English
A passage for editorial review. HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE HINDU ASTRONOMY, FROM THE EARUEST DAWN OF THAT SCIENCE IN INDIA, TO THE PRESENT TIME. IN TWO PARTS- PART I. THE ANCIENT ASTRONOMY. PART II. THE MODERN ASTRONOMY, WITH AN EXPLANATION OF THE APPARENT CAUSE OF ITS INTRODUCTION, AND THE VARIOUS IMPOSITIONS THAT FOLLOWED. TO WHICH ARE ADDED^ I. — Hindu Tables of Equations. II. — Remarks on the Chinese Astronomy. III. — Translations of certain Hieroglyphics, called the Zodiacs OF Dbndera. BY JOHN BENTLEY, MEMBER OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY. LONDON: SMITH, ELDER, & CO. 66, CORNHILL. MDCCCXXV. Digitfzed by Google /Isfr. 78,2^ { HARVARD UNIVERSITY LIBRARY NOV 15 n?' V : ^' Digitized by Google PREFACE. The subject of the present essay was undertaken many years ago ; but owing to a variety of causes^ which could not be foreseen^ its publication has been delayed much beyond the time that was ori* ginally intended. The first was, that I found it difficult to obtain any correct information respecting the ancient astronomy of the Hindus, by reason of all the. ancient works having been purposely de** stroyed or concealed, since the introduction of the systems now in use. I was therefore induced, by way of saving time, to lay before tlie Asiatic Society in A. D. 1799, a paper ** On the antiquity of the Surya SUddhanta, and the formation of the Astrono- mical Cycles therein contained,^'' intending to follow it up with the present essay, as soon as the neces- sary &cts and data that I was in search of could be obtained. My paper on the antiquity of the Suiya Siddhanta was published in the sixth volume of the Asiatic Researches ; and I was in great hopes that Digitized by Google Digitized by Google i PREFACE. V thanks^ it is unnecessary that we should labour in the field any longer: it is better by far that we should refrain from our labour, than involve our- selves in perpetual disputes with persons concealed, who may be both capable and willing to do us an injury, without our being able to ascertain whence it came." A more fatal blow could not be aimed by the greatest enemy to the institution than had been thus inflicted on it: for, settmg aside. the general apathy, it would ultimately, by its effects, not only be productive of the greatest evils to the welfare of the Society, but destructive to the intention of its original founder, which was thus perverted; so that, instead of the institution being " for enquiring into the history and antiquities, the arts, sciences, and literature of Asia," as expressed by the title-page of their work, it became of a direct opposite nature. Surely, it ought to have been foreseen, that such a mode of proceeding would ultimately tend to the loss of the Society, and perhaps to its final . disso- lution. The attack made on any member must obviously be intended to diminish the value of the writings or essays of the member so attacked ; con- sequently it must have the same effect, if it has any at all, in reducing the value of the volume of the Researches. The injury is intended for the indi- vidual, but it falls only on the Society ; for the in- Digitized by Google VI PREFACI:. dividual, becoming disgusted with the treatment he receives at the hands of secret enemies, is obliged to reserve the publication of the result of his labours for some future time, when more liberal sentiments may prevauL In consequence of the attack made on my essay on the antiquity of the Surya Siddhanta, I wrote another paper in the eighth volume of the Asiatic Researches, pointing out the complete igno- rance of the reviewer, and his ill nature in making an attack, where in fact therd was not the most distant foundation for it. I Uiere showed by a table the gradual decrease of the errors in the Surya Siddhanta, from the year 3102 before Christ, down to A. D, 999, and also for two periods later, in order to show the increase of the errors again in an op- posite direction; thereby showing, that the point at which the errors were the least possible was between seven * and eight hundred years back at the time. This table is s6 plain^ that a schoolboy totally unacquainted with astrotiomy can under- stand it ; but, plain and simple as it is, the reviewer, to show his knowledge of astronomy, I suppose, as well as his ill will, has thought fit to attack it by such sophistry and ignorance as, I believe, never before came from the pen of a reviewer; and am rather surprised that it could be at all admitted into the Review, which certainly did it no good, as casting a reHection on the abilities of those who Digitized by Google PREFACE. Vll conducted it. But, in order that others may be able to judge of the truth or falsehood of the as- sertions of the reviewer, I shall here give the three first columns of the table, which are all that are here wanting to exhibit the decrease in the errors. THE TABLE, PlanetB, &0. B.C.8102. A.D.499. A.D.999. Moon, 50 52^ 84"- 80 11 25 - 28 87 81 + 82 48 46 - 12 5 42 + 9 4T 0 + 17 12 86 - 21 25 48 + 8 15 53 + 0*> 20^ 14"- 4 52 58 - 8 56 6 ^ 8 88 41 - 2 82 42 + 1 80 50 + 1 48 56 - 2 50 9 + 0 5 45 •• 00 r 2"- 1 21 69 - 1 12 1 + 0 29 22 + 1 13 8 + 0 21 55 + 0 24 20 + 0 8 88 - 0 83 45 - ■■ ' Apogee, Node, Veniw, Mara, •••••••• ■ - Aphol Jupiter, • Saton, Sub's apogee. There is no man, I believe, in his senses, who, on inspection of this table, will not say, that the author of the work must have lived at that period of time when the errors were least, insteaid of that period when they were greatest ; but our reviewer would ¥dsh his readers to believe the contrary; and that the author of the Surya Siddhanta, instead of living about tfie year A.D. 1000, when the error in the moon's place was only about T, lived 3102 before Christ, when the error amounted to near 6^ : from which circumstance, it will naturally be con- cluded by many, that he must either be mad, or entirely ignorant of the nature of astronomy, which science could admit of no such conclusion; because. Digitized by Google Vlll PREFACE. from the quantity of the error in the moon's place 3102 before Christ, it was impossible that the com- putations by the Starya Siddhantay could give, or foretel the eclipses of the sun and moon, which clearly shows the absurdity of the reviewer's no- tions. Lest, however, it might be supposed that I am not speaking the truth, I will here tran- scribe his own words, which I think will point out still more his sophistry, ignorance, and ill will. *' Let us next consider the criterion which Mr. Bentley himself proposes for determining the age of a jsystem of astronomical tables, from the con- sideration of the tables themselves, independently of testimony, tradition, or any external evidence. Such a criterion is precisely the thing wanted on the present occasion: but we can by no means approve of that particukur one which he endeavours to establish. It is founded on this maxim, that the time of the construction of any set of tables must be that at which they agree best with the heavens. Hence, when such tables are given, and we Vish to determine their antiquity, we have only to compute from them the places, of the sun and moon, &c. for different times, considerably distant from one another: to compare these places with those given by the best modern tables ; and the time when they approach the nearest to one anpther is to be taken for the time when the tables were constructed." Digitized by Google PREFACE. IX The reviewer then goes on with his sophistry, to endeavour to set aside this rule, thus : — "As it must be an object, in all astronomical tables, to, represent the state of the heavens tolerably near the truth at the time when they are composed, it must be allowed thai this rule is not destituted plausibility. On examination, however, it will be found very fallacious, and such as might lead inta great mistakes." The reviewer then proceeds to show his extraordinary skill and sagacity, by sayings that " Astronomical tables are liable to errors of two different kinds, that may sometimes be in the same, sometimes in opposite directions.