Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, first edition - Volume I, A-B.pdf/12

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
vi
PREFACE.

The Editors, though fully ſenſible of the propriety of adopting the preſent plan, were not aware of the length of time neceſſary for the execution, but engaged to begin the publication too early. However, by the remonſtrances of the Compilers, the publication was delayed for twelve months. Still time was wanted. But the ſubſcribers puſhed the Editors, and they at laſt perſuaded the Compilers to conſent to the publication. If time had been allowed, the Compilers deſigned to have compleated the ſciences before proceeding to the technical terms; and by that means to have guarded againſt omiſſions, and made all the references from the terms to the ſciences more particular. The conſequence was unavoidable. All the references to any ſcience that occur in the alphabet previous to the name of the ſcience itself, are general: thoſe that follow are particular; pointing out, not only the name of the ſcience, but the number of the page.

We muſt further acknowledge, that, in ſome inſtances, we have deviated from the general plan; but, we hope, not without reaſon. For example, under the words Botany and Natural History, it would have been an endleſs, and perhaps an uſeleſs talk, to have given the generic diſtinctions of every plant, and of every animal. Theſe are to be found under the names of the plants and animals themſelves. The ſame obſervation may be made with reſpect to Mineralogy, Materia Medica, Pathology, Phyſiology, and Therapeutics. Theſe are ſo interwoven with Anatomy, Botany, Chemiſtry, and Medicine, that, in a work of this kind, it was almoſt impoſſible, without many unneceſſary repetitions, to treat them as diſtinct ſciences. Indeed, properly ſpeaking, they are not ſciences, but parts or acceſſories of ſciences, which, by the dexterity of teachers and authors, have been long exhibited under that form.

With regard to errors in general, whether falling under the denomination of mental, typographical, or accidental, we arc conſcious of being to point out a greater number than any critic whatever. Men who are acquainted with the innumerable difficulties attending the execution of a work of ſuch an extenſive nature will make proper allowances. To theſe we appeal, and shall reſt ſatiſfied with the judgment they pronounce.

In order to give ſome idea of the materials of which this Dictionary is compoſed, we ſhall conclude the preface with a liſt of the principal authors made uſe of in the compilation.

LIST