Thus, after the theory of gunnery had exercised the genius of the learned for nearly two hundred years, and for almost fourscore of that time had rested on fundamentals which had never been contested, it was pronounced at once to be almost intirely useless, and that by one of the most competent judges. Now, whether it were owing to the deference due to the authority of that experienced artillerist, or to some other cause, I shall not determine, but observe, that it appears not from the history of the academy, that the sentiments of M. de RESSONS were at this time controverted, or any reason offered afterwards for the failure of the theory of projectiles when applied to use. Nor can I pass unnoticed the pause that ensued before any further attempts were made to improve the theory of the art, either upon the old principles or upon new ones, except by such authors as seemed ignorant of this transaction, and who of course were not sufficiently apprized of the inefficacy of the properties of the parabola for directing practice. Or by those who were employed in speculatively investigating the nature of the curve traced by a ball in the air; a curve which began at last to be considered as one deviating much from the line of a parabola. Or, finally, by such as, having taken notice that NEWTON’s ideas had not been duly attended to, endeavoured to avail themselves of them, and of some experiments that had been made by others, for proving the great opposition of the air to bodies of swift motion; but without ascertaining the degree of that resistance, or enriching the art by any practical rules[20].