Thanks for the library links - I'm just getting into it. The English book from 1687 strikes me as being way too clear. The verbiage found 100 yr later is often tough for me to get thru. Is this really a book from that early a date? A scam?

m
Mike Banks | 08.08.06 - 6:54 pm | #

Mike:

I wouldn't be able to authenticate the date of the book although it seems quite unlikely that the scanned work has been altered in any way. Nevertheless, I find it any interesting work regardless of its actual antiquity.
Keith Kenney | Homepage | 08.12.06 - 3:01 am | #