Herschel’s New Dynasty

  • Clifford Cunningham


A pastel portrait of William Herschel by John Russell. (Courtesy of the Herschel Museum, Bath. Used with permission)


Solar System Royal Society Eighteenth Century Celestial Body Personal Attack 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Andrewes, L. (1657). Aposmasmatia sacra: Or a collection of posthumous and orphan Lectures: Delivered at St. Paul’s and St. Giles his Church. London: R. Hodgkinsonne.Google Scholar
  2. Anon. (1837). Essay on astronomy. The Naval Magazine, 2(2), 119–129.Google Scholar
  3. Arago, M. (1871). Herschel. In Annual report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. Google Scholar
  4. Aubert, A. (1786, June 19). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, W1/13, A3.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, J. (1985). Paul and Thomas Sandby, Royal Academicians. Bath: Charles Skilton.Google Scholar
  6. Banks, J. (1792, February 27). Letter to Jean Florimond Boudon de Saint-Amans. Dawson Turner Collection VIII. London: 13, Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
  7. Banks, J. (1802, June 7). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, B.42.Google Scholar
  8. Banks, J. (1807, June 3). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, B.47.Google Scholar
  9. Bardi, J. (2006). The calculus wars: Newton, Leibniz, and the greatest mathematical clash of all time. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett, J. A. (1976). “On the power of penetrating into space”: The telescopes of William Herschel. Journal for the History of Astronomy, 7, 75–108.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bermingham, A. (2005). Sensation and sensibility. New Haven: Yale Center for British Art.Google Scholar
  12. Beuermann, K. (2005). Die Herschels—eine hannoveranische Astronomenfamilie in England. In E. Mittler (Ed.), Eine Welt allein ist nicht genug: Grossbritannien, Hannover und Göttingen (pp. 245–259). Göttingen: Niedersächische Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen.Google Scholar
  13. Blanning, T. C. W. (1977). “That Horrid Electorate” or “Ma Patrie Germanique”? George III, Hanover, and the Fürstenbund of 1785. The Historical Journal, 20(2), 311–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bode, J. (1802c, May 4). Letter to Olbers. Bremen University Archives.Google Scholar
  15. Bolles, W. (1845). An explanatory and phonographic pronouncing dictionary of the English language. New London: Bolles & Williams.Google Scholar
  16. Borden, A. R. (1982). A comprehensive old-English dictionary. Washington, DC: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  17. Brewster, D. (1805, January 7). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, B.126 (2).Google Scholar
  18. Brewster, D. (1806). An examination of the letter addressed to Principal Hill. Edinburgh. Published anonymously. See also Larder (1970) p. 303, footnote 35.Google Scholar
  19. Brewster, D. (1823). Biographical account of Sir William Herschel, Knight Guelph. The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, 8(16), 209–226.Google Scholar
  20. Brougham, H. (1796). Experiments and observations on the inflection, reflection and colours of light. Philosophical Transactions, 86, 227–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Brougham, H. (1803). Observations on the two lately discovered celestial bodies. Philosophical Transactions 1802. The Edinburgh Review 1, October 1802 … January 1803, second edition, 426–431. Printed by D. Willison for Archibald Constable, Edinburgh; and T.N. Longman & O. Rees, London.Google Scholar
  22. Buchan, J. (2003). Capital of the mind: How Edinburgh changed the world. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  23. Burgess, J. P. (2008). Mathematics, models and modality: Selected philosophical essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Burney, C., Sn. (1802a). Letter to Charles Burney Jr., 10 May (likely correct date is 3 May). Yale University Archives, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, OSB MSS 3.
  25. Burney, C., Sn. (1802b). Letter to Frances Crewe, 7 December. Yale University Archives, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, OSB MSS 3.
  26. Bynum, C. (2001). Metamorphosis and identity. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  27. Cann, C. (1828). A scriptural and allegorical glossary to Milton’s Paradise Lost. London: Printed for the authoress.Google Scholar
  28. Cantor, G. N. (1971). Henry Brougham and the Scottish methodological tradition. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 2(1), 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chaikin, A. (2003, September 26). A Bizarro “Cometoid”. Sky & Telescope (online article).
  30. Chambers, R. (1856). Biographical dictionary of Eminent Scotsmen. Glasgow: Blackie & Son.Google Scholar
  31. Chesterton, G. K. (1913). The Victorian age in literature. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
  32. Clerke, A. (1901). The Herschels and modern astronomy. London: Cassell & Co.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Conybeare, W. D. (1836). An elementary course of theological lectures. London: Sherwood, Gilbert and Piper.Google Scholar
  34. Cooke, T. (1830). A discourse on the theory of the Planetary System. The Imperial Magazine, 12, 916–923.Google Scholar
  35. Corry, J. (1802). The detector of quackery; or, analyser of medical, political, dramatic, and literary imposture. London: Hurst.Google Scholar
  36. Cotton, R. W. (1892). Stephen Weston. Notes and Gleanings, 5(49–50), 6–9.Google Scholar
  37. Crum, W. (1855). Sketch of the life and labours of Dr Thomas Thomson. Proceedings of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow, 3, 250–264.Google Scholar
  38. Cunningham, C. J., & Orchiston, W. (2011). Who invented the word asteroid, William Herschel or Stephen Weston? Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 14(3), 230–234.ADSGoogle Scholar
  39. Cunningham, C. J., & Oestmann, G. (2013). Classical deities in astronomy, the employment of verse to commemorate the discovery of the planets Uranus, Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta. Culture and Cosmos, 17(1), 3–29.Google Scholar
  40. Cunningham, C. J., & Orchiston, W. (2015). The clash between William Herschel and the great “amateur” astronomer Johann Schröter. In W. Orchiston, D. Green, & R. Strom (Eds.), New insights from recent studies in the history of astronomy: Following in the footsteps of F. Richard Stephenson (pp. 205–222). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Cunningham, C. J. (2015). Discovery of the Origin of the Word asteroid and the Related Terms asteroidal, planetoid, planetkin, planetule, and cometoid. Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, 20, 47–62.Google Scholar
  42. Cunningham, C. J. (2016). Milton’s Paradise Lost: Previously unrecognized allusions to the Aurora Borealis, and a solution to the comet conundrum in book 2. Renaissance and Reformation, 39(1).Google Scholar
  43. Davis, G. N. (1969). German thought and culture in England 1700–1770. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  44. Dick, S. J. (2013). Discovery and classification in astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Diogo, M. P., Carneiro, A., & Simoes, A. (2001). The Portuguese naturalist Correia da Serra (1751–1823) and his impact on early nineteenth-century botany. Journal of the History of Biology, 34(2), 353–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Dixon, T. (2008). The invention of altruism, making moral meanings in Victorian Britain. London: British Academy.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Drobyshevski, E. (2008). Stardust findings favor not only the planetart origin of comets but the underlying close-binary cosmogony of the Solar System as well. Icarus, 197, 203–210.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Fitch, J. (1987). Asteroids and astrophysics. Cassiopeia, Canadian Astronomical Society newsletter. Letter to the editor dated 29 June.Google Scholar
  49. Flynn, P. (2002). Francis Jeffrey and the Scottish critical tradition. In D. Wu & D. Massimiliano (Eds.), British romanticism and the Edinburgh review, bicentenary essays (pp. 13–32). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Foss, M. (1949). Symbol and metaphor in human experience. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Reprinted by University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, 1966.Google Scholar
  51. Freely, J. (2013). Before Galileo: The birth of modern science in Medieval Europe. New York and London: Overlook Duckworth.Google Scholar
  52. Gascoigne, J. (1994). Joseph Banks and the English enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Gauss, C. (1802c, June 25). Letter to Olbers. Bremen Archives.Google Scholar
  54. Gauss, C. (1802d, October 16). Letter to Zach. The Monthly Correspondence. November issue, 503.Google Scholar
  55. Goldstein, K. (1948). On naming and pseudonaming. ETC, V(3), 191–197.Google Scholar
  56. Gosse, E. (1897). A short history of modern English literature. New York: D. Appleton and Co.Google Scholar
  57. Gould, B. A. (1848). On the orbits of the asteroids. American Journal of Science, 6, 28–36.Google Scholar
  58. Grainger, J. D. (2004). The Amiens Truce: Britain and Bonaparte, 1801–1803. Woodbridge: Boydell Press.Google Scholar
  59. Grosseteste, R. (1514). Opuscula. Venice: Mondato. The first printed work that includes De artibus liberalibus.Google Scholar
  60. Grove, W. (1843, October). Physical science in England. Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine 54(336), 514–525.Google Scholar
  61. Hanham, A., & Hoskin, M. (2013). The Herschel Knighthoods: Facts and fiction. Journal for the History of Astronomy, 44, 149–164.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Harding, K. (1804a, September 13). Letter to Gauss. Goettingen Archives, Cod. Ms. Gauss Briefe A: Harding, 23.Google Scholar
  63. Herschel, W. (1782b, June 3). Letter to Caroline Herschel. RAS, W.1/8.18.Google Scholar
  64. Herschel, W. (1782c). Letter to Alexander Aubert. RAS W1/1, 21–24.Google Scholar
  65. Herschel, W. (1802a, April 25). Letter to William Watson. RAS, W.1/1, 247–248.Google Scholar
  66. Herschel, W. (1802c), Observations on the two lately discovered celestial Bodies. Philosophical Transactions, 92, 213–232. Read 6 May 1802.Google Scholar
  67. Herschel, W. (1802d). Letter of 22 May (to multiple recipients). RAS, W.1/1, 249.Google Scholar
  68. Herschel, W. (1802e, June 10). Letter to Joseph Banks. Dawson Turner Collection 13, 163–164. London: Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
  69. Herschel, W. (1803). Account of the changes that have happened, during the last twenty-five years, in the relative situation of double stars; With an investigation of the cause to which they are owing. Philosophical Transactions, 93, 339–382.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Herschel, W. (1805). Experiments for ascertaining how far telescopes will enable us to determine very small angles, and to distinguish the real from the spurious diameters of celestial and terrestrial objects, with an application of the result of the experiments to a series of observations on the nature and magnitude of Mr. Harding’s lately discovered star. Philosophical Transactions, 95, 31–64.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Herschel, W. (1807a, June 1). Letter to Joseph Banks. RAS, W.1/1, 269–270.Google Scholar
  72. Herschel, W. (1807a). Observations on the nature of the new celestial body discovered by Dr. Olbers, and of the comet which was expected to appear last January in its return from the Sun. Philosophical Transactions, 97, 260–266. Read 4 June 1807.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Higgitt, R. (2014). Maskelyne: Astronomer royal. London: Robert Hale.Google Scholar
  74. Holmes, R. (2008). The age of wonder. NY: Pantheon Books. footnote 134.Google Scholar
  75. Hoskin, M. (2003b), The Herschel partnership. Cambridge: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
  76. Howell, W. S. (1971). Eighteenth-century British logic and rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Hume, D. (1748). Enquiries concerning the human understanding and concerning the principles of morals. London: A. Millar.Google Scholar
  78. Huth, J. (1802, September 10). Letter to Herschel. RAS, H.33.Google Scholar
  79. Huth, J. (1804). Aus einem Schreiben des Hrn. Hofrath Huth vom 21 Sept. 1804. Astronomisches Jahrbuch für das Jahr, 1807, 265–268.Google Scholar
  80. Hutton, C. (1815). A philosophical and mathematical dictionary (Vol. 2). London: F.C. and J. Ridon.Google Scholar
  81. International Astronomical Union. (2008). 11 June meeting of the IAU Executive Committee, Oslo, Norway.Google Scholar
  82. Jones, W. P. (1966). The rhetoric of science. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  83. Jungnickel, C., & McCormmach, R. (1996). Cavendish. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
  84. Kirkwood, D. (1888). The asteroids, or minor planets between Mars and Jupiter. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.Google Scholar
  85. Larder, D. (1970). Thomas Thomson’s activities in Edinburgh 1791–1811. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, 24(2), 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lemmon, J. G. (1878). Honorary names in scientific nomenclature. Botanical Gazette, 3(7), 61–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lewis, S. (1842). The history and topography of the parish of Saint Mary, Islington, in the county of Middlesex. London: J. H. Jackson.Google Scholar
  88. Linnaeus, C. (1735). Systema Naturae. Facsimile of the First Edition. Nieuwkoop: B. DeGraaf (1964).Google Scholar
  89. Linnaeus, C. (1767). Systema Naturae, Tomus II. Holmiae. Impensis Direct. Laurentii Salvii.Google Scholar
  90. Lloyd, G. E. R. (1987). The revolutions of wisdom. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  91. Locke, J. (1690). An essay concerning humane understanding. London: Tho. Basset.Google Scholar
  92. Loemker, L. (1972). Struggle for synthesis: The seventeenth century background of Leibniz’s synthesis of order and freedom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Lofft, C. (1798). The monthly magazine, Part II for 1798, p. 406. Letter dated November 23.Google Scholar
  94. Lofft, C. (1802a). Ceres Ferdinandea. The Monthly Mirror, 13, 230–231.Google Scholar
  95. Lofft, C. (1802b, October). The monthly magazine, 14(3), 199–200.Google Scholar
  96. Lofft, C. (1803a, January). The Monthly Magazine, 14(6), 479.Google Scholar
  97. Lofft, C. (1805, July). Whether it would be preferable, according to their Phenomena, to call Ceres, Pallas, and Juno, simply Planets, or Asteroids, or Cometoids. Monthly Magazine; or British Register, 19, 534.Google Scholar
  98. Love, J. J. (2013). On the insignificance of Herschel’s sunspot correlation. Geophysical Research Letters, 40, 4171–4176.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Lynn, W. T. (1900). Alexander Aubert. The Observatory, 23, 346–347.ADSGoogle Scholar
  100. Lysaght, A. M. (1971). Joseph Banks in Newfoundland and Labrador, 1766. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  101. Maas, H. (2003). Where mechanism ends, Thomas Reid on the moral and the animal oeconomy. History of Political Economy, 35(Annual Supplement), 338–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Magie, D. (2014). Historia Augusta. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  103. Maguire, L., & Smith, E. (2012). ‘Time’s cosmic sparks’, The dramaturgy of a mad world, My Masters and Timon of Athens. In G. Taylor & T. Henley (Eds.), The oxford handbook of Thomas Middleton (pp. 181–195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Manara, A. (1997). Controversie e curiosità sulla nomenclatura dei piccoli pianeti. Memorie della Società Astronomica Italiana, 68, 679–686.ADSGoogle Scholar
  105. Markham, F. (1625). The book of honour. London: Augustine Matthews & John Norton.Google Scholar
  106. Maskelyne, N. (1782, August 8). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, M.20.Google Scholar
  107. Maurer, A. (1998). A compendium of all known William Herschel telescopes. Journal of the Antique Telescope Society, 14, 4–15.ADSGoogle Scholar
  108. Monthly Correspondence. (1802, July). Letter from Banks to Zach, 90.Google Scholar
  109. New, C. (1961). The life of Henry Brougham to 1830. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  110. Newton, I. (1726). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (3rd ed.). Published in English as Newton’s Principia by N. W. Chittenden, Andrew Motte (Trans.) (1848: 465), Daniel Adee, New York.Google Scholar
  111. Norton, C. E. (1887). Reminiscences by Thomas Carlyle (Vol. 1). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  112. Olbers, W. (1802a, May 23). Letter to Carl Gauss. Goettingen University Archives.Google Scholar
  113. Olbers, W. (1802b, May 24). Letter to J. J. Lalande. Bremen University Archives.Google Scholar
  114. Olbers, W. (1802c, June 17). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, O.2.Google Scholar
  115. Oriani, B. (1802, August 28). Letter to Franz Zach. Archivo storico Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Milan.Google Scholar
  116. Phillips, J. S. (1841). Nomenclature of natural science. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1, 85–88.Google Scholar
  117. Phillips, R. (1836). A million facts connected with the studies, pursuits, and interests of mankind (3rd ed.). New York: Connor & Cooke.Google Scholar
  118. Phillips, W. (1817). Eight familiar lectures on astronomy. London: William Phillips.Google Scholar
  119. Piazzi, G. (1802a, July 2). Letter to Oriani. Archivo storico Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Milan.Google Scholar
  120. Piazzi, G. (1802b, July 4). Letter to Herschel. RAS, W.1/13.P.20, London.Google Scholar
  121. Pindar, P. (1816). The works of Peter Pindar, Esq., with a copious index. London: Walker and Edwards.Google Scholar
  122. Pope, A. (1712, November 7). Letter to Richard Steele. Printed in the Spectator, November 10.Google Scholar
  123. Reichenbach, H. G. L. (1822). Vorwort. Magazin für aesthetische Botanik, 1.Google Scholar
  124. Rice, A. (2001). Inexplicable? The status of complex numbers in Britain, 1750–1850. In J. Lutzen (Ed.), Around Caspar Wessel and the geometric representation of complex numbers (pp. 147–180). Denmark: Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab.Google Scholar
  125. Robertson, R. (2009). Mock-epic poetry from Pope to Heine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Rousseau, J.-J. (1782). Les Réveries du promeneur solitaire (The reveries of a solitary walker). Lausanne, Switzerland: Grasset.Google Scholar
  127. Savich, A. N. (1855). Historical view of the discovery of minor planets or asteroids. St. Petersburg: V.V. Grigor’ev (in Russian).Google Scholar
  128. Schaffer, S. (1998). Leviathan of Parsonstown. In T. Lenoir (Ed.), Inscribing science, scientific texts and the materiality of communication (pp. 182–222). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  129. Schiller, F. (1788, March 17). Letter to C. G. Koerner. In Schiller’s Briefe, 2 (1893). Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlag Anstalt.Google Scholar
  130. Sime, J. (1900). William Herschel and his work. New York: C. Scribner’s & Son.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Smith, B. (2010). Natural reflections, human cognition at the nexus of science and religion. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  132. Smith, J. (1815). The panorama of science and art (Vol. 1). Liverpool: Nuttall, Fisher, and Co.Google Scholar
  133. Smolin, L. (2006). The trouble with physics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  134. Somerville, M. (1831). Mechanism of the heavens. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  135. Sydney, W. C. (1898). The early days of the nineteenth century in England, 1800–1820 (Vol. 1). London: George Redway.Google Scholar
  136. Tannoch-Bland, J. (1997). Dugald Stewart on intellectual character. British Journal for the History of Science, 30, 307–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Terdiman, R. (1985). Discourse/counter-discourse: The theory and practice of symbolic resistance in nineteenth-century France. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  138. Terdiman, R. (2003). The marginality of Michel de Certeau. In T. Stovall & G. Van Den Abbeele (Eds.), French civilization and its discontents (pp. 19–40). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  139. Terdiman, R. (2005). Body & story: The ethics and practice of theoretical conflict. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  140. (1803a). The Critical Review, 38, 15–19.Google Scholar
  141. (1807). The Eclectic Review, 3, 182–183.Google Scholar
  142. (1796). The Monthly Magazine, 1, Description of Herschel’s forty-foot reflecting telescope, 45.Google Scholar
  143. Thomson, J. A. (1915). What science owes to German investigators. In W. P. Paterson (Ed.), German culture (pp. 65–160). London: T.C. & E.C. Jack.Google Scholar
  144. Thomson, T. (1812). History of the royal society. London: Robert Baldwin.Google Scholar
  145. Uglow, J. (2002). The lunar men. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  146. Vermeir, K., & Deckard, M. (2012). Philosophical enquiries into the science of sensibility. In The science of sensibility: Reading Burke’s philosophical enquiry (pp. 3–56). NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  147. Vick, B. E. (2014). The congress of Vienna: Power and politics after Napoleon. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Voiron de Chambéry. (1810). Histoire de l’Astronomie, depuis 1781 jusqu’s 1811. Chez Courcier, Imprimeur-Libraire pour les Mathématiques, quai des Augustins, no. 57.Google Scholar
  149. Ward, A. W., & Waller, A. R. (Eds.). (1907–1921). Cambridge history of English and American literature (Vol. 12). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  150. Ward, A. W., & Waller, A. R. (Eds.). (1907–1916), Cambridge history of English and American literature (Vol. 14). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  151. Watson, W. (1802, April 27). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, W.76 (1).Google Scholar
  152. Watson, W. (1803, March 2). Letter to William Herschel. RAS, W.77 (1).Google Scholar
  153. Welsh, D. (1825). An account of the life and writings of Thomas Brown. Edinburgh: Tait.Google Scholar
  154. Whatmore, R. (2008). Treason and despotism, the impact of the French Revolution upon Britain. History of European Ideas, 34(4), 583–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Winch, D. (1983). The system of the north: Dugald Stewart and his pupils. In S. Collini, D. Winch, & J. Burrows (Eds.), That noble science of politics: A study of nineteenth-century intellectual history (pp. 23–62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  156. Zach, F. X. (1802a, September 17). Letter to Jan Sniadecki. Jagiellonian University Library, Cracow.Google Scholar
  157. Zach, F. X. (1802b, September 17). Letter to Barnaba Oriani. Archivo storico Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Milan.Google Scholar
  158. Zach, F. X. (1802d, March 15). Letter to Joseph Banks. RGO 4/119viii.Google Scholar
  159. Zach, F. X. (1802g, June 24). Letter to Carl Gauss. Göttingen Archives.Google Scholar
  160. Zach, F. X. (1802h, June 26). Letter to Oriani. Brera Observatory Archives.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clifford Cunningham
    • 1
  1. 1.Ft. LauderdaleUSA

Personalised recommendations