Comet Halley's First Expected Return: English Public Apprehensions,1755–58

Earlier predicted returns of comets (which were not fulfilled) made by Cassini and Bernoulli do not seem to have attracted any public attention.

The most detailed recent studies of this return are Taton René , “Clairaut et le retour de la comète de Halley”, pp. 253–74 in Arithmos-Arrythmos: Skizzen aus der Wissenschaftsgeschichte; Festschrift für Joachim Otto Fleckenstein zum 65. Geburtstag , ed. by Figala Karin and Berninger Ernst H. (Munich, 1979); Wallis Ruth , “The glory of gravity — Halley's comet 1759”, Annals of science, xli (1984), 279–86; and Broughton Peter , “The first predicted return of Comet Halley”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xvi (1985), 123–33. Wallis's paper is the only one of these to deal specifically with the public reaction to the comet's return. Based primarily on a selection of articles (mostly appearing after the actual reappearance of the comet) in the Gentleman's magazine and Benjamin Martin's General magazine, her paper deals almost exclusively with the interest in vindicating gravitational theory.

A more general study of “comet lore” in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is now being undertaken by Sara Schechner Genuth in her Harvard doctoral dissertation.

For a list of publications of this essay, see Broughton , “The first predicted return” (ref. 2), 124. In addition, numerous later editions were published of many of the books on his list. For a detailed discussion of Halley's essay, see Rigaud S. P. , Some account of Halley's Astronomiæ cometicæ synopsis… (Oxford, 1835). The origin of the essay is briefly discussed by Hoskin Michael , “The first edition of Halley's ‘Synopsis’”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xvi (1985), 133.

Martin Benjamin , “Of the comets”, Dialogue XV of “The young gentleman and lady's philosophy”, 99–106. On the rather complicated publication of the General magazine, see Millburn John R. , “Martin's magazine: The general magazine of arts and science, 1755–65”, The library: Transactions of the Bibliographic Society, 5th series, xxviii (1973), 221–39. For general biographical information on Martin, see Millburn's Benjamin Martin: Author, instrument-maker, and “country showman” (Science in History, no. 2; Leyden, 1976).

Millburn , Martin, 1–2, 16, 68–75.

Martin , “Of the comets”, 100.

The alleged periods of the latter two comets were first suggested by Halley in the various 1705 printings of his “Synopsis”, e.g., A synopsis of the astronomy of comets (London, 1705), 22. The proposed 575-year period for the comet of 1680 was first attributed to Halley by Newton in the second edition (1713) of the Principia. Halley himself first publicly discussed this period in the expanded version of the “Synopsis” that was written sometime before 1717 and published in his posthumous Astronomical tables (Latin, 1749; English, 1752; French, 1759).

These figures were calculated by Newton and mentioned in the Example following Proposition XLI, Book III of the Principia; in the familiar Motte-Cajori translation (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1934; hereafter: Motte-Cajori ed.), 521.

Martin , “Of the comets”, 103.

Whiston William , Astronomical principles of religion, natural and reveal'd (London, 1717), 155–6: “I observe, that the Sacred Accounts of Hell, or of the Place and State of Punishment for wicked Men after the general Resurrection, is agreeable not only to the Remains of ancient profane Tradition, but to the true System of the World also. This sad state is in Scripture describ'd as a State of Darkness, of blackness of Darkness, of Torment and Punishment for Ages, or for Ages of Ages, by Flame, or by Fire, or by Fire and Brimstone, with Weeping and Gnashing of Teeth; where the Smoak of the Ungodly's Torment ascends up for ever and ever; where they are Tormented in the Presence of the Holy Angels, and in the Presence of the Lamb; when the Holy Angels shall have separated the Wicked from among the Just, and have cast them into a Furnace of Fire. Now this Description does in every Circumstance, so exactly agree with the Nature of a Comet, ascending from the Hot Regions near the Sun, and going into the Cold Regions beyond Saturn, with its long smoaking Tail arising up from it, through its several Ages or Periods of revolving, and this in the Sight of all the Inhabitants of our Air, and of the rest of the System; that I cannot but think the Surface or Atmosphere of such a Comet to be that Place of Torment so terribly described in Scripture, into which the Devil and his Angels, with wicked Men their Companions, when delivered out of their Prison in the Heart of the Earth, shall be cast for their utter Perdition or second Death; which will be indeed a terrible but a most useful Spectacle to the rest of God's rational Creatures; and will admonish them above all Things to preserve their Innocence and Obedience; and to fear him who is thus able to destroy both Soul and Body in Hell.” I am grateful to Michael Hoskin for this reference.

Martin , “Of the comets”, 104.

Ibid., 106. Newton discussed this idea in the long discourse inserted after the Example that follows Proposition XLI, Book III of the Principia; Motte-Cajori ed., 529–30.

Newton made this proposal in the discourse following Proposition XLII, Book III of the Principia; Motte-Cajori ed., 540–1.

For a general discussion of this topic, see Miller Perry , “The end of the world”, The William and Mary quarterly, 3rd series, viii (1951), 171–91.

Martin , “Of the comets”, 105–6.

Halley , Synopsis, 23–24.

Curnock Nehemiah (ed.), The journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., iv (London, 1938), 141. On the impact of the Lisbon earthquake on European society, see Kendrick T. D. , The Lisbon earthquake (London, 1956). Marguerite Carozzi has also explored the “Reaction of British colonies in America to the 1755 Lisbon earthquake: A comparison to the European response”, History of geology, ii (1983), 17–27.

“Serious thoughts” was reprinted in The works of the Rev. John Wesley, xi (London, 1872), 1–13, from which I cite.

Kendrick , The Lisbon earthquake, 142–64, esp. pp. 158–61.

Wesley , “Serious thoughts”, 1–2.

Ibid., 4–7.

Wesley may have been referring to the expanded passage (quoted below; see the text attached to ref. 76) on the close approach of the comet of 1680 with the Earth that Halley inserted in the revised version of the “Synopsis” that appeared in his Astronomical tables. As will be described below, it was Whiston who predicted a collision of this comet with the Earth at its next return.

Wesley , “Serious thoughts”, 8–10.

Halley Edmond , “Some considerations about the cause of the Universal Deluge, laid before the Royal Society, on the 12th of December 1694” and “Some farther thoughts upon the same subject, delivered on the 19th of the same month”, Philosophical transactions, xxxiii, no. 383 (May-June 1724), 118–23 and 123–4. A note (p. 125) that follows these papers says that Halley refrained from publishing them in 1694, “he being sensible that he might have adventured ultra crepidam; and apprehensive least by some unguarded Expression he might incur the Censure of the Sacred Order”.

Force James E. , William Whiston, honest Newtonian (Cambridge, 1985), 40–53. For earlier discussions of Whiston's use of comets to explain the creation, universal deluge, and the forthcoming general conflagration, see Collier Brownell Katharine , Cosmogonies of our fathers: Some theories of the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries (New York, 1934; facsimile reprint, New York, 1968), 109–24; Greene John C. , The death of Adam: Evolution and its impact on western thought (Ames, Iowa, 1959), 17–24; and Jaki Stanley L. , Planets and planetarians: A history of theories of the origin of planetary systems (New York and Toronto, 1978), 87–96.

Burnet Thomas , The sacred theory of the Earth, ed. by Willey Basil (Carbondale, Illinois, 1965), 408. The cited passage is from Burnet's Review of the theory of the Earth, and of its proofs, especially in reference to Scripture (London, 1690).

Whiston William , A new theory of the Earth, from its original, to the consumation of all things. Wherein the creation of the world in six days, the universal Deluge, and the general conflagration, as laid down in the Holy Scriptures, are shewn to be perfectly agreeable to reason and philosophy, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1708), 440–9.

Force , Whiston, 27.

The annotated Gulliver's travels, ed. by Asimov Isaac (New York, 1980), 157 and 151. In her article “The scientific background of Swift's Voyage to Laputa”, Annals of science, ii (1937), 299–334, reprinted in her Science and imagination (Ithaca, N.Y., 1956), 110–54, Marjorie Nicolson argued (pp. 127–32) that most readers in Swift's time would have easily identified the comet described here as the one predicted by Halley to return in the late 1750s.

The annotated Gulliver's travels, 153.

[ Gay John ], “A true and faithful narrative of what pass'd in London during the general consternation of all ranks and degrees of mankind; on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday last” in Miscellanies: The third volume, ed. by Swift Jonathan and Pope Alexander (London, 1732), 239–60, p. 241. On Gay's authorship of this essay, see Osborn James M. , “‘That on Whiston’ by John Gay”, The papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, lvi (1962), 73–78.

[ Gay ], “A true and faithful narrative”, 243–4.

Ibid., 260.

Force , Whiston , 130. The reaction of the London public to these earthquakes is described in great detail by Kendrick, The Lisbon earthquake (ref. 18), 1–23, and Rousseau G. S. , “The London earthquakes of 1750”, Cahiers d'histoire mondiale = Journal of world history, xi (1968), 436–51.

Graticola [pseud.], “Error concerning the expected comet corrected”, GM, xxv (supplement for the year 1755), 584. According to Frank Baker, A union catalogue of the publications of John and Charles Wesley (Durham, N.C., 1966), 99, a new London edition of the pamphlet published in 1756 corrected the error about Halley's comet.

For biographical information on Witchell (1728–85; elected frs in 1767), see Taylor E. G. R. , The mathematical practitioners of Hanoverian England 1714–1840 (Cambridge, 1966), 221.

Gemsege Paul , “Cruelty of terrifying weak minds with groundless pains”, GM, xxvi (issue for February 1756), 71–72. For other contributions of Gemsege, about whom little is known, to GM, see xxiv (1754), 157–60, and xxvi (1756), 164–5.

Candidus [pseud.], “Hally [sic] and Newton on the comet expected in 1758”, GM, xxvi (issue for January 1756), 24–27 = GLM, xxv (issue for January 1756), 3–7= NGM, January 1756, 38–43. See also ref. 67. In a collection of calculations of the transit of Mercury by an assortment of observers that appears in GM, xxiii (issue for May 1753), 211–12, the reporter “Candidus” says that he observed the transit with John Bevis (see ref. 68). In his account of the observations that appears in the Philosophical transactions, xlviii (1753), 192–200, James Short says that he observed at the house of Thomas Birch along with Bevis. I am grateful for these references to Ruth Wallis, who thus identifies “Candidus” as either Bevis, Birch, or Short, in descending order of probability.

Season Henry , “A compendious discourse on comets”, signatures C3 verso and C4 recto-verso in his Speculum anni redivivum: Or, an almanack for the year of our Lord 1757 (London, n.d). Season issued almanacs from 1732 to 1774, was licensed in medicine and surgery at Salisbury in 1737, and made a study of rickets. I am grateful to Ruth Wallis for this biographical information.

Martin Benjamin , A view of the solar system and orbit of the comet, (with its proper elevation,) which will next return; truly representing all its appearances for any part of the year. A copy of this rare broadside is held by the British Library map room under shelfmark *10.(3.)

DA, no. 8147 (21 February 1757), p. [2], col. 2. I am grateful to John Millburn for calling my attention to Martin's advertisements in this publication.

DA, no. 8149 (23 February 1757), p. [2], col. 1. Martin gave this lecture again on 30 March.

DA, no. 8157 (4 March 1757), p. [2], col. 1; no. 8161 (9 March 1757), p. [2], col. 2; no. 8170 (19 March 1757), p. [2], col. 1; no. 8179 (30 March 1757), p. [2], col. 1; no. 8183 (4 April 1757), p. [2], col. 2; and no. 8191 (13 April 1757), p.[2], col. 2. On 11 March (DA, no. 8163, p.[2], col. 2), Martin advertised a related broadside entitled The wonders of the cometary world, in five new views of the mundane system that he had published in November 1754.

The British Library holds a copy of the first edition of this rare pamphlet under shelfmark 8708 i.2.(1). See also ref. 52.

Anon., An account of the remarkable comet (London, 1757), p. v.

CR, iii (issue for June 1757), 557.

MacLaurin Colin , “Of the comets”: Pp. 368–77 (Book IV, chap. VIII) in his An account of Sir Isaac Newton's philosophical discoveries (London, 1748).

Anon., An account of the remarkable comet, 4–5.

MR, xvii (issue for August 1757), 178. As for the general observations on comets contained in the pamphlet, this reviewer, apparently unaware that their true author was Maclaurin, characterized them as “very superficial and trifling”.

LM, xxvi (issue for May 1757), 211 = NGM, May 1757, 234.

An advertisement for such an edition appeared in LC, ii, no. 92 (30 July to 2 August 1757), 112, col. 3. The Yale University Library has a copy of this third edition, which, perhaps in response to the Critical review commentary, noted on the title page that it was “Printed for, and sold by, H. Dell, at the Angel and the Bible, the corner of St. Dunstan's Hill, in Tower-street; and by all Booksellers in Town and Country”.

“A summary account of the state of the weather for July 1757, extracted from a register kept in Dublin; with an attempt to explain the cause of our late remarkable hot weather”, GLM, xxvi (issue for July 1757), 380–1.

Flamsteed's 1682 observations of the comet appear on pp. 108–10 of the first volume of his Historiæ cælestis Britannicæ (London, 1725).

Anon., “Astronomical observations, &c.”, GLM, xxvi (issue for April 1757), 164.

Cowley J. L. , “Of the comet whose return is expected shortly”, pp. 38–41 in his A discourse on comets. Containing a brief description of the true system of the world, and an enumeration of all the discoveries which have been yet made concerning those temporary appearances, with respect to their orbits, forms, velocity, magnitudes, distances, tails, &c. particularly that whose return is expected in this or the following year, extracted from the writings of Sir Isaac Newton and other astronomers. To which is added, the opinion of that illustrious author, concerning the use of comets, the origin of matter, and his definition of the supreme being of the universe (London, 1757). Cowley's pamphlet was favourably reviewed in MR, xvii (issue for August 1757), 178–9. For biographical information on Cowley (1719–1797; elected frs, 1768), who later taught (1761–73) at the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, see Taylor , Mathematical practitioners (ref. 37), 226.

He was of course contrasting his pamphlet with Halley's Astronomical tables (Latin, 1749; English, 1752), in which the expanded and revised version of the “Synopsis” was to be found. It might be worth noting here that J. Richardson, the successor to W. Innys, the publisher of the tables, advertised the English version of the tables in LC, i, no. 68 (4 to 7 June 1757), 544, col. 3, and no. 74 (18 to 21 June 1757), 592, col. 3, as “This day is publish'd”, but this most likely was a new printing or remainders from Innys' stock.

Halley Edmund , A compendious view of the astronomy of comets. Containing likewise an accurate calculation, in the curve of an ellipsis, of that whose appearance is shortly expected, trans. by G.T. (London, 1757), pp. iii–iv.

Martin Benjamin , The theory of comets illustrated…. The whole adapted to, and exemplified in the orbit of the comet of the year 1682, whose return is now near at hand (London, 1757), 13–14. Martin dated his preface 4 June; in a private communication to me, John Millburn has suggested a publication date of about July. The book received a favourable review in MR, xvii (issue for August 1757), 177–8.

EA, no. 479 (31 March to 2 April 1757), p. [3], col. 3.

GLM, xxvi (issue for April 1757), 214.

LC, ii, no. 102 (23 to 25 August 1757), 190, col. 3. This newspaper dispatch was dated “Newcastle, August 20”. It perhaps may be worthwhile to quote here the extract regarding the phenomenon from one of the navigator's journals: “That, at Midnight, on Friday the 3rd of June last, in 77 Deg. 30 Min North Latitude, the Weather being clear, they observed the Sun to be very bright, and encompassed with a luminous Circle, coloured like the Rainbow, at the Distance of 10 Degrees from his Body. After this they had dark close Weather; and, at Four in the Morning, the Appearance of a bright Sun broke out to the Eastward, about 60 Deg. above the Horizon, accompanied with a broken Halo or Semicircle, distant from it 11 Deg. the Back of which was turned towards the true Sun, and from this Halo issued a Tail or Stream of Light, extending 50 Degrees in Length towards the North.” The author of the newspaper dispatch remarked that this phenomenon resembled one that had been seen at Rome on 20 March 1629 and which Descartes had circumstantially described in the tenth chapter of his “Book of Meteors”, i.e., the final portion of his Discours de la méthode … (Leiden, 1637).

Bradley J. , “Observations upon the comet that appeared in the months of September and October 1757, made at the Royal Observatory”, Philosophical transactions, I (1757), 408–15. The first sighting of the comet was made by Christian Gärtner near Dresden on 11 September, according to Klinkenberg Dirk , “Observations on the late comet in September and October 1757; made at the Hague”, ibid. , 483–8. For other European observations of this comet, see Pingré A.-G. , “Mémoire sur la comète qui a paru en cette année 1757”, Mémoires de l'Académie Royale des Sciences [Paris], 1757 (publ. 1762), 97–107, and those cited in refs 64–66 and 68 below. On the western side of the Atlantic Ocean, apparently only Thomas Stevenson and others in Barbados observed this comet. A brief dispatch concerning this sighting appeared in The Boston-gazette, and country journal, no. 139 (28 November 1757), p. [2], col. 3.

LC, ii, no. 117 (27 to 29 September 1757), 310, col. 2 = LoEP, no. 4664 (27 to 29 September 1757), p. [3], col. 2.

LC, ii, no. 118 (29 September to 1 October 1757), 313, col. 1. An identical report was published at the end of October in LM, xxvi (issue for October 1757), 514.

RWJ, no. 3946 (1 October 1757), p. [3], col. 3.

LC, ii, no. 118 (29 September to 1 October 1757), 316–17, and no. 119 (1 to 4 October 1757), 323. It was also republished at about the same time in SM, xix (issue for September 1757), 469–74. See also ref. 39.

“Curious accounts of the present comet”, GM, xxvii (issue for September 1757), 392–4. The first letter, dated 27 September, was written by “Astrophilus Londinensis”; the second, dated 29 September, by “B.J.” (John Bevis). The latter letter also appeared in GLM, xxvi (issue for September 1757), 443. Extracts from both letters appeared in SM, xix (issue for September 1757), 489–90. For biographical information on Bevis, see Ashworth William B. , “John Bevis and his Uranographia (ca. 1750)”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, cxxv (1981), 52–73, and Wallis Ruth , “John Bevis, M.D., F.R.S. (1695–1771), astronomer loyal”, Notes and records of the Royal Society of London, xxxvi (1982), 211–25.

LC, ii, no. 121 (6 to 8 October 1757), 338, col. 2. A differently worded report of the same event appeared at the end of the month in GM, xxvii (issue for October 1757), 479, and NGM, October 1757, 599: “About ten in the morning an uncommon darkness was observed in London and its neighbourhood, which occasioned terrible apprehensions in many weak people, who considered it as the effect of the present comet.”

LC, ii, no. 123 (11 to 13 October 1757), 359, col. 3 = DA, no. 8348 (13 October 1757), p. [1], col. 3 = GM, xxvii (issue for October 1757), 479 = LM, xxvi (issue for October 1757), 513 = GLM, xxvi (issue for October 1757), 542 = NGM, October 1757, 599 = SM, xix (issue for October 1757), 551. Bradley's denial about the Read's paragraph appears only in LC and DA.

LC, ii, no. 126 (18 to 20 October 1757), 384, cols 1–2.

Perhaps a deliberate contraction of “phantom phenomenon”?.

The downfalls of such people had of course long been associated with the appearances of comets; see ref. 79.

DA , no. 8342 (6 October 1757), p. [2], col. 2; no. 8345 (10 October 1757), p. [2], col. 3; no. 8347 (12 October 1757), p. [2], col. 3. Martin's lecture rivals also took advantage of the current popularity of comets. James Ferguson also advertised in the 10 October DA (p. [2], col. 3) to announce that he would that night begin a course of astronomical lectures; in the first lecture, on the solar system, he promised that “the Motions of the Comet [will be] shewn by a particular Machine”. Two weeks later, Richard Oliver, a mathematics teacher at Greenwich, announced a lecture, to be given on 27 October, on comets, in which “the Nature and Uses of these stupendous Bodies will be shewn, also the Observations necessary to trace their Orbits exemplified, and the Methods of delineating their Paths on a Celestial Globe. The whole illustrated by the Comet which now appears, and that which is soon expected to return into our System” ( DA , no. 8357 (24 October 1757), p. [2], col. 3).

B.M., “Of the visible way of the present comet among the Stars, &c.”, MC, ii (issue for October 1757), 646–7. An advertisement for the October issue appeared in DA, no. 8364 (1 November 1757), p. [1], col. 3.

The translation of this message is Martin's own, as are the emphases. The English translation of this passage that appears in the Tables version of Halley's “Synopsis” appears on sign. Tttt4.

According to advertisements in DA , no. 8377 (16 November 1757), p. [2], col. 1; no. 8409 (23 December 1757), p. [2], col. 3; no. 8445 (3 February 1758), p. [2], col. 1; and no. 8475 (10 March 1758), p. [2], col. 2. For a description of the cyclical pattern of Martin's lectures during a later period (early 1770s), see Millburn John , “The London evening courses of Benjamin Martin and James Ferguson, eighteenth-century lecturers on experimental philosophy”, Annals of science, xl (1983), 437–55.

According to advertisements in LC, ii, no. 134 (5 to 8 November 1757), 444, col. 1; no. 135 (8 to 10 November 1757), 450, col. 1; no. 136 (10 to 12 November 1757), 458, col. 1; and no. 140 (19 to 22 November 1757), 496, col. 2.

Season also recalled that comets were thought to be “certain Presages of the Death of Emperors, Kings, or Men in eminent Stations, and of Destruction to ancient Powers”. He was joined in this belief by “Francis Moore”, who thought “there is Reason for postponing the Downfall of France till 1759, and for looking upon the Comet, which is to appear this present Year 1758, as the fore-runner of this important Event” (Vox stellarum: Or, a loyal almanack for the year of human redemption, 1758 (London, n.d.), 11).

See ref. 35 above.

Season Henry , “A short appendix to my former discourse on comets”, signatures C3 verso and C4 recto-verso in his Speculum anni redivivum: Or, an almanack for the year of our Lord 1758 (London, n.d.)

[ Heath Robert ], “Of the comet expected to return this year, 1758”, pp. 56–57 in The gentleman and lady's palladium, for the year of our Lord, 1758 ([London], 1758). For biographical information on Heath, see Taylor , Mathematical practitioners (ref. 37), 180–1.

Letter , James Ferguson to the Rev. Alexander Irvine, 17 January 1758, in Henderson E. , Life of James Ferguson, F.R.S., in a brief autobiographical account, and further extended memoir (Edinburgh, London, and Glasgow, 1867), 230.

Fisher T. , “Of the periodical return of comets”, GM, xxviii (issue for February 1758), 66–68 = NGM, February 1758, 72–74 = LsEP, ii, no. 101 (10–13 March 1758), 245. The article title given here is from LsEP; GM had the page heads “Comets not dangerous” and “Desiderata in astronomy”, while the NGM printing carried neither a title nor a page head. Ruth Wallis identifies the author as Thomas Fisher, gent., Cold Bath Square, who is mentioned in GM, xx (1750), 446; xxi (1751), 177; and xxviii (1758), 367–8.

Quoted from a second letter from Fisher (see ref. 104).

DA, no. 8533 (17 May 1758), p. [2], col. 2.

LsEP, iii, no. 162 (31 July to 2 August 1758), 109. In the passages from this essay that I quote below, I have retained the original small caps and italics, but 1 have divided the essay into several paragraphs for clarity.

On Martin's failed attempts to become a Fellow of the Royal Society, see Millburn John , “Benjamin Martin and the Royal Society”, Notes and records of the Royal Society of London, xxviii (1973), 15–23.

A reference to Martin's lecture of 23 December (see ref. 77); Fisher (see ref. 104) refers explicitly to this lecture. The authors may have attended this particular lecture.

In an earlier dispute with Martin over electricity, John Freke, an eminent surgeon and Fellow of the Royal Society, criticized those who took money for electrical demonstrations, a practice Freke thought would inevitably encourage the employment of any tricks that could more easily gain the applause of the audience, and characterized Martin as a mere “country showman”. Martin took great offence at these remarks and wrote a witty and devastating attack on Freke in A supplement containing remarks on a rhapsody of adventures of a modern knight-errant in philosophy (Bath, 1746). On this dispute, see Millburn , Martin (ref. 5), 54–58. The satirists, like G.T. and Henry Season earlier, apparently shared Freke's contempt for those individuals, such as Martin, who lectured or wrote for profit on natural philosophy.

An obvious reference to the broadside published by Martin in February 1757 (see ref. 41).

Apparently Fisher (see ref. 84).

Possibly a reference to John Bevis (see ref. 68).

In LsEP, ii, no. 91 (15 to 17 February 1758), 168, and LC, iii, no. 178 (16 to 18 February 1758), 166, there appeared a letter (dated 16 February) from “B. I.” entitled “Of the present remarkable bright appearance of the Planet Venus”. The author recalled that “The late eminent Dr. Halley has, in the Philosophical Transactions, observed, That it may be justly reckoned one of the principal uses of the Mathematical Sciences, that they are in many cases able to prevent or correct the superstition of the unskillful vulgar; and by shewing the genuine causes of rare appearances, to deliver them from the vain apprehensions they are apt to entertain of what they call Prodigies, which sometimes by the artifices of designing men (as of late with regard to the expected Comet) have been made use of to very ill purposes”. The author then briefly described Halley's determination that Venus would be brightest at about 40° elongation from the Sun, about halfway between its greatest elongation and inferior conjunction. After noting that the latter two events in early 1758 would occur on 14 January and 27 May, the author observed that the time for Venus's greatest apparent brightness was thus “just now”. In the semiannual index to their newspaper, the editors of the LC attributed this article, perhaps inadvertently, to “Dr Bevis”, although the identity of “B.I.” was probably well known to readers.

Martin , The theory of comets illustrated (ref. 59), 18–19. How Martin could square a c. September perihelion date with a possible 12 May descending-node passage is unclear. Perhaps he was unaware of the contradiction between his statements on the times of these separate but related events.

Yeomans Donald K. and Kiang Tao , “The long-term motion of comet Halley”, Monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, cxcvii (1981), 633–46, p. 643 (Table 4).

Martin , “The young gentleman and lady's philosophy” (see ref. 5), 107–13. The performance and use of such devices by Martin, Desaguliers, Demainbray, Ferguson and others has been studied by John Millburn and J. E. Nuttall in a paper currently being considered for publication.

Millburn , Martin (ref. 5), 108. For comments on Cuffs work, see Turner G. L'E. , “Henry Baker, F.R.S., founder of the Bakerian Lecture”, Notes and records of the Royal Society of London, xxix (1974), 53–79.

For a description and illustration of them, see Millburn , Martin (ref. 5), 90, 92–95. Among his advertisements for them were “Visual Glasses, or Spectacles of a new Construction, agreeable to the Rules of Optics for assisting the Sight in the best Manner, and preserving the Eyes from the ill Effects they are liable to from common Spectacles” in LC, ii, no. 131 (29 October to 1 November 1757), 420, col. 3. Apparently inferior imitations were produced, causing Martin to warn in another advertisement that “Those that have not the initial Letters B.M. on the Frames, are not of Mr. Martin's Make, but pirated” (DA, no. 8477 (13 March 1758), p. [2], col. 3). This advertisement apparently did not go unnoticed, for soon, as Millburn notes, pedlars and hawkers were selling their cheap imitations with BM initials on the frames.

The relevant passage, as excerpted from Samuel Butler, Hudibras, with Dr. Grey's annotations, ii (London, 1819), 199–203, is as follows: It happen'd as a boy, one night, Did fly his tarsel of a kite; The strangest long-wing'd hawk that flies, … His train was six yards long, milk white, At th' end of which, there hung a light, Inclosed in lanthorn made of paper, That far off like a star did appear. This Sidrophel by chance espy'd, And with amazement staring wide, Bless us! (quoth he,) what dreadful wonder Is that, appears in heaven yonder? A comet, and without a beard! Or star that ne'er before appear'd? … It must be supernatural, Unless it be that cannon-ball, That shot i' th' air point-blank upright, Was borne to that prodigious height, That learn'd philosophers maintain, It ne'er came backwards down again; This passage has appeared more recently in Digby Joan (ed.), Permutations: Readings in science and literature (New York, 1985), 116–18. Martin himself had quoted two unrelated lines from Hudibras in the “Of the comets” section of “The young gentleman and lady's philosophy” (ref. 5), 104.

An announcement that “Mr. Dunn, a Teacher of the Mathematicks, has discovered a Method whereby several Maps of the Earth and Heavens of his constructing, answer all the uses of a large Pair of Globes”, appeared in DA , no. 8383 (23 November 1757), p. [1], col. 2, and LC, ii, no. 142 (24 to 26 November 1757), 506, col. 2. John Millburn has informed me that a testimonial — signed by six mathematics teachers, including John Cowley — for Samuel Dunn's planispheres appeared in the 7 January 1758 issue of Jackson's Oxford journal. In 1759, Dunn published both a Lecture on comets and The description & use of the universal planisphere; or, terrestrial & celestial globes in plane. With their applications … in geography, astronomy & navigation. For further biographical information on Dunn (1723–94), who was head of an academy in Chelsea at this time, see Taylor , Mathematical practitioners (ref. 37), 204–5.

Millburn , Martin (ref. 5), 102–4, 108–10.

[ Martin B. ], “Observations upon the comet that appeared in the months of September and October, 1757, made at the Royal Observatory by Dr. Bradley, Regius Professor of Astronomy”, MC, ii (issue for August 1758), 857–8.

LsEP, iii, no. 196 (18 to 20 October 1758), 379–80.

Martin Benjamin , A plain and familiar introduction to the Newtonian philosophy …. Designed for the use of such gentlemen and ladies as would acquire a competent knowledge of this science, without mathematical learning; and more especially those who have, or may attend the author's course of six lectures and experiments on these subjects (London, 1751), 108.

GM, xxviii (issue for October 1758), 487.

Urban Sylvanus , the editor of the Gentleman's magazine.

MC, ii (issue for October 1758), 901–2. See ref. 95.

DA, no. 8705 (4 December 1758), p. [2], col. 2; no. 8753 (29 January 1759), p. [2], col. 3; no. 8793 (16 March 1759), p. [2]. col. 1.

Astrophilus [pseud.], “Problem proposed to the Astronomers”, GM, xxix (issue for April 1759), 154. This was probably the same Astrophilus who observed the comet of 1757 (ref. 68) and had co-authored the “Search Warrant” essay (ref. 87).

Halley's Comet: A bibliography, compiled by Ruth S. Freitag (Washington, D.C., 1984).

See ref. 2.