral student Paul Knipping. OnApril 12, 1912, Friedrich and Knipping succeeded in producing a regular pattern of dark spots on a photographic plate placed behind a copper sulphate crystal which had been bombarded with X-rays. Laue's second paper contains his complicated mathematical explanation of the phenomenon. "The awarding of the Nobel Prize in physics for 1914 to Laue indicated the significance of the discovery that Albert Einstein called 'one of the most beautiful in physics'. Subsequently it was possible to investigate X-radiation itself by means of wavelength determinations as well as to study the structure of the irradiated material. In the truest sense of the word scientists began to cast light on the structure of matter" (DSB).The following year the Prize was granted to the father and son team W. H. and W. L. Bragg for their exploration of crystal structure using X-rays.ABPC/RBH lists three other copies of this offprint (Christie's, 4 October 2002, lot 151, $5736; Sotheby's, 11 January 2001, lot 333, $10,200; Christie's 29 October 1998, lot 1161, $16,100). In 1912, "the nature of the X rays discovered by Röntgen in 1895 was not known. Röntgen himself conjectured that they might be longitudinal ether waves as opposed to the transverse ones, the electromagnetic waves found by Hertz. Since in Röntgen's original experiment the X-rays originated from the point where cathode rays, i.e., electrons, hit matter, Wiechert and also Stokes suggested already in 1896 that X-rays were emitted by electrons while the latter were decelerated. In Maxwell's theory an electric charge with a velocity, which is not constant, emits electromagnetic waves. In the Hertzian dipole antenna the charges oscillate to and fro. In a Röntgen tube electrons lose their velocity hitting a piece of matter. The fact that interference effects, characteristic of all waves, in particular, light and Hertzian waves, were not observed for X-rays, did not preclude that they were electromagnetic waves. Their wavelength might be too small for the detection of interference . "The nature of X-rays, homogeneous or heterogeneous, remained a mystery. They could be understood as electromagnetic waves of short wavelengths or as new neutral particles. The former standpoint was taken, for instance, by Barkla, the latter by William Henry Bragg. One of Bragg's arguments ran like this: X-rays, produced by electrons falling on matter, fly more or less in the same direction as the incident electrons. That is easily understood if one assumes them to be particles. The production of X-rays can then be seen as a collision process, just as one billiard ball hitting another. For some time the two scientists fought out the Barkla-Bragg controversy in the columns of Nature. Sommerfeld showed that, contrary to the expectations of Bragg and others, electromagnetic radiation is emitted mostly in forward direction if a fast electron suffers a sudden deceleration. The German term bremsstrahlung [breaking radiation] is still used commonly in the literature. "It was the work of Laue and the experiment done by Friedrich and Knipping on his suggestion that cleared up the nature of X-rays once and for all and that, moreover, beautifully demonstrated that crystals are composed of atoms arranged in a regular lattice. Laue had studied mathematics and physics in Strasbourg, Göttingen, Munich, and Berlin, where in 1903 he took his Ph.D. with a thesis under Planck. Feeling that he still had to continue his studies he went for another two years to Göttingen. In 1905 Planck offered him a position as his assistant. Laue worked with Planck on the latter's speciality, the entropy of radiation. In the autumn of 1905 Planck gave a talk in the Berlin Physics Colloquium on Einstein's first paper The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies. Laue was deeply impressed. In 1906, when on a mountaineering trip in Switzerland, as one of the first (possibly the very first) visitor from abroad, he looked up Einstein in the patent office in Bern. In 1907 he published a paper in which he showed that classic experiment by Fizeau, who had measured the velocity of light in a moving liquid, was in accordance with Einstein's theory. Laue became a Privatdozent in Berlin and, also in that capacity, moved to Munich University in 1909. In 1910 he wrote the first book on the theory of relativity . "The t
An Account of the Proceedings

An Account of the Proceedings, in Order to the Discovery of the Longitude: In a Letter to the Right Honourable ******, Member of Parliament

HARRISON, John; [SHORT, James] First edition, extremely rare, of Harrison's announcement of his invention and testing of his first accurate chronometer, the famous 'sea-watch' later called H4, which solved the problem of determining longitude at sea. "There has possibly been no advance of comparable importance in aids to navigation until the introduction of radar" (PMM). "Harrison's creation of this watch [H4] is the foundation of all subsequent chronometer developments" (Cambridge Digital Library, cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/ES-LON-00003). "The fact is that there is [an] element - the most important of all - common to H4 and all subsequent watches enabling them to perform well as portable timekeepers. This element, created by Harrison, is a high energy, high frequency balance and today forms the central feature of any successful marine chronometer. In essence, it is the ultimate solution to the Longitude Problem" (Betts, p. 44). Details of the construction of H4 were published four years later in Harrison's best-known work, The Principles of Mr. Harrison's Time-Keeper, but the Account is the only work of Harrison listed in Printing and the Mind of Man. The position of a ship at sea is given by its latitude and longitude. The former is easily determined by observing the Sun; the latter can be found by comparing local time with standard time at the prime meridian, but determining the latter requires a clock that will keep accurate time in the difficult conditions prevalent on a sea voyage. "Finally, John Harrison, a clockmaker with several useful inventions to his credit, attracted by a premium of £20,000 offered by the Board of Longitude in 1714 for a solution, perfected a chronometer of the required degree of accuracy [i.e., H4] . Harrison's chronometer not only supplied navigators with a perfect instrument for observing the true geographical position at any moment during their voyage, but also laid the foundation for the compilation of exact charts of the deep seas and the coastal waters of the world" (PMM). An account of the proceedings, in order to the discovery of the longitude describes the history and development of H4 and the results of its first practical test on a voyage to Jamaica in 1761-62 aboard H.M.S. Deptford. On arrival at Kingston, after 81 days and 5 hours at sea, the watch was found to be just 5 seconds slow compared to the known longitude of Kingston, corresponding to an error in longitude of 1.25 minutes, or approximately one nautical mile. On the basis of this remarkable success, Harrison claimed the £20,000 prize, but the Board were persuaded that the accuracy could have been just luck and demanded another trial. Harrison was eventually awarded a portion of the prize in 1773, but only after the direct intervention of George III on his behalf. Harrison's H4 received its most thorough trial on Captain Cook's first voyage in 1768: Cook refers a number of times in his journal to 'Mr Harrison's watch', which proved highly accurate both for navigation and for coastal charting. ABPC/RBH list only two other copies: the Frank Streeter copy (Christie's New York, April 17, 2007, lot 251, $96,000) and the Brooke-Hitching copy (Sotheby's, September 30, 2014, lot 605, £47,500 = $78,864). ESTC lists 9 copies (5 in UK and 4 in US). A second edition was published in the same year. "In the early 1700s, European monarchies aspired to power by building world-spanning networks of colonies and commercial ventures. As a result, the merchant fleets and navies that connected and protected these assets were critically important. Eighteenth-century sailors led dangerous lives, not least because they seldom knew their exact location on the open ocean. Although navigators readily determined latitude, or north-south position, by estimating the height of certain stars at their zenith, they could not determine longitude. This failure caused shipwrecks that killed thousands of mariners and lost cargoes worth fortunes. Several countries offered immense financial rewards for a solution to the problem; Britain promised £20,000 (several million dollars in today's currency) for a way to establish longitude to within half a degree (30 nautical miles at the equator) after a journey from England to the West Indies. To judge proposed solutions, the crown established a Board of Longitude, made up of the Astronomer Royal, various admirals and mathematics professors, the Speaker of the House of Commons and 10 members of Parliament. "In effect, determining longitude depended on knowing the difference between local time and the time in Greenwich, site of the Royal Observatory. In principle, if a ship had a clock keeping Greenwich time, the navigator could measure the angle of the Sun to note local noon and compare it to the clock. If the clock read 2 p.m., his longitude was two hours, or 30 degrees, west of Greenwich. The problem lay in finding a clock reliable enough to keep time during the long voyages of that era. The best pendulum clocks of the day were accurate enough, but were useless on a heaving ship at sea. Alternately, a less reliable clock might be used if some means could be devised to correct it frequently. In practice this meant an astronomical method, the best of which became known as the method of lunar distances, in reference to the fact that the Moon's orbit causes it to continually change position in the sky. For example, a new moon, which appears close to the Sun, will have moved 180 degrees by the time it becomes a full moon two weeks later. The idea was for astronomers to provide tables of this angle between Moon and Sun (or Moon and selected stars in the night sky) as a function of Greenwich time. A measurement of this angle every few days would provide a correction to the mechanical clock. This scheme had two drawbacks: The first was that, at least initially, astronomers could not accurately predict the Moon's motion; the second was that the mathematical calculations required of the mariner were very complex-they took ho
Nouvelle fonction du foie

Nouvelle fonction du foie, considerée comme organe producteur de matière sucrée chez l’homme et les animaux

BERNARD, Claude First edition, monograph issue, of Bernard's doctoral thesis, a "remarkable exposition of the glycogenic function of the liver" (Horblit - referring to this issue). This is an outstanding presentation copy, inscribed by Bernard to the anatomist Marie Philibert Constant Sappey on the front wrapper: "Monsieur Sappey hommage affectueux de l'auteur Cl. Bernard." "As much through concrete discoveries as through the creation of new concepts, the work of Claude Bernard constitutes the founding of modern experimental physiology. His scientific career started with two series of precise and well delimited researches: on the one hand, the chemical and physiological study of gastric digestion, and on the other, experimental sections of nerves" (DSB). Bernard's doctoral thesis on the gastric juice published the first results of his experiments on the artificial ingestion of food substances. It linked two important discoveries: first, that when sucrose (a complex sugar) is injected into the bloodstream, it is eliminated in the urine, while injected glucose (a simple sugar) is retained in the organism; and second, that gastric juice transforms sucrose into physiologically usable sugar; i.e., one that, when injected, is not eliminated. This led to the realization that glucose and the other monosaccharides represent the only physiologically useful sugars in the animal organism, and that gastric juice changes all other forms of carbohydrate into assimilable physiological sugar" (Norman). Provenance: Bernard inscribed this copy of his thesis to French anatomist Marie Philibert Constant Sappey (1810 - 1896). Sappey studied medicine at the University of Paris, earning his degree in 1843. Later he became a professor of anatomy in Paris, and in 1862 was elected to the Académie Nationale de Médecine, becoming its president in 1887. In 1868 he succeeded Jean-François Jarjavay (1815-1868) as chair of anatomy, a position he held until 1886. Sappey was a highly regarded anatomist remembered for his research of the lymphatic system. In 1874 he published an anatomical atlas that included a detailed study of cutaneous lymphatic drainage. He was married to Antoinette Clotilde Dumas who was a scientific illustrator. She illustrated some of his publications. He devised a procedure to define and delineate the lymphatic system by injecting mercury into the skin of a cadaver in order to properly view the individual lymphatic vessels. Anatomist Henri Rouvière (1876-1952) continued Sappey's anatomical work of the human lymphatic system. "Bernard's most impressive discoveries in the field of digestion proper concern the functions of the pancreas, especially the importance of pancreatic juice in the digestion and absorption of fats. Two observations showed him the road to follow. First, he had noted that the urine of herbivores is alkaline, while that of carnivores is acid. Bernard showed that fasting brought about acidity of the urine in herbivores (they lived off their body fat) and that man and carnivorous animals put on a vegetarian diet excreted alkaline urine (1846). Bernard then applied himself to the comparative study of the phenomena of digestion in both carnivores and herbivores. He initiated experiments by which to follow the changes in the chyle in the various parts of the intestinal tract of a dog and a rabbit. Thereby he noted that the absorption of fat by the chyliferous vessels occurred at a rather considerable distance from the pylorus in the rabbit and immediately at the beginning of the duodenum in the dog. Bernard discovered that this difference coincided with an anatomical difference at the point of discharge of the pancreatic juice into the intestine. Thus the role of the pancreas in the first phase of fat metabolism was demonstrated ("Du sucpancreéatique et de son rôle dans les phénomènes dela digestion," 1849). In order to collect pancreatic juice in its pure state and to study the regulation of its secretion, Bernard conceived and made the temporary pancreatic fistula, later improved by Pavlov. Bernard found that pancreatic juice acted on fats by a saponification process. "In studying the digestive properties of the gastric and pancreatic Juices. Bernard did not intend to restrict himself to a narrow view of the problem of local digestion alone, or of the decomposition of food in the gastrointestinal tract. Although he studied intensively the chemical changes in food exposed, both in vivo and in vitro, to saliva, gastric Juice, or pancreatic juice, this was to him only one, fragmentary aspect of a vast research subject. What interested him above all was what happened to the food in the animal organism, from its entry until its total assimilation or excretion. Thus the horizon of Bernard's research kept widening and, by going beyond the limits of simple "digestion," it made its true object "nutrition" (or, in modern terminology, "metabolism"). "Never wavering, Bernard was to advance beyond the then prevailing notions of "animal statics" and to set up the first milestones on the road to the understanding of intermediate metabolism. To begin with, Bernard accepted the theory of his teachers that animals are incapable of synthesizing sugar, fat, and albumin. These three substances would always originate in plants, and their percentage in the blood would vary and would depend essentially on the food consumed. Nutrition would consist of three stages: digestion, transport of digested substances, and chemical in corporation or combustion. "Then he discovered that the alleged transport of absorbed substances is an extremely complicated process, more chemical than physical, more a series of transformations than a series of displacements. He also understood that nutrition is a phenomenon of synthesis as much as it is an analytical process. If food intake is an intermittent process, "nutrition" (in the sense of metabolism) is continuous and is stopped only by death. "Nutrition" is also indirect: prior to being inte
Hesperi et Phosphori nova phaenomena sive observationes circa planetam Veneris unde colligitur. I. Descriptio illius macularum. II. Vertigo circa axem proprium . III. Parallelismus axis in orbita octimestri circa solem. IV. Et quantitas parallaxeos methodo Cassiniana explorata .

Hesperi et Phosphori nova phaenomena sive observationes circa planetam Veneris unde colligitur. I. Descriptio illius macularum. II. Vertigo circa axem proprium . III. Parallelismus axis in orbita octimestri circa solem. IV. Et quantitas parallaxeos methodo Cassiniana explorata .

BIANCHINI, Francesco First edition of the first book of telescopic observations of the planet Venus, including descriptions and illustrations of the dark spots on the surface of Venus; the work also contains important illustrations of lunar topography. The erudite Roman historian and polymath Bianchini (1662-1729), who worked in the papal court and was a specialist in calendar reform, sought to determine the rotational period of the planet Venus from the dark patches on the disc, and to draw a map of its surface. "In 1728 he published Hesperi et Phosphori nova phaenomena, the first book ever to be written about the planet Venus. Bianchini described in detail his discovery - or discovery claim - of patches and other markings observed on Venus and also his determination of the planet's period of rotation, for which he got a value entirely different from the one obtained by [Gian Domenico] Cassini: whereas the latter had found 23-24 hours, Bianchini concluded that the planet turned around itself in 24 days and 8 hours. Equipped with one of the excellent telescopes of the Roman telescope maker Guiseppe Campani - whose telescopes were also used by Cassini - he thought to have identified several Venus 'continents' and 'oceans' which he proposed to name after Portuguese and Italian celebrities (his oceans included a mare Columbi, a mare Vespucci and a mare Galilei)" (Kragh, p. 22). Bianchini also concluded, on the basis of several successive observations, that the north pole of Venus's rotation was elevated 20 degrees above the plane of the ecliptic, and that the axis kept parallel to itself during the planet's revolution around the sun. Although his results on the rotational period were incorrect, due to Venus's thick cloud cover, his observations were pioneering efforts in investigating the planet. Bianchini's text is also important in the history of lunar cartography, notably for the two mezzotint views of lunar features in the text. They depict the crater Plato and the Alpine Valley and were the result of the problems of determining topography from shadow patterns. "This small engraving, which appears in the text as part of the introductory chapter, shows the crater Plato at the right, with Aristotle and Eudoxus at left, and the mountain range of the Alps cut by the dramatic slash of the Alpine Valley. Bianchini noted with surprise that the valley did not appear on the great Cassini map, and he was right; Bianchini was the first to see and to portray this most impressive of lunar valleys" (Ashworth). Bianchini's book is perhaps best known today for two often reproduced plates of aerial telescopes, of extremely long focal length, with lenses by Campani. The fine frontispiece was engraved by Rocco Pozzi (d. 1780) after a design by Stefano Pozzi (1707-1768). It depicts Minerva on a throne, supporting a portrait of the King of Portugal. A putto presents a globe of Venus to the King's portrait; other astronomical instruments are also depicted. The figure of Atlas supports the celestial globe on which the constellations are visible. Bianchini's observations of Venus began in July 1716, when he attempted to measure the diurnal parallax of the planet; these observations are described in Chap. VII of the present work. "This will solve a most pressing problem in Cosmology, Astronomy and Physics, namely the size of the Solar System, which follows as a direct corollary from the observation of Venus' parallax, and is fixed so finely and accurately by this method that we can hardly expect equal certainty, it seems, from any other observation undertaken hitherto" (Heilbron, p. 71). The method was invented by Cassini, and involves measuring the change in apparent position of Venus due to the change in the position of the observer as the earth rotates. To notice this change, it is necessary to have in the same field of view some 'fixed' star as a reference point. "On 3 July 1716 Venus and [the star] Regulus came close enough to make possible a parallax measurement by Cassini's method. Bianchini was ready, in a darkened room in a palace on the Palatine Hill put at his disposal by Clement XI. The telescope of 23 palms (5.1 m) detected both bodies during daylight and, although awkward, did not present a problem to Bianchini" (ibid.). He deduced a diurnal parallax of 14.3 seconds, close to the modern value. Bianchini attempted to repeat his observations in 1724, using Sirius as the marker star, but this led to a less exact result. "That did not exhaust the charms of Venus. Bianchini had access to a lens of 94 palms (21 m) with which he thought he might observe her surface features - if she had any. He began his prying with Venus as evening star and with maximum elongation; he consequently sought a site with a rise toward the West of some 25 feet. He would then have to build a platform only 20 feet high to support the objective lens with which to study Venus around sunset, when its elevation was 40 degrees. Only two sites in Rome would do, the better being the garden of the Barberini palace on the Quirinale, built by Galileo's one-time friend Pope Urban VIII. From there Bianchini found blemishes on Venus's face that even the great Cassini had missed - although, as a Jesuit learned in astronomy informed him, Cassini had glimpsed a spot in 1677 and 1678. Bianchini gracefully acknowledged the possibility of this priority and asked [Cassini's assistant] Maraldi to search Cassini's manuscripts for information that would enable him to identify the spot and name it after its discoverer. If he had been able to see further, Bianchini wrote, it was not by standing on the shoulders of other astronomers but by using longer lenses. "The first successful observations from the Barberini gardens took place in February and March 1726 in the presence of several distinguished gentlemen including a Scottish nobleman called Hope [presumably the Earl of Hopetoun] and a Spanish duke. The magnification of 112 made markings along the terminator as large as
Opticorum libri sex philosophis iuxta ac mathematicis utilis

Opticorum libri sex philosophis iuxta ac mathematicis utilis

AGUILON, François d' First edition, and a fine copy, of this great Jesuit treatise on optics, with engraved allegorical frontispiece and exquisite headpieces designed by Peter Paul Rubens. "A master treatise on optics that synthesized the works of Euclid, Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen), Vitellio, Roger Bacon, Pena, Ramus (Pierre de la Ramée), Risner, and Kepler" (DSB). "A landmark of baroque book illustration, this is one of seven works known to have been illustrated by Rubens" (Becker). "Aguilón was one of the first of a long line of distinguished Jesuit writers on optics. His treatise has acquired a great deal of attention because of its seven engravings after drawings by Rubens. It is not so well known that Aguilón's color theory and his prescriptions for the mixing of colors were actually used by Rubens in his paintings" (Ashworth, in Jesuit science in the age of Galileo). "The color system of François d'Aguilón in 1613 is believed to be the oldest system to use red, yellow, and blue" (Burchett, A Bibliographic History of the study and use of color from Aristotle to Kandinsky, p. 19). "A remarkable collaboration between the scientific, printing and visual arts. Intended for use in Jesuit schools, Aguilón's work was primarily a synthesis of classical and modern writings on optics; however, it also contained the first discussion of the stereographic process (which Aguilón named), one of the earliest presentations of the red-yellow-blue color system, an original theory of binocular vision and the first published description of Aguilón's horopter" (Norman). "Amidst geometrical theorems stands out the discovery of the horopter as the area where objects are seen as single with both eyes. During the nineteenth century this concept developed into the contemporary science of vision" (Ziggelaar). "The sixth book, on orthographic, stereographic, and scenographic projections, remains important in the history of science. It accounts for a third of the treatise and was meant for the use of astronomers, cosmographers, architects, military leaders, navigators, painters, and engravers. It places particular emphasis on stereographic projection - a type of projection, used by Ptolemy, in which the portion of the sphere to.be represented is projected from the pole onto the plane of the equatorial circle. The balance of the treatise is of interest for the history of optics: description of the eye; controversies on the nature of light and its action; the application of mathematics to optics; the analysis of the concepts of distance, quantity, shape, place, position, continuity, discontinuity, movement, rest, transparency, opacity, shadow, light, resemblance, beauty, and deformity; and explanation of the various errors of perception. Book 5, in spite of an Aristotelian concept of light, studies the propagation of light, the limit of its action, the phenomena produced by the combinations of light sources, and the production of shadows. Aguilón proposes an experimental apparatus, drawn by Rubens, that made it possible to study the variations of intensity according to variations in distance and to compare lights of different intensities. This attempt . resulted in Bouguer's photometer" (DSB). Fine copies such as ours in untouched contemporary bindings are rare on the market. Born in Brussels, the son of a secretary to Philip II, Aguilón (1567-1617) became a Jesuit in 1586. In 1598 he moved to Antwerp, where in 1611 he started a Jesuit school of mathematics, fulfilling a dream of Christopher Clavius; in 1616, he was joined there by Grégoire de Saint-Vincent. The notable geometers educated at this school included Jean-Charles de la Faille, André Tacquet, and Theodorus Moretus. Regarded by the Society of Jesus as their greatest authority in the science of optics, Aguilón was associated with several members of Galileo's earliest audience. He was in particularly close touch with Christoph Scheiner, a Jesuit professor of mathematics in Ingolstadt then engaged, under the name of 'Apelles', in the sunspot controversy with Galileo. In Book V (p. 421), which was partly devoted to a discussion of the lunar globe, Aguilón mentioned the sunspot observations and Scheiner's pseudonym. Written in 1610-1611, the manuscript of Opticorum libri sex received the approval of the censor on 9 December 1611 and that of the provincial superior on 15 January 1612; the book was issued by the Plantin Press late in 1613. After the death of the influential publisher Christopher Plantin in 1589, the business was continued by his son-in-law Jan Moretus; after his death in 1610, the widow Martina Plantin and the sons Balthasar and Jan took over. The family Moretus was on good terms with the Jesuits; as early as 1593, the provincial superior had decided that books should be published exclusively through Moretus. The Opticorum libri sex was dedicated to the Spanish commander of the fortress of Antwerp, Iñigo de Borja (ca. 1575-1622). Iñigo was a great grandson of Saint Francisco de Borja who had been Duke of Gandia in Spain before he became a Jesuit. After the death of his wife he entered the Society of Jesus publicly in 1551 and in 1565 he became the third general superior of the Society. In his preface Aguilón states that this is the first of three books on optics, intended to be followed by a second on catoptrics and a third on dioptrics, but his death prevented the completion of the last two parts; only a few manuscript sections of the catoptrics were produced. The Opticorum libri sex is famous for its frontispiece and six headpieces which begin each book, all designed by Rubens (1577-1640) (although Aguilón never mentions Rubens by name). At the time of publication, Aguilón was Rector of the Jesuit Maison Professe at Antwerp and Rubens had become a member of the Grand Sodality of the Enunciation at the Maison. The frontispiece, by Cornelius Galle from a drawing by Rubens, "is full of symbols of light. A lady (the goddess Juno or a personification of the optics) is s
Über einen der Erzeugung und Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Gesichtpunkt. Offprint from Annalen der Physik

Über einen der Erzeugung und Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Gesichtpunkt. Offprint from Annalen der Physik, 4. Folge, 17. Band, 1905

EINSTEIN, Albert First Edition, very rare author's presentation offprint, of Einstein's paper on light quanta, for which (along with his 1912 paper on the photo-electric equation) he was awarded the 1921 Nobel Prize for physics. Completed in March of 1905 (Einstein's annus mirabilis), 'On a heuristic point of view about the creation and conversion of light' was the first of four epochal scientific papers published by Einstein that year; the others were his paper on Brownian motion and two papers on the special theory of relativity. "No one before or since has widened the horizons of physics in so short a time as Einstein did in 1905" (Pais, p. 47). Einstein's paper on light quanta was the only one of his works that he himself called 'revolutionary,' and for good reason: "The heuristic viewpoint of the title was nothing less than the suggestion that light be considered a collection of independent particles of energy . Einstein had his reasons for advancing such a bold suggestion, one that seemed to dismiss a century of evidence supporting the wave theory of light. First among these was a negative result: The combination of the electromagnetic theory of light with the (statistical) mechanics of particles was incapable of dealing with the problem of black-body radiation. It predicted that radiation in thermodynamic equilibrium within an enclosure would have a frequency distribution corresponding to an infinite amount of energy at the high-frequency end of the spectrum. This was incompatible with the experimental results, but, worse than that, it meant that the theory did not give an acceptable answer to the problem . Einstein showed that his strange proposal of light quanta could immediately account for several puzzling properties of fluorescence, photoionization, and especially of the photoelectric effect" (DSB). "He determined that a massless quantum of light, the photon, would have to impart the energy required according to Planck's radiation law to break the attractive forces holding the electrons in the metal. This theory was one of the milestones in the development of quantum mechanics, making Einstein the foremost pioneer in the field and opening the world of quantum physics" (Calaprice, The Eintsein Almanac, p. 14). Einstein submitted his light-quanta paper to Annalen der Physik immediately upon its completion; it was published in the first issue of Vol. 17, which was distributed on June 9, 1905. A letter from Einstein to his friend Conrad Habicht, written in April 1905, indicates that Einstein had received his allotment of offprints of the paper by that date; thus the offprint, rather than the journal article, represents the true first edition. In his bibliography of Einstein's works, Weil states that "it seems to be certain that there were few [offprints of Einstein's papers made] before 1914. They were given only to the author, and mostly 'Überreicht vom Verfasser' (Presented by the Author) is printed on the wrapper [as in our copy]" (Weil, p. 4). ABPC/RBH lists six copies in the last half-century: Aguttes, 2019, ?94,777 ('dos fendu, papier fragile'); Sotheby's, 2003, £1320; Christie's, 2002, Plotnick copy, $8365 (spine reinforced, covers tissue-lined on versos); Sotheby's, 1989, Garden copy, $4250; Sotheby's, 1984, £495; Sotheby's, 1971, $204. The present copy appears to be at least as fine, and possibly finer, than any other copy that has appeared on the market. Provenance: 'Falter' written in pencil in upper right corner of front cover. This is possibly Ludwig Falter (born 15 June 1880 in Steinbuch, Odenwald, date of death unknown), German philosopher and mathematician. (We would like to thank Brian Markle for suggesting this provenance to us.) Some time in the first half of the year 1905 Einstein wrote a letter to Conrad Habicht, in which he announced that he would soon send him copies of four different scientific papers: the first dealt with radiation [the offered paper]; the second with methods to determine the real dimensions of atoms; the third with the irregular motion of particles suspended in fluids; and the fourth with the electrodynamics of moving bodies . The first paper . bore the title 'On a heuristic point of view about the creation and conversion of light' . 'It is on radiation and energy of light,' he described its content [to Habicht], 'and it is very revolutionary, as you will see yourself'" (The Historical Development of Quantum Theory, vol. 1, pp. 70-72). "In describing four of his 1905 papers, Einstein characterized only the one on the quantum hypothesis as revolutionary. It is now regarded as revolutionary in challenging the unlimited validity of Maxwell's theory of light and suggesting the existence of light quanta. The paper shows that, at a sufficiently high frequency, the entropy of equilibrium thermal (or 'black-body') radiation behaves as if the radiation consists of a gas of independent 'quanta of light energy', each with energy proportional to the frequency. Einstein showed how to explain several otherwise puzzling phenomena by assuming that the interaction of light with matter consists of the emission or absorption of such energy quanta . "Einstein started to study black-body radiation well before 1905. Mach's Wärmelehre, which Einstein read in 1897 or shortly thereafter, contains two chapters on thermal radiation, culminating in a discussion of Kirchhoff's work. Kirchhoff showed that the energy emission spectrum of a perfectly black body (defined as one absorbing all incident radiation) at a given temperature is a universal function of the temperature and wavelength. He inferred that equilibrium thermal radiation in a cavity with walls maintained at a certain temperature behaves like radiation emitted by a black body at the same temperature. "H. F. Weber, Einstein's physics professor at the ETH, attempted to determine the universal black-body radiation function. He made measurements of the energy spectrum and proposed an empirical formula for the distribution fu
Discours de la Methode pour bien conduire saRraison

Discours de la Methode pour bien conduire saRraison, & chercher la Verité dans les Sciences. Plus la Dioptrique, les Meteores, et la Geometrie. Qui sont des essais de cete Methode

DESCARTES, René First edition, a fine, large copy, of Descartes' first and most famous work. Following the Discours, now celebrated as one of the canonical texts of Western philosophy, are three 'Essais', the last of which, La Géométrie, contains the birth of analytical or co-ordinate geometry, "of epoch-making importance" (Cajori, History of Mathematics, p. 174), designated by John Stuart Mill as "the greatest single step ever made in the progress of the exact sciences". It "rendered possible the later achievements of seventeenth-century mathematical physics" (Hall, Nature and nature's laws (1970), p. 91). The first of the Essais, La Dioptrique, contains Descartes' discovery of 'Snell's law' of refraction of light (earlier than Snell); the second, Les Météores, contains Descartes' explanation of the rainbow, based on the optical theories developed in the first Essai. "It is no exaggeration to say that Descartes was the first of modern philosophers and one of the first modern scientists; in both branches of learning his influence has been vast . The revolution he caused can be most easily found in his reassertion of the principle (lost in the middle ages) that knowledge, if it is to have any value, must be intelligence and not erudition. His application of modern algebraic arithmetic to ancient geometry created the analytical geometry which is the basis of the post-Euclidean development of that science. His statement of the elementary laws of matter and movement in the physical universe, the theory of vortices, and many other speculations threw light on every branch of science from optics to biology. Not least may be remarked his discussion of Harvey's discovery of the circulation of blood, the first mention of it by a prominent foreign scholar. All this found its starting point in the 'Discourse on the Method for Proper Reasoning and Investigating Truth in the Sciences'. Descartes's purpose is to find the simple indestructible proposition which gives to the universe and thought their order and system. Three points are made: the truth of thought, when thought is true to itself (thus cogito, ergo, sum), the inevitable elevation of its partial state in our finite consciousness to its full state in the infinite existence of God, and the ultimate reduction of the material universe to extension and local movement" (PMM). Provenance: Lessing J. Rosenwald (small morocco monogram bookplate); given to the Library of Congress (bookplate and duplicate stamp); Richard Green (Christie's NY, 17 June 2008, The Richard Green Library, lot 87, $116,500). In October 1629 Descartes began work on The World, which included not only his Treatise on Light, first published as Le Monde in 1664, and the Treatise on Man, first published two years earlier as Renatus Descartes de Homine, but also the material on the formation of colours in the Meteors and the material on geometrical optics in the Dioptrics, both subsequently published in 1637 along with the Discourse and the Geometry. Descartes sets out the details of the treatise he was working on from mid-1629 to 1633 in part 5 of the Discourse: "I tried to explain the principles in a Treatise which certain considerations prevented me from publishing, and I know of no better way of making them known than to set out here briefly what it contained. I had as my aim to include in it everything that I thought I knew before I wrote it about the nature of material things. But just as painters, not being able to represent all the different sides of a body equally well on a flat canvas, choose one of the main ones and set it facing the light, and shade the others so as to make them stand out only when viewed from the perspective of the chosen side; so too, fearing that I could not put everything I had in mind in my discourse, I undertook to expound fully only what I knew about light. Then, as the opportunity arose, I added something about the Sun and the fixed stars, because almost all of it comes from them; the heavens, because they transmit it; the planets, comets, and the earth, because they reflect light; and especially bodies on the earth, because they are coloured, or transparent, or luminous; and finally about man, because he observes these bodies" (quoted in Gaukroger (ed.), Rene Descartes: The World and Other Writings, p. xi). But The World was never published in Descartes' lifetime. "During the years immediately following the condemnation of Galileo, Descartes held fast to his initial view that the cardinals had made a mistake, though one that was potentially dangerous for himself. His fundamental idea was that the decision involved a misunderstanding of the role of the Bible as a source of scientific knowledge. He also argued that he was not bound to accept the Roman decision as a matter of faith, and he hoped that it would be reversed in due course so that he could publish his World without fear of censure. He had to concede, however, that as long as there was no change of mind about Galileo by the church, the World would remain 'out of season' . In these circumstances, the next-best option was to consider ways in which parts of his work that were not theologically sensitive could be released to the public. Accordingly, during the years from 1633 to 1637, Descartes spent most of his time on this project. His efforts came to fruition with the publication of the Discourse on the Method for Guiding one's Reason and Searching for Truth in the Sciences, together with the Dioptrics, the Meteors, and the Geometry, which are samples of this Method (1637) . [It] omitted what Descartes called the 'foundations of my physics', that is, the controversial view of the universe that included heliocentrism. He offered instead some examples of the results that one could expect from his basic theory when applied to specific areas such as dioptrics. For good measure, he made sure that the book appeared anonymously. "The standard practice among scholars in the seventeenth century was to write in La
Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche

Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche, intorno adue nuove Scienze. Attenenti all Mechanica & i Movimenti Locali . Con une Appendice del centro di gravita ad’alcuni Solidi

GALILEI, Galileo First edition, the extremely rare and virtually unrecorded first issue, of Galileo's last and most important work; this issue has the final gathering as a bifolium Rr2, with the final leaf blank, before the addition of the index and errata. The Discorsi is "the first modern textbook of physics, a foundation stone in the science of mechanics" (Grolier/Horblit); the 'two new sciences'were the engineering science of strength of materials and the mathematical science of kinematics. Galileo presented the work in dialogue form, with the same interlocutors Salviati, Sagredo and Simplicio, as those of the condemned Dialogo. The results of his trial before the Inquisition for his support of heliocentrism had left Galileo "so crushed that his life had been feared for" (DSB), and it was only at the urgings of his friend and supporter the Archbishop of Siena, Ascanio Piccolomini, that Galileo set about pulling together his life's work in physics. "Unable to publish this treatise on mechanics in his own country because of the ban placed on his books by the Inquisition, he published it in Leyden. Considered the first modern textbook in physics, in it Galileo pressed forward the experimental and mathematical methods in the analysis of problems in mechanics and dynamics. The Aristotelian concept of motion was replaced by a new one of inertia and general principles were sought and found in the motion of falling bodies, projectiles and in the pendulum. He rolled balls down an inclined plane and thereby verified their uniformly accelerated motion, acquiring equal increments of velocity in equal increments of time. The concept of mass was implied by Galileo's conviction that in a vacuum all bodies would fall with the same acceleration. Newton said he obtained the first two laws of motion from this book" (Dibner). Subject matter includes, among other things, uniform and accelerated motion, parabolic trajectories, the constitution of matter, the nature of mathematics, the role of experiment and reason in science, the weight of air, the nature of sound and the speed of light. The Discorsi "underlies modern physics not only because it contains the elements of the mathematical treatment of motion, but also because most of the problems that came rather quickly to be seen as problems amenable to physical experiment and mathematical analysis were gathered together in this book with suggestive discussions of their possible solution" (DSB). The Discorsi was only fully appreciated after the publication of Newton's Principia in 1687. "Mathematicians and physicists of the later seventeenth century, Isaac Newton among them, rightly supposed that Galileo had begun a new era in the science of mechanics. It was upon his foundations that Huygens, Newton and others were able to erect the frame of the science of dynamics, and to extend its range (with the concept of universal gravitation) to the heavenly bodies" (PMM). In 1589, on the recommendation of Guidobaldo del Monte, Galileo (1564-1642) was appointed to the chair of mathematics at the University of Pisa. While in Pisa, in addition to carrying out his alleged demonstration at the Leaning Tower, he composed an untitled treatise on motion, now usually referred to as De motu, in which he attempted to destroy the Aristotelian dichotomy of natural versus forced motions. Its opening sections developed a theory of falling bodies derived from the buoyancy principle of Archimedes, an idea previously published by Giovanni Battista Benedetti in his Diversarum speculationum (1585). In the same treatise, Galileo derived the law governing equilibrium of weights on inclined planes and attempted to relate this law to speeds of descent. However, the results did not accord with experience-as Galileo noted-owing to his neglect of acceleration, and he withheld the treatise from publication. Galileo's position at Pisa was poorly paid, and he was out of favour with the faculty of philosophy owing to his opposition to Aristotelianism. At the end of his three-year contract he moved, once again with Guidobaldo's assistance, to the chair of mathematics at Padua, where there were several kindred spirits, notably including Paolo Sarpi. To supplement his university income Galileo gave private lessons on fortification, military engineering, mechanics, and the use of the quadrant for artillerists. "The knowledge of artillerists, which he presumably partook of to accomplish his lessons, became the basis for his emerging new science of motion, published in the Discorsi in 1638. It was this fundamental knowledge that allowed Galileo and Guidobaldo del Monte to set up the experiment to demonstrate that the trajectory of a projectile follows a parabolic path, Galileo's first step toward formulating the law of fall" (Valleriani, p. 200). This experiment, which is described in the Discorsi, involved rolling an inked ball obliquely down an inclined plane in order to make visible the path of its trajectory. "Toward the end of 1602, Galileo wrote to Guidobaldo concerning the motions of pendulums and the descent of bodies along the arcs and chords of circles. His deep interest in phenomena of acceleration appears to date from this time. The correct law of falling bodies, but with a false assumption behind it, is embodied in a letter to Sarpi in 1604. Associated with the letter is a fragment, separately preserved, containing an attempted proof of the correct law from the false assumption. No clue is given as to the source of Galileo's knowledge of the law that the ratios of spaces traversed from rest in free fall are as those of the squares of the elapsed times . It is probable either that he observed a rough 1, 3, 5, . . . progression of spaces traversed along inclined planes in equal times and assumed this to be exact, or that he reasoned (as Christian Huygens later did) that only the odd number rule of spaces would preserve the ratios unchanged for arbitrary changes of the unit time. From this fact, the times-
Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche

Discorsi e Dimostrazioni Matematiche, intorno adue nuove Scienze. Attenenti all Mechanica & i Movimenti Locali . Con une Appendice del centro di gravita ad’alcuni Solidi

GALILEI, Galileo First edition, a fine copy in untouched contemporary vellum, of Galileo's last and most important work, "the first modern textbook of physics, a foundation stone in the science of mechanics" (Grolier/Horblit); the 'two new sciences'were the engineering science of strength of materials and the mathematical science of kinematics. Galileo presented the work in dialogue form, with the same interlocutors Salviati, Sagredo and Simplicio, as those of the condemned Dialogo. The results of his trial before the Inquisition for his support of heliocentrism had left Galileo "so crushed that his life had been feared for" (DSB), and it was only at the urgings of his friend and supporter the Archbishop of Siena, Ascanio Piccolomini, that Galileo set about pulling together his life's work in physics. "Unable to publish this treatise on mechanics in his own country because of the ban placed on his books by the Inquisition, he published it in Leyden. Considered the first modern textbook in physics, in it Galileo pressed forward the experimental and mathematical methods in the analysis of problems in mechanics and dynamics. The Aristotelian concept of motion was replaced by a new one of inertia and general principles were sought and found in the motion of falling bodies, projectiles and in the pendulum. He rolled balls down an inclined plane and thereby verified their uniformly accelerated motion, acquiring equal increments of velocity in equal increments of time. The concept of mass was implied by Galileo's conviction that in a vacuum all bodies would fall with the same acceleration. Newton said he obtained the first two laws of motion from this book" (Dibner). Subject matter includes, among other things, uniform and accelerated motion, parabolic trajectories, the constitution of matter, the nature of mathematics, the role of experiment and reason in science, the weight of air, the nature of sound and the speed of light. The Discorsi "underlies modern physics not only because it contains the elements of the mathematical treatment of motion, but also because most of the problems that came rather quickly to be seen as problems amenable to physical experiment and mathematical analysis were gathered together in this book with suggestive discussions of their possible solution" (DSB). The Discorsi was only fully appreciated after the publication of Newton's Principia in 1687. "Mathematicians and physicists of the later seventeenth century, Isaac Newton among them, rightly supposed that Galileo had begun a new era in the science of mechanics. It was upon his foundations that Huygens, Newton and others were able to erect the frame of the science of dynamics, and to extend its range (with the concept of universal gravitation) to the heavenly bodies" (PMM). Copies in fine condition in contemporary bindings are rare on the market - copies are very often found in 18th century bindings (about 50% of those listed on ABPC/RBH)). In 1589, on the recommendation of Guidobaldo del Monte, Galileo (1564-1642) was appointed to the chair of mathematics at the University of Pisa. While in Pisa, in addition to carrying out his alleged demonstration at the Leaning Tower, he composed an untitled treatise on motion, now usually referred to as De motu, in which he attempted to destroy the Aristotelian dichotomy of natural versus forced motions. Its opening sections developed a theory of falling bodies derived from the buoyancy principle of Archimedes, an idea previously published by Giovanni Battista Benedetti in his Diversarum speculationum (1585). In the same treatise, Galileo derived the law governing equilibrium of weights on inclined planes and attempted to relate this law to speeds of descent. However, the results did not accord with experience-as Galileo noted-owing to his neglect of acceleration, and he withheld the treatise from publication. Galileo's position at Pisa was poorly paid, and he was out of favour with the faculty of philosophy owing to his opposition to Aristotelianism. At the end of his three-year contract he moved, once again with Guidobaldo's assistance, to the chair of mathematics at Padua, where there were several kindred spirits, notably including Paolo Sarpi. To supplement his university income Galileo gave private lessons on fortification, military engineering, mechanics, and the use of the quadrant for artillerists. "The knowledge of artillerists, which he presumably partook of to accomplish his lessons, became the basis for his emerging new science of motion, published in the Discorsi in 1638. It was this fundamental knowledge that allowed Galileo and Guidobaldo del Monte to set up the experiment to demonstrate that the trajectory of a projectile follows a parabolic path, Galileo's first step toward formulating the law of fall" (Valleriani, p. 200). This experiment, which is described in the Discorsi, involved rolling an inked ball obliquely down an inclined plane in order to make visible the path of its trajectory. "Toward the end of 1602, Galileo wrote to Guidobaldo concerning the motions of pendulums and the descent of bodies along the arcs and chords of circles. His deep interest in phenomena of acceleration appears to date from this time. The correct law of falling bodies, but with a false assumption behind it, is embodied in a letter to Sarpi in 1604. Associated with the letter is a fragment, separately preserved, containing an attempted proof of the correct law from the false assumption. No clue is given as to the source of Galileo's knowledge of the law that the ratios of spaces traversed from rest in free fall are as those of the squares of the elapsed times . It is probable either that he observed a rough 1, 3, 5, . . . progression of spaces traversed along inclined planes in equal times and assumed this to be exact, or that he reasoned (as Christian Huygens later did) that only the odd number rule of spaces would preserve the ratios unchanged for arbitrary changes of the unit time. From this
The Newe Attractive. Containing a Short Discourse of the Magnes or Loadstone: and amongst other his vertues

The Newe Attractive. Containing a Short Discourse of the Magnes or Loadstone: and amongst other his vertues, of a new discovered secret and subtil propertie, concerning the Declining of the Needle . Heereunto are annexed certaine necessary rules for the Arte of Navigation . Newly corrected and amended by M. W. B[orough]. London: E. Allde, for H. Astley, 1592. [Bound, as issued, with:] BOROUGH, William. A Discourse of the Variation of the Compasse, or Magneticall Needle .

NORMAN, Robert Third edition (first, 1581) of one of the greatest rarities in the entire literature of navigation and magnetism, and "one of the first truly scientific books published in England" (Waters, The Art of Navigation, p. 153). "It is usual to ascribe to Galileo the development of the scientific method in the seventeenth century. It will be seen that in England the principles underlying Galileo's methods had been in practice for a quarter of a century before the great Italian rose to fame" (ibid., p. 156, note). We know of only one other 16th-century edition of The New Attractive having appeared on the market - Horblit's copy of the fourth edition (1596) (in a modern binding), offered by H. P. Kraus in Cat. 168 (ca. 1975) for $15,000. The Newe Attractive "is the first English work devoted to the use of the compass, and it contains Norman's proposal for a magnetic field of force acting independently of matter - one of the most important concepts in the history of science" (Tomash & Williams). Norman's work was issued with A Discourse of the Variation of the Compasse, the only published work of William Borough (bap. 1536-98), which was based on Richard Eden's English translation of Jean Taisnier's study of terrestrial magnetism in his Opusculum perpetua . De natura magnetis (1562). "In 1581 Robert Norman had published The Newe Attractive; it came out with William Borough's The Variation of the Cumpas as one book. Norman's contribution described his discovery of the phenomenon of magnetic dip [now called magnetic inclination] - the deflection in the vertical plane of a pivoted compass needle towards the earth. The importance of his discovery lay not so much in the attempts it inspired to use magnetic dip as a method of position-finding at sea as in its definition of the scientific method - Norman's method of research. For Norman claimed that he had founded his arguments 'only upon experience, reason, and demonstration by exact trial and perfect experiment.' His researches were amongst those which inspired Dr. William Gilbert's and resulted in the publication of De magnete in 1600 . In The Newe Attractive, besides describing magnetic dip, Norman discussed Borough's subject, magnetic variation [the angle between the geographic meridian and the direction of the magnetic field as indicated by a compass needle, now called magnetic declination]. Norman's researches upon this phenomenon had led him to conclude that the attempts to use variation as a means to determine longitude precisely were doomed to failure. In his opinion (which was correct), they were based upon a theory contrary to the observed and recorded facts relating to the distribution of variation over the surface of the globe. As this conclusion was contrary to that of many scholars and navigators, Norman showed unusual intellectual impartiality and courage in publishing it. Like Borough he believed in the necessity for more accurate instruments with which to measure variation and in the need to collect and study systematically the observations recorded, in order to provide a firmer basis for determining the truth about its distribution. In his pamphlet Borough described not only new instruments for finding variation but also, for the first time in any English book, the results of his scientific measurements and the various ways in which variation could be measured. In doing so, Borough introduced English seamen for the first time to spherical trigonometry in print. He also gave them a detailed criticism of the plane sea-chart and of the hydrographical expedients adopted in its construction" (Waters, English Navigation Books, p. 35). OCLC lists, in the US, 2 copies of the first edition (1581), 4 of the second (1585), 2 of the third (1592) (New York Public and Wisconsin-Madison), and 2 of the fourth (1596). Provenance: John Scott (1830-1903) and Robert Lyons Scott (1871-1939), shipbuilders, the latter's gift in 1921 to The Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Scott Library Collection, with book label; Christie's London, Scott Library sale, 4-5 December 1974, lot 354 to Traylen, £1900 = $4560. Robert Norman (fl. 1560-1585) served at sea for 18 or 20 years before settling in the seafaring district of Ratcliff, on the north bank of the Thames, London, as a maker of navigational instruments, and in particular marine compasses. Norman belonged to a class of men who were coming to play an increasingly important role in the wider rise of science: intelligent, ingenious craftsmen, sailors and travellers who, while not 'learned' in the sense of having received a Latinate classical education, were to approach the study of natural phenomena from an original viewpoint, based not on philosophical analysis of classical sources but on practical experience. They formed that cadre of men whose praises were soon to be sung by William Gilbert, Francis Bacon, and the early fellows of the Royal Society. But there was a tension between 'mathematical practitioners' such as Norman, and the university men. This was laid bare in the preface to The Newe Attractive, in which Norman delivers a thinly-veiled rebuke to Thomas Digges who, in his Addition to the 1576 edition of his father Leonard's A Prognostication everlastinge gave, as well as the first detailed and illustrated description in English of the Copernican system, a discourse on the variation of the compass and on the errors in English navigational practice. Digges denied the then prevalent theory that a compass always points to a single attractive point (the magnetic north pole), stating that this was inconsistent with observations, and instead proposed a purely geometrical model of variation. Digges also wished to reserve for mathematically-trained men like himself the right to form theories of effects such as variation: 'it may be said by the learned in the mathematicalls . that this is no question or matter for a mechanician or mariner to meddle with, no more than is the finding of the longitude, for th
Le miroir d'alquimie; HERMES TRISMEGISTUS. La Table d'esmeraude; HORTULANUS. Petit commentaire de l'hortulain . sus la table d'esmeraude; KHALID ibn Yazid ibn Mu'awiya. Le Livre des Secretz d'Alquimie; MEUN

Le miroir d’alquimie; HERMES TRISMEGISTUS. La Table d’esmeraude; HORTULANUS. Petit commentaire de l’hortulain . sus la table d’esmeraude; KHALID ibn Yazid ibn Mu’awiya. Le Livre des Secretz d’Alquimie; MEUN, Jean de. Le Miroir. Traduict de Latin en François, par un gentilhomme du D’aulphiné. POPE JOHN XXII. L’Elixir des Philosophes, autrement l’Art transmutatoire. BACON, Roger. De l’admirable Pouvoir et Puissance de l’art & de nature, ou est traicté de la pierre philosophale, traduit en François par Iaques Girard de Tournus. [COELESTINUS, Claudius.] Des choses merveilleuses en la nature, ou est traicté des erreurs des sens, des puissances de l’ame, & des influences des cieux, . traduit en François par Iaques Girard de Tornus

BACON, Roger First edition of this extremely rare collection, which includes the first French translation and second appearance overall of the famous 'Mirror of Alchemy' of the 'Doctor Mirabilis' Roger Bacon; the first English translation was published in 1597. The works L'elixir des philosophes and L'art transmutatoire are published here for the first time; all the other works are the first vernacular editions. Bacon's "skill in mathematics, experimental science and mechanical inventions was so remarkable for his time that . he acquired the reputation . of being a magician" (Ferguson I, p. 65). He was "the first Englishman who is known to have cultivated alchemical philosophy" (Waite, p. 63). Bacon maintained that alchemy is "a Science, teaching how to transforme any kind of mettall into another . by a proper medicine . Alchemy therefore is a science teaching how to make and compound a certain medicine, which is called Elixir, the which when it is cast upon mettals or imperfect bodies, doth fully protect them" (quoted in Linden, p. 4). "Bacon's discussions of alchemy are scattered throughout his work . at times recall[ing] Aristotle's theories concerning the origins of metals and Geber's sulphur-mercury theory: they are notable for their clarity of expression and general avoidance of alchemical jargon" (ibid., p. 111). Bacon explored "the purification of gold beyond the present achievements of alchemy," intent on "producing astonishing as well as practically useful effects by harnessing the hidden powers of nature" (DSB). Some of these effects are described by Bacon in his De l'admirable Pouvoir et Puissance de l'art & de nature, about which Duveen remarks that it is: "one of the most remarkable and at the same time one of the most authentic works by Roger Bacon. It contains almost prophetic gleams of the future course of science, dealing with automobiles, flying machines, diving-bells, telescopes, burning-mirrors, a sort of gun-powder, etc." ABPC/RBH list only one complete copy of this collection (in a modern binding) offered by Schab in 1947 for $250 (none at auction). Caillet mentions the last copy at auction being the Yemeniz copy in 1867 when it fetched 85 francs (that copy is now in the Mellon collection at Yale). The English translation of Bacon's 'Mirror of Alchemy', which was published 40 years after our collection, and which Ferguson describes as "one of the greatest rarities of alchemical literature", is not as rare as the present edition; the last complete copy at auction was Honeyman's (Sotheby's, 30 October 1978, lot 186, £4500). OCLC lists 3 copies in US: Harvard (first part only), Yale, University of Pennsylvania (we have not verified the completeness of the last copy - the online description is identical to Yale's, including the Mellon/Yemeniz provenance). Alchemy, the mediaeval forerunner of chemistry, began in ancient and Hellenistic Egypt, probably originating in the Egyptian goldsmith's art, but later absorbing aspects of Greek philosophy and different religious traditions.After the fall of the Roman Empire, the focus of alchemical development moved to the Islamic World. The word 'alchemy' itself was derived from the Arabic word 'al-kimiya,' which in turn derives from the Greek 'khemia' (the 'art of transmuting metals'). The introduction of alchemy to Latin Europe may be dated to 11 February 1144, with the completion of Robert of Chester's translation of the Arabic Book of the Composition of Alchemy. Through much of the 12th and 13th centuries, alchemical knowledge in Europe consisted largely in Latin translations of Arabic works, but original works began to appear in the 13th century, notably those of Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon. Alchemists attempted to 'purify,' 'mature,' and 'perfect' certain materials. Common aims were the transmutation of 'base metals' (e.g., lead) into 'noble metals' (particularly gold and silver), the creation of an elixir of immortality, the creation of panaceas able to cure any disease, and the development of an 'alkahest' or universal solvent. In Europe, the creation of a 'philosopher's stone' was variously connected with all of these projects; this stone came in two varieties, prepared by an almost identical method: white (for the purpose of making silver), and red (for the purpose of making gold), the white stone being a less matured version of the red stone. The present collection begins with Bacon's Mirror of Alchemy, which first appeared as Speculum alchemiae in 1541, in a Latin collection published at Nuremberg which also contained the first printings of Hermes Trismegistus (with Hortulanus' commentary) and the tract by Khalid ibn Yazid. These four works were translated into French by Nicolas Barnaud (d. 1605?) according to some sources, or by Jacques Girard de Tournus, the translator of the last two parts of this volume, according to others. Roger Bacon was born in Ilchester, Somerset in either 1214 or 1220. After his matriculation at Oxford, he was one of the pioneers in teaching Aristotle's natural philosophy at the University of Paris. He returned to Oxford, where he was strongly influenced by Robert Grosseteste and the Franciscan school, but in 1257 he was sent back to Paris by the Franciscans, whose order he had entered. Under the patronage of Pope Clement IV, he wrote the Opus majus, his most important work, not published until 1733. Together with his Opus Minus, and Opus Tertium, this presented his views on how to incorporate Aristotelian logic and science into a new theology. He sent these works, and perhaps others, to Clement in 1267/68. But his protector Clement died in 1268 and, following the Condemnations of 1277, he was imprisoned, to be set free only a year before his death at Oxford, in 1293. The Mirror of Alchemy sets out the sulphur-mercury doctrine of the composition of the metals and describes the alchemical process in which the materials are heated in a tightly closed vessel. Chapter 1, 'Of the definitions of alchemy,' de