<1r>

Sr

The amendments wch need be made are only these \I meet wth no other amendments wch need be made beside these wch follow./

pag. 368 lin. ult. pro 1665 lege 1666.

pag. 392 lin. ult. pro $-2\stackrel{.}{x}oo\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}$ {illeg} $+\stackrel{.}{x}oo\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}+x{o}^{3}\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}$ lege $-2\stackrel{.}{x}oo\stackrel{.}{y}y-\stackrel{.}{x}oo\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}-x{o}^{3}\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}$

pag. 393 l. 2. pro $+xo\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}+\stackrel{.}{x}o\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}$ lege $-xo\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}-\stackrel{.}{x}o\stackrel{.}{y}\stackrel{.}{y}$.

The plague was in Cambridge in both ye years 1665 & 1666 but it was in yt year 1666 yt I was in ye Country. \absent from Cambridge & therefore I have set down an amendmt of ye year./ I wrote to you lately that I found ye method of converging series in the winter between ye years 1665 & 1666. For yt was ye earliest mention \of it/ I could find then amongst my papers. But meeting since wth the notes wch \in ye year 1664/ upon my first reading of Vieta's works Schooten's Miscelanies & yor Arithmetica Infinitorum \{illeg}/ I took out of those books (wch was done in ye year 1664) I & finding among these notes my deduction of ye these series \for the circle & Hyperbola & some other figures/ out of yours in yor Arithmetica Infinitorum for squaring ye circle & Hyperbola: I collect yt it was in ye year 1664 that I deduced these series out of yors for squaring \the circle/ these {illeg} figures with some others |Then is also among these notes Mercators series for squaring the Hyperbola found by ye same method wth {illeg} some others.| But I cannot find yt I understood ye invention of these series by division & extraction of roots or made any further progress in this business before the writer wch was between ye years 1665 & 1666. But in yt winter & yt spring following by ye use of Division & extraction of roots I brought that method to be general, & then the plague made me leave c|C|ambridge. But I do not think it requisite that you should make a particular mention of these things. I believe you have said enough in ye beginning of yor 91th Chapter.

In yor third Chapter you have given us a collation of the Arabic cyphers with ours both old & modern. The other day looking into Tave{illeg}|r|niere's travells into India pa lib. 1 pag {illeg}|2|3 I met wth ye cyphers now used all over India. They are these.
$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccc}q& ɀ& \epsilon & ४& \mathit{y}& ʒ& \mathit{9}& ﺡ& ७& q.& q..& q...& q....\\ 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6& 7& 8& 9& 10& 100& 1000& 10000\end{array}$
Our old \figures/ 2, 4 & 5 \& 8 (thus marked ɀ $\underset{X}{_}$ {sic} $\mathit{y}$ ﺡ)/ seem to be borrowed from these.