JB/135/049/003: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/135/049/003: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>Conduct</head>
 
<p>and <del>what</del> if so what <unclear>manner</unclear> they had for not<lb/>
making use of it it was a <gap/> touch.<lb/>
I <gap/> found <del><gap/></del> my method was no new<lb/>
discovery De Charles Jacquet and <add>as well as</add> several<lb/>
modern Geometers had had recourse to<lb/>
the same Criterion. <del>But</del> <add>and</add> I also found<lb/>
that instead of having him thought to<lb/>
have him the <unclear>impressions</unclear> of the <gap/>, they<lb/>
had him <gap/> against by those who<lb/>
<del><gap/> <gap/></del> were held in highest repute nay<lb/>
even <gap/>. they had says Simpson<lb/>
adapted the Vulgar Ideas, this writing<lb/>
were called mutilated Editions &amp;c.<lb/>
all the objections <gap/> to <gap/><lb/>
in two. First that Euclid had nowhere<lb/>
shew how to divide a quantity into any<lb/>
number of parts, <gap/> by that <gap/> <gap/><lb/>
Quantities to which a common measure<lb/>
could not be found [which could not<lb/>
possibly be divided into aliquots] <add>equal parts</add><lb/>
These objections I had not find that<lb/>
any one had answered in a satisfactory<lb/>
manner others had pursued the same<lb/>
plane without defending it. <gap/> &amp;<lb/>
<gap/> Simpson <gap/> have done <unclear>must towards</unclear></p>
 





Revision as of 08:27, 17 January 2017

Click Here To Edit

Conduct

and what if so what manner they had for not
making use of it it was a touch.
I found my method was no new
discovery De Charles Jacquet and as well as several
modern Geometers had had recourse to
the same Criterion. But and I also found
that instead of having him thought to
have him the impressions of the , they
had him against by those who
were held in highest repute nay
even . they had says Simpson
adapted the Vulgar Ideas, this writing
were called mutilated Editions &c.
all the objections to
in two. First that Euclid had nowhere
shew how to divide a quantity into any
number of parts, by that
Quantities to which a common measure
could not be found [which could not
possibly be divided into aliquots] equal parts
These objections I had not find that
any one had answered in a satisfactory
manner others had pursued the same
plane without defending it. &
Simpson have done must towards




Identifier: | JB/135/049/003"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 135.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

135

Main Headings

Folio number

049

Info in main headings field

conduct

Image

003

Titles

Category

copy/fair copy sheet

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f13 / f14 / f15 / f16

Penner

sir samuel bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::[gr with crown] [pro patria motif]]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

46167

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in