NGC/IC Project Restoration Effort

===== NGC 3063 is the double star southwest of NGC 3065 and NGC 3066. Though N3063 was first seen by WH in 1802, he apparently described it only indirectly: "F, pL, R; the last of three, the others are II 333 and II 334." The position he gives is that of NGC 3066, and the description fits, too, so that is probably the object he mistakenly thought was new. If so, he also mistook the double star as one of his previous objects. His confusion was carried over through the GC and d'A's catalogue into NGC, and eventually into Dreyer's 1912 reprinting of WH's papers. I actually prefer the numbering that he has in the NGC itself as it more accurately reflects the history: NGC 3065 and 3066 are the true nebulae and are II 333 and II 334, respectively, while the last object found is II 909 = NGC 3063. This "last" object was not seen by JH, but was measured twice by d'A (his position appears in the NGC). d'A also has six measures of the other two objects, so he pinned down all three. - - - - - In August 2015, Courtney Seligman asked about the history of the discovery and numbering of these objects, so I collected almost all of the information available in the old papers. The only things missing here are d'A's extensive Latin notes describing his observations. Here are WH's notes from CH's fair copies of the sweeps: 3 April 1785, Sweep 390: Two, S, pF, bM. The most north a very little larger and brighter than the southern one; otherwise much alike; not far from being in the same meridian. 27 Ursa maj. f 20' 14" s 0o 2' RA 9h 45' 2" PD 16o 54'. (854, 855) ==> 10 02 04 +72 09.8 (J2000) Reduced wrt 27 UMa 10 02 43 +72 09.0 " Precessed from CH reduction 30 Sept 1802, Sweep 1112: Three, the place is that of the last, which is F, pL, R. The sp one eF, vS about 1' more south and, 1 F = 20" preceding. The np one pB stellar about 3' more north than that of which the place is taken, and, 15 [sic] F = 30" preceding. 27 Ursa f 20' 3" s 0o 5' RA 9h 44' 51" PD 16o 57' (854, 855, 2508), RA & PD of the 1st 9h 44" [sic] 21' [sic]. 16o 54'. Of the 2nd 9h 44' 31". 16o 58'. ==> 10 01 58 +72 07.1 (J2000) Reduced wrt 27 UMa sp 10 01 38 +72 06.1 " WH's estimated offset wrt measured neb. np 10 01 28 +72 10.1 " Ditto 10 02 32 +72 06.1 (J2000) Precessed from CH reduction 10 02 12 +72 05.1 " Ditto 10 02 04 +72 09.1 " Ditto Dreyer quotes the second of these in his 1912 edition of the Scientific Papers (under II 909) and adds, "These three are NGC 3063 = II 333, 3065 = II 334, and 3066 = II 909." The NGC positions are 3063 09 49 27 17 12.4 ==> 10 01 43 +72 07.6 (J2000) 3065 09 49 40 17 09.4 ==> 10 01 56 +72 10.5 (J2000) 3066 09 49 45 17 12.3 ==> 10 02 00 +72 07.6 (J2000) His NGC note for NGC 3063 reads Probably II 909 is = II 334, which is pL according to d'A; but H must have seen all three nebulae, as he says that II 909 is the last of the three. Finally, in his 1912 MNRAS paper, Dreyer has 3063 is II 333 3065 is II 334 3066 is II 909 with no further comment. JH (1833) has 654 II 333 09 46 01.4 17 00 57 vF, S, R, 10"; near * 11.12 m ==> 10 01 03.4 +72 10 41 (J2000) 655 II 334 09 46 16.4 17 03 48 F, R, 20", vglbM ==> 10 01 16.7 +72 07 48 (J2000) both in Sweep 382 on 4 Nov 1831. In CGH (1847), JH presents the "HON" list, including II 909 as Number 5 (his position is for 1830): 5 II 909 09 47 09.0 17 03 55 F, pL, R; the last of 3, the others are II 333 and 334. Follows 27 Ursae (G. 1563) 20m 3s, and is 0o 5' south of it. Discovered Sept. 30, 1802. ==> 10 02 06.9 +72 07 34 (J2000) For GC (1864), he has 1969 654 II 333 --- 09 48 42.7 17 09 25.2 pF, vS, R, bM; *11 nr Position from 1 observation, 3 total observations by H and h ==> 10 01 01.3 +72 10 37 (J2000) 1971 655 II 334 --- 09 48 57.4 17 12 16.5 vF, vS, vglbM Position from 1 observation, 3 total observations by H and h ==> 10 01 14.5 +72 07 44 (J2000) 1972 --- II 909 H.ON 5 09 49 50.5 17 12 24.7 F, pL, R; 3rd of 3 Position from 1 observation, 1 total observation by H ==> 10 02 05.7 +72 07 30 (J2000) In the GC Supplement (1879), Dreyer has two notes: 1969, 1971 The minute of RA should be 49 (H and D'Arrest). 1972 = II 909. Not found by D'Arrest, unless it is a Nebula observed by him in RA 9h 49m 27s (2 obs). d'A (1864; with extensive Latin commentary as well): H h 1861 J2000 II 909? --- 09 49 32.5 +72 47 21 n = 2 ==> 10 01 43.1 +72 07 35 II 333 654 09 49 45.0 +72 50 07 n = 6 ==> 10 01 56.0 +72 10 20 II 334 655 09 50 00.0 +72 47 34 n = 6 ==> 10 02 09.7 +72 07 45