Abstract
(1) Since writing my first note1 I have come across a passage in meteorite literature which, I think, definitely establishes the view that the high figure usually quoted for the number of Pultusk stones was based on a reasonable estimate and was not due to a misreading of a Warsaw publication, as suggested by Dr. Stenz2. Daubree3 mentions this very publication, and refutes energetically the low figures therein given as being “bien loin de la realite”. He knows already (August 1868) of more than 3,000 stones actually found, and emphasizes the exceptionally unfavourable circumstances for their collection. So, evidently, it was not ignorance of the statement made by the Haute Ecole de Varsovie, but opposition to it, based on more extended knowledge which induced French, Austrian and German authorities to adopt the high value for the total number of the stones.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
