This is a modern-English version of Great Astronomers, originally written by Ball, Robert S. (Robert Stawell). It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

GREENWICH OBSERVATORY.
GREENWICH OBSERVATORY.
Greenwich Observatory.

GREAT ASTRONOMERS

by

by

SIR ROBERT S. BALL D.Sc. LL.D. F.R.S.

SIR ROBERT S. BALL, D.Sc., LL.D., F.R.S.

Lowndean Professor of Astronomy and Geometry in the University of Cambridge
Author of "In Starry Realms" "In the High Heavens" etc.

Lowndean Professor of Astronomy and Geometry at the University of Cambridge
Author of "In Starry Realms," "In the High Heavens," etc.

WITH NUMEROUS ILLUSTRATIONS

WITH MANY ILLUSTRATIONS

PREFACE.

It has been my object in these pages to present the life of each astronomer in such detail as to enable the reader to realise in some degree the man's character and surroundings; and I have endeavoured to indicate as clearly as circumstances would permit the main features of the discoveries by which he has become known.

It has been my goal in these pages to portray the life of each astronomer in enough detail for the reader to understand, to some extent, the person's character and environment; and I have tried to clearly highlight, as much as the situation allowed, the key aspects of the discoveries that made him renowned.

There are many types of astronomers—from the stargazer who merely watches the heavens, to the abstract mathematician who merely works at his desk; it has, consequently, been necessary in the case of some lives to adopt a very different treatment from that which seemed suitable for others.

There are many types of astronomers—from the stargazer who just looks at the sky, to the abstract mathematician who works at his desk; because of this, it has been necessary to take a very different approach with some people compared to what seemed right for others.

While the work was in progress, some of the sketches appeared in "Good Words." The chapter on Brinkley has been chiefly derived from an article on the "History of Dunsink Observatory," which was published on the occasion of the tercentenary celebration of the University of Dublin in 1892, and the life of Sir William Rowan Hamilton is taken, with a few alterations and omissions, from an article contributed to the "Quarterly Review" on Graves' life of the great mathematician. The remaining chapters now appear for the first time. For many of the facts contained in the sketch of the late Professor Adams, I am indebted to the obituary notice written by my friend Dr. J. W. L. Glaisher, for the Royal Astronomical Society; while with regard to the late Sir George Airy, I have a similar acknowledgment to make to Professor H. H. Turner. To my friend Dr. Arthur A. Rambaut I owe my hearty thanks for his kindness in aiding me in the revision of the work.

While the work was in progress, some of the sketches were published in "Good Words." The section on Brinkley is mainly based on an article about the "History of Dunsink Observatory," which was published during the tercentenary celebration of the University of Dublin in 1892, and the life of Sir William Rowan Hamilton is taken, with a few changes and omissions, from an article contributed to the "Quarterly Review" on Graves' biography of the great mathematician. The other chapters are now appearing for the first time. For many of the details included in the sketch of the late Professor Adams, I am grateful to the obituary written by my friend Dr. J. W. L. Glaisher for the Royal Astronomical Society; similarly, concerning the late Sir George Airy, I owe thanks to Professor H. H. Turner. I also extend my sincere appreciation to my friend Dr. Arthur A. Rambaut for his assistance in reviewing the work.

R.S.B.

R.S.B.

The Observatory, Cambridge.
October, 1895

The Observatory, Cambridge.
October 1895

CONTENTS.

PREFACE.
INTRODUCTION.
PTOLEMY.
COPERNICUS.
TYCHO BRAHE.
GALILEO.
KEPLER.
ISAAC NEWTON.
FLAMSTEED.
HALLEY.
BRADLEY.
WILLIAM HERSCHEL.
LAPLACE.
BRINKLEY.
JOHN HERSCHEL.
THE EARL OF ROSSE.
AIRY.
HAMILTON.
LE VERRIER.
ADAMS.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

[Note of etext transcriber: The illustrations by be seen enlarged by clicking on them.]

[Note of etext transcriber: You can see the illustrations in larger size by clicking on them.]

INTRODUCTION.

Of all the natural sciences there is not one which offers such sublime objects to the attention of the inquirer as does the science of astronomy. From the earliest ages the study of the stars has exercised the same fascination as it possesses at the present day. Among the most primitive peoples, the movements of the sun, the moon, and the stars commanded attention from their supposed influence on human affairs.

Of all the natural sciences, none captures the curiosity of the investigator quite like astronomy. Since ancient times, studying the stars has held the same allure that it does today. Even among the most primitive societies, the movements of the sun, moon, and stars drew attention due to their believed impact on human life.

The practical utilities of astronomy were also obvious in primeval times. Maxims of extreme antiquity show how the avocations of the husbandman are to be guided by the movements of the heavenly bodies. The positions of the stars indicated the time to plough, and the time to sow. To the mariner who was seeking a way across the trackless ocean, the heavenly bodies offered the only reliable marks by which his path could be guided. There was, accordingly, a stimulus both from intellectual curiosity and from practical necessity to follow the movements of the stars. Thus began a search for the causes of the ever-varying phenomena which the heavens display.

The practical uses of astronomy were clear even in ancient times. Old sayings show how farmers’ tasks were scheduled based on the movements of the stars. The positions of the stars indicated when to plough and when to sow. For sailors navigating the vast ocean, the stars provided the only reliable way to chart their course. As a result, there was both an intellectual curiosity and a practical need to track the movements of the stars. This initiated a quest to understand the reasons behind the constantly changing phenomena displayed in the heavens.

Many of the earliest discoveries are indeed prehistoric. The great diurnal movement of the heavens, and the annual revolution of the sun, seem to have been known in times far more ancient than those to which any human monuments can be referred. The acuteness of the early observers enabled them to single out the more important of the wanderers which we now call planets. They saw that the star-like objects, Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars, with the more conspicuous Venus, constituted a class of bodies wholly distinct from the fixed stars among which their movements lay, and to which they bear such a superficial resemblance. But the penetration of the early astronomers went even further, for they recognized that Mercury also belongs to the same group, though this particular object is seen so rarely. It would seem that eclipses and other phenomena were observed at Babylon from a very remote period, while the most ancient records of celestial observations that we possess are to be found in the Chinese annals.

Many of the earliest discoveries are indeed prehistoric. The daily movement of the sky and the yearly orbit of the sun seem to have been understood long before any human structures were built. The keen observations of early astronomers allowed them to identify the more significant celestial objects we now refer to as planets. They noticed that the star-like figures, Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars, along with the more prominent Venus, formed a distinct category apart from the fixed stars among which they moved and to which they looked so similar. But early astronomers' insight went even deeper, as they realized that Mercury also belongs to this group, even though this particular planet is rarely seen. It appears that eclipses and other phenomena were recorded in Babylon from a very ancient time, while the oldest records of celestial observations we have come from Chinese history.

The study of astronomy, in the sense in which we understand the word, may be said to have commenced under the reign of the Ptolemies at Alexandria. The most famous name in the science of this period is that of Hipparchus who lived and worked at Rhodes about the year 160BC. It was his splendid investigations that first wrought the observed facts into a coherent branch of knowledge. He recognized the primary obligation which lies on the student of the heavens to compile as complete an inventory as possible of the objects which are there to be found. Hipparchus accordingly commenced by undertaking, on a small scale, a task exactly similar to that on which modern astronomers, with all available appliances of meridian circles, and photographic telescopes, are constantly engaged at the present day. He compiled a catalogue of the principal fixed stars, which is of special value to astronomers, as being the earliest work of its kind which has been handed down. He also studied the movements of the sun and the moon, and framed theories to account for the incessant changes which he saw in progress. He found a much more difficult problem in his attempt to interpret satisfactorily the complicated movements of the planets. With the view of constructing a theory which should give some coherent account of the subject, he made many observations of the places of these wandering stars. How great were the advances which Hipparchus accomplished may be appreciated if we reflect that, as a preliminary task to his more purely astronomical labours, he had to invent that branch of mathematical science by which alone the problems he proposed could be solved. It was for this purpose that he devised the indispensable method of calculation which we now know so well as trigonometry. Without the aid rendered by this beautiful art it would have been impossible for any really important advance in astronomical calculation to have been effected.

The study of astronomy, as we know it today, began during the Ptolemaic era in Alexandria. The most notable figure from this time is Hipparchus, who lived and worked in Rhodes around 160 BC. His remarkable research was the first to transform observed facts into a structured area of knowledge. He understood the essential duty of anyone studying the heavens to create as thorough a list as possible of the celestial objects present. Therefore, Hipparchus started by undertaking, on a small scale, a task similar to what modern astronomers do today with tools like meridian circles and photographic telescopes. He created a catalogue of the main fixed stars, which is especially valuable to astronomers as it is the earliest work of its kind that has survived. He also examined the movements of the sun and moon and developed theories to explain the constant changes he observed. However, he faced a far more challenging problem when trying to interpret the complex movements of the planets. To create a coherent theory about them, he made numerous observations of these wandering stars. The significant progress Hipparchus made can be appreciated by recognizing that, before he could delve into his core astronomical work, he had to invent the branch of mathematics necessary to solve the problems he posed. This led him to develop the essential method of calculation that we now call trigonometry. Without the support of this elegant discipline, any significant advancements in astronomical calculations would have been impossible.

But the discovery which shows, beyond all others, that Hipparchus possessed one of the master-minds of all time was the detection of that remarkable celestial movement known as the precession of the equinoxes. The inquiry which conducted to this discovery involved a most profound investigation, especially when it is remembered that in the days of Hipparchus the means of observation of the heavenly bodies were only of the rudest description, and the available observations of earlier dates were extremely scanty. We can but look with astonishment on the genius of the man who, in spite of such difficulties, was able to detect such a phenomenon as the precession, and to exhibit its actual magnitude. I shall endeavour to explain the nature of this singular celestial movement, for it may be said to offer the first instance in the history of science in which we find that combination of accurate observation with skilful interpretation, of which, in the subsequent development of astronomy, we have so many splendid examples.

But the discovery that clearly shows Hipparchus was one of the greatest minds ever was his identification of the remarkable celestial movement called the precession of the equinoxes. The investigation that led to this discovery was incredibly deep, especially considering that during Hipparchus's time, the tools for observing heavenly bodies were very basic, and the earlier observations were extremely limited. We can only marvel at the genius of the man who, despite these challenges, managed to detect such a phenomenon as precession and demonstrate its actual magnitude. I will try to explain this unique celestial movement, as it represents the first instance in the history of science where we see a combination of precise observation and skilled interpretation, which would later become common in the advancement of astronomy.

The word equinox implies the condition that the night is equal to the day. To a resident on the equator the night is no doubt equal to the day at all times in the year, but to one who lives on any other part of the earth, in either hemisphere, the night and the day are not generally equal. There is, however, one occasion in spring, and another in autumn, on which the day and the night are each twelve hours at all places on the earth. When the night and day are equal in spring, the point which the sun occupies on the heavens is termed the vernal equinox. There is similarly another point in which the sun is situated at the time of the autumnal equinox. In any investigation of the celestial movements the positions of these two equinoxes on the heavens are of primary importance, and Hipparchus, with the instinct of genius, perceived their significance, and commenced to study them. It will be understood that we can always define the position of a point on the sky with reference to the surrounding stars. No doubt we do not see the stars near the sun when the sun is shining, but they are there nevertheless. The ingenuity of Hipparchus enabled him to determine the positions of each of the two equinoxes relatively to the stars which lie in its immediate vicinity. After examination of the celestial places of these points at different periods, he was led to the conclusion that each equinox was moving relatively to the stars, though that movement was so slow that twenty five thousand years would necessarily elapse before a complete circuit of the heavens was accomplished. Hipparchus traced out this phenomenon, and established it on an impregnable basis, so that all astronomers have ever since recognised the precession of the equinoxes as one of the fundamental facts of astronomy. Not until nearly two thousand years after Hipparchus had made this splendid discovery was the explanation of its cause given by Newton.

The word "equinox" means the time when night and day are equal. For someone living on the equator, night is pretty much equal to day all year round. But for those living in other parts of the world, in either hemisphere, night and day aren't usually equal. However, there are two times a year—once in spring and once in autumn—when day and night are each twelve hours long everywhere on Earth. The time when day and night are equal in spring is called the vernal equinox. There’s also another point in the sky during the autumnal equinox. When studying celestial movements, the locations of these two equinoxes are really important. Hipparchus, with his brilliant insight, recognized their significance and started studying them. We can always define where a point is in the sky based on the surrounding stars. Even if we can’t see the stars near the sun when it’s shining, they’re still there. Hipparchus was able to figure out the positions of both equinoxes relative to nearby stars. After observing the sky at different times, he concluded that each equinox was moving in relation to the stars, although this movement was so slow that it would take twenty-five thousand years to complete a full circuit of the heavens. Hipparchus documented this phenomenon, establishing it firmly so that all astronomers have since recognized the precession of the equinoxes as a fundamental fact of astronomy. It wasn’t until nearly two thousand years later that Newton provided an explanation for its cause.

From the days of Hipparchus down to the present hour the science of astronomy has steadily grown. One great observer after another has appeared from time to time, to reveal some new phenomenon with regard to the celestial bodies or their movements, while from time to time one commanding intellect after another has arisen to explain the true import of the facts of observations. The history of astronomy thus becomes inseparable from the history of the great men to whose labours its development is due.

From the time of Hipparchus to now, the field of astronomy has consistently expanded. Great observers have emerged one after another, uncovering new phenomena related to celestial bodies or their movements. Occasionally, brilliant minds have stepped forward to clarify the true significance of these observations. As a result, the history of astronomy is closely tied to the influential figures whose efforts have contributed to its progress.

In the ensuing chapters we have endeavoured to sketch the lives and the work of the great philosophers, by whose labours the science of astronomy has been created. We shall commence with Ptolemy, who, after the foundations of the science had been laid by Hipparchus, gave to astronomy the form in which it was taught throughout the Middle Ages. We shall next see the mighty revolution in our conceptions of the universe which are associated with the name of Copernicus. We then pass to those periods illumined by the genius of Galileo and Newton, and afterwards we shall trace the careers of other more recent discoverers, by whose industry and genius the boundaries of human knowledge have been so greatly extended. Our history will be brought down late enough to include some of the illustrious astronomers who laboured in the generation which has just passed away.

In the coming chapters, we aim to outline the lives and contributions of the great philosophers whose work established the science of astronomy. We'll start with Ptolemy, who, after Hipparchus laid the groundwork, shaped astronomy into the form that was taught throughout the Middle Ages. Next, we'll explore the significant shift in our understanding of the universe linked to Copernicus. Then, we'll examine the periods illuminated by the brilliance of Galileo and Newton, and afterward, we'll follow the journeys of other more recent discoverers whose hard work and ingenuity have greatly expanded the limits of human knowledge. Our history will continue far enough to include some of the remarkable astronomers who worked in the recent past.

PTOLEMY.

PTOLEMY.
PTOLEMY.
Ptolemy.

The career of the famous man whose name stands at the head of this chapter is one of the most remarkable in the history of human learning. There may have been other discoverers who have done more for science than ever Ptolemy accomplished, but there never has been any other discoverer whose authority on the subject of the movements of the heavenly bodies has held sway over the minds of men for so long a period as the fourteen centuries during which his opinions reigned supreme. The doctrines he laid down in his famous book, "The Almagest," prevailed throughout those ages. No substantial addition was made in all that time to the undoubted truths which this work contained. No important correction was made of the serious errors with which Ptolemy's theories were contaminated. The authority of Ptolemy as to all things in the heavens, and as to a good many things on the earth (for the same illustrious man was also a diligent geographer), was invariably final.

The career of the famous man whose name appears at the beginning of this chapter is one of the most impressive in the history of human knowledge. There may have been other discoverers who contributed more to science than Ptolemy did, but no other discoverer has maintained influence over the understanding of the movements of celestial bodies for as long as he did—more than fourteen centuries. The ideas he presented in his well-known book, "The Almagest," dominated thought throughout that time. No significant new insights were added to the undeniable truths contained in this work during that period. No major corrections were made to the serious errors present in Ptolemy's theories. Ptolemy's authority on all things celestial, and on many aspects of the earth as well (since he was also a dedicated geographer), was always considered final.

Though every child may now know more of the actual truths of the celestial motions than ever Ptolemy knew, yet the fact that his work exercised such an astonishing effect on the human intellect for some sixty generations, shows that it must have been an extraordinary production. We must look into the career of this wonderful man to discover wherein lay the secret of that marvellous success which made him the unchallenged instructor of the human race for such a protracted period.

Though every child today may understand more about the real truths of celestial movements than Ptolemy ever did, the fact that his work had such an incredible impact on human thought for around sixty generations shows that it must have been something extraordinary. We need to explore the life of this amazing man to uncover the secrets behind the remarkable success that made him the unquestioned teacher of humanity for such an extended time.

Unfortunately, we know very little as to the personal history of Ptolemy. He was a native of Egypt, and though it has been sometimes conjectured that he belonged to the royal families of the same name, yet there is nothing to support such a belief. The name, Ptolemy, appears to have been a common one in Egypt in those days. The time at which he lived is fixed by the fact that his first recorded observation was made in 127 AD, and his last in 151 AD. When we add that he seems to have lived in or near Alexandria, or to use his own words, "on the parallel of Alexandria," we have said everything that can be said so far as his individuality is concerned.

Unfortunately, we know very little about Ptolemy's personal history. He was from Egypt, and although it's sometimes speculated that he was part of the royal families sharing that name, there’s no evidence to support that idea. The name Ptolemy appears to have been quite common in Egypt at that time. We know he lived between the years of his first recorded observation in 127 AD and his last in 151 AD. Additionally, it seems he lived in or near Alexandria, or as he put it, "on the parallel of Alexandria." That's about all we can say regarding his individuality.

Ptolemy is, without doubt, the greatest figure in ancient astronomy. He gathered up the wisdom of the philosophers who had preceded him. He incorporated this with the results of his own observations, and illumined it with his theories. His speculations, even when they were, as we now know, quite erroneous, had such an astonishing verisimilitude to the actual facts of nature that they commanded universal assent. Even in these modern days we not unfrequently find lovers of paradox who maintain that Ptolemy's doctrines not only seem true, but actually are true.

Ptolemy is undoubtedly the most important figure in ancient astronomy. He compiled the knowledge of the philosophers who came before him. He merged this with his own observations and enriched it with his theories. His ideas, even when we now know they were wrong, had such a striking resemblance to the actual workings of nature that they gained widespread agreement. Even today, we often encounter enthusiasts of paradox who argue that Ptolemy's teachings not only seem true but are actually true.

In the absence of any accurate knowledge of the science of mechanics, philosophers in early times were forced to fall back on certain principles of more or less validity, which they derived from their imagination as to what the natural fitness of things ought to be. There was no geometrical figure so simple and so symmetrical as a circle, and as it was apparent that the heavenly bodies pursued tracks which were not straight lines, the conclusion obviously followed that their movements ought to be circular. There was no argument in favour of this notion, other than the merely imaginary reflection that circular movement, and circular movement alone, was "perfect," whatever "perfect" may have meant. It was further believed to be impossible that the heavenly bodies could have any other movements save those which were perfect. Assuming this, it followed, in Ptolemy's opinion, and in that of those who came after him for fourteen centuries, that all the tracks of the heavenly bodies were in some way or other to be reduced to circles.

In the absence of any accurate understanding of mechanics, early philosophers had to rely on certain principles that were somewhat valid, which they imagined the natural order of things should follow. There was no geometric shape as simple and symmetrical as a circle, and since it was clear that celestial bodies moved along paths that weren't straight lines, it seemed obvious that their movements should be circular. The only support for this idea came from the purely imagined belief that circular motion, and circular motion alone, was "perfect," whatever "perfect" meant. It was also thought that it was impossible for celestial bodies to have any movements other than those that were perfect. Based on this assumption, Ptolemy, along with those who followed him for fourteen centuries, believed that all the paths of celestial bodies could somehow be explained as circles.

Ptolemy succeeded in devising a scheme by which the apparent changes that take place in the heavens could, so far as he knew them, be explained by certain combinations of circular movement. This seemed to reconcile so completely the scheme of things celestial with the geometrical instincts which pointed to the circle as the type of perfect movement, that we can hardly wonder Ptolemy's theory met with the astonishing success that attended it. We shall, therefore, set forth with sufficient detail the various steps of this famous doctrine.

Ptolemy managed to create a system that explained the apparent changes happening in the sky through specific combinations of circular movement, based on what he understood. This seemed to fully align the structure of the heavens with the mathematical intuition that regarded the circle as the ideal form of motion, so it’s no surprise that Ptolemy's theory became so remarkably successful. Therefore, we will outline the different aspects of this renowned doctrine in detail.

Ptolemy commences with laying down the undoubted truth that the shape of the earth is globular. The proofs which he gives of this fundamental fact are quite satisfactory; they are indeed the same proofs as we give today. There is, first of all, the well-known circumstance of which our books on geography remind us, that when an object is viewed at a distance across the sea, the lower part of the object appears cut off by the interposing curved mass of water.

Ptolemy starts by stating the undeniable truth that the Earth is round. The evidence he presents for this essential fact is quite convincing; in fact, it’s the same evidence we provide today. First of all, there’s the well-known observation that when you look at something far away over the sea, the bottom part of the object seems to be blocked by the curved surface of the water.

The sagacity of Ptolemy enabled him to adduce another argument, which, though not quite so obvious as that just mentioned, demonstrates the curvature of the earth in a very impressive manner to anyone who will take the trouble to understand it. Ptolemy mentions that travellers who went to the south reported, that, as they did so, the appearance of the heavens at night underwent a gradual change. Stars that they were familiar with in the northern skies gradually sank lower in the heavens. The constellation of the Great Bear, which in our skies never sets during its revolution round the pole, did set and rise when a sufficient southern latitude had been attained. On the other hand, constellations new to the inhabitants of northern climes were seen to rise above the southern horizon. These circumstances would be quite incompatible with the supposition that the earth was a flat surface. Had this been so, a little reflection will show that no such changes in the apparent movements of the stars would be the consequence of a voyage to the south. Ptolemy set forth with much insight the significance of this reasoning, and even now, with the resources of modern discoveries to help us, we can hardly improve upon his arguments.

The wisdom of Ptolemy allowed him to present another argument, which, while not as obvious as the previous one, shows the curvature of the earth in a very convincing way to anyone willing to understand it. Ptolemy notes that travelers heading south reported a gradual change in the appearance of the night sky. Stars they recognized in the northern skies gradually sank lower. The constellation of the Great Bear, which never sets in our skies as it moves around the pole, did set and rise once they reached a sufficient southern latitude. In contrast, new constellations appeared above the southern horizon that were unfamiliar to people from the north. These observations would not make sense if the earth were flat. If that were the case, it’s clear that no such changes in the apparent movements of the stars would occur simply from traveling south. Ptolemy insightfully explained the importance of this reasoning, and even today, with the help of modern discoveries, we can hardly improve on his arguments.

Ptolemy, like a true philosopher disclosing a new truth to the world, illustrated and enforced his subject by a variety of happy demonstrations. I must add one of them, not only on account of its striking nature, but also because it exemplifies Ptolemy's acuteness. If the earth were flat, said this ingenious reasoner, sunset must necessarily take place at the same instant, no matter in what country the observer may happen to be placed. Ptolemy, however, proved that the time of sunset did vary greatly as the observer's longitude was altered. To us, of course, this is quite obvious; everybody knows that the hour of sunset may have been reached in Great Britain while it is still noon on the western coast of America. Ptolemy had, however, few of those sources of knowledge which are now accessible. How was he to show that the sun actually did set earlier at Alexandria than it would in a city which lay a hundred miles to the west? There was no telegraph wire by which astronomers at the two Places could communicate. There was no chronometer or watch which could be transported from place to place; there was not any other reliable contrivance for the keeping of time. Ptolemy's ingenuity, however, pointed out a thoroughly satisfactory method by which the times of sunset at two places could be compared. He was acquainted with the fact, which must indeed have been known from the very earliest times, that the illumination of the moon is derived entirely from the sun. He knew that an eclipse of the moon was due to the interposition of the earth which cuts off the light of the sun. It was, therefore, plain that an eclipse of the moon must be a phenomenon which would begin at the same instant from whatever part of the earth the moon could be seen at the time. Ptolemy, therefore, brought together from various quarters the local times at which different observers had recorded the beginning of a lunar eclipse. He found that the observers to the west made the time earlier and earlier the further away their stations were from Alexandria. On the other hand, the eastern observers set down the hour as later than that at which the phenomenon appeared at Alexandria. As these observers all recorded something which indeed appeared to them simultaneously, the only interpretation was, that the more easterly a place the later its time. Suppose there were a number of observers along a parallel of latitude, and each noted the hour of sunset to be six o'clock, then, since the eastern times are earlier than western times, 6 p.m. at one station A will correspond to 5 p.m. at a station B sufficiently to the west. If, therefore, it is sunset to the observer at A, the hour of sunset will not yet be reached for the observer at B. This proves conclusively that the time of sunset is not the same all over the earth. We have, however, already seen that the apparent time of sunset would be the same from all stations if the earth were flat. When Ptolemy, therefore, demonstrated that the time of sunset was not the same at various places, he showed conclusively that the earth was not flat.

Ptolemy, like a real philosopher revealing a new truth to the world, illustrated and supported his topic with various effective demonstrations. I want to share one of them, not just because it's striking, but also because it shows Ptolemy's cleverness. He pointed out that if the earth were flat, sunset would happen at the same moment, no matter where the observer was. However, Ptolemy proved that the timing of sunset varied greatly depending on the observer's longitude. This is obvious to us now; everyone knows that it can be sunset in Great Britain while it's still noon on the western coast of America. Ptolemy, however, had very few of the knowledge sources accessible to us today. How could he show that the sun actually set earlier in Alexandria than in a city a hundred miles to the west? There were no telegraph wires for astronomers in the two locations to communicate. There were no chronometers or watches that could be easily transported; there was no reliable way to keep time. Ptolemy's cleverness, however, led him to a completely satisfactory method for comparing the times of sunset at two places. He understood a fact that must have been known since ancient times: the moon's light comes entirely from the sun. He knew that a lunar eclipse happens when the earth blocks the sun's light. Therefore, it was clear that a lunar eclipse would start at the same time, regardless of where on earth the moon was visible. Ptolemy then gathered data from different locations on the local times when various observers recorded the start of a lunar eclipse. He found that observers to the west noted the time as earlier the further they were from Alexandria. Conversely, observers to the east recorded the hour as later than when it appeared in Alexandria. Since all these observers recorded something they saw happening at the same time, the only conclusion was that the more east you went, the later the time. Imagine if several observers along a line of latitude all noted sunset at six o'clock. Since eastern times are earlier than western times, 6 p.m. at one station (A) would correspond to 5 p.m. at a station (B) further to the west. So, when it’s sunset for the observer at A, it hasn’t happened yet for the observer at B. This clearly shows that sunset times are not the same worldwide. We already noted that if the earth were flat, the apparent time of sunset would be the same from all locations. Therefore, when Ptolemy demonstrated that sunset times varied from place to place, he conclusively proved that the earth was not flat.

As the same arguments applied to all parts of the earth where Ptolemy had either been himself, or from which he could gain the necessary information, it followed that the earth, instead of being the flat plain, girdled with an illimitable ocean, as was generally supposed, must be in reality globular. This led at once to a startling consequence. It was obvious that there could be no supports of any kind by which this globe was sustained; it therefore followed that the mighty object must be simply poised in space. This is indeed an astonishing doctrine to anyone who relies on what merely seems the evidence of the senses, without giving to that evidence its due intellectual interpretation. According to our ordinary experience, the very idea of an object poised without support in space, appears preposterous. Would it not fall? we are immediately asked. Yes, doubtless it could not remain poised in any way in which we try the experiment. We must, however, observe that there are no such ideas as upwards or downwards in relation to open space. To say that a body falls downwards, merely means that it tries to fall as nearly as possible towards the centre of the earth. There is no one direction along which a body will tend to move in space, in preference to any other. This may be illustrated by the fact that a stone let fall at New Zealand will, in its approach towards the earth's centre, be actually moving upwards as far as any locality in our hemisphere is concerned. Why, then, argued Ptolemy, may not the earth remain poised in space, for as all directions are equally upward or equally downward, there seems no reason why the earth should require any support? By this reasoning he arrives at the fundamental conclusion that the earth is a globular body freely lying in space, and surrounded above, below, and on all sides by the glittering stars of heaven.

As the same arguments applied to every part of the earth where Ptolemy had either been or from which he could get the needed information, it followed that the earth, instead of being a flat plain surrounded by an endless ocean, as was commonly believed, must actually be spherical. This immediately led to a surprising conclusion. It was clear that there could be no supports of any kind holding this globe up; therefore, it must be simply balanced in space. This is indeed a startling idea for anyone who relies solely on what seems to be the evidence of the senses without properly interpreting that evidence. Based on our everyday experience, the very idea of an object balanced without support in space seems ridiculous. Wouldn’t it fall? is the immediate question. Yes, of course, it couldn’t stay balanced in any way that we test the idea. However, we need to note that there are no such concepts as up or down in relation to open space. Saying that an object falls down means that it moves as close as possible to the center of the earth. There’s no specific direction in which an object will tend to move in space over another. This can be illustrated by the fact that a stone dropped in New Zealand will, in its path toward the earth's center, actually be moving upwards relative to any point in our hemisphere. So, Ptolemy argued, why can’t the earth stay balanced in space, since all directions are equally upward or downward? There seems to be no reason why the earth should need any support. Through this reasoning, he concludes that the earth is a spherical body freely floating in space and surrounded above, below, and on all sides by the shimmering stars of the sky.

The perception of this sublime truth marks a notable epoch in the history of the gradual development of the human intellect. No doubt, other philosophers, in groping after knowledge, may have set forth certain assertions that are more or less equivalent to this fundamental truth. It is to Ptolemy we must give credit, however, not only for announcing this doctrine, but for demonstrating it by clear and logical argument. We cannot easily project our minds back to the conception of an intellectual state in which this truth was unfamiliar. It may, however, be well imagined that, to one who thought the earth was a flat plain of indefinite extent, it would be nothing less than an intellectual convulsion for him to be forced to believe that he stood upon a spherical earth, forming merely a particle relatively to the immense sphere of the heavens.

The understanding of this profound truth represents a significant period in the history of the gradual evolution of human thought. Undoubtedly, other philosophers, while seeking knowledge, may have proposed certain ideas that are more or less similar to this fundamental truth. However, we must credit Ptolemy not only for presenting this concept but also for proving it through clear and logical reasoning. It’s hard for us to imagine a time when this truth was unknown. However, it’s easy to think that for someone who believed the earth was a flat expanse with no limits, it would be nothing short of an intellectual shock to be made to accept that they were standing on a spherical earth, just a tiny part of the vast sphere of the cosmos.

What Ptolemy saw in the movements of the stars led him to the conclusion that they were bright points attached to the inside of a tremendous globe. The movements of this globe which carried the stars were only compatible with the supposition that the earth occupied its centre. The imperceptible effect produced by a change in the locality of the observer on the apparent brightness of the stars made it plain that the dimensions of the terrestrial globe must be quite insignificant in comparison with those of the celestial sphere. The earth might, in fact, be regarded as a grain of sand while the stars lay upon a globe many yards in diameter.

What Ptolemy observed in the movements of the stars led him to conclude that they were bright points fixed to the inside of a huge globe. The movements of this globe, which carried the stars, only made sense if the earth was at its center. The barely noticeable effect that a change in the observer's location had on the apparent brightness of the stars clearly indicated that the size of the earth was very small compared to that of the celestial sphere. The earth could basically be seen as a grain of sand while the stars were spread across a globe many yards wide.

So tremendous was the revolution in human knowledge implied by this discovery, that we can well imagine how Ptolemy, dazzled as it were by the fame which had so justly accrued to him, failed to make one further step. Had he made that step, it would have emancipated the human intellect from the bondage of fourteen centuries of servitude to a wholly monstrous notion of this earth's importance in the scheme of the heavens. The obvious fact that the sun, the moon, and the stars rose day by day, moved across the sky in a glorious never-ending procession, and duly set when their appointed courses had been run, demanded some explanation. The circumstance that the fixed stars preserved their mutual distances from year to year, and from age to age, appeared to Ptolemy to prove that the sphere which contained those stars, and on whose surface they were believed by him to be fixed, revolved completely around the earth once every day. He would thus account for all the phenomena of rising and setting consistently with the supposition that our globe was stationary. Probably this supposition must have appeared monstrous, even to Ptolemy. He knew that the earth was a gigantic object, but, large as it may have been, he knew that it was only a particle in comparison with the celestial sphere, yet he apparently believed, and certainly succeeded in persuading other men to believe, that the celestial sphere did actually perform these movements.

The impact of this discovery on human knowledge was so significant that we can easily imagine how Ptolemy, overwhelmed by the recognition he rightfully earned, failed to make any further advancements. If he had taken that step, it would have freed human thought from the constraints of fourteen centuries of believing in a completely distorted idea of the earth's significance in the universe. The clear reality that the sun, moon, and stars rose daily, traveled across the sky in a magnificent, endless cycle, and set after following their paths, called for an explanation. Ptolemy thought that the fact the fixed stars maintained their distances from each other year after year proved that the sphere containing those stars, where he believed they were attached, revolved around the earth once each day. This allowed him to explain all the rising and setting phenomena while assuming that our planet was stationary. This assumption must have seemed absurd, even to Ptolemy. He recognized that the earth was a massive object, but despite its size, he understood it was just a small part compared to the celestial sphere. Still, he seemingly believed, and certainly managed to convince others, that the celestial sphere was actually moving as he described.

Ptolemy was an excellent geometer. He knew that the rising and the setting of the sun, the moon, and the myriad stars, could have been accounted for in a different way. If the earth turned round uniformly once a day while poised at the centre of the sphere of the heavens, all the phenomena of rising and setting could be completely explained. This is, indeed, obvious after a moment's reflection. Consider yourself to be standing on the earth at the centre of the heavens. There are stars over your head, and half the contents of the heavens are visible, while the other half are below your horizon. As the earth turns round, the stars over your head will change, and unless it should happen that you have taken up your position at either of the poles, new stars will pass into your view, and others will disappear, for at no time can you have more than half of the whole sphere visible. The observer on the earth would, therefore, say that some stars were rising, and that some stars were setting. We have, therefore, two totally distinct methods, each of which would completely explain all the observed facts of the diurnal movement. One of these suppositions requires that the celestial sphere, bearing with it the stars and other celestial bodies, turns uniformly around an invisible axis, while the earth remains stationary at the centre. The other supposition would be, that it is the stupendous celestial sphere which remains stationary, while the earth at the centre rotates about the same axis as the celestial sphere did before, but in an opposite direction, and with a uniform velocity which would enable it to complete one turn in twenty-four hours. Ptolemy was mathematician enough to know that either of these suppositions would suffice for the explanation of the observed facts. Indeed, the phenomena of the movements of the stars, so far as he could observe them, could not be called upon to pronounce which of these views was true, and which was false.

Ptolemy was a brilliant geometer. He understood that the rising and setting of the sun, moon, and countless stars could be explained in different ways. If the earth rotated uniformly once a day while positioned at the center of the celestial sphere, all the phenomena of rising and setting could be fully accounted for. This becomes clear after a moment’s thought. Imagine standing on earth at the center of the heavens. There are stars above you, and half of the heavens are visible while the other half is below your horizon. As the earth rotates, the stars overhead will change, and unless you're at one of the poles, new stars will come into view while others will disappear, since you can never see more than half of the entire sphere at any time. Therefore, the observer on earth would say some stars are rising and others are setting. Thus, we have two completely different explanations that could fully account for all the observed facts of daily movement. One explanation suggests that the celestial sphere, carrying the stars and other celestial bodies, rotates uniformly around an invisible axis while the earth stays still at the center. The other explanation posits that the immense celestial sphere remains stationary while the earth at the center rotates around the same axis as the celestial sphere did before, but in the opposite direction, at a consistent speed that allows it to make one full rotation in twenty-four hours. Ptolemy was knowledgeable enough to realize that either of these scenarios could explain the observed phenomena. In fact, the movements of the stars, as he observed them, could not determine which of these perspectives was true and which was false.

Ptolemy had, therefore, to resort for guidance to indirect lines of reasoning. One of these suppositions must be true, and yet it appeared that the adoption of either was accompanied by a great difficulty. It is one of his chief merits to have demonstrated that the celestial sphere was so stupendous that the earth itself was absolutely insignificant in comparison therewith. If, then, this stupendous sphere rotated once in twenty-four hours, the speed with which the movement of some of the stars must be executed would be so portentous as to seem well-nigh impossible. It would, therefore, seem much simpler on this ground to adopt the other alternative, and to suppose the diurnal movements were due to the rotation of the earth. Here Ptolemy saw, or at all events fancied he saw, objections of the weightiest description. The evidence of the senses appeared directly to controvert the supposition that this earth is anything but stationary. Ptolemy might, perhaps, have dismissed this objection on the ground that the testimony of the senses on such a matter should be entirely subordinated to the interpretation which our intelligence would place upon the facts to which the senses deposed. Another objection, however, appeared to him to possess the gravest moment. It was argued that if the earth were rotating, there is nothing to make the air participate in this motion, mankind would therefore be swept from the earth by the furious blasts which would arise from the movement of the earth through an atmosphere at rest. Even if we could imagine that the air were carried round with the earth, the same would not apply, so thought Ptolemy, to any object suspended in the air. So long as a bird was perched on a tree, he might very well be carried onward by the moving earth, but the moment he took wing, the ground would slip from under him at a frightful pace, so that when he dropped down again he would find himself at a distance perhaps ten times as great as that which a carrier-pigeon or a swallow could have traversed in the same time. Some vague delusion of this description seems even still to crop up occasionally. I remember hearing of a proposition for balloon travelling of a very remarkable kind. The voyager who wanted to reach any other place in the same latitude was simply to ascend in a balloon, and wait there till the rotation of the earth conveyed the locality which happened to be his destination directly beneath him, whereupon he was to let out the gas and drop down! Ptolemy knew quite enough natural philosophy to be aware that such a proposal for locomotion would be an utter absurdity; he knew that there was no such relative shift between the air and the earth as this motion would imply. It appeared to him to be necessary that the air should lag behind, if the earth had been animated by a movement of rotation. In this he was, as we know, entirely wrong. There were, however, in his days no accurate notions on the subject of the laws of motion.

Ptolemy had to rely on indirect reasoning for guidance. One of these possibilities had to be true, but choosing either came with significant challenges. One of his main achievements was showing that the celestial sphere was so vast that the earth itself was completely insignificant in comparison. If this enormous sphere rotated once every twenty-four hours, the speed at which some stars would have to move would seem almost impossible. Therefore, it seemed much simpler to assume that the earth's rotation was responsible for the daily movements of the stars. Ptolemy thought he saw major objections to this idea. The evidence from our senses appeared to directly contradict the idea that the earth is anything but stationary. He might have dismissed this objection by arguing that sensory evidence should take a backseat to the interpretations our intellect provides regarding the facts our senses perceive. However, he considered another objection to be more serious. It was argued that if the earth were rotating, there was nothing to make the air move along with it, meaning people would be swept off the earth by fierce winds created by the earth's motion through a still atmosphere. Even if we could imagine the air moving with the earth, Ptolemy believed that objects suspended in the air would not be affected in the same way. As long as a bird was perched on a tree, it could be carried along by the moving earth, but once it took flight, the ground would rush away beneath it at a terrifying speed, so that when it landed again, it would find itself much farther away than a carrier pigeon or swallow could have traveled in the same time. Some vague misunderstanding of this type seems to still pop up occasionally. I remember hearing about a very unusual idea for balloon travel. The traveler who wanted to reach another place at the same latitude just needed to ascend in a balloon and wait until the earth's rotation brought their destination directly beneath them, then they would let out the gas and drop down! Ptolemy understood enough about natural philosophy to know that this method of travel was completely absurd; he realized that there was no relative movement between the air and the earth that this motion would imply. He thought it essential that the air would lag behind if the earth were rotating. In this, he was completely mistaken. However, in his time, there was no accurate understanding of the laws of motion.

Assiduous as Ptolemy may have been in the study of the heavenly bodies, it seems evident that he cannot have devoted much thought to the phenomena of motion of terrestrial objects. Simple, indeed, are the experiments which might have convinced a philosopher much less acute than Ptolemy, that, if the earth did revolve, the air must necessarily accompany it. If a rider galloping on horseback tosses a ball into the air, it drops again into his hand, just as it would have done had he been remaining at rest during the ball's flight; the ball in fact participates in the horizontal motion, so that though it really describes a curve as any passer-by would observe, yet it appears to the rider himself merely to move up and down in a straight line. This fact, and many others similar to it, demonstrate clearly that if the earth were endowed with a movement of rotation, the atmosphere surrounding it must participate in that movement. Ptolemy did not know this, and consequently he came to the conclusion that the earth did not rotate, and that, therefore, notwithstanding the tremendous improbability of so mighty an object as the celestial sphere spinning round once in every twenty-four hours, there was no course open except to believe that this very improbable thing did really happen. Thus it came to pass that Ptolemy adopted as the cardinal doctrine of his system a stationary earth poised at the centre of the celestial sphere, which stretched around on all sides at a distance so vast that the diameter of the earth was an inappreciable point in comparison therewith.

As diligent as Ptolemy was in studying the stars, it's clear he probably didn’t think much about how things move on Earth. The experiments that could have shown a philosopher less sharp than Ptolemy that if the Earth rotates, the air must move along with it are quite simple. For example, if a rider on horseback throws a ball into the air, it will come back into his hand just like it would if he were standing still while the ball flew. The ball actually moves along with the horizontal motion, so even though it traces a curve as anyone watching would see, to the rider it seems to be moving straight up and down. This fact, along with many others like it, clearly shows that if the Earth spun, the atmosphere around it would have to move with it. Ptolemy didn’t recognize this, so he concluded that the Earth doesn’t rotate, and thus, despite the extreme unlikelihood of such a massive object as the celestial sphere spinning once every twenty-four hours, he had no choice but to accept this unlikely situation as reality. As a result, Ptolemy established the central belief of his system: a stationary Earth positioned at the center of a celestial sphere that extended infinitely, making the diameter of the Earth seem almost insignificant by comparison.

Ptolemy having thus deliberately rejected the doctrine of the earth's rotation, had to make certain other entirely erroneous suppositions. It was easily seen that each star required exactly the same period for the performance of a complete revolution of the heavens. Ptolemy knew that the stars were at enormous distances from the earth, though no doubt his notions on this point came very far short of what we know to be the reality. If the stars had been at very varied distances, then it would be so wildly improbable that they should all accomplish their revolutions in the same time, that Ptolemy came to the conclusion that they must be all at the same distance, that is, that they must be all on the surface of a sphere. This view, however erroneous, was corroborated by the obvious fact that the stars in the constellations preserved their relative places unaltered for centuries. Thus it was that Ptolemy came to the conclusion that they were all fixed on one spherical surface, though we are not informed as to the material of this marvellous setting which sustained the stars like jewels.

Ptolemy, having consciously rejected the idea that the earth rotates, had to make several other completely incorrect assumptions. It was clear that each star took the exact same amount of time to complete a full revolution around the heavens. Ptolemy understood that the stars were at vast distances from the earth, although his understanding was far from the reality we know today. If the stars were at very different distances, it would be extremely unlikely for them to all complete their revolutions in the same time frame, leading Ptolemy to conclude that they must all be at the same distance, meaning they were all on the surface of a sphere. Despite being wrong, this view was supported by the obvious fact that the stars in the constellations maintained their relative positions unchanged for centuries. Thus, Ptolemy concluded that they were all fixed on one spherical surface, though we aren't told what material made up this incredible setting that held the stars like jewels.

Nor should we hastily pronounce this doctrine to be absurd. The stars do appear to lie on the surface of a sphere, of which the observer is at the centre; not only is this the aspect which the skies present to the untechnical observer, but it is the aspect in which the skies are presented to the most experienced astronomer of modern days. No doubt he knows well that the stars are at the most varied distances from him; he knows that certain stars are ten times, or a hundred times, or a thousand times, as far as other stars. Nevertheless, to his eye the stars appear on the surface of the sphere, it is on that surface that his measurements of the relative places of the stars are made; indeed, it may be said that almost all the accurate observations in the observatory relate to the places of the stars, not as they really are, but as they appear to be projected on that celestial sphere whose conception we owe to the genius of Ptolemy.

Nor should we quickly dismiss this idea as ridiculous. The stars do seem to be positioned on the surface of a sphere, with the observer at its center. This is not only how the skies look to someone untrained, but also how they appear to even the most skilled modern astronomer. While he certainly understands that the stars are at vastly different distances from him—some being ten, a hundred, or even a thousand times farther away than others—he still sees the stars as if they are on the surface of this sphere. It's on that surface where he measures the relative positions of the stars; in fact, almost all the precise observations in the observatory pertain to the stars' locations as they appear projected on that celestial sphere, a concept we owe to the brilliance of Ptolemy.

This great philosopher shows very ingeniously that the earth must be at the centre of the sphere. He proves that, unless this were the case, each star would not appear to move with the absolute uniformity which does, as a matter of fact, characterise it. In all these reasonings we cannot but have the most profound admiration for the genius of Ptolemy, even though he had made an error so enormous in the fundamental point of the stability of the earth. Another error of a somewhat similar kind seemed to Ptolemy to be demonstrated. He had shown that the earth was an isolated object in space, and being such was, of course, capable of movement. It could either be turned round, or it could be moved from one place to another. We know that Ptolemy deliberately adopted the view that the earth did not turn round; he had then to investigate the other question, as to whether the earth was animated by any movement of translation. He came to the conclusion that to attribute any motion to the earth would be incompatible with the truths at which he had already arrived. The earth, argued Ptolemy, lies at the centre of the celestial sphere. If the earth were to be endowed with movement, it would not lie always at this point, it must, therefore, shift to some other part of the sphere. The movements of the stars, however, preclude the possibility of this; and, therefore, the earth must be as devoid of any movement of translation as it is devoid of rotation. Thus it was that Ptolemy convinced himself that the stability of the earth, as it appeared to the ordinary senses, had a rational philosophical foundation.

This great philosopher cleverly demonstrates that the Earth must be at the center of the sphere. He proves that if this weren’t true, each star wouldn’t appear to move with the consistent uniformity that actually characterizes its motion. Through all this reasoning, we can’t help but deeply admire the genius of Ptolemy, even though he made a monumental mistake about the fundamental idea of the Earth's stability. Another somewhat similar error seemed to be proven by Ptolemy. He showed that the Earth was an isolated object in space, and being that, it could obviously move. It could rotate or it could shift from one location to another. We know that Ptolemy intentionally took the position that the Earth did not rotate; he then had to explore the other question of whether the Earth had any kind of translational movement. He concluded that attributing any motion to the Earth would contradict the truths he had already established. The Earth, Ptolemy argued, is at the center of the celestial sphere. If the Earth were to be capable of movement, it wouldn’t always remain at this point; it would have to shift to another part of the sphere. However, the movements of the stars rule out this possibility; therefore, the Earth must lack any translational movement just as it lacks rotation. This is how Ptolemy convinced himself that the Earth’s apparent stability, as observed by ordinary senses, rested on a solid philosophical foundation.

Not unfrequently it is the lot of the philosophers to contend against the doctrines of the vulgar, but when it happens, as in the case of Ptolemy's researches, that the doctrines of the vulgar are corroborated by philosophical investigation which bear the stamp of the highest authority, it is not to be wondered at that such doctrines should be deemed well-nigh impregnable. In this way we may, perhaps, account for the remarkable fact that the theories of Ptolemy held unchallenged sway over the human intellect for the vast period already mentioned.

Not infrequently, philosophers find themselves arguing against the beliefs of the general public. However, when, as in the case of Ptolemy's research, the popular beliefs are supported by philosophical investigation that carries the weight of the highest authority, it’s not surprising that these beliefs are seen as nearly unassailable. This might explain the striking fact that Ptolemy's theories dominated human thought for the long period already mentioned.

Up to the present we have been speaking only of those primary motions of the heavens, by which the whole sphere appeared to revolve once every twenty-four hours. We have now to discuss the remarkable theories by which Ptolemy endeavoured to account for the monthly movement of the moon, for the annual movement of the sun, and for the periodic movements of the planets which had gained for them the titles of the wandering stars.

Up to now, we’ve only talked about the basic movements of the heavens, where the entire sky seems to rotate once every twenty-four hours. Now, we need to discuss the interesting theories that Ptolemy used to explain the moon's monthly movement, the sun's yearly movement, and the periodic movements of the planets that earned them the name “wandering stars.”

Possessed with the idea that these movements must be circular, or must be capable, directly or indirectly, of being explained by circular movements, it seemed obvious to Ptolemy, as indeed it had done to previous astronomers, that the track of the moon through the stars was a circle of which the earth is the centre. A similar movement with a yearly period must also be attributed to the sun, for the changes in the positions of the constellations in accordance with the progress of the seasons, placed it beyond doubt that the sun made a circuit of the celestial sphere, even though the bright light of the sun prevented the stars in its vicinity, from being seen in daylight. Thus the movements both of the sun and the moon, as well as the diurnal rotation of the celestial sphere, seemed to justify the notion that all celestial movements must be "perfect," that is to say, described uniformly in those circles which were the only perfect curves.

Believing that these movements had to be circular, or could be explained by circular motions either directly or indirectly, Ptolemy, like earlier astronomers, thought it was clear that the moon's path among the stars was a circle with the Earth at its center. A similar yearly motion had to be assigned to the sun since the changing positions of the constellations with the seasons made it obvious that the sun completed a circuit of the celestial sphere, even though its bright light made the nearby stars invisible during the day. Therefore, the movements of both the sun and the moon, along with the daily rotation of the celestial sphere, seemed to support the idea that all celestial movements should be "perfect," meaning they should follow uniform paths in circles, which were seen as the only perfect curves.

The simplest observations, however, show that the movements of the planets cannot be explained in this simple fashion. Here the geometrical genius of Ptolemy shone forth, and he devised a scheme by which the apparent wanderings of the planets could be accounted for without the introduction of aught save "perfect" movements.

The simplest observations, however, show that the movements of the planets can't be explained so easily. Here, the geometric genius of Ptolemy stood out, and he created a system that accounted for the apparent paths of the planets without using anything but "perfect" movements.

To understand his reasoning, let us first set forth clearly those facts of observation which require to be explained. I shall take, in particular, two planets, Venus and Mars, as these illustrate, in the most striking manner, the peculiarities of the inner and the outer planets respectively. The simplest observations would show that Venus did not move round the heavens in the same fashion as the sun or the moon. Look at the evening star when brightest, as it appears in the west after sunset. Instead of moving towards the east among the stars, like the sun or the moon, we find, week after week, that Venus is drawing in towards the sun, until it is lost in the sunbeams. Then the planet emerges on the other side, not to be seen as an evening star, but as a morning star. In fact, it was plain that in some ways Venus accompanied the sun in its annual movement. Now it is found advancing in front of the sun to a certain limited distance, and now it is lagging to an equal extent behind the sun.

To understand his reasoning, let's first clearly outline the observable facts that need explanation. I’ll focus on two planets, Venus and Mars, as they highlight the differences between the inner and outer planets. The simplest observations show that Venus doesn’t move across the sky like the sun or the moon. When you look at the evening star at its brightest, right after sunset in the west, you’ll notice something. Instead of moving eastward among the stars like the sun or the moon, week after week, Venus moves closer to the sun until it disappears in the sun's glare. Then the planet appears on the other side, not as an evening star but as a morning star. It's clear that in some respects, Venus tracks along with the sun in its yearly journey. Sometimes it is visible ahead of the sun for a limited distance, and other times it trails behind it by the same amount.

FIG. 1. PTOLEMY'S PLANETARY SCHEME.
FIG. 1. PTOLEMY'S PLANETARY SCHEME.
FIG. 1. PTOLEMY'S PLANETARY MODEL.

These movements were wholly incompatible with the supposition that the journeys of Venus were described by a single motion of the kind regarded as perfect. It was obvious that the movement was connected in some strange manner with the revolution of the sun, and here was the ingenious method by which Ptolemy sought to render account of it. Imagine a fixed arm to extend from the earth to the sun, as shown in the accompanying figure (Fig. 1), then this arm will move round uniformly, in consequence of the sun's movement. At a point P on this arm let a small circle be described. Venus is supposed to revolve uniformly in this small circle, while the circle itself is carried round continuously by the movement of the sun. In this way it was possible to account for the chief peculiarities in the movement of Venus. It will be seen that, in consequence of the revolution around P, the spectator on the earth will sometimes see Venus on one side of the sun, and sometimes on the other side, so that the planet always remains in the sun's vicinity. By properly proportioning the movements, this little contrivance simulated the transitions from the morning star to the evening star. Thus the changes of Venus could be accounted for by a Combination of the "perfect" movement of P in the circle which it described uniformly round the earth, combined with the "perfect" motion of Venus in the circle which it described uniformly around the moving centre.

These movements were completely at odds with the idea that Venus's journeys could be explained by a single type of perfect motion. It was clear that this movement was somehow linked to the sun’s rotation, and this was the clever way Ptolemy tried to explain it. Picture a fixed line extending from the Earth to the sun, as shown in the accompanying figure (Fig. 1); this line will rotate uniformly due to the sun's movement. At a point P on this line, imagine a small circle is drawn. Venus is thought to move uniformly in this small circle, while the circle itself is continuously moved around by the sun's movement. This setup made it possible to explain the main features of Venus's movement. As a result of the revolution around P, someone on Earth will sometimes see Venus on one side of the sun and sometimes on the other, keeping the planet always close to the sun. By adjusting the movements correctly, this little device mimicked the transitions from the morning star to the evening star. So, the changes of Venus could be explained by combining the "perfect" motion of P in the circle it traced uniformly around the Earth with the "perfect" motion of Venus in the circle it traced uniformly around the moving center.

In a precisely similar manner Ptolemy rendered an explanation of the fitful apparitions of Mercury. Now just on one side of the sun, and now just on the other, this rarely-seen planet moved like Venus on a circle whereof the centre was also carried by the line joining the sun and the earth. The circle, however, in which Mercury actually revolved had to be smaller than that of Venus, in order to account for the fact that Mercury lies always much closer to the sun than the better-known planet.

In a very similar way, Ptolemy explained the sporadic appearances of Mercury. Sometimes it's just off one side of the sun, and other times just on the other; this rarely-seen planet moved like Venus on a circle, with the center of that circle being along the line connecting the sun and the earth. However, the circle in which Mercury actually orbited had to be smaller than Venus's in order to explain why Mercury is always much closer to the sun than the more familiar planet.

FIG. 2. PTOLEMY'S THEORY OF THE MOVEMENT OF MARS.
FIG. 2. PTOLEMY'S THEORY OF THE MOVEMENT OF MARS.
FIG. 2. PTOLEMY'S THEORY ON HOW MARS MOVES.

The explanation of the movement of an outer planet like Mars could also be deduced from the joint effect of two perfect motions. The changes through which Mars goes are, however, so different from the movements of Venus that quite a different disposition of the circles is necessary. For consider the facts which characterise the movements of an outer planet such as Mars. In the first place, Mars accomplishes an entire circuit of the heaven. In this respect, no doubt, it may be said to resemble the sun or the moon. A little attention will, however, show that there are extraordinary irregularities in the movement of the planet. Generally speaking, it speeds its way from west to east among the stars, but sometimes the attentive observer will note that the speed with which the planet advances is slackening, and then it will seem to become stationary. Some days later the direction of the planet's movement will be reversed, and it will be found moving from the east towards the west. At first it proceeds slowly and then quickens its pace, until a certain speed is attained, which afterwards declines until a second stationary position is reached. After a due pause the original motion from west to east is resumed, and is continued until a similar cycle of changes again commences. Such movements as these were obviously quite at variance with any perfect movement in a single circle round the earth. Here, again, the geometrical sagacity of Ptolemy provided him with the means of representing the apparent movements of Mars, and, at the same time, restricting the explanation to those perfect movements which he deemed so essential. In Fig. 2 we exhibit Ptolemy's theory as to the movement of Mars. We have, as before, the earth at the centre, and the sun describing its circular orbit around that centre. The path of Mars is to be taken as exterior to that of the sun. We are to suppose that at a point marked M there is a fictitious planet, which revolves around the earth uniformly, in a circle called the DEFERENT. This point M, which is thus animated by a perfect movement, is the centre of a circle which is carried onwards with M, and around the circumference of which Mars revolves uniformly. It is easy to show that the combined effect of these two perfect movements is to produce exactly that displacement of Mars in the heavens which observation discloses. In the position represented in the figure, Mars is obviously pursuing a course which will appear to the observer as a movement from west to east. When, however, the planet gets round to such a position as R, it is then moving from east to west in consequence of its revolution in the moving circle, as indicated by the arrow-head. On the other hand, the whole circle is carried forward in the opposite direction. If the latter movement be less rapid than the former, then we shall have the backward movement of Mars on the heavens which it was desired to explain. By a proper adjustment of the relative lengths of these arms the movements of the planet as actually observed could be completely accounted for.

The way an outer planet like Mars moves can also be explained by the combined effect of two perfect motions. However, the changes Mars undergoes are so different from the movements of Venus that a completely different arrangement of circles is needed. Consider the facts that define the movements of an outer planet like Mars. First, Mars completes an entire circuit of the heavens. In this regard, it resembles the sun or the moon. However, a closer look reveals that there are unusual irregularities in the planet's movement. Generally, it moves from west to east among the stars, but sometimes a careful observer will notice that its speed is slowing down, and it appears to stop. After a few days, the direction of its movement reverses, and it starts moving from east to west. Initially, it moves slowly and then speeds up until it reaches a certain pace, which later slows down again until it appears to stop for a second time. After a pause, it resumes its original motion from west to east, continuing until a similar cycle of changes starts again. These movements clearly do not match any perfect circular motion around the Earth. Once again, Ptolemy's geometric insight allowed him to represent the apparent movements of Mars while keeping the explanation focused on those perfect motions he considered essential. In Fig. 2, we illustrate Ptolemy's theory regarding Mars's movement. As before, the Earth is at the center, with the sun tracing its circular orbit around that center. Mars's path is seen as outside the sun's orbit. We imagine a point marked M where there is a fictitious planet that revolves uniformly around the Earth in a circle known as the DEFERENT. This point M, which undergoes perfect motion, is the center of a circle that moves along with M, and around its circumference, Mars revolves uniformly. It is easy to show that the combined effect of these two perfect movements results in the precise displacement of Mars in the heavens that we observe. In the position shown in the figure, Mars is clearly moving in a way that appears as a west-to-east movement to the observer. However, when the planet reaches the position marked R, it is moving from east to west due to its revolution in the moving circle, as indicated by the arrow. Meanwhile, the entire circle moves forward in the opposite direction. If this movement is slower than the first, we will observe the backward movement of Mars in the heavens that we aimed to explain. By properly adjusting the relative lengths of these arms, the observed movements of the planet could be fully explained.

The other outer planets with which Ptolemy was acquainted, namely, Jupiter and Saturn, had movements of the same general character as those of Mars. Ptolemy was equally successful in explaining the movements they performed by the supposition that each planet had perfect rotation in a circle of its own, which circle itself had perfect movement around the earth in the centre.

The other outer planets that Ptolemy knew about, specifically Jupiter and Saturn, moved in a similar way to Mars. Ptolemy also successfully explained their movements by suggesting that each planet rotated perfectly in its own circle, which in turn moved perfectly around the Earth at the center.

It is somewhat strange that Ptolemy did not advance one step further, as by so doing he would have given great simplicity to his system. He might, for instance, have represented the movements of Venus equally well by putting the centre of the moving circle at the sun itself, and correspondingly enlarging the circle in which Venus revolved. He might, too, have arranged that the several circles which the outer planets traversed should also have had their centres at the sun. The planetary system would then have consisted of an earth fixed at the centre, of a sun revolving uniformly around it, and of a system of planets each describing its own circle around a moving centre placed in the sun. Perhaps Ptolemy had not thought of this, or perhaps he may have seen arguments against it. This important step was, however, taken by Tycho. He considered that all the planets revolved around the sun in circles, and that the sun itself, bearing all these orbits, described a mighty circle around the earth. This point having been reached, only one more step would have been necessary to reach the glorious truths that revealed the structure of the solar system. That last step was taken by Copernicus.

It’s a bit odd that Ptolemy didn’t take it a step further, because doing so would have made his system much simpler. For example, he could have represented Venus’s movements just as well by placing the center of its orbit at the sun and enlarging the circle that Venus moved in. He could have also set the centers of the orbits of the outer planets at the sun. The planetary system would then have had the Earth fixed in the center, the sun revolving uniformly around it, and a system of planets each orbiting around a moving center positioned at the sun. Maybe Ptolemy didn’t think of this, or he might have found reasons against it. However, this crucial step was taken by Tycho, who believed that all the planets revolved around the sun in circles, and that the sun itself, carrying all these orbits, traced a massive circle around the Earth. Once this point was established, only one more step was needed to uncover the amazing truths about the structure of the solar system. That final step was taken by Copernicus.

COPERNICUS.

THORN, FROM AN OLD PRINT.
THORN, FROM AN OLD PRINT.
THORN, FROM A VINTAGE PRINT.

The quaint town of Thorn, on the Vistula, was more than two centuries old when Copernicus was born there on the 19th of February, 1473. The situation of this town on the frontier between Prussia and Poland, with the commodious waterway offered by the river, made it a place of considerable trade. A view of the town, as it was at the time of the birth of Copernicus, is here given. The walls, with their watch-towers, will be noted, and the strategic importance which the situation of Thorn gave to it in the fifteenth century still belongs thereto, so much so that the German Government recently constituted the town a fortress of the first class.

The charming town of Thorn, located on the Vistula, was over two centuries old when Copernicus was born there on February 19, 1473. Its position on the border between Prussia and Poland, along with the convenient waterway provided by the river, made it a significant trade hub. A depiction of the town as it was during Copernicus's birth is included here. The walls, complete with their watchtowers, are noteworthy, and the strategic significance of Thorn in the fifteenth century still applies today, to the extent that the German Government has recently designated the town as a first-class fortress.

Copernicus, the astronomer, whose discoveries make him the great predecessor of Kepler and Newton, did not come from a noble family, as certain other early astronomers have done, for his father was a tradesman. Chroniclers are, however, careful to tell us that one of his uncles was a bishop. We are not acquainted with any of those details of his childhood or youth which are often of such interest in other cases where men have risen to exalted fame. It would appear that the young Nicolaus, for such was his Christian name, received his education at home until such time as he was deemed sufficiently advanced to be sent to the University at Cracow. The education that he there obtained must have been in those days of a very primitive description, but Copernicus seems to have availed himself of it to the utmost. He devoted himself more particularly to the study of medicine, with the view of adopting its practice as the profession of his life. The tendencies of the future astronomer were, however, revealed in the fact that he worked hard at mathematics, and, like one of his illustrious successors, Galileo, the practice of the art of painting had for him a very great interest, and in it he obtained some measure of success.

Copernicus, the astronomer whose discoveries make him a significant predecessor of Kepler and Newton, did not come from a noble family like some other early astronomers; his father was a tradesman. However, chroniclers are careful to mention that one of his uncles was a bishop. We don’t know much about his childhood or youth, which are often quite interesting in other cases of people who achieved great fame. It seems that the young Nicolaus, as was his Christian name, received his education at home until he was considered advanced enough to be sent to the University of Cracow. The education he got there must have been quite basic by today’s standards, but Copernicus appears to have made the most of it. He focused particularly on studying medicine, intending to practice it as his career. However, the future astronomer’s inclinations were clear as he worked hard on mathematics, and like one of his famous successors, Galileo, he had a strong interest in painting, in which he achieved some success.

By the time he was twenty-seven years old, it would seem that Copernicus had given up the notion of becoming a medical practitioner, and had resolved to devote himself to science. He was engaged in teaching mathematics, and appears to have acquired some reputation. His growing fame attracted the notice of his uncle the bishop, at whose suggestion Copernicus took holy orders, and he was presently appointed to a canonry in the cathedral of Frauenburg, near the mouth of the Vistula.

By the time he was twenty-seven, it seems Copernicus had given up on becoming a doctor and decided to focus on science instead. He was busy teaching mathematics and seemed to have gained some recognition. His rising fame caught the attention of his uncle, the bishop, who suggested that Copernicus join the clergy. He was soon appointed to a canonry in the cathedral of Frauenburg, near the mouth of the Vistula.

To Frauenburg, accordingly, this man of varied gifts retired. Possessing somewhat of the ascetic spirit, he resolved to devote his life to work of the most serious description. He eschewed all ordinary society, restricting his intimacies to very grave and learned companions, and refusing to engage in conversation of any useless kind. It would seem as if his gifts for painting were condemned as frivolous; at all events, we do not learn that he continued to practise them. In addition to the discharge of his theological duties, his life was occupied partly in ministering medically to the wants of the poor, and partly with his researches in astronomy and mathematics. His equipment in the matter of instruments for the study of the heavens seems to have been of a very meagre description. He arranged apertures in the walls of his house at Allenstein, so that he could observe in some fashion the passage of the stars across the meridian. That he possessed some talent for practical mechanics is proved by his construction of a contrivance for raising water from a stream, for the use of the inhabitants of Frauenburg. Relics of this machine are still to be seen.

To Frauenburg, this man with diverse talents withdrew. With a somewhat ascetic mindset, he decided to dedicate his life to serious work. He avoided ordinary social interactions, limiting his friendships to very serious and intellectual companions, and refusing to engage in any pointless conversations. It seems like his talent for painting was dismissed as trivial; in any case, we don’t hear that he continued to pursue it. Besides fulfilling his theological responsibilities, he spent part of his life providing medical care for the poor and conducting research in astronomy and mathematics. His set of instruments for studying the stars was quite minimal. He created openings in the walls of his house in Allenstein so he could observe the stars as they moved across the meridian. His skills in practical mechanics are demonstrated by his invention of a device to raise water from a stream for the residents of Frauenburg. Remnants of this machine can still be seen today.

COPERNICUS.
COPERNICUS.
COPERNICUS.

The intellectual slumber of the Middle Ages was destined to be awakened by the revolutionary doctrines of Copernicus. It may be noted, as an interesting circumstance, that the time at which he discovered the scheme of the solar system has coincided with a remarkable epoch in the world's history. The great astronomer had just reached manhood at the time when Columbus discovered the new world.

The intellectual dormancy of the Middle Ages was set to be stirred by Copernicus's groundbreaking ideas. It's interesting to note that the period when he formulated the solar system's model aligned with a significant moment in history. The great astronomer had just come of age when Columbus uncovered the New World.

Before the publication of the researches of Copernicus, the orthodox scientific creed averred that the earth was stationary, and that the apparent movements of the heavenly bodies were indeed real movements. Ptolemy had laid down this doctrine 1,400 years before. In his theory this huge error was associated with so much important truth, and the whole presented such a coherent scheme for the explanation of the heavenly movements, that the Ptolemaic theory was not seriously questioned until the great work of Copernicus appeared. No doubt others, before Copernicus, had from time to time in some vague fashion surmised, with more or less plausibility, that the sun, and not the earth, was the centre about which the system really revolved. It is, however, one thing to state a scientific fact; it is quite another thing to be in possession of the train of reasoning, founded on observation or experiment, by which that fact may be established. Pythagoras, it appears, had indeed told his disciples that it was the sun, and not the earth, which was the centre of movement, but it does not seem at all certain that Pythagoras had any grounds which science could recognise for the belief which is attributed to him. So far as information is available to us, it would seem that Pythagoras associated his scheme of things celestial with a number of preposterous notions in natural philosophy. He may certainly have made a correct statement as to which was the most important body in the solar system, but he certainly did not provide any rational demonstration of the fact. Copernicus, by a strict train of reasoning, convinced those who would listen to him that the sun was the centre of the system. It is useful for us to consider the arguments which he urged, and by which he effected that intellectual revolution which is always connected with his name.

Before Copernicus published his research, the prevailing scientific belief was that the earth was still and that the movements we saw in the sky were real changes. Ptolemy had established this idea 1,400 years earlier. His theory combined this significant error with a lot of crucial truths, creating a consistent explanation for the heavenly motions, which is why the Ptolemaic theory wasn't seriously challenged until Copernicus's major work came out. Sure, others before Copernicus had vaguely considered, with varying degrees of plausibility, that the sun was actually the center around which everything revolved, not the earth. However, stating a scientific fact is one thing, while having the reasoning based on observation or experiment to back it up is something else entirely. Pythagoras apparently informed his students that the sun, not the earth, was the center of motion, but it's unclear whether he had any scientifically recognized reasons for this belief. From what we know, it seems Pythagoras connected his ideas about the heavens with various absurd notions in natural philosophy. While he might have accurately pointed out which body in the solar system was the most significant, he certainly didn’t provide any logical proof for it. Copernicus, on the other hand, through a clear line of reasoning, convinced those willing to listen that the sun was at the center of the system. It’s helpful for us to examine the arguments he presented, which led to the intellectual revolution always associated with his name.

The first of the great discoveries which Copernicus made relates to the rotation of the earth on its axis. That general diurnal movement, by which the stars and all other celestial bodies appear to be carried completely round the heavens once every twenty-four hours, had been accounted for by Ptolemy on the supposition that the apparent movements were the real movements. As we have already seen, Ptolemy himself felt the extraordinary difficulty involved in the supposition that so stupendous a fabric as the celestial sphere should spin in the way supposed. Such movements required that many of the stars should travel with almost inconceivable velocity. Copernicus also saw that the daily rising and setting of the heavenly bodies could be accounted for either by the supposition that the celestial sphere moved round and that the earth remained at rest, or by the supposition that the celestial sphere was at rest while the earth turned round in the opposite direction. He weighed the arguments on both sides as Ptolemy had done, and, as the result of his deliberations, Copernicus came to an opposite conclusion from Ptolemy. To Copernicus it appeared that the difficulties attending the supposition that the celestial sphere revolved, were vastly greater than those which appeared so weighty to Ptolemy as to force him to deny the earth's rotation.

The first major discovery that Copernicus made was about the Earth's rotation on its axis. The general daily movement, which makes the stars and other celestial bodies seem to move completely around the sky every twenty-four hours, had been explained by Ptolemy under the assumption that these apparent movements were actual movements. As we have already noted, Ptolemy recognized the incredible challenge posed by the idea that such a massive structure as the celestial sphere could spin as suggested. Such movements would mean that many stars would need to travel at almost unimaginable speeds. Copernicus also realized that the daily rise and set of heavenly bodies could be explained by either the notion that the celestial sphere was moving around while the Earth stayed still, or by the idea that the celestial sphere was still while the Earth rotated in the opposite direction. He considered the arguments on both sides as Ptolemy had, and as a result of his reflections, Copernicus reached a conclusion that contrasted with Ptolemy's. To Copernicus, it seemed that the challenges associated with assuming the celestial sphere revolved were much greater than those that Ptolemy found so significant that he had to reject the idea of the Earth's rotation.

Copernicus shows clearly how the observed phenomena could be accounted for just as completely by a rotation of the earth as by a rotation of the heavens. He alludes to the fact that, to those on board a vessel which is moving through smooth water, the vessel itself appears to be at rest, while the objects on shore seem to be moving past. If, therefore, the earth were rotating uniformly, we dwellers upon the earth, oblivious of our own movement, would wrongly attribute to the stars the displacement which was actually the consequence of our own motion.

Copernicus clearly explains that the observed phenomena can be explained just as completely by the Earth's rotation as by the rotation of the heavens. He points out that, for those on a boat moving through calm water, the boat seems still while the shore appears to be moving. So, if the Earth is rotating smoothly, we living on the Earth, unaware of our own movement, would mistakenly think that the stars are shifting when it's actually our own motion causing that effect.

Copernicus saw the futility of the arguments by which Ptolemy had endeavoured to demonstrate that a revolution of the earth was impossible. It was plain to him that there was nothing whatever to warrant refusal to believe in the rotation of the earth. In his clear-sightedness on this matter we have specially to admire the sagacity of Copernicus as a natural philosopher. It had been urged that, if the earth moved round, its motion would not be imparted to the air, and that therefore the earth would be uninhabitable by the terrific winds which would be the result of our being carried through the air. Copernicus convinced himself that this deduction was preposterous. He proved that the air must accompany the earth, just as his coat remains round him, notwithstanding the fact that he is walking down the street. In this way he was able to show that all a priori objections to the earth's movements were absurd, and therefore he was able to compare together the plausibilities of the two rival schemes for explaining the diurnal movement.

Copernicus recognized the pointlessness of the arguments that Ptolemy used to claim that the Earth's movement was impossible. It was clear to him that there was no reason to reject the idea of the Earth's rotation. His insight into this issue showcases Copernicus's wisdom as a natural philosopher. Some had argued that if the Earth moved, its motion wouldn't be transferred to the air, making the Earth unlivable due to the violent winds that would result from being carried through the atmosphere. Copernicus found this reasoning absurd. He demonstrated that the air would move along with the Earth, just like his coat stays with him when he walks down the street. In this way, he was able to show that all arguments against the Earth's movement were ridiculous, allowing him to evaluate the merits of the two competing theories explaining the daily motion.

FRAUENBURG, FROM AN OLD PRINT.
FRAUENBURG, FROM AN OLD PRINT.
FRAUENBURG, FROM AN OLD PRINT.

Once the issue had been placed in this form, the result could not be long in doubt. Here is the question: Which is it more likely—that the earth, like a grain of sand at the centre of a mighty globe, should turn round once in twenty-four hours, or that the whole of that vast globe should complete a rotation in the opposite direction in the same time? Obviously, the former is far the more simple supposition. But the case is really much stronger than this. Ptolemy had supposed that all the stars were attached to the surface of a sphere. He had no ground whatever for this supposition, except that otherwise it would have been well-nigh impossible to have devised a scheme by which the rotation of the heavens around a fixed earth could have been arranged. Copernicus, however, with the just instinct of a philosopher, considered that the celestial sphere, however convenient from a geometrical point of view, as a means of representing apparent phenomena, could not actually have a material existence. In the first place, the existence of a material celestial sphere would require that all the myriad stars should be at exactly the same distances from the earth. Of course, no one will say that this or any other arbitrary disposition of the stars is actually impossible, but as there was no conceivable physical reason why the distances of all the stars from the earth should be identical, it seemed in the very highest degree improbable that the stars should be so placed.

Once the issue was framed this way, the answer was clear. Here’s the question: Which is more likely—that the earth, like a grain of sand in the center of a huge globe, should rotate once every twenty-four hours, or that the entire vast globe should spin in the opposite direction in the same time? Obviously, the former is a much simpler idea. But the case is actually much stronger than that. Ptolemy believed that all the stars were attached to the surface of a sphere. He had no real reason for this belief, except that it would have been nearly impossible to create a model explaining the rotation of the heavens around a fixed earth otherwise. Copernicus, though, with the keen insight of a philosopher, thought that the celestial sphere, while useful from a geometric standpoint for representing what we see, couldn't have a physical existence. First of all, a physical celestial sphere would mean that all the countless stars would have to be at exactly the same distance from the earth. Of course, no one would claim that this or any other random arrangement of stars is truly impossible, but since there was no logical reason for all the stars to be at the same distance from the earth, it seemed extremely unlikely that they would be positioned that way.

Doubtless, also, Copernicus felt a considerable difficulty as to the nature of the materials from which Ptolemy's wonderful sphere was to be constructed. Nor could a philosopher of his penetration have failed to observe that, unless that sphere were infinitely large, there must have been space outside it, a consideration which would open up other difficult questions. Whether infinite or not, it was obvious that the celestial sphere must have a diameter at least many thousands of times as great as that of the earth. From these considerations Copernicus deduced the important fact that the stars and the other celestial bodies must all be vast objects. He was thus enabled to put the question in such a form that it could hardly receive any answer but the correct one. Which is it more rational to suppose, that the earth should turn round on its axis once in twenty-four hours, or that thousands of mighty stars should circle round the earth in the same time, many of them having to describe circles many thousands of times greater in circumference than the circuit of the earth at the equator? The obvious answer pressed upon Copernicus with so much force that he was compelled to reject Ptolemy's theory of the stationary earth, and to attribute the diurnal rotation of the heavens to the revolution of the earth on its axis.

There's no doubt that Copernicus struggled with the materials that Ptolemy's incredible sphere would be made of. A philosopher as insightful as he was couldn't have missed the fact that, unless that sphere was infinitely large, there had to be space beyond it, which would lead to more complicated questions. Whether infinite or not, it was clear that the celestial sphere had to have a diameter at least thousands of times larger than that of the earth. From this, Copernicus concluded that the stars and other celestial bodies must all be enormous objects. This allowed him to frame the question in a way that could only lead to the correct answer. Which is more rational to believe: that the earth spins on its axis once every twenty-four hours, or that thousands of powerful stars rotate around the earth in the same time, many of them tracing paths thousands of times bigger than the earth’s circumference at the equator? The obvious answer was so compelling that Copernicus was forced to dismiss Ptolemy's theory of a stationary earth and attribute the daily movement of the heavens to the earth rotating on its axis.

Once this tremendous step had been taken, the great difficulties which beset the monstrous conception of the celestial sphere vanished, for the stars need no longer be regarded as situated at equal distances from the earth. Copernicus saw that they might lie at the most varied degrees of remoteness, some being hundreds or thousands of times farther away than others. The complicated structure of the celestial sphere as a material object disappeared altogether; it remained only as a geometrical conception, whereon we find it convenient to indicate the places of the stars. Once the Copernican doctrine had been fully set forth, it was impossible for anyone, who had both the inclination and the capacity to understand it, to withhold acceptance of its truth. The doctrine of a stationary earth had gone for ever.

Once this huge step was taken, the major challenges surrounding the massive idea of the celestial sphere disappeared, because the stars no longer had to be thought of as being at equal distances from the earth. Copernicus realized that they could be at varying distances, with some being hundreds or thousands of times farther away than others. The complex structure of the celestial sphere as a physical object faded away entirely; it existed now only as a geometric concept, where it was useful to mark the positions of the stars. Once the Copernican theory was fully explained, anyone willing and able to understand it could not deny its truth. The idea of a stationary earth was gone forever.

Copernicus having established a theory of the celestial movements which deliberately set aside the stability of the earth, it seemed natural that he should inquire whether the doctrine of a moving earth might not remove the difficulties presented in other celestial phenomena. It had been universally admitted that the earth lay unsupported in space. Copernicus had further shown that it possessed a movement of rotation. Its want of stability being thus recognised, it seemed reasonable to suppose that the earth might also have some other kinds of movements as well. In this, Copernicus essayed to solve a problem far more difficult than that which had hitherto occupied his attention. It was a comparatively easy task to show how the diurnal rising and setting could be accounted for by the rotation of the earth. It was a much more difficult undertaking to demonstrate that the planetary movements, which Ptolemy had represented with so much success, could be completely explained by the supposition that each of those planets revolved uniformly round the sun, and that the earth was also a planet, accomplishing a complete circuit of the sun once in the course of a year.

Copernicus established a theory of celestial movements that deliberately dismissed the idea of a stable Earth. It seemed natural for him to explore whether the idea of a moving Earth could help resolve the issues presented by other celestial phenomena. It was universally accepted that the Earth floated unsupported in space. Copernicus had also demonstrated that it was rotating. Recognizing its lack of stability, it seemed reasonable to think that the Earth might have other types of movements as well. In doing this, Copernicus tackled a problem much more challenging than those he had previously considered. It was relatively easy to explain how the daily rise and set of celestial bodies could be accounted for by the Earth's rotation. However, it was significantly more difficult to prove that the planetary movements, which Ptolemy had successfully represented, could be fully explained by the idea that each of those planets revolved uniformly around the Sun, with the Earth being just another planet completing a full orbit around the Sun once a year.

EXPLANATION OF PLANETARY MOVEMENTS.
EXPLANATION OF PLANETARY MOVEMENTS.
Explanation of planetary movements.

It would be impossible in a sketch like the present to enter into any detail as to the geometrical propositions on which this beautiful investigation of Copernicus depended. We can only mention a few of the leading principles. It may be laid down in general that, if an observer is in movement, he will, if unconscious of the fact, attribute to the fixed objects around him a movement equal and opposite to that which he actually possesses. A passenger on a canal-boat sees the objects on the banks apparently moving backward with a speed equal to that by which he is himself advancing forwards. By an application of this principle, we can account for all the phenomena of the movements of the planets, which Ptolemy had so ingeniously represented by his circles. Let us take, for instance, the most characteristic feature in the irregularities of the outer planets. We have already remarked that Mars, though generally advancing from west to east among the stars, occasionally pauses, retraces his steps for awhile, again pauses, and then resumes his ordinary onward progress. Copernicus showed clearly how this effect was produced by the real motion of the earth, combined with the real motion of Mars. In the adjoining figure we represent a portion of the circular tracks in which the earth and Mars move in accordance with the Copernican doctrine. I show particularly the case where the earth comes directly between the planet and the sun, because it is on such occasions that the retrograde movement (for so this backward movement of Mars is termed) is at its highest. Mars is then advancing in the direction shown by the arrow-head, and the earth is also advancing in the same direction. We, on the earth, however, being unconscious of our own motion, attribute, by the principle I have already explained, an equal and opposite motion to Mars. The visible effect upon the planet is, that Mars has two movements, a real onward movement in one direction, and an apparent movement in the opposite direction. If it so happened that the earth was moving with the same speed as Mars, then the apparent movement would exactly neutralise the real movement, and Mars would seem to be at rest relatively to the surrounding stars. Under the actual circumstances represented, however, the earth is moving faster than Mars, and the consequence is, that the apparent movement of the planet backwards exceeds the real movement forwards, the net result being an apparent retrograde movement.

It would be impossible in a summary like this to go into detail about the geometric principles that Copernicus's beautiful investigation relied on. We can only mention a few key concepts. Generally, if an observer is in motion without realizing it, they'll attribute an equal and opposite motion to the stationary objects around them. For example, someone on a canal boat sees the banks moving backward at the same speed they're moving forward. By applying this idea, we can explain all the phenomena of the planets' movements, which Ptolemy cleverly represented with his circles. For instance, let's consider one of the notable features of the outer planets' irregularities. We've already noted that Mars usually moves from west to east among the stars, but sometimes it pauses, moves backward for a bit, pauses again, and then continues its usual forward motion. Copernicus clearly demonstrated how this effect is caused by Earth's actual motion combined with Mars's actual motion. In the adjacent figure, we illustrate part of the circular paths that Earth and Mars follow according to the Copernican model. I specifically highlight the situation where Earth comes directly between the planet and the sun because that's when the retrograde motion (as this backward movement of Mars is called) is most pronounced. At that moment, Mars is moving in the direction indicated by the arrowhead, and Earth is also moving in the same direction. However, since we on Earth aren't aware of our motion, we attribute, based on the principle I previously explained, an equal and opposite motion to Mars. The visible effect on Mars is that it appears to have two movements: a real forward motion in one direction and an apparent motion in the opposite direction. If Earth were moving at the same speed as Mars, then the apparent motion would exactly cancel out the real motion, making Mars seem at rest relative to the surrounding stars. Under the actual conditions depicted, though, Earth is moving faster than Mars, resulting in an apparent backward movement of Mars that exceeds its real forward movement, making it appear to move retrograde.

With consummate skill, Copernicus showed how the applications of the same principles could account for the characteristic movements of the planets. His reasoning in due time bore down all opposition. The supreme importance of the earth in the system vanished. It had now merely to take rank as one of the planets.

With incredible skill, Copernicus demonstrated how using the same principles could explain the unique movements of the planets. His reasoning eventually overcame all opposition. The earth's supreme importance in the system disappeared. It was now just seen as one of the planets.

The same great astronomer now, for the first time, rendered something like a rational account of the changes of the seasons. Nor did certain of the more obscure astronomical phenomena escape his attention.

The same great astronomer now, for the first time, provided a reasonable explanation of the changes in the seasons. He also took note of some of the more obscure astronomical phenomena.

He delayed publishing his wonderful discoveries to the world until he was quite an old man. He had a well-founded apprehension of the storm of opposition which they would arouse. However, he yielded at last to the entreaties of his friends, and his book was sent to the press. But ere it made its appearance to the world, Copernicus was seized by mortal illness. A copy of the book was brought to him on May 23, 1543. We are told that he was able to see it and to touch it, but no more, and he died a few hours afterwards. He was buried in that Cathedral of Frauenburg, with which his life had been so closely associated.

He postponed sharing his amazing discoveries with the world until he was quite old. He had a solid fear of the backlash they would provoke. However, he eventually gave in to his friends' pleas, and his book went to print. But before it was released, Copernicus was struck by a fatal illness. A copy of the book was brought to him on May 23, 1543. Reports say he was able to see it and touch it, but that was all, and he died a few hours later. He was buried in the Cathedral of Frauenburg, which had been so closely linked to his life.

TYCHO BRAHE.

The most picturesque figure in the history of astronomy is undoubtedly that of the famous old Danish astronomer whose name stands at the head of this chapter. Tycho Brahe was alike notable for his astronomical genius and for the extraordinary vehemence of a character which was by no means perfect. His romantic career as a philosopher, and his taste for splendour as a Danish noble, his ardent friendships and his furious quarrels, make him an ideal subject for a biographer, while the magnificent astronomical work which he accomplished, has given him imperishable fame.

The most striking figure in the history of astronomy is definitely the famous old Danish astronomer whose name is at the start of this chapter. Tycho Brahe was known not only for his astronomical brilliance but also for the intense passion of his character, which wasn’t without its flaws. His dramatic life as a philosopher, his love for luxury as a Danish noble, his deep friendships, and his heated conflicts make him a perfect subject for a biography, while the impressive astronomical achievements he completed have earned him lasting fame.

The history of Tycho Brahe has been admirably told by Dr. Dreyer, the accomplished astronomer who now directs the observatory at Armagh, though himself a countryman of Tycho. Every student of the career of the great Dane must necessarily look on Dr. Dreyer's work as the chief authority on the subject. Tycho sprang from an illustrious stock. His family had flourished for centuries, both in Sweden and in Denmark, where his descendants are to be met with at the present day. The astronomer's father was a privy councillor, and having filled important positions in the Danish government, he was ultimately promoted to be governor of Helsingborg Castle, where he spent the last years of his life. His illustrious son Tycho was born in 1546, and was the second child and eldest boy in a family of ten.

The history of Tycho Brahe has been wonderfully told by Dr. Dreyer, the skilled astronomer who currently leads the observatory at Armagh, and who is also from the same country as Tycho. Every student studying the life of the great Dane must see Dr. Dreyer's work as the main source on the topic. Tycho came from a prominent family. His family had thrived for centuries in both Sweden and Denmark, where his descendants can still be found today. The astronomer's father was a privy councillor and held significant positions in the Danish government, eventually becoming the governor of Helsingborg Castle, where he spent his final years. His distinguished son, Tycho, was born in 1546 and was the second child and eldest son in a family of ten.

It appears that Otto, the father of Tycho, had a brother named George, who was childless. George, however, desired to adopt a boy on whom he could lavish his affection and to whom he could bequeath his wealth. A somewhat singular arrangement was accordingly entered into by the brothers at the time when Otto was married. It was agreed that the first son who might be born to Otto should be forthwith handed over by the parents to George to be reared and adopted by him. In due time little Tycho appeared, and was immediately claimed by George in pursuance of the compact. But it was not unnatural that the parental instinct, which had been dormant when the agreement was made, should here interpose. Tycho's father and mother receded from the bargain, and refused to part with their son. George thought he was badly treated. However, he took no violent steps until a year later, when a brother was born to Tycho. The uncle then felt no scruple in asserting what he believed to be his rights by the simple process of stealing the first-born nephew, which the original bargain had promised him. After a little time it would seem that the parents acquiesced in the loss, and thus it was in Uncle George's home that the future astronomer passed his childhood.

It seems that Otto, Tycho's father, had a brother named George, who didn’t have any children. However, George wanted to adopt a boy onto whom he could shower his love and leave his wealth. So, a unique agreement was made between the brothers when Otto got married. They decided that the first son Otto had would be handed over to George to be raised and adopted by him. Eventually, little Tycho was born, and George immediately claimed him based on their agreement. But it’s natural that the parental instincts, which had been dormant when the agreement was made, would kick in. Tycho's mom and dad backed out of the deal and refused to give up their son. George felt wronged. Still, he didn’t take any drastic actions until a year later when Tycho had a brother. The uncle then felt no guilt in claiming what he thought were his rights by simply taking his first-born nephew, as the original agreement had promised. After some time, it seems that the parents accepted their loss, and so it was in Uncle George's home that the future astronomer spent his childhood.

When we read that Tycho was no more than thirteen years old at the time he entered the University of Copenhagen, it might be at first supposed that even in his boyish years he must have exhibited some of those remarkable talents with which he was afterwards to astonish the world. Such an inference should not, however, be drawn. The fact is that in those days it was customary for students to enter the universities at a much earlier age than is now the case. Not, indeed, that the boys of thirteen knew more then than the boys of thirteen know now. But the education imparted in the universities at that time was of a much more rudimentary kind than that which we understand by university education at present. In illustration of this Dr. Dreyer tells us how, in the University of Wittenberg, one of the professors, in his opening address, was accustomed to point out that even the processes of multiplication and division in arithmetic might be learned by any student who possessed the necessary diligence.

When we read that Tycho was only thirteen years old when he entered the University of Copenhagen, it might initially seem like he must have shown some of the extraordinary talents that would later amaze the world. However, this assumption shouldn't be made. The truth is that back then, it was common for students to begin university at a much younger age than today. It’s not that thirteen-year-olds back then were any more knowledgeable than those today. Rather, the education offered at universities was much more basic than what we consider university education now. To illustrate this, Dr. Dreyer tells us how, at the University of Wittenberg, one of the professors used to say in his opening speech that any student with enough diligence could learn multiplication and division in arithmetic.

It was the wish and the intention of his uncle that Tycho's education should be specially directed to those branches of rhetoric and philosophy which were then supposed to be a necessary preparation for the career of a statesman. Tycho, however, speedily made it plain to his teachers that though he was an ardent student, yet the things which interested him were the movements of the heavenly bodies and not the subtleties of metaphysics.

It was his uncle's wish and intention for Tycho's education to focus specifically on the areas of rhetoric and philosophy that were thought to be essential for a career in politics. However, Tycho quickly made it clear to his teachers that, while he was a passionate learner, what truly fascinated him were the movements of celestial bodies, not the complexities of metaphysics.

TYCHO BRAHE.
TYCHO BRAHE.
Tycho Brahe.

On the 21st October, 1560, an eclipse of the sun occurred, which was partially visible at Copenhagen. Tycho, boy though he was, took the utmost interest in this event. His ardour and astonishment in connection with the circumstance were chiefly excited by the fact that the time of the occurrence of the phenomenon could be predicted with so much accuracy. Urged by his desire to understand the matter thoroughly, Tycho sought to procure some book which might explain what he so greatly wanted to know. In those days books of any kind were but few and scarce, and scientific books were especially unattainable. It so happened, however, that a Latin version of Ptolemy's astronomical works had appeared a few years before the eclipse took place, and Tycho managed to buy a copy of this book, which was then the chief authority on celestial matters. Young as the boy astronomer was, he studied hard, although perhaps not always successfully, to understand Ptolemy, and to this day his copy of the great work, copiously annotated and marked by the schoolboy hand, is preserved as one of the chief treasures in the library of the University at Prague.

On October 21, 1560, a solar eclipse happened, which was partially visible in Copenhagen. Tycho, despite being just a boy, was incredibly interested in this event. His enthusiasm and amazement about the phenomenon were mainly sparked by the fact that its timing could be predicted with such precision. Driven by his desire to fully grasp the subject, Tycho looked for a book that could explain what he desperately wanted to learn. Back then, books of any kind were rare and hard to come by, especially scientific ones. However, a Latin version of Ptolemy's astronomical works had been published a few years before the eclipse, and Tycho managed to buy a copy of this book, which was then the main authority on celestial topics. Though he was still young, the aspiring astronomer studied diligently, even if he wasn't always successful in understanding Ptolemy. To this day, his copy of the great work, filled with notes and markings from his schoolboy days, is preserved as one of the most valued treasures in the library of the University of Prague.

After Tycho had studied for about three years at the University of Copenhagen, his uncle thought it would be better to send him, as was usual in those days, to complete his education by a course of study in some foreign university. The uncle cherished the hope that in this way the attention of the young astronomer might be withdrawn from the study of the stars and directed in what appeared to him a more useful way. Indeed, to the wise heads of those days, the pursuit of natural science seemed so much waste of good time which might otherwise be devoted to logic or rhetoric or some other branch of study more in vogue at that time. To assist in this attempt to wean Tycho from his scientific tastes, his uncle chose as a tutor to accompany him an intelligent and upright young man named Vedel, who was four years senior to his pupil, and accordingly, in 1562, we find the pair taking up their abode at the University of Leipzig.

After Tycho had studied for about three years at the University of Copenhagen, his uncle thought it would be better to send him, as was common back then, to finish his education at a foreign university. His uncle hoped that this would shift the young astronomer's focus away from studying the stars and towards something that seemed more practical to him. In fact, to the wise minds of that time, pursuing natural science seemed like a waste of valuable time that could be spent on logic, rhetoric, or other subjects that were more popular. To help steer Tycho away from his scientific interests, his uncle chose a smart and honest young man named Vedel to accompany him as a tutor. Vedel was four years older than his student, and so in 1562, we see the two settling in at the University of Leipzig.

The tutor, however, soon found that he had undertaken a most hopeless task. He could not succeed in imbuing Tycho with the slightest taste for the study of the law or the other branches of knowledge which were then thought so desirable. The stars, and nothing but the stars, engrossed the attention of his pupil. We are told that all the money he could obtain was spent secretly in buying astronomical books and instruments. He learned the name of the stars from a little globe, which he kept hidden from Vedel, and only ventured to use during the latter's absence. No little friction was at first caused by all this, but in after years a fast and enduring friendship grew up between Tycho and his tutor, each of whom learned to respect and to love the other.

The tutor soon realized he had taken on a hopeless task. He couldn't get Tycho to develop even the slightest interest in studying law or any of the other subjects that were highly valued at the time. Tycho was completely focused on the stars, nothing else. It's said that all the money he could get his hands on went to secretly buying astronomical books and tools. He learned the names of the stars from a small globe that he kept hidden from Vedel, only using it when Vedel wasn't around. This caused some tension at first, but over the years, a strong and lasting friendship developed between Tycho and his tutor, with both learning to respect and care for one another.

Before Tycho was seventeen he had commenced the difficult task of calculating the movements of the planets and the places which they occupied on the sky from time to time. He was not a little surprised to find that the actual positions of the planets differed very widely from those which were assigned to them by calculations from the best existing works of astronomers. With the insight of genius he saw that the only true method of investigating the movements of the heavenly bodies would be to carry on a protracted series of measurements of their places. This, which now seems to us so obvious, was then entirely new doctrine. Tycho at once commenced regular observations in such fashion as he could. His first instrument was, indeed, a very primitive one, consisting of a simple pair of compasses, which he used in this way. He placed his eye at the hinge, and then opened the legs of the compass so that one leg pointed to one star and the other leg to the other star. The compass was then brought down to a divided circle, by which means the number of degrees in the apparent angular distance of the two stars was determined.

Before Tycho turned seventeen, he started the challenging job of calculating the movement of the planets and their positions in the sky at different times. He was quite surprised to discover that the actual positions of the planets varied significantly from those predicted by the best astronomical calculations of the time. With his keen insight, he realized that the only accurate way to study the movements of celestial bodies would be to conduct a long series of measurements of their positions. This idea, which seems obvious to us now, was completely innovative back then. Tycho immediately began regular observations in whatever way he could. His first instrument was quite basic, consisting of a simple pair of compasses, which he used like this: he positioned his eye at the hinge and opened the legs of the compass so that one leg pointed to one star and the other leg pointed to another star. The compass was then lowered to a divided circle, allowing him to measure the degrees in the apparent angular distance between the two stars.

His next advance in instrumental equipment was to provide himself with the contrivance known as the "cross-staff," which he used to observe the stars whenever opportunity offered. It must, of course, be remembered that in those days there were no telescopes. In the absence of optical aid, such as lenses afford the modern observers, astronomers had to rely on mechanical appliances alone to measure the places of the stars. Of such appliances, perhaps the most ingenious was one known before Tycho's time, which we have represented in the adjoining figure.

His next upgrade in tools was to get a device called the "cross-staff," which he used to observe the stars whenever he could. It's important to note that there were no telescopes back then. Without the optical tools that modern observers have, astronomers had to depend solely on mechanical devices to locate the stars. Among these devices, one of the most clever was known even before Tycho's time, which we have illustrated in the adjacent figure.

Let us suppose that it be desired to measure the angle between two stars, then if the angle be not too large it can be determined in the following manner. Let the rod AB be divided into inches and parts of an inch, and let another rod, CD, slide up and down along AB in such a way that the two always remain perpendicular to each other. "Sights," like those on a rifle, are placed at A and C, and there is a pin at D. It will easily be seen that, by sliding the movable bar along the fixed one, it must always be possible when the stars are not too far apart to bring the sights into such positions that one star can be seen along DC and the other along DA. This having been accomplished, the length from A to the cross-bar is read off on the scale, and then, by means of a table previously prepared, the value of the required angular distance is obtained. If the angle between the two stars were greater than it would be possible to measure in the way already described, then there was a provision by which the pin at D might be moved along CD into some other position, so as to bring the angular distance of the stars within the range of the instrument.

Let's say we want to measure the angle between two stars. If the angle isn't too large, we can do it like this. Take a rod AB divided into inches and parts of an inch, and let another rod, CD, slide up and down along AB while staying perpendicular to it. "Sights," similar to those on a rifle, are placed at A and C, and there's a pin at D. By sliding the movable rod along the fixed one, we can usually adjust the sights so that one star is visible along DC and the other along DA, as long as the stars aren't too far apart. Once that's done, we measure the distance from A to the cross-bar on the scale, and then we can find the value of the angle using a pre-prepared table. If the angle between the two stars is too large to measure this way, there's a way to move the pin at D along CD to a different position, bringing the angular distance between the stars within the measuring range of the instrument.

TYCHO'S "NEW STAR" SEXTANT OF 1572. (The arms, of walnut wood, are about 5 1/2 ft. long.)
TYCHO'S "NEW STAR" SEXTANT OF 1572.
(The arms, of walnut wood, are about 5 1/2 ft. long.)
TYCHO'S "NEW STAR" SEXTANT OF 1572.
(The arms, made of walnut wood, are approximately 5 1/2 ft. long.)

No doubt the cross-staff is a very primitive contrivance, but when handled by one so skilful as Tycho it afforded results of considerable accuracy. I would recommend any reader who may have a taste for such pursuits to construct a cross-staff for himself, and see what measurements he can accomplish with its aid.

No doubt the cross-staff is a very basic tool, but when used by someone as skilled as Tycho, it produced fairly accurate results. I encourage any reader interested in this kind of thing to build a cross-staff for themselves and see what measurements they can achieve with it.

To employ this little instrument Tycho had to evade the vigilance of his conscientious tutor, who felt it his duty to interdict all such occupations as being a frivolous waste of time. It was when Vedel was asleep that Tycho managed to escape with his cross staff and measure the places of the heavenly bodies. Even at this early age Tycho used to conduct his observations on those thoroughly sound principles which lie at the foundation of all accurate modern astronomy. Recognising the inevitable errors of workmanship in his little instrument, he ascertained their amount and allowed for their influence on the results which he deduced. This principle, employed by the boy with his cross-staff in 1564, is employed at the present day by the Astronomer Royal at Greenwich with the most superb instruments that the skill of modern opticians has been able to construct.

To use this small instrument, Tycho had to sneak past his strict tutor, who believed it was his job to stop any activities he saw as a waste of time. Tycho would wait until Vedel was asleep, then take his cross staff to measure the positions of the stars. Even at such a young age, Tycho based his observations on sound principles that form the foundation of modern astronomy. He understood that there were inevitable errors in his small instrument, figured out how much they affected his measurements, and accounted for them in his results. This method, which the boy used with his cross staff in 1564, is still used today by the Astronomer Royal at Greenwich with the best instruments that modern optics can produce.

TYCHO'S TRIGONIC SEXTANT. (The arms, AB and AC, are about 5 1/2 ft. long.)
TYCHO'S TRIGONIC SEXTANT.
(The arms, AB and AC, are about 5 1/2 ft. long.)
TYCHO'S TRIGONIC SEXTANT.
(The arms, AB and AC, are approximately 5 1/2 feet long.)

After the death of his uncle, when Tycho was nineteen years of age, it appears that the young philosopher was no longer interfered with in so far as the line which his studies were to take was concerned. Always of a somewhat restless temperament, we now find that he shifted his abode to the University of Rostock, where he speedily made himself notable in connection with an eclipse of the moon on 28th October, 1566. Like every other astronomer of those days, Tycho had always associated astronomy with astrology. He considered that the phenomena of the heavenly bodies always had some significance in connection with human affairs. Tycho was also a poet, and in the united capacity of poet, astrologer, and astronomer, he posted up some verses in the college at Rostock announcing that the lunar eclipse was a prognostication of the death of the great Turkish Sultan, whose mighty deeds at that time filled men's minds. Presently news did arrive of the death of the Sultan, and Tycho was accordingly triumphant; but a little later it appeared that the decease had taken place BEFORE the eclipse, a circumstance which caused many a laugh at Tycho's expense.

After his uncle passed away, Tycho, at nineteen, seemed to finally have the freedom to choose his own path in his studies. Always a bit restless, he moved to the University of Rostock, where he quickly made a name for himself by predicting a lunar eclipse on October 28, 1566. Like many astronomers of his time, Tycho linked astronomy with astrology, believing that the movements of celestial bodies had significant implications for human events. He was also a poet, and in his combined roles as poet, astrologer, and astronomer, he put up a notice at the college in Rostock claiming that the lunar eclipse foretold the death of the great Turkish Sultan, who was a hot topic at the time. Soon after, news of the Sultan's death arrived, and Tycho celebrated his success; however, it later turned out that the Sultan had died BEFORE the eclipse, which led to many laughs at Tycho's expense.

TYCHO'S ASTRONOMIC SEXTANT. (Made of steel; the arms, A B, A C, measure 4ft.)
TYCHO'S ASTRONOMIC SEXTANT.
(Made of steel; the arms, A B, A C, measure 4ft.)
TYCHO'S ASTRONOMIC SEXTANT.
(Made of steel; the arms, A B, A C, are 4ft long.)

TYCHO'S EQUATORIAL ARMILLARY. (The meridian circle, E B C A D, made of solid steel, is nearly 6 ft. in diameter.)
TYCHO'S EQUATORIAL ARMILLARY.
(The meridian circle, E B C A D, made of solid steel, is nearly 6 ft. in diameter.)
TYCHO'S EQUATORIAL ARMILLARY.
(The meridian circle, E B C A D, made of solid steel, is almost 6 feet in diameter.)

Tycho being of a somewhat turbulent disposition, it appears that, while at the University of Rostock, he had a serious quarrel with another Danish nobleman. We are not told for certain what was the cause of the dispute. It does not, however, seem to have had any more romantic origin than a difference of opinion as to which of them knew the more mathematics. They fought, as perhaps it was becoming for two astronomers to fight, under the canopy of heaven in utter darkness at the dead of night, and the duel was honourably terminated when a slice was taken off Tycho's nose by the insinuating sword of his antagonist. For the repair of this injury the ingenuity of the great instrument-maker was here again useful, and he made a substitute for his nose "with a composition of gold and silver." The imitation was so good that it is declared to have been quite equal to the original. Dr. Lodge, however, pointedly observes that it does not appear whether this remark was made by a friend or an enemy.

Tycho, having a somewhat fiery temperament, seems to have gotten into a serious fight with another Danish nobleman while he was at the University of Rostock. We're not exactly sure what sparked the disagreement, but it doesn't seem to have been anything romantic—more likely a debate over which of them was better at math. They ended up dueling, as it seemed fitting for two astronomers, under the night sky in complete darkness, and the duel ended honorably when his opponent managed to slice off part of Tycho's nose. To fix this injury, the skill of the great instrument maker came in handy once more, and he created a replacement for his nose "using a mix of gold and silver." The imitation was so convincing that it was said to be just as good as the original. Dr. Lodge, however, pointedly notes that it's unclear whether this comment came from a friend or an enemy.

THE GREAT AUGSBURG QUADRANT
THE GREAT AUGSBURG QUADRANT.
THE GREAT AUGSBURG QUAD.

TYCHO'S "NEW SCHEME OF THE TERRESTRIAL SYSTEM," 1577.
TYCHO'S "NEW SCHEME OF THE TERRESTRIAL SYSTEM," 1577.
TYCHO'S "NEW SCHEME OF THE TERRESTRIAL SYSTEM," 1577.

The next few years Tycho spent in various places ardently pursuing somewhat varied branches of scientific study. At one time we hear of him assisting an astronomical alderman, in the ancient city of Augsburg, to erect a tremendous wooden machine—a quadrant of 19-feet radius—to be used in observing the heavens. At another time we learn that the King of Denmark had recognised the talents of his illustrious subject, and promised to confer on him a pleasant sinecure in the shape of a canonry, which would assist him with the means for indulging his scientific pursuits. Again we are told that Tycho is pursuing experiments in chemistry with the greatest energy, nor is this so incompatible as might at first be thought with his devotion to astronomy. In those early days of knowledge the different sciences seemed bound together by mysterious bonds. Alchemists and astrologers taught that the several planets were correlated in some mysterious manner with the several metals. It was, therefore hardly surprising that Tycho should have included a study of the properties of the metals in the programme of his astronomical work.

The next few years, Tycho traveled to different places passionately exploring various branches of science. At one point, we hear about him helping an astronomical official in the old city of Augsburg build a massive wooden device—a quadrant with a 19-foot radius—for observing the skies. At another point, we learn that the King of Denmark recognized his talents and promised to give him a nice position as a canon, which would provide him with the resources to pursue his scientific interests. Again, we're told that Tycho was energetically conducting experiments in chemistry, which isn't as unrelated to his commitment to astronomy as it might seem at first. In those early days of knowledge, different sciences appeared to be interconnected in mysterious ways. Alchemists and astrologers suggested that the various planets were somehow linked to different metals. Therefore, it was hardly surprising that Tycho included the study of metal properties in his astronomical research.

URANIBORG AND ITS GROUNDS.  PLATE: GROUND-PLAN OF THE OBSERVATORY.
URANIBORG AND ITS GROUNDS.
URANIBORG AND ITS GROUNDS.

GROUND-PLAN OF THE OBSERVATORY.
GROUND-PLAN OF THE OBSERVATORY.
Observatory layout.

An event, however, occurred in 1572 which stimulated Tycho's astronomical labours, and started him on his life's work. On the 11th of November in that year, he was returning home to supper after a day's work in his laboratory, when he happened to lift his face to the sky, and there he beheld a brilliant new star. It was in the constellation of Cassiopeia, and occupied a position in which there had certainly been no bright star visible when his attention had last been directed to that part of the heavens. Such a phenomenon was so startling that he found it hard to trust the evidence of his senses. He thought he must be the subject of some hallucination. He therefore called to the servants who were accompanying him, and asked them whether they, too, could see a brilliant object in the direction in which he pointed. They certainly could, and thus he became convinced that this marvellous object was no mere creation of the fancy, but a veritable celestial body—a new star of surpassing splendour which had suddenly burst forth. In these days of careful scrutiny of the heavens, we are accustomed to the occasional outbreak of new stars. It is not, however, believed that any new star which has ever appeared has displayed the same phenomenal brilliance as was exhibited by the star of 1572.

An event happened in 1572 that inspired Tycho's astronomical work and set him on his life's mission. On November 11th of that year, he was heading home for dinner after a day in his lab when he happened to look up at the sky and saw a brilliant new star. It was in the constellation of Cassiopeia, in a spot where he was sure no bright star had been visible previously. The sight was so astonishing that he found it hard to believe his own eyes. He thought he might be having some sort of hallucination. So, he called out to the servants who were with him and asked if they could also see the bright object in the direction he was pointing. They could, and that convinced him that this amazing object was not just a figment of his imagination, but a real celestial body—a new star of incredible brightness that had suddenly appeared. Nowadays, with our careful observation of the heavens, we're used to the occasional emergence of new stars. However, it's generally believed that no new star has ever been as phenomenally bright as the star of 1572.

This object has a value in astronomy far greater than it might at first appear. It is true, in one sense, that Tycho discovered the new star, but it is equally true, in a different sense, that it was the new star which discovered Tycho. Had it not been for this opportune apparition, it is quite possible that Tycho might have found a career in some direction less beneficial to science than that which he ultimately pursued.

This object holds much more value in astronomy than it might seem at first. It's true, in one way, that Tycho discovered the new star, but it's also true, in another way, that the new star discovered Tycho. If it hadn't been for this timely appearance, Tycho might have ended up in a career that wasn't as beneficial to science as the one he ultimately followed.

THE OBSERVATORY OF URANIBORG, ISLAND OF HVEN.
THE OBSERVATORY OF URANIBORG, ISLAND OF HVEN.
THE URANIBORG OBSERVATORY, ISLAND OF HVEN.

When he reached his home on this memorable evening, Tycho immediately applied his great quadrant to the measurement of the place of the new star. His observations were specially directed to the determination of the distance of the object. He rightly conjectured that if it were very much nearer to us than the stars in its vicinity, the distance of the brilliant body might be determined in a short time by the apparent changes in its distance from the surrounding points. It was speedily demonstrated that the new star could not be as near as the moon, by the simple fact that its apparent place, as compared with the stars in its neighbourhood, was not appreciably altered when it was observed below the pole, and again above the pole at an interval of twelve hours. Such observations were possible, inasmuch as the star was bright enough to be seen in full daylight. Tycho thus showed conclusively that the body was so remote that the diameter of the earth bore an insignificant ratio to the star's distance. His success in this respect is the more noteworthy when we find that many other observers, who studied the same object, came to the erroneous conclusion that the new star was quite as near as the moon, or even much nearer. In fact, it may be said, that with regard to this object Tycho discovered everything which could possibly have been discovered in the days before telescopes were invented. He not only proved that the star's distance was too great for measurement, but he showed that it had no proper motion on the heavens. He recorded the successive changes in its brightness from week to week, as well as the fluctuations in hue with which the alterations in lustre were accompanied.

When Tycho got home that memorable evening, he quickly used his large quadrant to measure the position of the new star. His observations focused on figuring out how far away the object was. He correctly guessed that if the star was much closer to us than the nearby stars, its distance could be determined fairly quickly by the apparent changes in its position relative to those surrounding points. It was soon proven that the new star couldn't be as close as the moon, simply because its apparent position, compared to the nearby stars, didn’t noticeably change when observed below the pole and then again above the pole twelve hours later. Such observations were possible because the star was bright enough to be seen even in full daylight. Tycho conclusively demonstrated that the star was so far away that the Earth's diameter was negligible in relation to its distance. His achievement is even more impressive considering that many other observers studying the same object mistakenly concluded that the new star was as close as the moon or even much nearer. In fact, it can be said that regarding this object, Tycho discovered everything that could possibly be known before telescopes were invented. He not only proved that the star's distance was too great for measurement but also showed that it had no proper motion in the sky. He recorded the changes in its brightness from week to week, as well as the color fluctuations that accompanied the variations in brightness.

It seems, nowadays, strange to find that such thoroughly scientific observations of the new star as those which Tycho made, possessed, even in the eyes of the great astronomer himself, a profound astrological significance. We learn from Dr. Dreyer that, in Tycho's opinion, "the star was at first like Venus and Jupiter, and its effects will therefore, first, be pleasant; but as it then became like Mars, there will next come a period of wars, seditions, captivity, and death of princes, and destruction of cities, together with dryness and fiery meteors in the air, pestilence, and venomous snakes. Lastly, the star became like Saturn, and thus will finally come a time of want, death, imprisonment, and all kinds of sad things!" Ideas of this kind were, however, universally entertained. It seemed, indeed, obvious to learned men of that period that such an apparition must forebode startling events. One of the chief theories then held was, that just as the Star of Bethlehem announced the first coming of Christ, so the second coming, and the end of the world, was heralded by the new star of 1572.

It seems strange today to realize that the detailed scientific observations of the new star made by Tycho had, even in the eyes of the famed astronomer himself, a deep astrological significance. Dr. Dreyer informs us that, in Tycho's view, "the star was initially like Venus and Jupiter, and its effects will therefore first be pleasant; but as it then resembled Mars, a period of wars, uprisings, captivity, and the death of princes will follow, along with the destruction of cities, drought, fiery meteors in the sky, plagues, and venomous snakes. Finally, as the star became like Saturn, a time of want, death, imprisonment, and all sorts of misfortunes will ultimately arrive!" Such ideas were widely accepted at the time. It seemed plain to educated people of that era that such an appearance must foreshadow significant events. One of the main theories then was that just as the Star of Bethlehem announced the first coming of Christ, the new star of 1572 heralded the second coming and the end of the world.

The researches of Tycho on this object were the occasion of his first appearance as an author. The publication of his book was however, for some time delayed by the urgent remonstrances of his friends, who thought it was beneath the dignity of a nobleman to condescend to write a book. Happily, Tycho determined to brave the opinion of his order; the book appeared, and was the first of a series of great astronomical productions from the same pen.

The research Tycho conducted on this topic marked his initial emergence as an author. However, the release of his book was delayed for a while due to the strong objections from his friends, who believed it was beneath the dignity of a nobleman to write a book. Fortunately, Tycho decided to disregard the opinions of his peers; the book was eventually published and became the first in a series of significant astronomical works from him.

EFFIGY ON TYCHO'S TOMB AT PRAGUE.
EFFIGY ON TYCHO'S TOMB AT PRAGUE.
EFFIGY ON TYCHO'S TOMB IN PRAGUE.

The fame of the noble Dane being now widespread, the King of Denmark entreated him to return to his native country, and to deliver a course of lectures on astronomy in the University of Copenhagen. With some reluctance he consented, and his introductory oration has been preserved. He dwells, in fervent language, upon the beauty and the interest of the celestial phenomena. He points out the imperative necessity of continuous and systematic observation of the heavenly bodies in order to extend our knowledge. He appeals to the practical utility of the science, for what civilised nation could exist without having the means of measuring time? He sets forth how the study of these beautiful objects "exalts the mind from earthly and trivial things to heavenly ones;" and then he winds up by assuring them that "a special use of astronomy is that it enables us to draw conclusions from the movements in the celestial regions as to human fate."

The noble Dane's fame had spread far and wide, prompting the King of Denmark to ask him to return to his homeland and give a series of lectures on astronomy at the University of Copenhagen. After some hesitation, he agreed, and his introductory speech has been preserved. He passionately discusses the beauty and intrigue of celestial phenomena. He emphasizes the crucial need for continuous and systematic observation of the stars to expand our knowledge. He highlights the practical benefits of the science, asking what civilized nation could function without a way to measure time. He explains how studying these magnificent objects "elevates the mind from earthly and trivial matters to heavenly ones," and concludes by assuring them that "one important use of astronomy is that it allows us to draw conclusions about human fate based on the movements in the celestial realms."

An interesting event, which occurred in 1572, distracted Tycho's attention from astronomical matters. He fell in love. The young girl on whom his affections were set appears to have sprung from humble origin. Here again his august family friends sought to dissuade him from a match they thought unsuitable for a nobleman. But Tycho never gave way in anything. It is suggested that he did not seek a wife among the highborn dames of his own rank from the dread that the demands of a fashionable lady would make too great an inroad on the time that he wished to devote to science. At all events, Tycho's union seems to have been a happy one, and he had a large family of children; none of whom, however, inherited their father's talents.

An interesting event that happened in 1572 distracted Tycho from his astronomical work. He fell in love. The young girl he liked seems to have come from a humble background. Once again, his prestigious family friends tried to dissuade him from a match they believed was not suitable for a nobleman. But Tycho was never one to back down from anything. It's suggested that he didn't look for a wife among the upper-class women of his own status because he feared that the demands of a fashionable lady would take too much time away from the science he wanted to pursue. In any case, Tycho's marriage appears to have been a happy one, and he had a large family of children; however, none of them inherited their father's talents.

TYCHO'S MURAL QUADRANT PICTURE, URANIBORG.
TYCHO'S MURAL QUADRANT PICTURE, URANIBORG.
Tycho's mural quadrant image, Uraniborg.

Tycho had many scientific friends in Germany, among whom his work was held in high esteem. The treatment that he there met with seemed to him so much more encouraging than that which he received in Denmark that he formed the notion of emigrating to Basle and making it his permanent abode. A whisper of this intention was conveyed to the large-hearted King of Denmark, Frederick II. He wisely realised how great would be the fame which would accrue to his realm if he could induce Tycho to remain within Danish territory and carry on there the great work of his life. A resolution to make a splendid proposal to Tycho was immediately formed. A noble youth was forthwith despatched as a messenger, and ordered to travel day and night until he reached Tycho, whom he was to summon to the king. The astronomer was in bed on the morning of 11th February, 1576, when the message was delivered. Tycho, of course, set off at once and had an audience of the king at Copenhagen. The astronomer explained that what he wanted was the means to pursue his studies unmolested, whereupon the king offered him the Island of Hven, in the Sound near Elsinore. There he would enjoy all the seclusion that he could desire. The king further promised that he would provide the funds necessary for building a house and for founding the greatest observatory that had ever yet been reared for the study of the heavens. After due deliberation and consultation with his friends, Tycho accepted the king's offer. He was forthwith granted a pension, and a deed was drawn up formally assigning the Island of Hven to his use all the days of his life.

Tycho had many scientific friends in Germany, who greatly respected his work. The support he received there felt so much more encouraging than what he got in Denmark that he came up with the idea of moving to Basle and making it his permanent home. Word of this intention reached the generous King of Denmark, Frederick II. He understood that it would enhance his kingdom's reputation significantly if he could persuade Tycho to stay in Denmark and continue his important work there. He quickly decided to make an impressive proposal to Tycho. A noble young man was sent as a messenger, instructed to travel day and night until he found Tycho and bring him to the king. On the morning of February 11, 1576, Tycho was in bed when the message arrived. He immediately set off to meet the king in Copenhagen. Tycho explained that he wanted the resources to pursue his studies without interruptions, and the king offered him the Island of Hven, in the Sound near Elsinore. There, he would have all the privacy he could wish for. The king also promised to provide the funds needed to build a house and create the greatest observatory ever established for studying the heavens. After thoughtful consideration and discussion with his friends, Tycho accepted the king's offer. He was soon granted a pension, and a formal document was created assigning the Island of Hven for his use for the rest of his life.

The foundation of the famous castle of Uraniborg was laid on 30th August, 1576. The ceremony was a formal and imposing one, in accordance with Tycho's ideas of splendour. A party of scientific friends had assembled, and the time had been chosen so that the heavenly bodies were auspiciously placed. Libations of costly wines were poured forth, and the stone was placed with due solemnity. The picturesque character of this wonderful temple for the study of the stars may be seen in the figures with which this chapter is illustrated.

The foundation of the famous castle of Uraniborg was laid on August 30, 1576. The ceremony was formal and grand, reflecting Tycho's vision of splendor. A group of scientific friends gathered, and the timing was chosen so that the celestial bodies were favorably positioned. Expensive wines were poured out, and the stone was set with great seriousness. The beautiful design of this remarkable observatory for studying the stars can be seen in the images that illustrate this chapter.

One of the most remarkable instruments that has ever been employed in studying the heavens was the mural quadrant which Tycho erected in one of the apartments of Uraniborg. By its means the altitudes of the celestial bodies could be observed with much greater accuracy than had been previously attainable. This wonderful contrivance is represented on the preceding page. It will be observed that the walls of the room are adorned by pictures with a lavishness of decoration not usually to be found in scientific establishments.

One of the most impressive tools ever used to study the skies was the mural quadrant that Tycho built in one of the rooms at Uraniborg. With it, the altitudes of celestial bodies could be measured with much greater accuracy than ever before. This amazing device is shown on the previous page. You'll notice that the walls of the room are decorated with pictures in a style that's not typically found in scientific institutions.

A few years later, when the fame of the observatory at Hven became more widely spread, a number of young men flocked to Tycho to study under his direction. He therefore built another observatory for their use in which the instruments were placed in subterranean rooms of which only the roofs appeared above the ground. There was a wonderful poetical inscription over the entrance to this underground observatory, expressing the astonishment of Urania at finding, even in the interior of the earth, a cavern devoted to the study of the heavens. Tycho was indeed always fond of versifying, and he lost no opportunity of indulging this taste whenever an occasion presented itself.

A few years later, when the observatory at Hven gained more fame, a number of young men came to Tycho to learn from him. To accommodate them, he built another observatory where the instruments were placed in underground rooms, with only the roofs visible above ground. There was a beautiful poetic inscription over the entrance to this underground observatory, expressing Urania's amazement at finding a space dedicated to studying the heavens even deep within the earth. Tycho always enjoyed writing poetry and took every chance to indulge this passion whenever he could.

Around the walls of the subterranean observatory were the pictures of eight astronomers, each with a suitable inscription—one of these of course represented Tycho himself, and beneath were written words to the effect that posterity should judge of his work. The eighth picture depicted an astronomer who has not yet come into existence. Tychonides was his name, and the inscription presses the modest hope that when he does appear he will be worthy of his great predecessor. The vast expenses incurred in the erection and the maintenance of this strange establishment were defrayed by a succession of grants from the royal purse.

Around the walls of the underground observatory were portraits of eight astronomers, each with a fitting inscription—one of them, of course, depicted Tycho himself, with words stating that future generations should evaluate his work. The eighth portrait showed an astronomer who hasn’t existed yet. His name was Tychonides, and the inscription expresses a humble hope that when he does arrive, he will be deserving of his remarkable predecessor. The hefty costs associated with building and maintaining this unusual establishment were covered by a series of grants from the royal treasury.

For twenty years Tycho laboured hard at Uraniborg in the pursuit of science. His work mainly consisted in the determination of the places of the moon, the planets, and the stars on the celestial sphere. The extraordinary pains taken by Tycho to have his observations as accurate as his instruments would permit, have justly entitled him to the admiration of all succeeding astronomers. His island home provided the means of recreation as well as a place for work. He was surrounded by his family, troops of friends were not wanting, and a pet dwarf seems to have been an inmate of his curious residence. By way of change from his astronomical labours he used frequently to work with his students in his chemical laboratory. It is not indeed known what particular problems in chemistry occupied his attention. We are told, however, that he engaged largely in the production of medicines, and as these appear to have been dispensed gratuitously there was no lack of patients.

For twenty years, Tycho worked hard at Uraniborg in pursuit of science. His main focus was determining the positions of the moon, planets, and stars in the sky. The exceptional care Tycho took to ensure his observations were as accurate as his instruments would allow has rightfully earned him the admiration of all future astronomers. His island home offered both a place to work and a chance to relax. He was surrounded by family, had plenty of friends, and even had a pet dwarf living in his unusual residence. To take a break from his astronomical work, he often collaborated with his students in his chemistry lab. It's not really known what specific chemistry issues he focused on, but we do know that he was heavily involved in creating medicines, and since these were given out for free, there was never a shortage of patients.

Tycho's imperious and grasping character frequently brought him into difficulties, which seem to have increased with his advancing years. He had ill-treated one of his tenants on Hven, and an adverse decision by the courts seems to have greatly exasperated the astronomer. Serious changes also took place in his relations to the court at Copenhagen. When the young king was crowned in 1596, he reversed the policy of his predecessor with reference to Hven. The liberal allowances to Tycho were one after another withdrawn, and finally even his pension was stopped. Tycho accordingly abandoned Hven in a tumult of rage and mortification. A few years later we find him in Bohemia a prematurely aged man, and he died on the 24th October, 1601.

Tycho's bossy and greedy personality often got him into trouble, which seemed to grow worse as he got older. He treated one of his tenants on Hven poorly, and a negative ruling from the courts really frustrated the astronomer. Significant changes also occurred in his relationship with the court in Copenhagen. When the young king was crowned in 1596, he changed the approach of his predecessor towards Hven. The generous support Tycho had been receiving was gradually taken away, and ultimately, even his pension was cut off. As a result, Tycho left Hven in a storm of anger and humiliation. A few years later, we find him in Bohemia, looking like an old man before his time, and he died on October 24, 1601.

GALILEO.

Among the ranks of the great astronomers it would be difficult to find one whose life presents more interesting features and remarkable vicissitudes than does that of Galileo. We may consider him as the patient investigator and brilliant discoverer. We may consider him in his private relations, especially to his daughter, Sister Maria Celeste, a woman of very remarkable character; and we have also the pathetic drama at the close of Galileo's life, when the philosopher drew down upon himself the thunders of the Inquisition.

Among the great astronomers, it’s hard to find anyone whose life is as interesting and full of ups and downs as Galileo's. We can see him as the dedicated researcher and brilliant discoverer. We can also look at his personal life, especially his relationship with his daughter, Sister Maria Celeste, who had an extraordinary character. Additionally, there's the tragic story at the end of Galileo's life when the philosopher faced the wrath of the Inquisition.

The materials for the sketch of this astonishing man are sufficiently abundant. We make special use in this place of those charming letters which his daughter wrote to him from her convent home. More than a hundred of these have been preserved, and it may well be doubted whether any more beautiful and touching series of letters addressed to a parent by a dearly loved child have ever been written. An admirable account of this correspondence is contained in a little book entitled "The Private Life of Galileo," published anonymously by Messrs. Macmillan in 1870, and I have been much indebted to the author of that volume for many of the facts contained in this chapter.

The materials for the sketch of this remarkable man are more than enough. Here, we rely heavily on the lovely letters his daughter wrote to him from her convent. More than a hundred of these have been kept, and it's hard to imagine a more beautiful and heartfelt collection of letters addressed to a parent by a beloved child. An excellent account of this correspondence is found in a small book called "The Private Life of Galileo," published anonymously by Macmillan in 1870, and I am very grateful to the author of that book for many of the details in this chapter.

Galileo was born at Pisa, on 18th February, 1564. He was the eldest son of Vincenzo de' Bonajuti de' Galilei, a Florentine noble. Notwithstanding his illustrious birth and descent, it would seem that the home in which the great philosopher's childhood was spent was an impoverished one. It was obvious at least that the young Galileo would have to be provided with some profession by which he might earn a livelihood. From his father he derived both by inheritance and by precept a keen taste for music, and it appears that he became an excellent performer on the lute. He was also endowed with considerable artistic power, which he cultivated diligently. Indeed, it would seem that for some time the future astronomer entertained the idea of devoting himself to painting as a profession. His father, however, decided that he should study medicine. Accordingly, we find that when Galileo was seventeen years of age, and had added a knowledge of Greek and Latin to his acquaintance with the fine arts, he was duly entered at the University of Pisa.

Galileo was born in Pisa on February 18, 1564. He was the oldest son of Vincenzo de' Bonajuti de' Galilei, a noble from Florence. Despite his noble heritage, it seems that the home where the great philosopher grew up was a poor one. It was clear that the young Galileo would need to find a profession to support himself. From his father, he inherited a strong passion for music and it seems he became an excellent lute player. He was also gifted in art, which he worked hard to develop. In fact, for a while, the future astronomer considered pursuing painting as a career. However, his father decided that he should study medicine. So, when Galileo was seventeen and had learned both Greek and Latin in addition to the fine arts, he enrolled at the University of Pisa.

Here the young philosopher obtained some inkling of mathematics, whereupon he became so much interested in this branch of science, that he begged to be allowed to study geometry. In compliance with his request, his father permitted a tutor to be engaged for this purpose; but he did so with reluctance, fearing that the attention of the young student might thus be withdrawn from that medical work which was regarded as his primary occupation. The event speedily proved that these anxieties were not without some justification. The propositions of Euclid proved so engrossing to Galileo that it was thought wise to avoid further distraction by terminating the mathematical tutor's engagement. But it was too late for the desired end to be attained. Galileo had now made such progress that he was able to continue his geometrical studies by himself. Presently he advanced to that famous 47th proposition which won his lively admiration, and on he went until he had mastered the six books of Euclid, which was a considerable achievement for those days.

Here the young philosopher got a taste of mathematics, which sparked his interest in this field of study, leading him to ask to learn geometry. In response to his request, his father reluctantly agreed to hire a tutor for this purpose, worried that it might distract the young student from his primary focus on medicine. Soon, it became clear that these worries were somewhat justified. The principles of Euclid fascinated Galileo so much that it was decided to end the tutor's engagement to avoid further distractions. But by then, it was too late to achieve the desired outcome. Galileo had progressed enough that he could continue his geometry studies on his own. Eventually, he mastered that famous 47th proposition, which greatly impressed him, and he went on to master the six books of Euclid, a significant accomplishment for those times.

The diligence and brilliance of the young student at Pisa did not, however, bring him much credit with the University authorities. In those days the doctrines of Aristotle were regarded as the embodiment of all human wisdom in natural science as well as in everything else. It was regarded as the duty of every student to learn Aristotle off by heart, and any disposition to doubt or even to question the doctrines of the venerated teacher was regarded as intolerable presumption. But young Galileo had the audacity to think for himself about the laws of nature. He would not take any assertion of fact on the authority of Aristotle when he had the means of questioning nature directly as to its truth or falsehood. His teachers thus came to regard him as a somewhat misguided youth, though they could not but respect the unflagging industry with which he amassed all the knowledge he could acquire.

The hard work and intelligence of the young student at Pisa didn’t earn him much respect from the University authorities. Back then, Aristotle's teachings were seen as the ultimate authority on all human knowledge, especially in natural science. Every student was expected to memorize Aristotle’s work, and any hint of doubt or questioning of this revered philosopher was viewed as unacceptable arrogance. But young Galileo had the nerve to think for himself about the laws of nature. He wouldn’t accept any claim as fact just because Aristotle said so when he had the ability to directly explore nature for the truth. As a result, his teachers considered him somewhat misguided, although they couldn’t help but admire his relentless pursuit of knowledge.

GALILEO'S PENDULUM.
GALILEO'S PENDULUM.
Galileo's Pendulum.

We are so accustomed to the use of pendulums in our clocks that perhaps we do not often realise that the introduction of this method of regulating time-pieces was really a notable invention worthy the fame of the great astronomer to whom it was due. It appears that sitting one day in the Cathedral of Pisa, Galileo's attention became concentrated on the swinging of a chandelier which hung from the ceiling. It struck him as a significant point, that whether the arc through which the pendulum oscillated was a long one or a short one, the time occupied in each vibration was sensibly the same. This suggested to the thoughtful observer that a pendulum would afford the means by which a time-keeper might be controlled, and accordingly Galileo constructed for the first time a clock on this principle. The immediate object sought in this apparatus was to provide a means of aiding physicians in counting the pulses of their patients.

We are so used to pendulums in our clocks that we often don't realize that introducing this way of regulating timepieces was a significant invention attributed to the great astronomer who came up with it. One day, while sitting in the Cathedral of Pisa, Galileo became focused on the swinging of a chandelier hanging from the ceiling. He noticed that regardless of whether the pendulum swung over a long or short distance, the time taken for each swing was approximately the same. This led him to think that a pendulum could be used to control a timekeeper, and so Galileo built the first clock based on this principle. The primary aim of this device was to help doctors count their patients’ pulses.

The talents of Galileo having at length extorted due recognition from the authorities, he was appointed, at the age of twenty-five, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Pisa. Then came the time when he felt himself strong enough to throw down the gauntlet to the adherents of the old philosophy. As a necessary part of his doctrine on the movement of bodies Aristotle had asserted that the time occupied by a stone in falling depends upon its weight, so that the heavier the stone the less time would it require to fall from a certain height to the earth. It might have been thought that a statement so easily confuted by the simplest experiments could never have maintained its position in any accepted scheme of philosophy. But Aristotle had said it, and to anyone who ventured to express a doubt the ready sneer was forthcoming, "Do you think yourself a cleverer man than Aristotle?" Galileo determined to demonstrate in the most emphatic manner the absurdity of a doctrine which had for centuries received the sanction of the learned. The summit of the Leaning Tower of Pisa offered a highly dramatic site for the great experiment. The youthful professor let fall from the overhanging top a large heavy body and a small light body simultaneously. According to Aristotle the large body ought to have reached the ground much sooner than the small one, but such was found not to be the case. In the sight of a large concourse of people the simple fact was demonstrated that the two bodies fell side by side, and reached the ground at the same time. Thus the first great step was taken in the overthrow of that preposterous system of unquestioning adhesion to dogma, which had impeded the development of the knowledge of nature for nearly two thousand years.

Galileo's talents finally gained recognition from the authorities, and at just twenty-five, he was appointed Professor of Mathematics at the University of Pisa. It was then that he felt ready to challenge the supporters of the old philosophy. As part of his doctrine on the movement of bodies, Aristotle had claimed that the time it takes for a stone to fall depends on its weight, suggesting that the heavier the stone, the less time it would take to fall from a certain height. One might think that such a claim, easily disproven by simple experiments, could never hold its ground in any accepted philosophical framework. However, Aristotle had said it, and anyone who dared to question it would face the dismissive retort, "Do you think you're smarter than Aristotle?" Galileo decided to show, in the most striking way possible, how absurd this doctrine was, which had been accepted by scholars for centuries. The top of the Leaning Tower of Pisa was the perfect dramatic location for his grand experiment. The young professor dropped a heavy object and a light object from the overhanging top at the same time. According to Aristotle, the heavy object should have hit the ground much sooner than the light one, but that wasn’t the case. In front of a large crowd, he demonstrated that both objects fell side by side and reached the ground simultaneously. This marked the first significant step in dismantling the ridiculous system of blind adherence to dogma that had held back the development of our understanding of nature for almost two thousand years.

This revolutionary attitude towards the ancient beliefs was not calculated to render Galileo's relations with the University authorities harmonious. He had also the misfortune to make enemies in other quarters. Don Giovanni de Medici, who was then the Governor of the Port of Leghorn, had designed some contrivance by which he proposed to pump out a dock. But Galileo showed up the absurdity of this enterprise in such an aggressive manner that Don Giovanni took mortal offence, nor was he mollified when the truths of Galileo's criticisms were abundantly verified by the total failure of his ridiculous invention. In various ways Galileo was made to feel his position at Pisa so unpleasant that he was at length compelled to abandon his chair in the University. The active exertions of his friends, of whom Galileo was so fortunate as to have had throughout his life an abundant supply, then secured his election to the Professorship of Mathematics at Padua, whither he went in 1592.

This revolutionary attitude toward ancient beliefs didn't help Galileo's relationship with the university authorities. He also unfortunately made enemies elsewhere. Don Giovanni de Medici, who was the Governor of the Port of Leghorn at the time, had designed a device to pump out a dock. However, Galileo pointed out how ridiculous this idea was so aggressively that Don Giovanni took serious offense, and he wasn't comforted when Galileo's criticisms were proven true by the complete failure of his ridiculous invention. In various ways, Galileo was made to feel very uncomfortable in his position at Pisa, and he eventually had to give up his position at the university. Fortunately, his friends, who were plentiful throughout his life, helped secure him a Professorship of Mathematics at Padua, where he went in 1592.

PORTRAIT OF GALILEO.
PORTRAIT OF GALILEO.
Galileo's Portrait.

It was in this new position that Galileo entered on that marvellous career of investigation which was destined to revolutionize science. The zeal with which he discharged his professorial duties was indeed of the most unremitting character. He speedily drew such crowds to listen to his discourses on Natural Philosophy that his lecture-room was filled to overflowing. He also received many private pupils in his house for special instruction. Every moment that could be spared from these labours was devoted to his private study and to his incessant experiments.

It was in this new role that Galileo began his amazing journey of exploration that would change science forever. The enthusiasm with which he fulfilled his teaching responsibilities was truly relentless. He quickly attracted huge audiences to hear his talks on Natural Philosophy, and his lecture hall was often packed. He also took on many private students at his home for specialized lessons. Every spare moment from these duties was dedicated to his personal study and ongoing experiments.

Like many another philosopher who has greatly extended our knowledge of nature, Galileo had a remarkable aptitude for the invention of instruments designed for philosophical research. To facilitate his practical work, we find that in 1599 he had engaged a skilled workman who was to live in his house, and thus be constantly at hand to try the devices for ever springing from Galileo's fertile brain. Among the earliest of his inventions appears to have been the thermometer, which he constructed in 1602. No doubt this apparatus in its primitive form differed in some respects from the contrivance we call by the same name. Galileo at first employed water as the agent, by the expansion of which the temperature was to be measured. He afterwards saw the advantage of using spirits for the same purpose. It was not until about half a century later that mercury came to be recognised as the liquid most generally suitable for the thermometer.

Like many other philosophers who have greatly expanded our understanding of nature, Galileo had a remarkable talent for inventing tools for scientific research. To support his practical work, he hired a skilled craftsman in 1599 who lived in his house, allowing him to always be available to test the devices that constantly emerged from Galileo's creative mind. One of his earliest inventions was the thermometer, which he built in 1602. It's clear that this early device was different in some ways from the thermometer we know today. Initially, Galileo used water to measure temperature based on its expansion. Later, he recognized the benefits of using alcohol for the same purpose. It wasn’t until about fifty years later that mercury was identified as the most suitable liquid for thermometers.

The time was now approaching when Galileo was to make that mighty step in the advancement of human knowledge which followed on the application of the telescope to astronomy. As to how his idea of such an instrument originated, we had best let him tell us in his own words. The passage is given in a letter which he writes to his brother-in-law, Landucci.

The time was getting close for Galileo to take that huge leap forward in human knowledge that came from using the telescope in astronomy. To understand how he came up with the idea for such a device, it's best to let him explain it himself. This excerpt comes from a letter he wrote to his brother-in-law, Landucci.

"I write now because I have a piece of news for you, though whether you will be glad or sorry to hear it I cannot say; for I have now no hope of returning to my own country, though the occurrence which has destroyed that hope has had results both useful and honourable. You must know, then, that two months ago there was a report spread here that in Flanders some one had presented to Count Maurice of Nassau a glass manufactured in such a way as to make distant objects appear very near, so that a man at the distance of two miles could be clearly seen. This seemed to me so marvellous that I began to think about it. As it appeared to me to have a foundation in the Theory of Perspective, I set about contriving how to make it, and at length I found out, and have succeeded so well that the one I have made is far superior to the Dutch telescope. It was reported in Venice that I had made one, and a week since I was commanded to show it to his Serenity and to all the members of the senate, to their infinite amazement. Many gentlemen and senators, even the oldest, have ascended at various times the highest bell-towers in Venice to spy out ships at sea making sail for the mouth of the harbour, and have seen them clearly, though without my telescope they would have been invisible for more than two hours. The effect of this instrument is to show an object at a distance of say fifty miles, as if it were but five miles."

I’m writing now because I have some news for you, though I can’t say whether you’ll be happy or upset to hear it; I’ve lost hope of returning to my own country, but the event that crushed that hope has led to both useful and honorable outcomes. You should know that two months ago, there was a rumor going around here that someone in Flanders had shown Count Maurice of Nassau a glass that made distant objects look very close, so a person two miles away could be seen clearly. This seemed so amazing to me that I started thinking about it. It appeared to have some foundation in the Theory of Perspective, so I set out to figure out how to make it, and eventually, I succeeded so well that what I created is far better than the Dutch telescope. It was reported in Venice that I had made one, and a week ago I was asked to show it to his Serenity and all the members of the senate, which left them all in absolute amazement. Many gentlemen and senators, even the oldest among them, have climbed various high bell towers in Venice at different times to look for ships at sea headed for the harbor entrance, and they’ve seen them clearly, even though without my telescope they wouldn’t have been visible for over two hours. This instrument allows you to see something that's fifty miles away as if it were only five miles away.

The remarkable properties of the telescope at once commanded universal attention among intellectual men. Galileo received applications from several quarters for his new instrument, of which it would seem that he manufactured a large number to be distributed as gifts to various illustrious personages.

The amazing features of the telescope quickly caught the attention of thinkers everywhere. Galileo received requests from many different places for his new device, and it seems that he made a lot of them to give as gifts to various notable figures.

But it was reserved for Galileo himself to make that application of the instrument to the celestial bodies by which its peculiar powers were to inaugurate the new era in astronomy. The first discovery that was made in this direction appears to have been connected with the number of the stars. Galileo saw to his amazement that through his little tube he could count ten times as many stars in the sky as his unaided eye could detect. Here was, indeed, a surprise. We are now so familiar with the elementary facts of astronomy that it is not always easy to realise how the heavens were interpreted by the observers in those ages prior to the invention of the telescope. We can hardly, indeed, suppose that Galileo, like the majority of those who ever thought of such matters, entertained the erroneous belief that the stars were on the surface of a sphere at equal distances from the observer. No one would be likely to have retained his belief in such a doctrine when he saw how the number of visible stars could be increased tenfold by means of Galileo's telescope. It would have been almost impossible to refuse to draw the inference that the stars thus brought into view were still more remote objects which the telescope was able to reveal, just in the same way as it showed certain ships to the astonished Venetians, when at the time these ships were beyond the reach of unaided vision.

But it was Galileo himself who used the telescope on celestial bodies, leading to a new era in astronomy with its unique capabilities. The first discovery he made in this area seems to relate to the number of stars. Galileo was amazed to find that through his small tube, he could count ten times as many stars in the sky as his naked eye could see. This was indeed surprising. We are now so accustomed to basic astronomical facts that it can be challenging to understand how observers interpreted the heavens before the telescope was invented. It’s hard to believe that Galileo, like most others who considered such things, held the mistaken belief that the stars were on a sphere at equal distances from us. No one could have maintained that belief after seeing how the telescope increased the number of visible stars tenfold. It would have been nearly impossible to ignore the conclusion that the stars now visible were even more distant objects the telescope revealed, just as it showed certain ships to the amazed Venetians when those ships were beyond the reach of unaided sight.

Galileo's celestial discoveries now succeeded each other rapidly. That beautiful Milky Way, which has for ages been the object of admiration to all lovers of nature, never disclosed its true nature to the eye of man till the astronomer of Padua turned on it his magic tube. The splendid zone of silvery light was then displayed as star-dust scattered over the black background of the sky. It was observed that though the individual stars were too small to be seen severally without optical aid, yet such was their incredible number that the celestial radiance produced that luminosity with which every stargazer was so familiar.

Galileo's discoveries of the cosmos came quickly one after another. That stunning Milky Way, which has captivated nature lovers for ages, only revealed its true nature to humans when the astronomer from Padua pointed his telescope at it. The magnificent band of silvery light was then shown to be star dust scattered across the dark expanse of the sky. It was noted that although the individual stars were too tiny to be seen separately without help, their astonishing number created the brightness that every stargazer recognized so well.

But the greatest discovery made by the telescope in these early days, perhaps, indeed, the greatest discovery that the telescope has ever accomplished, was the detection of the system of four satellites revolving around the great planet Jupiter. This phenomenon was so wholly unexpected by Galileo that, at first, he could hardly believe his eyes. However, the reality of the existence of a system of four moons attending the great planet was soon established beyond all question. Numbers of great personages crowded to Galileo to see for themselves this beautiful miniature representing the sun with its system of revolving planets.

But the biggest discovery made by the telescope in those early days, and arguably the biggest discovery the telescope has ever made, was finding the system of four moons orbiting the massive planet Jupiter. This phenomenon was so completely unexpected for Galileo that he could hardly believe what he was seeing at first. However, the reality of these four moons orbiting the giant planet was soon confirmed beyond any doubt. Many notable figures flocked to Galileo to witness this stunning miniature model of the sun with its system of orbiting planets.

Of course there were, as usual, a few incredulous people who refused to believe the assertion that four more moving bodies had to be added to the planetary system. They scoffed at the notion; they said the satellites may have been in the telescope, but that they were not in the sky. One sceptical philosopher is reported to have affirmed, that even if he saw the moons of Jupiter himself he would not believe in them, as their existence was contrary to the principles of common-sense!

Of course, there were, as usual, a few skeptical people who refused to believe that four more moving objects needed to be added to the planetary system. They laughed at the idea; they claimed the satellites might have been visible in the telescope, but that they weren’t actually in the sky. One doubtful philosopher is said to have insisted that even if he saw Jupiter's moons himself, he still wouldn’t believe in them, since their existence went against common sense!

There can be no doubt that a special significance attached to the new discovery at this particular epoch in the history of science. It must be remembered that in those days the doctrine of Copernicus, declaring that the sun, and not the earth, was the centre of the system, that the earth revolved on its axis once a day, and that it described a mighty circle round the sun once a year, had only recently been promulgated. This new view of the scheme of nature had been encountered with the most furious opposition. It may possibly have been that Galileo himself had not felt quite confident in the soundness of the Copernican theory, prior to the discovery of the satellites of Jupiter. But when a picture was there exhibited in which a number of relatively small globes were shown to be revolving around a single large globe in the centre, it seemed impossible not to feel that the beautiful spectacle so displayed was an emblem of the relations of the planets to the sun. It was thus made manifest to Galileo that the Copernican theory of the planetary system must be the true one. The momentous import of this opinion upon the future welfare of the great philosopher will presently appear.

There’s no doubt that the new discovery held special significance at this point in the history of science. We have to remember that during this time, Copernicus’s idea—that the sun, not the earth, is the center of the system; that the earth rotates on its axis once a day; and that it makes a huge circle around the sun every year—had only recently been introduced. This fresh perspective on nature faced intense opposition. Galileo himself might not have been entirely confident in the validity of the Copernican theory before discovering Jupiter's moons. However, when he saw an illustration showing several smaller spheres revolving around a single larger sphere in the center, it was hard not to interpret that stunning image as a representation of the planets’ relationship with the sun. This realization led Galileo to conclude that the Copernican theory of the planetary system must be the correct one. The important implications of this belief for the future success of the great philosopher will soon become clear.

It would seem that Galileo regarded his residence at Padua as a state of undesirable exile from his beloved Tuscany. He had always a yearning to go back to his own country and at last the desired opportunity presented itself. For now that Galileo's fame had become so great, the Grand Duke of Tuscany desired to have the philosopher resident at Florence, in the belief that he would shed lustre on the Duke's dominions. Overtures were accordingly made to Galileo, and the consequence was that in 1616 we find him residing at Florence, bearing the title of Mathematician and Philosopher to the Grand Duke.

It seems that Galileo saw his time in Padua as an unwanted exile from his beloved Tuscany. He always longed to return to his homeland, and finally, the chance he had been hoping for came along. Now that Galileo's fame had grown significantly, the Grand Duke of Tuscany wanted him to live in Florence, believing that his presence would bring prestige to the Duke's realm. Offers were made to Galileo, and as a result, in 1616 we find him living in Florence with the title of Mathematician and Philosopher to the Grand Duke.

Two daughters, Polissena and Virginia, and one son, Vincenzo, had been born to Galileo in Padua. It was the custom in those days that as soon as the daughter of an Italian gentleman had grown up, her future career was somewhat summarily decided. Either a husband was to be forthwith sought out, or she was to enter the convent with the object of taking the veil as a professed nun. It was arranged that the two daughters of Galileo, while still scarcely more than children, should both enter the Franciscan convent of St. Matthew, at Arcetri. The elder daughter Polissena, took the name of Sister Maria Celeste, while Virginia became Sister Arcangela. The latter seems to have been always delicate and subject to prolonged melancholy, and she is of but little account in the narrative of the life of Galileo. But Sister Maria Celeste, though never leaving the convent, managed to preserve a close intimacy with her beloved father. This was maintained only partly by Galileo's visits, which were very irregular and were, indeed, often suspended for long intervals. But his letters to this daughter were evidently frequent and affectionate, especially in the latter part of his life. Most unfortunately, however, all his letters have been lost. There are grounds for believing that they were deliberately destroyed when Galileo was seized by the Inquisition, lest they should have been used as evidence against him, or lest they should have compromised the convent where they were received. But Sister Maria Celeste's letters to her father have happily been preserved, and most touching these letters are. We can hardly read them without thinking how the sweet and gentle nun would have shrunk from the idea of their publication.

Two daughters, Polissena and Virginia, and one son, Vincenzo, were born to Galileo in Padua. Back then, it was the custom that once the daughter of an Italian gentleman grew up, her future was usually decided quickly. Either a husband was to be found right away, or she was to enter a convent to become a nun. It was decided that both of Galileo's daughters, while still barely more than children, would enter the Franciscan convent of St. Matthew in Arcetri. The older daughter, Polissena, took the name Sister Maria Celeste, while Virginia became Sister Arcangela. Virginia seemed to be delicate and often struggled with long periods of sadness, and she doesn't play a significant role in the story of Galileo's life. However, Sister Maria Celeste, despite never leaving the convent, managed to maintain a close relationship with her beloved father. This connection was upheld not only through Galileo’s visits, which were quite irregular and often delayed for long periods, but also through his letters to her, which were clearly frequent and loving, especially later in his life. Unfortunately, all of his letters have been lost. There’s reason to believe they were intentionally destroyed when Galileo was captured by the Inquisition, to prevent them from being used as evidence against him or to avoid compromising the convent where they were received. Thankfully, Sister Maria Celeste's letters to her father have survived, and they are very touching. It’s hard to read them without imagining how the sweet and gentle nun would have recoiled at the thought of them being published.

Her loving little notes to her "dearest lord and father," as she used affectionately to call Galileo, were almost invariably accompanied by some gift, trifling it may be, but always the best the poor nun had to bestow. The tender grace of these endearing communications was all the more precious to him from the fact that the rest of Galileo's relatives were of quite a worthless description. He always acknowledged the ties of his kindred in the most generous way, but their follies and their vices, their selfishness and their importunities, were an incessant source of annoyance to him, almost to the last day of his life.

Her sweet little notes to her "dearest lord and father," as she affectionately called Galileo, were almost always paired with some gift, no matter how small, but it was always the best the poor nun could offer. The gentle charm of these loving messages meant even more to him because the rest of Galileo's relatives were truly disappointing. He always recognized his family ties in the kindest way, but their foolishness and vices, their self-centeredness and demands, were a constant source of frustration for him, right up until the end of his life.

On 19th December, 1625, Sister Maria Celeste writes:—

On December 19, 1625, Sister Maria Celeste writes:—

"I send two baked pears for these days of vigil. But as the greatest treat of all, I send you a rose, which ought to please you extremely, seeing what a rarity it is at this season; and with the rose you must accept its thorns, which represent the bitter passion of our Lord, whilst the green leaves represent the hope we may entertain that through the same sacred passion we, having passed through the darkness of the short winter of our mortal life, may attain to the brightness and felicity of an eternal spring in heaven."

"I’m sending you two baked pears for these days of waiting. But for the best gift of all, I’m sending you a rose, which should make you very happy since it’s so rare at this time of year; and with the rose, you also have to accept its thorns, which symbolize the bitter passion of our Lord, while the green leaves symbolize the hope that through this sacred passion, we can pass through the darkness of the brief winter of our mortal life and reach the brightness and happiness of an eternal spring in heaven."

When the wife and children of Galileo's shiftless brother came to take up their abode in the philosopher's home, Sister Maria Celeste feels glad to think that her father has now some one who, however imperfectly, may fulfil the duty of looking after him. A graceful note on Christmas Eve accompanies her little gifts. She hopes that—

When Galileo's laid-back brother's wife and kids moved in with him, Sister Maria Celeste felt happy that her father now had someone, even if not perfectly, to take care of him. A lovely note on Christmas Eve accompanies her small gifts. She hopes that—

"In these holy days the peace of God may rest on him and all the house. The largest collar and sleeves I mean for Albertino, the other two for the two younger boys, the little dog for baby, and the cakes for everybody, except the spice-cakes, which are for you. Accept the good-will which would readily do much more."

"In these holy days, may the peace of God be upon him and the entire household. The biggest collar and sleeves are for Albertino, the other two are for the younger boys, the little dog is for the baby, and the cakes are for everyone, except the spice cakes, which are for you. Please accept the goodwill that would gladly do much more."

The extraordinary forbearance with which Galileo continually placed his time, his purse, and his influence at the service of those who had repeatedly proved themselves utterly unworthy of his countenance, is thus commented on by the good nun.—

The remarkable patience with which Galileo consistently devoted his time, money, and influence to help those who had repeatedly shown they were completely unworthy of his support is commented on by the good nun.—

"Now it seems to me, dearest lord and father, that your lordship is walking in the right path, since you take hold of every occasion that presents itself to shower continual benefits on those who only repay you with ingratitude. This is an action which is all the more virtuous and perfect as it is the more difficult."

"Now it seems to me, dear lord and father, that you’re on the right track, since you take every opportunity to continually help those who only repay you with ingratitude. This action is even more virtuous and admirable because it’s so much harder to do."

When the plague was raging in the neighbourhood, the loving daughter's solicitude is thus shown:—

When the plague was sweeping through the neighborhood, the caring daughter’s concern is shown like this:—

"I send you two pots of electuary as a preventive against the plague. The one without the label consists of dried figs, walnuts, rue, and salt, mixed together with honey. A piece of the size of a walnut to be taken in the morning, fasting, with a little Greek wine."

"I’m sending you two jars of a medicinal paste to help prevent the plague. The one without a label contains dried figs, walnuts, rue, and salt, all mixed with honey. Take a piece about the size of a walnut in the morning on an empty stomach, along with a little Greek wine."

The plague increasing still more, Sister Maria Celeste obtained with much difficulty, a small quantity of a renowned liqueur, made by Abbess Ursula, an exceptionally saintly nun. This she sends to her father with the words:—

The plague continued to spread, and Sister Maria Celeste managed with great effort to get a small amount of a famous liqueur made by Abbess Ursula, a truly holy nun. She sends it to her father with these words:—

"I pray your lordship to have faith in this remedy. For if you have so much faith in my poor miserable prayers, much more may you have in those of such a holy person; indeed, through her merits you may feel sure of escaping all danger from the plague."

"I ask you to trust in this remedy. If you have faith in my humble prayers, you can have even more faith in those of such a holy person; truly, through her merits, you can be confident of avoiding any danger from the plague."

Whether Galileo took the remedy we do not know, but at all events he escaped the plague.

Whether Galileo took the remedy, we don’t know, but in any case, he survived the plague.

THE VILLA ARCETRI. Galileo's residence, where Milton visited him.
THE VILLA ARCETRI. Galileo's residence, where Milton visited him.
THE VILLA ARCETRI. Galileo's home, where Milton came to visit him.

From Galileo's new home in Florence the telescope was again directed to the skies, and again did astounding discoveries reward the astronomer's labours. The great success which he had met with in studying Jupiter naturally led Galileo to look at Saturn. Here he saw a spectacle which was sufficiently amazing, though he failed to interpret it accurately. It was quite manifest that Saturn did not exhibit a simple circular disc like Jupiter, or like Mars. It seemed to Galileo as if the planet consisted of three bodies, a large globe in the centre, and a smaller one on each side. The enigmatical nature of the discovery led Galileo to announce it in an enigmatical manner. He published a string of letters which, when duly transposed, made up a sentence which affirmed that the planet Saturn was threefold. Of course we now know that this remarkable appearance of the planet was due to the two projecting portions of the ring. With the feeble power of Galileo's telescope, these seemed merely like small globes or appendages to the large central body.

From Galileo's new home in Florence, the telescope was once again pointed at the sky, and once more, astonishing discoveries rewarded the astronomer's efforts. The great success he had with studying Jupiter naturally led Galileo to examine Saturn. What he observed was truly remarkable, even though he couldn't interpret it correctly. It was clear that Saturn didn't show a simple circular disk like Jupiter or Mars. To Galileo, it looked like the planet consisted of three bodies: a large globe in the center and a smaller one on each side. The puzzling nature of this discovery prompted Galileo to announce it in a mysterious way. He published a series of letters that, when rearranged, formed a sentence claiming that the planet Saturn was threefold. Of course, we now know that this extraordinary appearance of the planet was due to the two extending parts of the ring. With the limited power of Galileo's telescope, these appeared merely as small globes or appendages to the large central body.

The last of Galileo's great astronomical discoveries related to the libration of the moon. I think that the detection of this phenomenon shows his acuteness of observation more remarkably than does any one of his other achievements with the telescope. It is well known that the moon constantly keeps the same face turned towards the earth. When, however, careful measurements have been made with regard to the spots and marks on the lunar surface, it is found that there is a slight periodic variation which permits us to see now a little to the east or to the west, now a little to the north or to the south of the average lunar disc.

The last of Galileo's significant astronomical discoveries was related to the moon's libration. I believe that recognizing this phenomenon highlights his keen observational skills more than any of his other accomplishments with the telescope. It's well known that the moon always shows the same face to the Earth. However, when precise measurements are taken regarding the spots and features on the lunar surface, it turns out there is a slight periodic variation that allows us to see a bit to the east or west, and occasionally a bit to the north or south of the average lunar disk.

But the circumstances which make the career of Galileo so especially interesting from the biographer's point of view, are hardly so much the triumphs that he won as the sufferings that he endured. The sufferings and the triumphs were, however, closely connected, and it is fitting that we should give due consideration to what was perhaps the greatest drama in the history of science.

But the circumstances that make Galileo's career so particularly compelling from a biographer's perspective are not just the successes he achieved, but also the hardships he faced. The hardships and the successes were closely linked, and it's important that we take a moment to consider what was arguably the greatest drama in the history of science.

On the appearance of the immortal work of Copernicus, in which it was taught that the earth rotated on its axis, and that the earth, like the other planets, revolved round the sun, orthodoxy stood aghast. The Holy Roman Church submitted this treatise, which bore the name "De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium," to the Congregation of the Index. After due examination it was condemned as heretical in 1615. Galileo was suspected, on no doubt excellent grounds, of entertaining the objectionable views of Copernicus. He was accordingly privately summoned before Cardinal Bellarmine on 26th February 1616, and duly admonished that he was on no account to teach or to defend the obnoxious doctrines. Galileo was much distressed by this intimation. He felt it a serious matter to be deprived of the privilege of discoursing with his friends about the Copernican system, and of instructing his disciples in the principles of the great theory of whose truth he was perfectly convinced. It pained him, however, still more to think, devout Catholic as he was, that such suspicions of his fervent allegiance to his Church should ever have existed, as were implied by the words and monitions of Cardinal Bellarmine.

On the release of Copernicus's groundbreaking work, which taught that the Earth rotates on its axis and, like other planets, revolves around the sun, traditional beliefs were shocked. The Holy Roman Church sent this treatise, titled "De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium," to the Congregation of the Index. After careful review, it was condemned as heretical in 1615. Galileo was suspected, for very good reasons, of holding the controversial views of Copernicus. As a result, he was privately summoned before Cardinal Bellarmine on February 26, 1616, and was warned not to teach or defend those rejected doctrines. Galileo was deeply troubled by this news. He considered it a serious issue to be prevented from discussing the Copernican system with his friends and from teaching his students about the principles of the great theory he firmly believed in. However, he was even more pained to think, as a devoted Catholic, that there could ever be suspicions about his loyalty to the Church, as suggested by Cardinal Bellarmine's words and warnings.

In 1616, Galileo had an interview with Pope Paul V., who received the great astronomer very graciously, and walked up and down with him in conversation for three-quarters of an hour. Galileo complained to his Holiness of the attempts made by his enemies to embarrass him with the authorities of the Church, but the Pope bade him be comforted. His Holiness had himself no doubts of Galileo's orthodoxy, and he assured him that the Congregation of the Index should give Galileo no further trouble so long as Paul V. was in the chair of St. Peter.

In 1616, Galileo met with Pope Paul V., who welcomed the great astronomer warmly and talked with him for about 45 minutes. Galileo expressed his concerns to the Pope about the efforts of his opponents to trouble him with the Church authorities, but the Pope encouraged him to stay calm. His Holiness had no doubts about Galileo's beliefs and assured him that the Congregation of the Index would not cause him any more issues as long as Paul V. was in charge of St. Peter's seat.

On the death of Paul V. in 1623, Maffeo Barberini was elected Pope, as Urban VIII. This new Pope, while a cardinal, had been an intimate friend of Galileo's, and had indeed written Latin verses in praise of the great astronomer and his discoveries. It was therefore not unnatural for Galileo to think that the time had arrived when, with the use of due circumspection, he might continue his studies and his writings, without fear of incurring the displeasure of the Church. Indeed, in 1624, one of Galileo's friends writing from Rome, urges Galileo to visit the city again, and added that—

On the death of Paul V. in 1623, Maffeo Barberini was elected Pope, taking the name Urban VIII. This new Pope, during his time as a cardinal, had been a close friend of Galileo's and had even written Latin verses praising the great astronomer and his discoveries. So, it wasn’t surprising that Galileo thought the time had come when, with careful consideration, he could resume his studies and writings, without worrying about upsetting the Church. In fact, in 1624, one of Galileo's friends wrote from Rome, encouraging Galileo to visit the city again, and added that—

"Under the auspices of this most excellent, learned, and benignant Pontiff, science must flourish. Your arrival will be welcome to his Holiness. He asked me if you were coming, and when, and in short, he seems to love and esteem you more than ever."

"With the support of this amazing, knowledgeable, and kind Pope, science is bound to thrive. Your visit will be appreciated by his Holiness. He inquired about your plans to come and when, and overall, he seems to care for and value you more than ever."

The visit was duly paid, and when Galileo returned to Florence, the Pope wrote a letter from which the following is an extract, commanding the philosopher to the good offices of the young Ferdinand, who had shortly before succeeded his father in the Grand Duchy of Tuscany.

The visit took place as planned, and when Galileo came back to Florence, the Pope wrote a letter from which the following is an extract, asking the philosopher to seek the support of young Ferdinand, who had recently taken over from his father as the Grand Duke of Tuscany.

"We find in Galileo not only literary distinction, but also the love of piety, and he is also strong in those qualities by which the pontifical good-will is easily obtained. And now, when he has been brought to this city to congratulate us on our elevation, we have very lovingly embraced him; nor can we suffer him to return to the country whither your liberality calls him, without an ample provision of pontifical love. And that you may know how dear he is to us, we have willed to give him this honourable testimonial of virtue and piety. And we further signify that every benefit which you shall confer upon him, imitating or even surpassing your father's liberality, will conduce to our gratification."

"We see in Galileo not just a literary talent, but also a deep sense of piety, and he possesses qualities that easily win the favor of the Church. Now that he has come to this city to congratulate us on our honor, we have welcomed him warmly; we cannot let him return to the place your generosity has called him to without showering him with ample goodwill from the Church. To show how important he is to us, we’re giving him this honorable recognition of his virtue and piety. We also want to say that any benefits you provide him—whether you match or even exceed your father's generosity—will greatly please us."

The favourable reception which had been accorded to him by Pope Urban VIII. seems to have led Galileo to expect that there might be some corresponding change in the attitude of the Papal authorities on the great question of the stability of the earth. He accordingly proceeded with the preparation of the chief work of his life, "The Dialogue of the two Systems." It was submitted for inspection by the constituted authorities. The Pope himself thought that, if a few conditions which he laid down were duly complied with, there could be no objection to the publication of the work. In the first place, the title of the book was to be so carefully worded as to show plainly that the Copernican doctrine was merely to be regarded as an hypothesis, and not as a scientific fact. Galileo was also instructed to conclude the book with special arguments which had been supplied by the Pope himself, and which appeared to his Holiness to be quite conclusive against the new doctrine of Copernicus.

The warm reception Galileo received from Pope Urban VIII seemed to lead him to hope for a shift in the Papal authorities' stance on the crucial issue of the earth's stability. He then moved forward with the preparation of the most important work of his life, "The Dialogue of the Two Systems." It was submitted for review by the relevant authorities. The Pope himself believed that, if a few conditions he set were met, there would be no objections to publishing the work. First, the book's title needed to be carefully crafted to clearly indicate that the Copernican theory was to be seen as just a hypothesis and not a scientific fact. Galileo was also directed to end the book with specific arguments provided by the Pope, which His Holiness believed were quite convincing against Copernicus's new doctrine.

Formal leave for the publication of the Dialogue was then given to Galileo by the Inquisitor General, and it was accordingly sent to the press. It might be thought that the anxieties of the astronomer about his book would then have terminated. As a matter of fact, they had not yet seriously begun. Riccardi, the Master of the Sacred Palace, having suddenly had some further misgivings, sent to Galileo for the manuscript while the work was at the printer's, in order that the doctrine it implied might be once again examined. Apparently, Riccardi had come to the conclusion that he had not given the matter sufficient attention, when the authority to go to press had been first and, perhaps, hastily given. Considerable delay in the issue of the book was the result of these further deliberations. At last, however, in June, 1632, Galileo's great work, "The Dialogue of the two Systems," was produced for the instruction of the world, though the occasion was fraught with ruin to the immortal author.

Formal approval for the publication of the Dialogue was then granted to Galileo by the Inquisitor General, and it was subsequently sent to the press. One might think that the astronomer's worries about his book would have ended there. In reality, they had not yet seriously begun. Riccardi, the Master of the Sacred Palace, suddenly had some new concerns and requested the manuscript from Galileo while the work was at the printer's, so the doctrine it presented could be examined once more. It seems Riccardi realized he hadn't given the matter enough attention when he first granted the authority to publish, perhaps too hastily. These further discussions caused considerable delays in the book's release. Finally, in June 1632, Galileo's significant work, "The Dialogue of the Two Systems," was published for the world's instruction, though the occasion would ultimately lead to the downfall of the legendary author.

FACSIMILE SKETCH OF LUNAR SURFACE BY GALILEO.
FACSIMILE SKETCH OF LUNAR SURFACE BY GALILEO.
FACSIMILE SKETCH OF THE MOON'S SURFACE BY GALILEO.

The book, on its publication, was received and read with the greatest avidity. But presently the Master of The Sacred Palace found reason to regret that he had given his consent to its appearance. He accordingly issued a peremptory order to sequestrate every copy in Italy. This sudden change in the Papal attitude towards Galileo formed the subject of a strong remonstrance addressed to the Roman authorities by the Grand Duke of Tuscany. The Pope himself seemed to have become impressed all at once with the belief that the work contained matter of an heretical description. The general interpretation put upon the book seems to have shown the authorities that they had mistaken its true tendency, notwithstanding the fact that it had been examined again and again by theologians deputed for the duty. To the communication from the Grand Duke the Pope returned answer, that he had decided to submit the book to a congregation of "learned, grave, and saintly men," who would weigh every word in it. The views of his Holiness personally on the subject were expressed in his belief that the Dialogue contained the most perverse matter that could come into a reader's hands.

The book, upon its release, was eagerly received and read by many. However, the Master of The Sacred Palace soon regretted giving his approval for its publication. He then issued a strict order to confiscate every copy in Italy. This sudden shift in the Church's stance on Galileo sparked a strong protest from the Grand Duke of Tuscany to the Roman authorities. The Pope himself appeared to have suddenly come to believe that the work contained heretical content. The overall interpretation of the book seems to have led the authorities to realize they had misunderstood its true message, despite it being reviewed multiple times by theologians assigned to the task. In response to the Grand Duke's communication, the Pope stated that he had decided to present the book to a gathering of "learned, grave, and holy men," who would carefully consider every word within it. His Holiness personally expressed his view that the Dialogue contained the most twisted material a reader could encounter.

The Master of the Sacred Palace was greatly blamed by the authorities for having given his sanction to its issue. He pleaded that the book had not been printed in the precise terms of the original manuscript which had been submitted to him. It was also alleged that Galileo had not adhered to his promise of inserting properly the arguments which the Pope himself had given in support of the old and orthodox view. One of these had, no doubt, been introduced, but, so far from mending Galileo's case, it had made matters really look worse for the poor philosopher. The Pope's argument had been put into the mouth of one of the characters in the Dialogue named "Simplicio." Galileo's enemies maintained that by adopting such a method for the expression of his Holiness's opinion, Galileo had intended to hold the Pope himself up to ridicule. Galileo's friends maintained that nothing could have been farther from his intention. It seems, however, highly probable that the suspicions thus aroused had something to say to the sudden change of front on the part of the Papal authorities.

The Master of the Sacred Palace faced severe criticism from the authorities for approving its publication. He argued that the book wasn’t printed exactly as the original manuscript he received. It was also claimed that Galileo had failed to include the arguments that the Pope himself had provided in support of the traditional view. While one of these arguments was included, it actually worsened Galileo's situation. The Pope's argument was voiced by a character in the Dialogue named "Simplicio." Galileo's opponents argued that by using this method to present the Pope’s opinion, Galileo intended to mock the Pope. Galileo’s supporters asserted that he had no such intention. However, it seems quite likely that the suspicions raised contributed to the sudden shift in the stance of the Papal authorities.

On 1st October, 1632, Galileo received an order to appear before the Inquisition at Rome on the grave charge of heresy. Galileo, of course, expressed his submission, but pleaded for a respite from compliance with the summons, on the ground of his advanced age and his failing health. The Pope was, however, inexorable; he said that he had warned Galileo of his danger while he was still his friend. The command could not be disobeyed. Galileo might perform the journey as slowly as he pleased, but it was imperatively necessary for him to set forth and at once.

On October 1, 1632, Galileo was ordered to appear before the Inquisition in Rome on serious charges of heresy. Galileo, of course, accepted the order but requested a delay in complying, citing his old age and poor health. However, the Pope was unyielding; he stated that he had warned Galileo about the risks when they were still friends. The order could not be ignored. Galileo could take as long as he wanted to make the journey, but he was urgently required to begin his travel immediately.

On 20th January, 1633, Galileo started on his weary journey to Rome, in compliance with this peremptory summons. On 13th February he was received as the guest of Niccolini, the Tuscan ambassador, who had acted as his wise and ever-kind friend throughout the whole affair. It seemed plain that the Holy Office were inclined to treat Galileo with as much clemency and consideration as was consistent with the determination that the case against him should be proceeded with to the end. The Pope intimated that in consequence of his respect for the Grand Duke of Tuscany he should permit Galileo to enjoy the privilege, quite unprecedented for a prisoner charged with heresy, of remaining as an inmate in the ambassador's house. He ought, strictly, to have been placed in the dungeons of the Inquisition. When the examination of the accused had actually commenced, Galileo was confined, not, indeed, in the dungeons, but in comfortable rooms at the Holy Office.

On January 20, 1633, Galileo began his long journey to Rome in response to this urgent summons. By February 13, he was welcomed as a guest of Niccolini, the Tuscan ambassador, who had been a wise and kind friend to him throughout the entire ordeal. It was clear that the Holy Office intended to treat Galileo with as much leniency and respect as possible while still moving forward with the case against him. The Pope indicated that out of respect for the Grand Duke of Tuscany, he would allow Galileo the unusual privilege of staying in the ambassador's house, which was rare for someone accused of heresy. Normally, he would have been placed in the dungeons of the Inquisition. When the examination of the accused actually began, Galileo was kept, not in the dungeons, but in comfortable rooms at the Holy Office.

By the judicious and conciliatory language of submission which Niccolini had urged Galileo to use before the Inquisitors, they were so far satisfied that they interceded with the Pope for his release. During the remainder of the trial Galileo was accordingly permitted to go back to the ambassador's, where he was most heartily welcomed. Sister Maria Celeste, evidently thinking this meant that the whole case was at an end, thus expresses herself:—

By the careful and accommodating language of submission that Niccolini had advised Galileo to use in front of the Inquisitors, they were satisfied enough to ask the Pope for his release. During the rest of the trial, Galileo was allowed to return to the ambassador's, where he received a very warm welcome. Sister Maria Celeste, clearly believing this meant the case was over, expressed herself as follows:—

"The joy that your last dear letter brought me, and the having to read it over and over to the nuns, who made quite a jubilee on hearing its contents, put me into such an excited state that at last I got a severe attack of headache."

"The happiness your last beloved letter gave me, and reading it again and again to the nuns, who celebrated hearing its contents, left me so excited that I ultimately ended up with a bad headache."

In his defence Galileo urged that he had already been acquitted in 1616 by Cardinal Bellarmine, when a charge of heresy was brought against him, and he contended that anything he might now have done, was no more than he had done on the preceding occasion, when the orthodoxy of his doctrines received solemn confirmation. The Inquisition seemed certainly inclined to clemency, but the Pope was not satisfied. Galileo was accordingly summoned again on the 21st June. He was to be threatened with torture if he did not forthwith give satisfactory explanations as to the reasons which led him to write the Dialogue. In this proceeding the Pope assured the Tuscan ambassador that he was treating Galileo with the utmost consideration possible in consequence of his esteem and regard for the Grand Duke, whose servant Galileo was. It was, however, necessary that some exemplary punishment be meted out to the astronomer, inasmuch as by the publication of the Dialogue he had distinctly disobeyed the injunction of silence laid upon him by the decree of 1616. Nor was it admissible for Galileo to plead that his book had been sanctioned by the Master of the Sacred College, to whose inspection it had been again and again submitted. It was held, that if the Master of the Sacred College had been unaware of the solemn warning the philosopher had already received sixteen years previously, it was the duty of Galileo to have drawn his attention to that fact.

In his defense, Galileo argued that he had already been cleared in 1616 by Cardinal Bellarmine when a heresy charge was brought against him. He claimed that anything he might have done now was no different from what he had done before, when his teachings were formally confirmed as orthodox. The Inquisition appeared to be leaning towards leniency, but the Pope was not satisfied. Galileo was called back on June 21. He faced threats of torture if he didn't immediately provide satisfactory explanations for why he wrote the Dialogue. During this process, the Pope assured the Tuscan ambassador that he was treating Galileo with the highest consideration possible because of his respect for the Grand Duke, whom Galileo served. However, it was deemed necessary to impose some form of exemplary punishment on the astronomer, since the publication of the Dialogue clearly went against the order of silence handed down to him by the 1616 decree. Galileo could not argue that his book had been approved by the Master of the Sacred College, to whom it had been repeatedly submitted. It was believed that if the Master of the Sacred College was unaware of the serious warning the philosopher had received sixteen years earlier, it was Galileo's responsibility to bring that to his attention.

On the 22nd June, 1633, Galileo was led to the great hall of the Inquisition, and compelled to kneel before the cardinals there assembled and hear his sentence. In a long document, most elaborately drawn up, it is definitely charged against Galileo that, in publishing the Dialogue, he committed the essentially grave error of treating the doctrine of the earth's motion as open to discussion. Galileo knew, so the document affirmed, that the Church had emphatically pronounced this notion to be contrary to Holy Writ, and that for him to consider a doctrine so stigmatized as having any shadow of probability in its favour was an act of disrespect to the authority of the Church which could not be overlooked. It was also charged against Galileo that in his Dialogue he has put the strongest arguments into the mouth, not of those who supported the orthodox doctrine, but of those who held the theory as to the earth's motion which the Church had so deliberately condemned.

On June 22, 1633, Galileo was brought to the main hall of the Inquisition, where he was forced to kneel before the assembled cardinals to hear his sentence. In a lengthy and detailed document, it was stated that by publishing the Dialogue, Galileo made a serious mistake by treating the idea of the earth's motion as debatable. The document asserted that Galileo was aware the Church had clearly declared this idea to be against the Scriptures, and that for him to consider such a condemned doctrine as having any likelihood of being true was a disrespectful act towards the Church’s authority that couldn’t be ignored. It was also claimed that in his Dialogue, Galileo had given the strongest arguments to those who supported the theory of the earth's motion, rather than to those who backed the orthodox doctrine, which the Church had expressly condemned.

After due consideration of the defence made by the prisoner, it was thereupon decreed that he had rendered himself vehemently suspected of heresy by the Holy Office, and in consequence had incurred all the censures and penalties of the sacred canons, and other decrees promulgated against such persons. The graver portion of these punishments would be remitted, if Galileo would solemnly repudiate the heresies referred to by an abjuration to be pronounced by him in the terms laid down.

After careful consideration of the defense presented by the prisoner, it was decided that he had made himself strongly suspected of heresy by the Holy Office, and as a result, had faced all the censure and penalties outlined in the sacred canons and other decrees against such individuals. The more severe parts of these punishments would be lifted if Galileo would formally reject the heresies mentioned by making an abjuration in the specified terms.

At the same time it was necessary to mark, in some emphatic manner, the serious offence which had been committed, so that it might serve both as a punishment to Galileo and as a warning to others. It was accordingly decreed that he should be condemned to imprisonment in the Holy Office during the pleasure of the Papal authorities, and that he should recite once a week for three years the seven Penitential Psalms.

At the same time, it was important to clearly highlight the serious offense that had been committed, so it could serve as both a punishment for Galileo and a warning to others. It was therefore decided that he would be imprisoned in the Holy Office at the discretion of the Papal authorities, and that he would recite the seven Penitential Psalms once a week for three years.

Then followed that ever-memorable scene in the great hall of the Inquisition, in which the aged and infirm Galileo, the inventor of the telescope and the famous astronomer, knelt down to abjure before the most eminent and reverend Lords Cardinal, Inquisitors General throughout the Christian Republic against heretical depravity. With his hands on the Gospels, Galileo was made to curse and detest the false opinion that the sun was the centre of the universe and immovable, and that the earth was not the centre of the same, and that it moved. He swore that for the future he will never say nor write such things as may bring him under suspicion, and that if he does so he submits to all the pains and penalties of the sacred canons. This abjuration was subsequently read in Florence before Galileo's disciples, who had been specially summoned to attend.

Then came that unforgettable scene in the grand hall of the Inquisition, where the elderly and frail Galileo, the inventor of the telescope and the renowned astronomer, knelt down to renounce before the most distinguished and respected Lords Cardinals, Inquisitors General throughout the Christian community against heretical beliefs. With his hands on the Gospels, Galileo was forced to curse and reject the false idea that the sun was the center of the universe and stationary, and that the earth was not the center and that it moved. He swore that from now on he would never say or write anything that might raise suspicion, and that if he did, he would accept all the punishments and penalties of the sacred canons. This renunciation was later read in Florence before Galileo's students, who had been specially called to attend.

It has been noted that neither on the first occasion, in 1616, nor on the second in 1633, did the reigning Pope sign the decrees concerning Galileo. The contention has accordingly been made that Paul V. and Urban VIII. are both alike vindicated from any technical responsibility for the attitude of the Romish Church towards the Copernican doctrines. The significance of this circumstance has been commented on in connection with the doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope.

It has been pointed out that neither on the first occasion, in 1616, nor on the second in 1633, did the sitting Pope sign the decrees regarding Galileo. Therefore, it has been argued that both Paul V and Urban VIII are equally cleared of any technical responsibility for the Catholic Church's stance on the Copernican theories. The importance of this situation has been discussed in relation to the doctrine of papal infallibility.

We can judge of the anxiety felt by Sister Maria Celeste about her beloved father during these terrible trials. The wife of the ambassador Niccolini, Galileo's steadfast friend, most kindly wrote to give the nun whatever quieting assurances the case would permit. There is a renewed flow of these touching epistles from the daughter to her father. Thus she sends word—

We can see how much Sister Maria Celeste worried about her beloved father during these tough times. The wife of Ambassador Niccolini, Galileo's loyal friend, kindly wrote to soothe the nun with whatever reassurances she could. There is a new wave of these heartfelt letters from the daughter to her father. So, she sends word—

"The news of your fresh trouble has pierced my soul with grief all the more that it came quite unexpectedly."

"The news of your new troubles has deeply saddened me, especially since it came as such a surprise."

And again, on hearing that he had been permitted to leave Rome, she writes—

And once again, upon hearing that he was allowed to leave Rome, she writes—

"I wish I could describe the rejoicing of all the mothers and sisters on hearing of your happy arrival at Siena. It was indeed most extraordinary. On hearing the news the Mother Abbess and many of the nuns ran to me, embracing me and weeping for joy and tenderness."

"I wish I could explain how all the mothers and sisters celebrated when they heard about your wonderful arrival in Siena. It was truly amazing. When they got the news, the Mother Abbess and several of the nuns hurried to me, hugging me and crying out of joy and affection."

The sentence of imprisonment was at first interpreted leniently by the Pope. Galileo was allowed to reside in qualified durance in the archbishop's house at Siena. Evidently the greatest pain that he endured arose from the forced separation from that daughter, whom he had at last learned to love with an affection almost comparable with that she bore to him. She had often told him that she never had any pleasure equal to that with which she rendered any service to her father. To her joy, she discovers that she can relieve him from the task of reciting the seven Penitential Psalms which had been imposed as a Penance:—

The prison sentence was initially interpreted lightly by the Pope. Galileo was allowed to stay under restricted conditions at the archbishop's house in Siena. Clearly, the biggest pain he felt came from being forced apart from his daughter, whom he had finally learned to love with a depth almost equal to the love she had for him. She often told him that there was no greater joy for her than serving her father. To her delight, she found that she could free him from the obligation of reciting the seven Penitential Psalms that had been assigned as penance:—

"I began to do this a while ago," she writes, "and it gives me much pleasure. First, because I am persuaded that prayer in obedience to Holy Church must be efficacious; secondly, in order to save you the trouble of remembering it. If I had been able to do more, most willingly would I have entered a straiter prison than the one I live in now, if by so doing I could have set you at liberty."

"I started doing this a while ago," she writes, "and it brings me a lot of joy. First, because I believe that prayer, when done in accordance with Holy Church, must be effective; and second, to save you the hassle of remembering it. If I could have done more, I would gladly have put myself in a stricter prison than the one I’m in now if it meant I could set you free."

CREST OF GALILEO'S FAMILY.
CREST OF GALILEO'S FAMILY.
GALILEO'S FAMILY CREST.

Sister Maria Celeste was gradually failing in health, but the great privilege was accorded to her of being able once again to embrace her beloved lord and master. Galileo had, in fact, been permitted to return to his old home; but on the very day when he heard of his daughter's death came the final decree directing him to remain in his own house in perpetual solitude.

Sister Maria Celeste was slowly losing her health, but she was granted the wonderful opportunity to once again embrace her beloved father. Galileo had, in fact, been allowed to return to his old home; but on the very day he learned of his daughter's death, he received the final order that required him to stay in his house in complete isolation.

Amid the advancing infirmities of age, the isolation from friends, and the loss of his daughter, Galileo once again sought consolation in hard work. He commenced his famous dialogue on Motion. Gradually, however, his sight began to fail, and blindness was at last added to his other troubles. On January 2nd, 1638, he writes to Diodati:—

Amid the growing challenges of aging, the distance from friends, and the loss of his daughter, Galileo once again found comfort in hard work. He started his famous dialogue on Motion. Gradually, though, his vision began to decline, and eventually, blindness was added to his other struggles. On January 2nd, 1638, he wrote to Diodati:—

"Alas, your dear friend and servant, Galileo, has been for the last month perfectly blind, so that this heaven, this earth, this universe which I by my marvellous discoveries and clear demonstrations have enlarged a hundred thousand times beyond the belief of the wise men of bygone ages, henceforward is for me shrunk into such a small space as is filled by my own bodily sensations."

"Unfortunately, your dear friend and servant, Galileo, has been completely blind for the past month, so this sky, this earth, this universe that I have expanded a hundred thousand times beyond what the wise men of the past could ever imagine is now reduced for me to the limited space filled by my own physical sensations."

But the end was approaching—the great philosopher, was attacked by low fever, from which he died on the 8th January, 1643.

But the end was near—the great philosopher was hit by a mild fever, and he passed away on January 8th, 1643.

KEPLER.

While the illustrious astronomer, Tycho Brahe, lay on his death-bed, he had an interview which must ever rank as one of the important incidents in the history of science. The life of Tycho had been passed, as we have seen, in the accumulation of vast stores of careful observations of the positions of the heavenly bodies. It was not given to him to deduce from his splendid work the results to which they were destined to lead. It was reserved for another astronomer to distil, so to speak, from the volumes in which Tycho's figures were recorded, the great truths of the universe which those figures contained. Tycho felt that his work required an interpreter, and he recognised in the genius of a young man with whom he was acquainted the agent by whom the world was to be taught some of the great truths of nature. To the bedside of the great Danish astronomer the youthful philosopher was summoned, and with his last breath Tycho besought of him to spare no labour in the performance of those calculations, by which alone the secrets of the movements of the heavens could be revealed. The solemn trust thus imposed was duly accepted, and the man who accepted it bore the immortal name of Kepler.

While the famous astronomer, Tycho Brahe, was on his deathbed, he had a meeting that will always be considered one of the key moments in the history of science. Tycho had spent his life gathering a vast collection of precise observations of the positions of celestial bodies. However, he wasn't able to draw the conclusions from his impressive work that were meant to emerge. That task was left to another astronomer, who would, so to speak, extract the great truths of the universe from the volumes where Tycho's figures were recorded. Tycho sensed that his work needed an interpreter and recognized in the talent of a young man he knew the person who would teach the world some of the fundamental truths of nature. The young philosopher was called to the bedside of the renowned Danish astronomer, and with his last breath, Tycho urged him to dedicate himself to the calculations necessary to uncover the secrets of the heavens' movements. The serious responsibility was accepted, and the man who took it on was the immortal Kepler.

Kepler was born on the 27th December, 1571, at Weil, in the Duchy of Wurtemberg. It would seem that the circumstances of his childhood must have been singularly unhappy. His father, sprung from a well-connected family, was but a shiftless and idle adventurer; nor was the great astronomer much more fortunate in his other parent. His mother was an ignorant and ill-tempered woman; indeed, the ill-assorted union came to an abrupt end through the desertion of the wife by her husband when their eldest son John, the hero of our present sketch, was eighteen years old. The childhood of this lad, destined for such fame, was still further embittered by the circumstance that when he was four years old he had a severe attack of small-pox. Not only was his eyesight permanently injured, but even his constitution appears to have been much weakened by this terrible malady.

Kepler was born on December 27, 1571, in Weil, in the Duchy of Wurtemberg. It seems that his childhood was particularly unhappy. His father, who came from a well-connected family, was a lazy and irresponsible adventurer; his mother was not much better, being uneducated and bad-tempered. Their mismatched marriage ended abruptly when the father abandoned the family, leaving his wife when their eldest son John, the subject of our story, was eighteen. John’s childhood, destined for such greatness, was further marked by hardship as he suffered a severe case of smallpox at just four years old. This illness not only permanently damaged his eyesight but also severely weakened his overall health.

It seems, however, that the bodily infirmities of young John Kepler were the immediate cause of his attention being directed to the pursuit of knowledge. Had the boy been fitted like other boys for ordinary manual work, there can be hardly any doubt that to manual work his life must have been devoted. But, though his body was feeble, he soon gave indications of the possession of considerable mental power. It was accordingly thought that a suitable sphere for his talents might be found in the Church which, in those days, was almost the only profession that afforded an opening for an intellectual career. We thus find that by the time John Kepler was seventeen years old he had attained a sufficient standard of knowledge to entitle him to admission on the foundation of the University at Tubingen.

It seems that the physical issues young John Kepler faced were the main reason he focused on pursuing knowledge. If he had been like other boys and capable of doing regular manual work, it's very likely that he would have dedicated his life to it. However, despite his weak body, he quickly showed he had significant mental abilities. It was believed that the Church could offer a suitable environment for his talents since, back then, it was one of the few professions that allowed for an intellectual career. Therefore, by the time John Kepler turned seventeen, he had reached a level of knowledge that qualified him for admission to the University of Tübingen.

In the course of his studies at this institution he seems to have divided his attention equally between astronomy and divinity. It not unfrequently happens that when a man has attained considerable proficiency in two branches of knowledge he is not able to see very clearly in which of the two pursuits his true vocation lies. His friends and onlookers are often able to judge more wisely than he himself can do as to which of the two lines it would be better for him to pursue. This incapacity for perceiving the path in which greatness awaited him, existed in the case of Kepler. Personally, he inclined to enter the ministry, in which a promising career seemed open to him. He yielded, however, to friends, who evidently knew him better than he knew himself, and accepted in 1594, the important Professorship of astronomy which had been offered to him in the University of Gratz.

During his time studying at this institution, he seemed to split his focus equally between astronomy and theology. It's not uncommon for someone who has developed significant expertise in two fields to struggle with knowing which path their true calling lies in. Often, friends and observers can provide better insight into which direction would be more beneficial for him to pursue than he can himself. This inability to recognize the path where success awaited him was evident in Kepler's case. He personally leaned towards entering the ministry, where a promising career seemed available to him. However, he listened to friends who clearly understood him better than he understood himself and accepted, in 1594, the prestigious Professorship of Astronomy offered to him at the University of Graz.

It is difficult for us in these modern days to realise the somewhat extraordinary duties which were expected from an astronomical professor in the sixteenth century. He was, of course, required to employ his knowledge of the heavens in the prediction of eclipses, and of the movements of the heavenly bodies generally. This seems reasonable enough; but what we are not prepared to accept is the obligation which lay on the astronomers to predict the fates of nations and the destinies of individuals.

It’s hard for us nowadays to understand the somewhat extraordinary responsibilities that were expected from an astronomy professor in the sixteenth century. He was definitely required to use his knowledge of the stars to predict eclipses and the movements of celestial bodies in general. That seems reasonable enough; however, what we find difficult to accept is the expectation that astronomers had to predict the fates of nations and the destinies of individuals.

It must be remembered that it was the almost universal belief in those days, that all the celestial spheres revolved in some mysterious fashion around the earth, which appeared by far the most important body in the universe. It was imagined that the sun, the moon, and the stars indicated, in the vicissitudes of their movements, the careers of nations and of individuals. Such being the generally accepted notion, it seemed to follow that a professor who was charged with the duty of expounding the movements of the heavenly bodies must necessarily be looked to for the purpose of deciphering the celestial decrees regarding the fate of man which the heavenly luminaries were designed to announce.

It should be noted that back then, it was a widely held belief that all the heavenly bodies rotated in some mysterious way around the earth, which seemed to be the most significant object in the universe. People thought that the sun, the moon, and the stars reflected, through their movements, the fortunes of nations and individuals. Given this general belief, it made sense that a professor responsible for explaining the movements of these celestial bodies would be expected to interpret the heavenly signs regarding human fate that the stars were meant to reveal.

Kepler threw himself with characteristic ardour into even this fantastic phase of the labours of the astronomical professor; he diligently studied the rules of astrology, which the fancies of antiquity had compiled. Believing sincerely as he did in the connection between the aspect of the stars and the state of human affairs, he even thought that he perceived, in the events of his own life, a corroboration of the doctrine which affirmed the influence of the planets upon the fate of individuals.

Kepler passionately immersed himself in this unusual aspect of the astronomical professor's work; he diligently studied the rules of astrology that were created by ancient thinkers. Truly believing in the link between the positions of the stars and human events, he even felt that he could see in the events of his own life evidence supporting the idea that planets have an impact on people's destinies.

KEPLER'S SYSTEM OF REGULAR SOLIDS.
KEPLER'S SYSTEM OF REGULAR SOLIDS.
Kepler's Regular Solids System.

But quite independently of astrology there seem to have been many other delusions current among the philosophers of Kepler's time. It is now almost incomprehensible how the ablest men of a few centuries ago should have entertained such preposterous notions, as they did, with respect to the system of the universe. As an instance of what is here referred to, we may cite the extraordinary notion which, under the designation of a discovery, first brought Kepler into fame. Geometers had long known that there were five, but no more than five, regular solid figures. There is, for instance, the cube with six sides, which is, of course, the most familiar of these solids. Besides the cube there are other figures of four, eight, twelve, and twenty sides respectively. It also happened that there were five planets, but no more than five, known to the ancients, namely, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. To Kepler's lively imaginations this coincidence suggested the idea that the five regular solids corresponded to the five planets, and a number of fancied numerical relations were adduced on the subject. The absurdity of this doctrine is obvious enough, especially when we observe that, as is now well known, there are two large planets, and a host of small planets, over and above the magical number of the regular solids. In Kepler's time, however, this doctrine was so far from being regarded as absurd, that its announcement was hailed as a great intellectual triumph. Kepler was at once regarded with favour. It seems, indeed, to have been the circumstance which brought him into correspondence with Tycho Brahe. By its means also he became known to Galileo.

But entirely separate from astrology, there were many other misconceptions among the philosophers of Kepler's time. It's now almost unimaginable how the smartest people from a few centuries ago could have held such ridiculous views about the universe's structure. One example of what we're talking about is the bizarre idea that first made Kepler famous, which he called a discovery. Geometers had long understood that there were five, and only five, regular solid shapes. For instance, there's the cube with six faces, which is clearly the most common of these shapes. Besides the cube, there are other shapes with four, eight, twelve, and twenty faces respectively. Coincidentally, there were five planets known to the ancients—Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn—no more, no less. To Kepler's vivid imagination, this coincidence led to the idea that the five regular solids were connected to the five planets, and he proposed various imagined numerical relationships about it. The absurdity of this theory is clear, especially now that we know there are two large planets and many small ones beyond the magical count of the regular solids. However, during Kepler's time, this theory was far from being seen as absurd; in fact, its announcement was celebrated as a significant intellectual achievement. Kepler was quickly seen in a positive light, and this idea seems to have been what connected him with Tycho Brahe. It also helped him become acquainted with Galileo.

The career of a scientific professor in those early days appears generally to have been marked by rather more striking vicissitudes than usually befall a professor in a modern university. Kepler was a Protestant, and as such he had been appointed to his professorship at Gratz. A change, however, having taken place in the religious belief entertained by the ruling powers of the University, the Protestant professors were expelled. It seems that special influence having been exerted in Kepler's case on account of his exceptional eminence, he was recalled to Gratz and reinstated in the tenure of his chair. But his pupils had vanished, so that the great astronomer was glad to accept a post offered him by Tycho Brahe in the observatory which the latter had recently established near Prague.

The career of a science professor in those early days seems to have been filled with more significant ups and downs than what a modern university professor typically experiences. Kepler was a Protestant and had been appointed to his teaching position at Gratz. However, after a change in the religious views of the university's ruling powers, the Protestant professors were expelled. It appears that due to special intervention on Kepler's behalf because of his exceptional skill, he was brought back to Gratz and reinstated in his role. However, his students were gone, so the renowned astronomer was happy to accept a position offered to him by Tycho Brahe at the observatory he had recently set up near Prague.

On Tycho's death, which occurred soon after, an opening presented itself which gave Kepler the opportunity his genius demanded. He was appointed to succeed Tycho in the position of imperial mathematician. But a far more important point, both for Kepler and for science, was that to him was confided the use of Tycho's observations. It was, indeed, by the discussion of Tycho's results that Kepler was enabled to make the discoveries which form such an important part of astronomical history.

On Tycho's death, which happened shortly after, a chance arose that offered Kepler the opportunity his talent needed. He was chosen to take over Tycho's role as the imperial mathematician. But an even more significant aspect, both for Kepler and for science, was that he was entrusted with Tycho's observations. It was, in fact, by analyzing Tycho's results that Kepler was able to make the discoveries that are crucial to the history of astronomy.

Kepler must also be remembered as one of the first great astronomers who ever had the privilege of viewing celestial bodies through a telescope. It was in 1610 that he first held in his hands one of those little instruments which had been so recently applied to the heavens by Galileo. It should, however, be borne in mind that the epoch-making achievements of Kepler did not arise from any telescopic observations that he made, or, indeed, that any one else made. They were all elaborately deduced from Tycho's measurements of the positions of the planets, obtained with his great instruments, which were unprovided with telescopic assistance.

Kepler should also be remembered as one of the first great astronomers who had the chance to observe celestial bodies through a telescope. It was in 1610 that he first held one of those small instruments that had recently been used to study the heavens by Galileo. However, it’s important to note that Kepler's groundbreaking achievements didn’t come from any telescopic observations he made, or even from anyone else's. They were all carefully derived from Tycho's measurements of the planets' positions, taken with his large instruments, which did not have telescopic help.

To realise the tremendous advance which science received from Kepler's great work, it is to be understood that all the astronomers who laboured before him at the difficult subject of the celestial motions, took it for granted that the planets must revolve in circles. If it did not appear that a planet moved in a fixed circle, then the ready answer was provided by Ptolemy's theory that the circle in which the planet did move was itself in motion, so that its centre described another circle.

To understand the huge progress that science made thanks to Kepler's groundbreaking work, it's important to recognize that all the astronomers who worked before him on the challenging topic of celestial motions assumed that the planets must move in circles. If it seemed like a planet wasn’t moving in a perfect circle, the common explanation was Ptolemy's theory, which stated that the circle the planet was moving in was itself also in motion, causing its center to trace out another circle.

When Kepler had before him that wonderful series of observations of the planet, Mars, which had been accumulated by the extraordinary skill of Tycho, he proved, after much labour, that the movements of the planet refused to be represented in a circular form. Nor would it do to suppose that Mars revolved in one circle, the centre of which revolved in another circle. On no such supposition could the movements of the planets be made to tally with those which Tycho had actually observed. This led to the astonishing discovery of the true form of a planet's orbit. For the first time in the history of astronomy the principle was laid down that the movement of a planet could not be represented by a circle, nor even by combinations of circles, but that it could be represented by an elliptic path. In this path the sun is situated at one of those two points in the ellipse which are known as its foci.

When Kepler examined the incredible series of observations of the planet Mars, collected through Tycho's extraordinary skill, he demonstrated after much hard work that the planet's movements couldn't be accurately described using circular motion. It also wasn't accurate to think Mars revolved in one circle while its center moved in another circle. None of these ideas could align the planet's movements with the actual observations made by Tycho. This led to the amazing discovery of the true shape of a planet's orbit. For the first time in the history of astronomy, it was established that a planet's motion couldn't be modeled by a circle or even by combinations of circles, but rather by an elliptical path. In this path, the sun is positioned at one of the two points in the ellipse known as its foci.

KEPLER.
KEPLER.
KEPLER.

Very simple apparatus is needed for the drawing of one of those ellipses which Kepler has shown to possess such astonishing astronomical significance. Two pins are stuck through a sheet of paper on a board, the point of a pencil is inserted in a loop of string which passes over the pins, and as the pencil is moved round in such a way as to keep the string stretched, that beautiful curve known as the ellipse is delineated, while the positions of the pins indicate the two foci of the curve. If the length of the loop of string is unchanged then the nearer the pins are together, the greater will be the resemblance between the ellipse and the circle, whereas the more the pins are separated the more elongated does the ellipse become. The orbit of a great planet is, in general, one of those ellipses which approaches a nearly circular form. It fortunately happens, however, that the orbit of Mars makes a wider departure from the circular form than any of the other important planets. It is, doubtless, to this circumstance that we must attribute the astonishing success of Kepler in detecting the true shape of a planetary orbit. Tycho's observations would not have been sufficiently accurate to have exhibited the elliptic nature of a planetary orbit which, like that of Venus, differed very little from a circle.

Very simple equipment is needed to draw one of those ellipses that Kepler showed to have such remarkable astronomical importance. Two pins are pushed through a sheet of paper on a board, the tip of a pencil is inserted in a loop of string that goes over the pins, and as the pencil is moved in a way that keeps the string taut, that beautiful curve known as the ellipse is drawn, with the positions of the pins marking the two foci of the curve. If the length of the string loop remains the same, then the closer the pins are to each other, the more the ellipse resembles a circle, while the further apart the pins are, the more elongated the ellipse becomes. The orbit of a major planet is generally one of those ellipses that closely resembles a circle. However, it just so happens that Mars's orbit deviates more from a circular shape than any other major planet. It's likely because of this that we credit Kepler's impressive success in identifying the true shape of planetary orbits. Tycho's observations wouldn't have been accurate enough to reveal the elliptical nature of a planetary orbit that, like Venus's, differed very little from a circle.

The more we ponder on this memorable achievement the more striking will it appear. It must be remembered that in these days we know of the physical necessity which requires that a planet shall revolve in an ellipse and not in any other curve. But Kepler had no such knowledge. Even to the last hour of his life he remained in ignorance of the existence of any natural cause which ordained that planets should follow those particular curves which geometers know so well. Kepler's assignment of the ellipse as the true form of the planetary orbit is to be regarded as a brilliant guess, the truth of which Tycho's observations enabled him to verify. Kepler also succeeded in pointing out the law according to which the velocity of a planet at different points of its path could be accurately specified. Here, again, we have to admire the sagacity with which this marvellously acute astronomer guessed the deep truth of nature. In this case also he was quite unprovided with any reason for expecting from physical principles that such a law as he discovered must be obeyed. It is quite true that Kepler had some slight knowledge of the existence of what we now know as gravitation. He had even enunciated the remarkable doctrine that the ebb and flow of the tide must be attributed to the attraction of the moon on the waters of the earth. He does not, however, appear to have had any anticipation of those wonderful discoveries which Newton was destined to make a little later, in which he demonstrated that the laws detected by Kepler's marvellous acumen were necessary consequences of the principle of universal gravitation.

The more we think about this remarkable achievement, the more impressive it becomes. We should remember that today we understand the physical necessity that requires a planet to move in an ellipse rather than any other shape. But Kepler didn’t have that knowledge. Even until the end of his life, he remained unaware of any natural cause that determined that planets should follow those specific curves that mathematicians understand so well. Kepler's identification of the ellipse as the true shape of planetary orbits is best seen as a brilliant guess, one that Tycho's observations allowed him to confirm. Kepler also successfully pointed out the law that specifies the velocity of a planet at different points along its orbit. Once again, we must admire the insight with which this remarkably sharp astronomer discerned the profound truth of nature. In this case, too, he had no reason to expect that such a law, which he discovered, must be followed based on physical principles. It’s true that Kepler had some basic understanding of what we now call gravitation. He even proposed the notable idea that the rise and fall of the tides should be attributed to the moon's pull on the Earth’s waters. However, he didn’t seem to anticipate the incredible discoveries that Newton would later make, demonstrating that the laws identified by Kepler's extraordinary insight were essential results of the principle of universal gravitation.

SYMBOLICAL REPRESENTATION OF THE PLANETARY SYSTEM.
SYMBOLICAL REPRESENTATION OF THE PLANETARY SYSTEM.
SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATION OF THE PLANETARY SYSTEM.

To appreciate the relations of Kepler and Tycho it is necessary to note the very different way in which these illustrious astronomers viewed the system of the heavens. It should be observed that Copernicus had already expounded the true system, which located the sun at the centre of the planetary system. But in the days of Tycho Brahe this doctrine had not as yet commanded universal assent. In fact, the great observer himself did not accept the new views of Copernicus. It appeared to Tycho that the earth not only appeared to be the centre of things celestial, but that it actually was the centre. It is, indeed, not a little remarkable that a student of the heavens so accurate as Tycho should have deliberately rejected the Copernican doctrine in favour of the system which now seems so preposterous. Throughout his great career, Tycho steadily observed the places of the sun, the moon, and the planets, and as steadily maintained that all those bodies revolved around the earth fixed in the centre. Kepler, however, had the advantage of belonging to the new school. He utilised the observations of Tycho in developing the great Copernican theory whose teaching Tycho stoutly resisted.

To understand the relationship between Kepler and Tycho, it's important to recognize how differently these famous astronomers viewed the structure of the universe. It's worth noting that Copernicus had already explained the correct model, which placed the sun at the center of the solar system. However, during Tycho Brahe's time, this idea had not yet gained widespread acceptance. In fact, the great observer himself did not believe in Copernicus's new views. Tycho thought that the earth not only seemed to be the center of the cosmos, but that it actually was the center. It's quite remarkable that someone as precise as Tycho would intentionally reject the Copernican model in favor of a system that now seems so ridiculous. Throughout his career, Tycho consistently tracked the positions of the sun, moon, and planets, while firmly insisting that all these bodies revolved around the earth, which he believed to be fixed at the center. On the other hand, Kepler was part of the new school of thought. He used Tycho's observations to develop the powerful Copernican theory that Tycho strongly opposed.

Perhaps a chapter in modern science may illustrate the intellectual relation of these great men. The revolution produced by Copernicus in the doctrine of the heavens has often been likened to the revolution which the Darwinian theory produced in the views held by biologists as to life on this earth. The Darwinian theory did not at first command universal assent even among those naturalists whose lives had been devoted with the greatest success to the study of organisms. Take, for instance, that great naturalist, Professor Owen, by whose labours vast extension has been given to our knowledge of the fossil animals which dwelt on the earth in past ages. Now, though Owens researches were intimately connected with the great labours of Darwin, and afforded the latter material for his epoch-making generalization, yet Owen deliberately refused to accept the new doctrines. Like Tycho, he kept on rigidly accumulating his facts under the influence of a set of ideas as to the origin of living forms which are now universally admitted to be erroneous. If, therefore, we liken Darwin to Copernicus, and Owen to Tycho, we may liken the biologists of the present day to Kepler, who interpreted the results of accurate observation upon sound theoretical principles.

Perhaps a chapter in modern science can illustrate the intellectual connection between these great individuals. The revolution initiated by Copernicus in our understanding of the universe is often compared to the shift brought about by Darwin's theory concerning life on Earth. Initially, the Darwinian theory did not receive unanimous agreement, even among those naturalists who had successfully devoted their lives to studying organisms. For example, there was the notable naturalist, Professor Owen, whose work greatly expanded our understanding of the fossil animals that lived on Earth in previous eras. Although Owen's research was closely tied to Darwin’s groundbreaking work and provided material for his influential theories, Owen intentionally chose not to accept the new ideas. Like Tycho, he continued to meticulously gather facts while holding onto a set of beliefs about the origins of living forms that are now widely accepted as incorrect. Therefore, if we compare Darwin to Copernicus and Owen to Tycho, we can liken modern biologists to Kepler, who interpreted the outcomes of precise observations based on sound theoretical principles.

In reading the works of Kepler in the light of our modern knowledge we are often struck by the extent to which his perception of the sublimest truths in nature was associated with the most extravagant errors and absurdities. But, of course, it must be remembered that he wrote in an age in which even the rudiments of science, as we now understand it, were almost entirely unknown.

In reading Kepler's works with our current understanding, we often notice how his insights into the most profound truths in nature were linked to some wild mistakes and absurdities. However, we have to keep in mind that he was writing in a time when even the basic elements of science, as we know it today, were almost completely unfamiliar.

It may well be doubted whether any joy experienced by mortals is more genuine than that which rewards the successful searcher after natural truths. Every science-worker, be his efforts ever so humble, will be able to sympathise with the enthusiastic delight of Kepler when at last, after years of toil, the glorious light broke forth, and that which he considered to be the greatest of his astonishing laws first dawned upon him. Kepler rightly judged that the number of days which a planet required to perform its voyage round the sun must be connected in some manner with the distance from the planet to the sun; that is to say, with the radius of the planet's orbit, inasmuch as we may for our present object regard the planet's orbit as circular.

It can definitely be questioned whether any joy felt by people is more genuine than the happiness that comes from successfully seeking out natural truths. Every scientist, no matter how humble their efforts, can relate to the enthusiastic joy Kepler felt when, after years of hard work, the brilliant insight finally emerged, and he grasped what he believed to be the most important of his remarkable discoveries. Kepler was right to think that the number of days a planet takes to orbit the sun must be linked in some way to its distance from the sun; in other words, it must relate to the radius of the planet's orbit, considering that we can treat the planet's orbit as circular for our current purposes.

Here, again, in his search for the unknown law, Kepler had no accurate dynamical principles to guide his steps. Of course, we now know not only what the connection between the planet's distance and the planet's periodic time actually is, but we also know that it is a necessary consequence of the law of universal gravitation. Kepler, it is true, was not without certain surmises on the subject, but they were of the most fanciful description. His notions of the planets, accurate as they were in certain important respects, were mixed up with vague ideas as to the properties of metals and the geometrical relations of the regular solids. Above all, his reasoning was penetrated by the supposed astrological influences of the stars and their significant relation to human fate. Under the influence of such a farrago of notions, Kepler resolved to make all sorts of trials in his search for the connection between the distance of a planet from the sun and the time in which the revolution of that planet was accomplished.

Here, once again, in his quest for the unknown law, Kepler lacked solid dynamical principles to guide him. Of course, we now understand the actual connection between a planet's distance from the sun and its orbital period, and we know this is a necessary result of the law of universal gravitation. It's true that Kepler had some ideas about the topic, but they were rather fanciful. His understanding of the planets, while accurate in some important ways, was intertwined with vague notions about the properties of metals and the geometric relationships of regular solids. Most importantly, his reasoning was influenced by believed astrological effects of the stars and their supposed significance in human destiny. Under the weight of such a mix of ideas, Kepler decided to conduct various experiments in his quest to find the link between a planet's distance from the sun and the time it takes for that planet to complete its orbit.

It was quite easily demonstrated that the greater the distance of the planet from the sun the longer was the time required for its journey. It might have been thought that the time would be directly proportional to the distance. It was, however, easy to show that this supposition did not agree with the fact. Finding that this simple relation would not do, Kepler undertook a vast series of calculations to find out the true method of expressing the connection. At last, after many vain attempts, he found, to his indescribable joy, that the square of the time in which a planet revolves around the sun was proportional to the cube of the average distance of the planet from that body.

It was pretty easy to show that the farther a planet is from the sun, the longer it takes to complete its orbit. One might think that the time would be directly proportional to the distance. However, it was simple to demonstrate that this assumption didn't match reality. Realizing that this straightforward relationship wouldn't work, Kepler embarked on an extensive series of calculations to discover the correct way to express the connection. Finally, after many failed attempts, he found, to his indescribable joy, that the square of the time it takes for a planet to orbit the sun is proportional to the cube of the average distance of that planet from the sun.

The extraordinary way in which Kepler's views on celestial matters were associated with the wildest speculations, is well illustrated in the work in which he propounded his splendid discovery just referred to. The announcement of the law connecting the distances of the planets from the sun with their periodic times, was then mixed up with a preposterous conception about the properties of the different planets. They were supposed to be associated with some profound music of the spheres inaudible to human ears, and performed only for the benefit of that being whose soul formed the animating spirit of the sun.

The amazing way Kepler's ideas about space were linked with the most outrageous theories is clearly shown in the work where he presented his remarkable discovery mentioned earlier. The announcement of the law that relates the distances of the planets from the sun to their orbital periods was then tangled with a ridiculous notion about the characteristics of the different planets. They were thought to be connected to some deep music of the spheres that was inaudible to human ears, played solely for the benefit of the being whose soul was the driving force of the sun.

Kepler was also the first astronomer who ever ventured to predict the occurrence of that remarkable phenomenon, the transit of a planet in front of the sun's disc. He published, in 1629, a notice to the curious in things celestial, in which he announced that both of the planets, Mercury and Venus, were to make a transit across the sun on specified days in the winter of 1631. The transit of Mercury was duly observed by Gassendi, and the transit of Venus also took place, though, as we now know, the circumstances were such that it was not possible for the phenomenon to be witnessed by any European astronomer.

Kepler was the first astronomer to ever predict the occurrence of the amazing phenomenon of a planet passing in front of the sun. In 1629, he published a notice for those curious about celestial events, announcing that both Mercury and Venus would transit across the sun on certain days in the winter of 1631. Gassendi successfully observed the transit of Mercury, and Venus also made its transit, although, as we now understand, the conditions meant that no European astronomer could witness the event.

In addition to Kepler's discoveries already mentioned, with which his name will be for ever associated, his claim on the gratitude of astronomers chiefly depends on the publication of his famous Rudolphine tables. In this remarkable work means are provided for finding the places of the planets with far greater accuracy than had previously been attainable.

In addition to Kepler's discoveries already mentioned, with which his name will always be linked, his claim to the gratitude of astronomers largely relies on the publication of his famous Rudolphine tables. In this remarkable work, methods are provided to determine the positions of the planets with much greater accuracy than was possible before.

Kepler, it must be always remembered, was not an astronomical observer. It was his function to deal with the observations made by Tycho, and, from close study and comparison of the results, to work out the movements of the heavenly bodies. It was, in fact, Tycho who provided as it were the raw material, while it was the genius of Kepler which wrought that material into a beautiful and serviceable form. For more than a century the Rudolphine tables were regarded as a standard astronomical work. In these days we are accustomed to find the movements of the heavenly bodies set forth with all desirable exactitude in the NAUTICAL ALMANACK, and the similar publication issued by foreign Governments. Let it be remembered that it was Kepler who first imparted the proper impulse in this direction.

Kepler, it's important to remember, was not an astronomical observer. His role was to analyze the observations made by Tycho and, through careful study and comparison of the results, to determine the movements of the celestial bodies. Essentially, Tycho provided the raw data, while Kepler's genius transformed that data into a clear and useful format. For over a hundred years, the Rudolphine tables were considered a standard in astronomy. Today, we are used to finding the movements of celestial bodies presented with precision in the NAUTICAL ALMANACK and similar publications produced by other governments. It's crucial to recognize that Kepler was the one who first set this process in motion.

THE COMMEMORATION OF THE RUDOLPHINE TABLES.
THE COMMEMORATION OF THE RUDOLPHINE TABLES.
THE CELEBRATION OF THE RUDOLPHINE TABLES.

When Kepler was twenty-six he married an heiress from Styria, who, though only twenty-three years old, had already had some experience in matrimony. Her first husband had died; and it was after her second husband had divorced her that she received the addresses of Kepler. It will not be surprising to hear that his domestic affairs do not appear to have been particularly happy, and his wife died in 1611. Two years later, undeterred by the want of success in his first venture, he sought a second partner, and he evidently determined not to make a mistake this time. Indeed, the methodical manner in which he made his choice of the lady to whom he should propose has been duly set forth by him and preserved for our edification. With some self-assurance he asserts that there were no fewer than eleven spinsters desirous of sharing his joys and sorrows. He has carefully estimated and recorded the merits and demerits of each of these would-be brides. The result of his deliberations was that he awarded himself to an orphan girl, destitute even of a portion. Success attended his choice, and his second marriage seems to have proved a much more suitable union than his first. He had five children by the first wife and seven by the second.

When Kepler was twenty-six, he married an heiress from Styria who, although only twenty-three, already had some experience with marriage. Her first husband had passed away, and after her second husband divorced her, she received proposals from Kepler. It’s not surprising that his home life wasn’t particularly happy, and his wife died in 1611. Two years later, undeterred by his lack of success the first time, he looked for a second partner and clearly decided to be more careful this time. In fact, he documented his methodical approach to choosing the woman he would propose to, which has been preserved for our insight. With a fair amount of confidence, he claimed that there were at least eleven single women eager to share his life. He meticulously assessed and recorded the pros and cons of each potential bride. Ultimately, he chose an orphan girl who had no dowry. His choice turned out to be successful, and his second marriage was a much better fit than the first. He had five children with his first wife and seven with his second.

The years of Kepler's middle life were sorely distracted by a trouble which, though not uncommon in those days, is one which we find it difficult to realise at the present time. His mother, Catherine Kepler, had attained undesirable notoriety by the suspicion that she was guilty of witchcraft. Years were spent in legal investigations, and it was only after unceasing exertions on the part of the astronomer for upwards of a twelve-month that he was finally able to procure her acquittal and release from prison.

The years of Kepler's middle life were heavily disrupted by a challenge that, while not unusual for that time, is hard for us to fully grasp today. His mother, Catherine Kepler, gained unwanted attention due to suspicions of witchcraft. Years went by with legal investigations, and it was only after relentless efforts from the astronomer for over a year that he finally managed to secure her acquittal and freedom from prison.

It is interesting for us to note that at one time there was a proposal that Kepler should forsake his native country and adopt England as a home. It arose in this wise. The great man was distressed throughout the greater part of his life by pecuniary anxieties. Finding him in a strait of this description, the English ambassador in Venice, Sir Henry Wotton, in the year 1620, besought Kepler to come over to England, where he assured him that he would obtain a favourable reception, and where, he was able to add, Kepler's great scientific work was already highly esteemed. But his efforts were unavailing; Kepler would not leave his own country. He was then forty-nine years of age, and doubtless a home in a foreign land, where people spoke a strange tongue, had not sufficient attraction for him, even when accompanied with the substantial inducements which the ambassador was able to offer. Had Kepler accepted this invitation, he would, in transferring his home to England, have anticipated the similar change which took place in the career of another great astronomer two centuries later. It will be remembered that Herschel, in his younger days, did transfer himself to England, and thus gave to England the imperishable fame of association with his triumphs.

It's interesting to note that there was a time when Kepler was encouraged to leave his home country and move to England. This happened because he faced financial struggles for much of his life. In 1620, when he was in this tough situation, the English ambassador in Venice, Sir Henry Wotton, urged Kepler to come to England. Wotton promised that he would be welcomed and mentioned that Kepler's significant scientific work was already highly regarded there. However, Kepler refused to leave his homeland. At forty-nine, the idea of settling in a foreign country where people spoke a different language just didn't appeal to him, even with the generous offers the ambassador presented. If Kepler had accepted the invitation, he would have predated a similar move made by another great astronomer two centuries later. It's worth remembering that Herschel, in his youth, did move to England, which ultimately linked his legacy to the country's scientific achievements.

The publication of the Rudolphine tables of the celestial movements entailed much expense. A considerable part of this was defrayed by the Government at Venice but the balance occasioned no little trouble and anxiety to Kepler. No doubt the authorities of those days were even less willing to spend money on scientific matters than are the Governments of more recent times. For several years the imperial Treasury was importuned to relieve him from his anxieties. The effects of so much worry, and of the long journeys which were involved, at last broke down Kepler's health completely. As we have already mentioned, he had never been strong from infancy, and he finally succumbed to a fever in November, 1630, at the age of fifty-nine. He was interred at St. Peter's Church at Ratisbon.

The publication of the Rudolphine tables for celestial movements was quite costly. A significant portion of this cost was covered by the Government in Venice, but the remaining amount caused Kepler a lot of stress and concern. It’s clear that the authorities back then were even less inclined to spend money on scientific pursuits than today's governments. For several years, Kepler tirelessly sought assistance from the imperial Treasury to ease his burdens. The stress and extensive travel eventually took a toll on Kepler’s health. As mentioned earlier, he had never been robust since childhood, and he ultimately succumbed to a fever in November 1630, at the age of fifty-nine. He was buried at St. Peter's Church in Ratisbon.

Though Kepler had not those personal characteristics which have made his great predecessor, Tycho Brahe, such a romantic figure, yet a picturesque element in Kepler's character is not wanting. It was, however, of an intellectual kind. His imagination, as well as his reasoning faculties, always worked together. He was incessantly prompted by the most extraordinary speculations. The great majority of them were in a high degree wild and chimerical, but every now and then one of his fancies struck right to the heart of nature, and an immortal truth was brought to light.

Though Kepler didn’t have the personal traits that made his great predecessor, Tycho Brahe, such a romantic figure, his character had its own interesting aspects. These were more intellectual in nature. His imagination and reasoning skills always operated in tandem. He was constantly inspired by the most extraordinary ideas. Most of these were quite wild and unrealistic, but occasionally one of his thoughts hit the essence of nature, revealing an enduring truth.

I remember visiting the observatory of one of our greatest modern astronomers, and in a large desk he showed me a multitude of photographs which he had attempted but which had not been successful, and then he showed me the few and rare pictures which had succeeded, and by which important truths had been revealed. With a felicity of expression which I have often since thought of, he alluded to the contents of the desk as the "chips." They were useless, but they were necessary incidents in the truly successful work. So it is in all great and good work. Even the most skilful man of science pursues many a wrong scent. Time after time he goes off on some track that plays him false. The greater the man's genius and intellectual resource, the more numerous will be the ventures which he makes, and the great majority of those ventures are certain to be fruitless. They are in fact, the "chips." In Kepler's case the chips were numerous enough. They were of the most extraordinary variety and structure. But every now and then a sublime discovery was made of such a character as to make us regard even the most fantastic of Kepler's chips with the greatest veneration and respect.

I remember visiting the observatory of one of our greatest modern astronomers. At a big desk, he showed me a bunch of photographs he had taken that hadn’t worked out. Then he revealed the few rare pictures that had succeeded, which uncovered important truths. With a way of expressing himself that I've thought about often, he referred to the contents of the desk as the "chips." They were useless, but they were necessary steps in the genuinely successful work. It's the same in all great and meaningful work. Even the most skilled scientist chases many wrong leads. Time and again, he goes down paths that turn out to be dead ends. The greater a man's genius and intellect, the more attempts he will make, and the vast majority of those attempts are bound to be unproductive. They are, in fact, the "chips." In Kepler's case, the chips were plentiful and came in the most extraordinary forms and structures. But now and then, he made a sublime discovery that made us view even the most bizarre of Kepler's chips with deep respect and admiration.

ISAAC NEWTON.

It was just a year after the death of Galileo, that an infant came into the world who was christened Isaac Newton. Even the great fame of Galileo himself must be relegated to a second place in comparison with that of the philosopher who first expounded the true theory of the universe.

It was just a year after Galileo died that a baby was born and named Isaac Newton. Even the immense fame of Galileo must take a backseat to that of the philosopher who first explained the true theory of the universe.

Isaac Newton was born on the 25th of December (old style), 1642, at Woolsthorpe, in Lincolnshire, about a half-mile from Colsterworth, and eight miles south of Grantham. His father, Mr. Isaac Newton, had died a few months after his marriage to Harriet Ayscough, the daughter of Mr. James Ayscough, of Market Overton, in Rutlandshire. The little Isaac was at first so excessively frail and weakly that his life was despaired of. The watchful mother, however, tended her delicate child with such success that he seems to have thriven better than might have been expected from the circumstances of his infancy, and he ultimately acquired a frame strong enough to outlast the ordinary span of human life.

Isaac Newton was born on December 25, 1642, at Woolsthorpe in Lincolnshire, about half a mile from Colsterworth and eight miles south of Grantham. His father, Mr. Isaac Newton, had died a few months after marrying Harriet Ayscough, the daughter of Mr. James Ayscough of Market Overton in Rutlandshire. Little Isaac was initially so frail and weak that his survival was uncertain. However, his attentive mother cared for her delicate child so well that he thrived more than anyone might have expected given his early circumstances, ultimately growing strong enough to live beyond the average lifespan.

For three years they continued to live at Woolsthorpe, the widow's means of livelihood being supplemented by the income from another small estate at Sewstern, in a neighbouring part of Leicestershire.

For three years, they stayed in Woolsthorpe, with the widow's income supported by revenue from another small estate in Sewstern, located in a nearby area of Leicestershire.

WOOLSTHORPE MANOR. Showing solar dial made by Newton when a boy.
WOOLSTHORPE MANOR. Showing solar dial made by Newton when a boy.
WOOLSTHORPE MANOR. Features the solar dial created by Newton as a child.

In 1645, Mrs. Newton took as a second husband the Rev. Barnabas Smith, and on moving to her new home, about a mile from Woolsthorpe, she entrusted little Isaac to her mother, Mrs. Ayscough. In due time we find that the boy was sent to the public school at Grantham, the name of the master being Stokes. For the purpose of being near his work, the embryo philosopher was boarded at the house of Mr. Clark, an apothecary at Grantham. We learn from Newton himself that at first he had a very low place in the class lists of the school, and was by no means one of those model school-boys who find favour in the eyes of the school-master by attention to Latin grammar. Isaac's first incentive to diligent study seems to have been derived from the circumstance that he was severely kicked by one of the boys who was above him in the class. This indignity had the effect of stimulating young Newton's activity to such an extent that he not only attained the desired object of passing over the head of the boy who had maltreated him, but continued to rise until he became the head of the school.

In 1645, Mrs. Newton married the Rev. Barnabas Smith, and when she moved to her new home, about a mile from Woolsthorpe, she left little Isaac with her mother, Mrs. Ayscough. Eventually, the boy was sent to the public school in Grantham, where the master was Stokes. To be close to his studies, the budding philosopher boarded at the home of Mr. Clark, a pharmacist in Grantham. Newton himself tells us that at first he ranked very low in the class and was definitely not one of those model students who impressed the teacher with their attention to Latin grammar. Isaac's first motivation to study hard came from the fact that he was harshly kicked by one of the boys who ranked above him in class. This humiliation drove young Newton to work so hard that he not only surpassed the boy who had bullied him but continued to rise until he became the top student in the school.

The play-hours of the great philosopher were devoted to pursuits very different from those of most school-boys. His chief amusement was found in making mechanical toys and various ingenious contrivances. He watched day by day with great interest the workmen engaged in constructing a windmill in the neighbourhood of the school, the result of which was that the boy made a working model of the windmill and of its machinery, which seems to have been much admired, as indicating his aptitude for mechanics. We are told that Isaac also indulged in somewhat higher flights of mechanical enterprise. He constructed a carriage, the wheels of which were to be driven by the hands of the occupant, while the first philosophical instrument he made was a clock, which was actuated by water. He also devoted much attention to the construction of paper kites, and his skill in this respect was highly appreciated by his school-fellows. Like a true philosopher, even at this stage he experimented on the best methods of attaching the string, and on the proportions which the tail ought to have. He also made lanthorns of paper to provide himself with light as he walked to school in the dark winter mornings.

The playtime of the great philosopher was spent on activities quite different from those of most schoolboys. His main hobby was creating mechanical toys and various clever devices. He watched with great interest as workers built a windmill near the school, which led him to create a working model of the windmill and its machinery, earning admiration for his mechanical talent. It’s said that Isaac also engaged in more ambitious mechanical projects. He built a car where the wheels were turned by the rider's hands, and his first philosophical invention was a clock powered by water. He also focused a lot on making paper kites, and his skills were highly valued by his classmates. True to his inquisitive nature, even at this young age, he experimented with the best ways to attach the string and the ideal length of the tail. He also made paper lanterns to light his way to school on dark winter mornings.

The only love affair in Newton's life appears to have commenced while he was still of tender years. The incidents are thus described in Brewster's "Life of Newton," a work to which I am much indebted in this chapter.

The only love affair in Newton's life seems to have started when he was still quite young. The events are described in Brewster's "Life of Newton," a book I owe a lot to in this chapter.

"In the house where he lodged there were some female inmates, in whose company he appears to have taken much pleasure. One of these, a Miss Storey, sister to Dr. Storey, a physician at Buckminster, near Colsterworth, was two or three years younger than Newton and to great personal attractions she seems to have added more than the usual allotment of female talent. The society of this young lady and her companions was always preferred to that of his own school-fellows, and it was one of his most agreeable occupations to construct for them little tables and cupboards, and other utensils for holding their dolls and their trinkets. He had lived nearly six years in the same house with Miss Storey, and there is reason to believe that their youthful friendship gradually rose to a higher passion; but the smallness of her portion, and the inadequacy of his own fortune, appear to have prevented the consummation of their happiness. Miss Storey was afterwards twice married, and under the name of Mrs. Vincent, Dr. Stukeley visited her at Grantham in 1727, at the age of eighty-two, and obtained from her many particulars respecting the early history of our author. Newton's esteem for her continued unabated during his life. He regularly visited her when he went to Lincolnshire, and never failed to relieve her from little pecuniary difficulties which seem to have beset her family."

"In the house where he stayed, there were some female residents, with whom he seemed to enjoy spending time. One of them, Miss Storey, the sister of Dr. Storey, a doctor in Buckminster, near Colsterworth, was two or three years younger than Newton and, in addition to her great personal charm, she seemed to possess more than her fair share of female talent. He always preferred the company of this young lady and her friends over that of his schoolmates, and he found great pleasure in making little tables, cupboards, and other items to hold their dolls and trinkets. He had lived in the same house with Miss Storey for nearly six years, and there's reason to believe that their youthful friendship gradually developed into a deeper affection; however, the limitation of her wealth and the insufficiency of his own means seemed to prevent their happiness from being realized. Miss Storey later got married twice, and under the name Mrs. Vincent, Dr. Stukeley visited her in Grantham in 1727 when he was eighty-two years old, and learned many details about the early life of our author from her. Newton's respect for her remained strong throughout his life. He made regular visits to her in Lincolnshire and always made sure to help her with the financial struggles that appeared to trouble her family."

The schoolboy at Grantham was only fourteen years of age when his mother became a widow for the second time. She then returned to the old family home at Woolsthorpe, bringing with her the three children of her second marriage. Her means appear to have been somewhat scanty, and it was consequently thought necessary to recall Isaac from the school. His recently-born industry had been such that he had already made good progress in his studies, and his mother hoped that he would now lay aside his books, and those silent meditations to which, even at this early age, he had become addicted. It was expected that, instead of such pursuits, which were deemed quite useless, the boy would enter busily into the duties of the farm and the details of a country life. But before long it became manifest that the study of nature and the pursuit of knowledge had such a fascination for the youth that he could give little attention to aught else. It was plain that he would make but an indifferent farmer. He greatly preferred experimenting on his water-wheels to looking after labourers, while he found that working at mathematics behind a hedge was much more interesting than chaffering about the price of bullocks in the market place. Fortunately for humanity his mother, like a wise woman, determined to let her boy's genius have the scope which it required. He was accordingly sent back to Grantham school, with the object of being trained in the knowledge which would fit him for entering the University of Cambridge.

The schoolboy at Grantham was only fourteen when his mother became a widow for the second time. She returned to the old family home in Woolsthorpe, bringing with her the three children from her second marriage. Her resources seemed to be pretty limited, so it was decided to pull Isaac out of school. He had recently started to show a lot of effort and had already made good progress in his studies, and his mother hoped he would now put aside his books and the quiet thinking he had become hooked on even at such a young age. It was expected that instead of these pursuits, which were seen as completely useless, the boy would throw himself into farm work and the details of country life. But it quickly became clear that his fascination with studying nature and seeking knowledge was so strong that he paid little attention to anything else. It was obvious that he wouldn’t be a very good farmer. He much preferred experimenting with his water-wheels to supervising laborers, and he found working on math behind a hedge far more interesting than haggling over the price of cattle in the market. Luckily for humanity, his mother, being a wise woman, decided to let her son's talent have the freedom it needed. He was sent back to Grantham school to pursue the education that would prepare him for entering the University of Cambridge.

TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. Showing Newton's rooms; on the leads of the gateway he placed his telescope.
TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. Showing Newton's rooms; on the leads of the gateway he placed his telescope.
TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. This is where Newton's rooms are located; he set up his telescope on the roof of the gateway.

It was the 5th of June, 1660, when Isaac Newton, a youth of eighteen, was enrolled as an undergraduate of Trinity College, Cambridge. Little did those who sent him there dream that this boy was destined to be the most illustrious student who ever entered the portals of that great seat of learning. Little could the youth himself have foreseen that the rooms near the gateway which he occupied would acquire a celebrity from the fact that he dwelt in them, or that the ante-chapel of his college was in good time to be adorned by that noble statue, which is regarded as one of the chief art treasures of Cambridge University, both on account of its intrinsic beauty and the fact that it commemorates the fame of her most distinguished alumnus, Isaac Newton, the immortal astronomer. Indeed, his advent at the University seemed to have been by no means auspicious or brilliant. His birth was, as we have seen, comparatively obscure, and though he had already given indication of his capacity for reflecting on philosophical matters, yet he seems to have been but ill-equipped with the routine knowledge which youths are generally expected to take with them to the Universities.

It was June 5, 1660, when Isaac Newton, an eighteen-year-old, enrolled as an undergraduate at Trinity College, Cambridge. Those who sent him there had no idea that this young man was destined to become the most outstanding student to ever walk through the doors of that prestigious institution. He himself could hardly have imagined that the rooms he occupied near the gateway would become famous because of him, or that the ante-chapel of his college would eventually feature a remarkable statue that is now considered one of the main artistic treasures of Cambridge University, both for its beauty and for honoring the legacy of its most notable graduate, Isaac Newton, the legendary astronomer. In fact, his arrival at the University didn’t seem particularly promising or impressive. His birth, as we have noted, was relatively humble, and while he had already shown signs of his ability to think deeply about philosophical issues, he appeared to lack the basic knowledge that students are typically expected to bring with them to universities.

From the outset of his college career, Newton's attention seems to have been mainly directed to mathematics. Here he began to give evidence of that marvellous insight into the deep secrets of nature which more than a century later led so dispassionate a judge as Laplace to pronounce Newton's immortal work as pre-eminent above all the productions of the human intellect. But though Newton was one of the very greatest mathematicians that ever lived, he was never a mathematician for the mere sake of mathematics. He employed his mathematics as an instrument for discovering the laws of nature. His industry and genius soon brought him under the notice of the University authorities. It is stated in the University records that he obtained a Scholarship in 1664. Two years later we find that Newton, as well as many residents in the University, had to leave Cambridge temporarily on account of the breaking out of the plague. The philosopher retired for a season to his old home at Woolsthorpe, and there he remained until he was appointed a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1667. From this time onwards, Newton's reputation as a mathematician and as a natural philosopher steadily advanced, so that in 1669, while still but twenty-seven years of age, he was appointed to the distinguished position of Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge. Here he found the opportunity to continue and develop that marvellous career of discovery which formed his life's work.

From the beginning of his college journey, Newton's focus seemed to be primarily on mathematics. He started to show signs of that remarkable ability to understand the deep mysteries of nature, which, over a century later, led even a reserved judge like Laplace to declare Newton's lasting work as the greatest of all human achievements. But even though Newton was one of the greatest mathematicians ever, he never pursued mathematics just for its own sake. He used mathematics as a tool to uncover the laws of nature. His hard work and talent quickly caught the attention of the University leaders. Records show that he received a Scholarship in 1664. Two years later, like many at the University, Newton had to leave Cambridge temporarily due to the outbreak of the plague. The philosopher took refuge at his family home in Woolsthorpe, where he stayed until he was appointed a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1667. From that point on, Newton's reputation as a mathematician and natural philosopher continued to grow, so much so that in 1669, at just twenty-seven years old, he was named the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge. Here, he found the chance to keep advancing and expanding that amazing career of discovery that defined his life's work.

The earliest of Newton's great achievements in natural philosophy was his detection of the composite character of light. That a beam of ordinary sunlight is, in fact, a mixture of a very great number of different-coloured lights, is a doctrine now familiar to every one who has the slightest education in physical science. We must, however, remember that this discovery was really a tremendous advance in knowledge at the time when Newton announced it.

The earliest of Newton's major accomplishments in natural philosophy was his discovery that light is made up of different colors. The idea that a beam of regular sunlight is actually a blend of many different colored lights is something everyone with even a basic education in physical science understands today. However, we should keep in mind that this revelation was a significant leap in knowledge when Newton first presented it.

DIAGRAM OF A SUNBEAM.
DIAGRAM OF A SUNBEAM.
DIAGRAM OF A SUNBEAM.

We here give the little diagram originally drawn by Newton, to explain the experiment by which he first learned the composition of light. A sunbeam is admitted into a darkened room through an opening, H, in a shutter. This beam when not interfered with will travel in a straight line to the screen, and there reproduce a bright spot of the same shape as the hole in the shutter. If, however, a prism of glass, A B C, be introduced so that the beam traverse it, then it will be seen at once that the light is deflected from its original track. There is, however, a further and most important change which takes place. The spot of light is not alone removed to another part of the screen, but it becomes spread out into a long band beautifully coloured, and exhibiting the hues of the rainbow. At the top are the violet rays, and then in descending order we have the indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange, and red.

We’re presenting the small diagram originally created by Newton to illustrate the experiment that led him to discover the composition of light. A beam of sunlight enters a darkened room through an opening, H, in a shutter. When uninterrupted, this beam travels in a straight line to the screen, creating a bright spot that matches the shape of the hole in the shutter. However, when a glass prism, A B C, is placed in its path, it’s immediately noticeable that the light is redirected from its original course. Additionally, a significant change occurs: the spot of light is not only moved to a different part of the screen but also spreads into a long, beautifully colored band displaying the hues of the rainbow. At the top are the violet rays, followed in descending order by indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange, and red.

The circumstance in this phenomenon which appears to have particularly arrested Newton's attention, was the elongation which the luminous spot underwent in consequence of its passage through the prism. When the prism was absent the spot was nearly circular, but when the prism was introduced the spot was about five times as long as it was broad. To ascertain the explanation of this was the first problem to be solved. It seemed natural to suppose that it might be due to the thickness of the glass in the prism which the light traversed, or to the angle of incidence at which the light fell upon the prism. He found, however, upon careful trial, that the phenomenon could not be thus accounted for. It was not until after much patient labour that the true explanation dawned upon him. He discovered that though the beam of white light looks so pure and so simple, yet in reality it is composed of differently coloured lights blended together. These are, of course, indistinguishable in the compound beam, but they are separated or disentangled, so to speak, by the action of the prism. The rays at the blue end of the spectrum are more powerfully deflected by the action of the glass than are the rays at the red end. Thus, the rays variously coloured red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet, are each conducted to a different part of the screen. In this way the prism has the effect of exhibiting the constitution of the composite beam of light.

The aspect of this phenomenon that particularly captured Newton's attention was the stretching of the luminous spot as it passed through the prism. Without the prism, the spot was nearly circular, but with the prism, the spot became about five times longer than it was wide. Figuring out why this happened was the first problem he needed to tackle. It seemed logical to think it might be due to the thickness of the glass in the prism that the light passed through or the angle at which the light struck the prism. However, after careful testing, he found that this wasn't the explanation. It wasn't until after much patient work that the true explanation became clear to him. He realized that although a beam of white light looks pure and simple, it is actually made up of different colored lights mixed together. These colors are indistinguishable in the combined beam, but the prism separates them, so to speak. The rays at the blue end of the spectrum are deflected more strongly by the glass than the rays at the red end. As a result, the rays of different colors—red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet—each reach a different part of the screen. In this way, the prism reveals the makeup of the combined beam of light.

To us this now seems quite obvious, but Newton did not adopt it hastily. With characteristic caution he verified the explanation by many different experiments, all of which confirmed his discovery. One of these may be mentioned. He made a hole in the screen at that part on which the violet rays fell. Thus a violet ray was allowed to pass through, all the rest of the light being intercepted, and on this beam so isolated he was able to try further experiments. For instance, when he interposed another prism in its path, he found, as he expected, that it was again deflected, and he measured the amount of the deflection. Again he tried the same experiment with one of the red rays from the opposite end of the coloured band. He allowed it to pass through the same aperture in the screen, and he tested the amount by which the second prism was capable of producing deflection. He thus found, as he had expected to find, that the second prism was more efficacious in bending the violet rays than in bending the red rays. Thus he confirmed the fact that the various hues of the rainbow were each bent by a prism to a different extent, violet being acted upon the most, and red the least.

To us, this now seems pretty obvious, but Newton didn't jump to conclusions. True to his cautious nature, he verified the explanation through multiple experiments, all of which supported his discovery. One example involves him making a hole in a screen where the violet rays hit. This allowed a violet ray to pass through while blocking the rest of the light, so he could conduct further experiments on this isolated beam. For instance, when he placed another prism in its path, he found, as he expected, that it was deflected again, and he measured the degree of that deflection. He also repeated the same experiment with one of the red rays from the opposite side of the color spectrum. He let it pass through the same hole in the screen and measured how much the second prism could deflect it. He discovered, as he had anticipated, that the second prism was more effective at bending the violet rays than the red rays. This confirmed his finding that different colors in the rainbow are bent by a prism to different extents, with violet being bent the most and red the least.

ISAAC NEWTON.
ISAAC NEWTON.
Isaac Newton.

Not only did Newton decompose a white beam into its constituent colours, but conversely by interposing a second prism with its angle turned upwards, he reunited the different colours, and thus reproduced the original beam of white light. In several other ways also he illustrated his famous proposition, which then seemed so startling, that white light was the result of a mixture of all hues of the rainbow. By combining painters' colours in the right proportion he did not indeed succeed in producing a mixture which would ordinarily be called white, but he obtained a grey pigment. Some of this he put on the floor of his room for comparison with a piece of white paper. He allowed a beam of bright sunlight to fall upon the paper and the mixed colours side by side, and a friend he called in for his opinion pronounced that under these circumstances the mixed colours looked the whiter of the two.

Not only did Newton break a white beam of light into its individual colors, but by placing a second prism with its angle tilted upward, he combined the different colors again, creating the original beam of white light. He demonstrated his famous idea in several other ways, which at the time seemed surprising: that white light is made up of a mix of all the colors of the rainbow. While he didn't manage to create a mixture that could be called white by combining artists' paints in the right proportions, he did produce a grey pigment. He placed some of this on the floor of his room to compare it with a piece of white paper. He let a beam of bright sunlight shine on the paper and the mixed colors side by side, and a friend he called in for his thoughts remarked that under those conditions, the mixed colors appeared whiter than the paper.

By repeated demonstrations Newton thus established his great discovery of the composite character of light. He at once perceived that his researches had an important bearing upon the principles involved in the construction of a telescope. Those who employed the telescope for looking at the stars, had been long aware of the imperfections which prevented all the various rays from being conducted to the same focus. But this imperfection had hitherto been erroneously accounted for. It had been supposed that the reason why success had not been attained in the construction of a refracting telescope was due to the fact that the object glass, made as it then was of a single piece, had not been properly shaped. Mathematicians had abundantly demonstrated that a single lens, if properly figured, must conduct all rays of light to the same focus, provided all rays experienced equal refraction in passing through the glass. Until Newton's discovery of the composition of white light, it had been taken for granted that the several rays in a white beam were equally refrangible. No doubt if this had been the case, a perfect telescope could have been produced by properly shaping the object glass. But when Newton had demonstrated that light was by no means so simple as had been supposed, it became obvious that a satisfactory refracting telescope was an impossibility when only a single object lens was employed, however carefully that lens might have been wrought. Such an objective might, no doubt, be made to conduct any one group of rays of a particular shade to the same focus, but the rays of other colours in the beam of white light must necessarily travel somewhat astray. In this way Newton accounted for a great part of the difficulties which had hitherto beset the attempts to construct a perfect refracting telescope.

By repeatedly demonstrating his findings, Newton established his significant discovery about the composite nature of light. He quickly realized that his research had crucial implications for the principles involved in building a telescope. People using telescopes to observe stars had long recognized the flaws that prevented different rays from converging at a single focus. However, this flaw had previously been misinterpreted. It was believed that the failure to successfully construct a refracting telescope was due to the object lens, which was then made from a single piece, not being properly shaped. Mathematicians had extensively shown that a single lens, if correctly designed, should direct all rays of light to the same focus, as long as all rays were equally refracted while passing through the glass. Until Newton's discovery regarding the composition of white light, it was assumed that the various rays in a white beam were equally refrangible. If this had been true, a perfect telescope could have been created by properly shaping the object lens. However, when Newton demonstrated that light was far more complex than previously thought, it became clear that achieving a satisfactory refracting telescope was impossible if only a single object lens was used, no matter how meticulously that lens was crafted. Such a lens could certainly focus one group of rays of a particular color, but the rays of other colors within the white light beam would inevitably be scattered. In this manner, Newton explained much of the challenges that had previously hindered efforts to create a flawless refracting telescope.

We now know how these difficulties can be, to a great extent, overcome, by employing for the objective a composite lens made of two pieces of glass possessing different qualities. To these achromatic object glasses, as they are called, the great development of astronomical knowledge, since Newton's time, is due. But it must be remarked that, although the theoretical possibility of constructing an achromatic lens was investigated by Newton, he certainly came to the conclusion that the difficulty could not be removed by employing a composite objective, with two different kinds of glass. In this his marvellous sagacity in the interpretation of nature seems for once to have deserted him. We can, however, hardly regret that Newton failed to discover the achromatic objective, when we observe that it was in consequence of his deeming an achromatic objective to be impossible that he was led to the invention of the reflecting telescope. Finding, as he believed, that the defects of the telescope could not be remedied by any application of the principle of refraction he was led to look in quite a different direction for the improvement of the tool on which the advancement of astronomy depended. The REFRACTION of light depended as he had found, upon the colour of the light. The laws of REFLECTION were, however, quite independent of the colour. Whether rays be red or green, blue or yellow, they are all reflected in precisely the same manner from a mirror. Accordingly, Newton perceived that if he could construct a telescope the action of which depended upon reflection, instead of upon refraction, the difficulty which had hitherto proved an insuperable obstacle to the improvement of the instrument would be evaded.

We now understand that many of these challenges can largely be overcome by using a composite lens made of two pieces of glass with different properties. These are called achromatic objective lenses, and they have greatly contributed to the advancement of astronomical knowledge since Newton's time. However, it’s worth noting that even though Newton explored the theoretical possibility of creating an achromatic lens, he ultimately concluded that the difficulty couldn't be resolved by using a composite objective with two different types of glass. In this instance, his remarkable insight into nature seems to have failed him. Nevertheless, we can hardly lament that Newton didn’t discover the achromatic objective, considering that his belief in its impossibility led him to invent the reflecting telescope. He found, as he believed, that the flaws of the telescope couldn’t be fixed by using the principle of refraction, prompting him to seek a completely different approach to improve the instrument essential for the progress of astronomy. Newton discovered that the REFRACTION of light was dependent on its color, while the laws of REFLECTION were independent of color. Whether the rays are red, green, blue, or yellow, they are all reflected in exactly the same way from a mirror. Therefore, Newton realized that if he could design a telescope that relied on reflection instead of refraction, he could bypass the challenges that had previously hindered the improvement of the instrument.

SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S LITTLE REFLECTOR.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S LITTLE REFLECTOR.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SMALL REFLECTOR.

For this purpose Newton fashioned a concave mirror from a mixture of copper and tin, a combination which gives a surface with almost the lustre of silver. When the light of a star fell upon the surface, an image of the star was produced in the focus of this mirror, and then this image was examined by a magnifying eye-piece. Such is the principle of the famous reflecting telescope which bears the name of Newton. The little reflector which he constructed, represented in the adjoining figure, is still preserved as one of the treasures of the Royal Society. The telescope tube had the very modest dimension of one inch in diameter. It was, however, the precursor of a whole series of magnificent instruments, each outstripping the other in magnitude, until at last the culminating point was attained in 1845, by the construction of Lord Rosse's mammoth reflector of six feet in aperture.

For this purpose, Newton created a concave mirror from a mix of copper and tin, which produced a surface with nearly the shine of silver. When a star's light hit the surface, it formed an image of the star at the focus of the mirror, and this image was then viewed through a magnifying eyepiece. This is the principle behind the famous reflecting telescope named after Newton. The small reflector he made, shown in the adjacent figure, is still kept as one of the treasures of the Royal Society. The telescope tube was quite modest, measuring only one inch in diameter. However, it paved the way for a series of impressive instruments, each larger than the last, culminating in 1845 with Lord Rosse's giant six-foot aperture reflector.

Newton's discovery of the composition of light led to an embittered controversy, which caused no little worry to the great Philosopher. Some of those who attacked him enjoyed considerable and, it must be admitted, even well-merited repute in the ranks of science. They alleged, however, that the elongation of the coloured band which Newton had noticed was due to this, to that, or to the other—to anything, in fact, rather than to the true cause which Newton assigned. With characteristic patience and love of truth, Newton steadily replied to each such attack. He showed most completely how utterly his adversaries had misunderstood the subject, and how slight indeed was their acquaintance with the natural phenomenon in question. In reply to each point raised, he was ever able to cite fresh experiments and adduce fresh illustrations, until at last his opponents retired worsted from the combat.

Newton's discovery of the composition of light sparked a heated controversy that caused considerable distress to the great philosopher. Some of his critics had significant, and admittedly well-deserved, reputations in the scientific community. They argued that the stretching of the colored band that Newton had observed was due to various factors—anything, really, except the actual cause that Newton proposed. With his characteristic patience and commitment to truth, Newton calmly responded to each attack. He clearly demonstrated how completely his opponents had misunderstood the issue and how limited their understanding of the natural phenomenon was. In response to every point raised, he was continually able to present new experiments and examples until finally, his adversaries withdrew, defeated in the debate.

It has been often a matter for surprise that Newton, throughout his whole career, should have taken so much trouble to expose the errors of those who attacked his views. He used even to do this when it plainly appeared that his adversaries did not understand the subject they were discussing. A philosopher might have said, "I know I am right, and whether others think I am right or not may be a matter of concern to them, but it is certainly not a matter about which I need trouble. If after having been told the truth they elect to remain in error, so much the worse for them; my time can be better employed than in seeking to put such people right." This, however, was not Newton's method. He spent much valuable time in overthrowing objections which were often of a very futile description. Indeed, he suffered a great deal of annoyance from the persistency, and in some cases one might almost say from the rancour, of the attacks which were made upon him. Unfortunately for himself, he did not possess that capacity for sublime indifference to what men may say, which is often the happy possession of intellects greatly inferior to his.

It's often surprising that Newton, throughout his career, put so much effort into refuting the mistakes of those who challenged his views. He would even do this when it was clear that his opponents didn’t fully understand the topic they were discussing. A philosopher might have said, "I know I'm right, and whether others agree with me is their concern, not mine. If they choose to stay misinformed after being shown the truth, that’s their problem; I can spend my time on better things than trying to correct them." However, that wasn't Newton’s approach. He dedicated a lot of time addressing objections that were often quite trivial. In fact, he experienced a lot of frustration from the persistence, and in some cases, one could almost say from the bitterness, of the attacks directed at him. Unfortunately for him, he didn’t have that ability to be wonderfully indifferent to what people say, which is often a trait found in minds much less brilliant than his.

The subject of optics still continuing to engross Newton's attention, he followed up his researches into the structure of the sunbeam by many other valuable investigations in connection with light. Every one has noticed the beautiful colours manifested in a soap-bubble. Here was a subject which not unnaturally attracted the attention of one who had expounded the colours of the spectrum with such success. He perceived that similar hues were produced by other thin plates of transparent material besides soap-bubbles, and his ingenuity was sufficient to devise a method by which the thicknesses of the different films could be measured. We can hardly, indeed, say that a like success attended his interpretation of these phenomena to that which had been so conspicuous in his explanation of the spectrum. It implies no disparagement to the sublime genius of Newton to admit that the doctrines he put forth as to the causes of the colours in the soap-bubbles can be no longer accepted. We must remember that Newton was a pioneer in accounting for the physical properties of light. The facts that he established are indeed unquestionable, but the explanations which he was led to offer of some of them are seen to be untenable in the fuller light of our present knowledge.

The topic of optics continued to capture Newton's attention, so he pursued his studies on the structure of sunlight with many other important investigations related to light. Everyone has noticed the beautiful colors seen in a soap bubble. This was a subject that naturally grabbed the interest of someone who had successfully explained the colors of the spectrum. He realized that similar colors were created by other thin layers of transparent materials besides soap bubbles, and he cleverly devised a way to measure the thickness of these different films. It’s fair to say that he didn’t achieve the same success in explaining these phenomena as he did with the spectrum. Acknowledging that the theories he proposed about the colors in soap bubbles are no longer accepted doesn’t take away from Newton’s extraordinary genius. We must remember that Newton was a trailblazer in understanding the physical properties of light. The facts he established are undoubtedly valid, but the explanations he offered for some of these facts are now seen as untenable in light of our current understanding.

SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SUN-DIAL.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SUN-DIAL.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SUN DIAL.

Had Newton done nothing beyond making his wonderful discoveries in light, his fame would have gone down to posterity as one of the greatest of Nature's interpreters. But it was reserved for him to accomplish other discoveries, which have pushed even his analysis of the sunbeam into the background; it is he who has expounded the system of the universe by the discovery of the law of universal gravitation.

Had Newton done nothing beyond his amazing discoveries in light, he would still be remembered as one of the greatest interpreters of nature. However, he went on to make other discoveries that have overshadowed even his analysis of sunlight; he is the one who explained the structure of the universe through the discovery of the law of universal gravitation.

The age had indeed become ripe for the advent of the genius of Newton. Kepler had discovered with marvellous penetration the laws which govern the movements of the planets around the sun, and in various directions it had been more or less vaguely felt that the explanation of Kepler's laws, as well as of many other phenomena, must be sought for in connection with the attractive power of matter. But the mathematical analysis which alone could deal with this subject was wanting; it had to be created by Newton.

The time was indeed right for the genius of Newton to emerge. Kepler had brilliantly uncovered the laws that control the movements of the planets around the sun, and it had been somewhat sensed in various ways that the explanation of Kepler's laws, along with many other phenomena, needed to be connected to the attractive force of matter. However, the mathematical analysis required to tackle this topic was lacking; it had to be developed by Newton.

At Woolsthorpe, in the year 1666, Newton's attention appears to have been concentrated upon the subject of gravitation. Whatever may be the extent to which we accept the more or less mythical story as to how the fall of an apple first directed the attention of the philosopher to the fact that gravitation must extend through space, it seems, at all events, certain that this is an excellent illustration of the line of reasoning which he followed. He argued in this way. The earth attracts the apple; it would do so, no matter how high might be the tree from which that apple fell. It would then seem to follow that this power which resides in the earth by which it can draw all external bodies towards it, extends far beyond the altitude of the loftiest tree. Indeed, we seem to find no limit to it. At the greatest elevation that has ever been attained, the attractive power of the earth is still exerted, and though we cannot by any actual experiment reach an altitude more than a few miles above the earth, yet it is certain that gravitation would extend to elevations far greater. It is plain, thought Newton, that an apple let fall from a point a hundred miles above this earth's surface, would be drawn down by the attraction, and would continually gather fresh velocity until it reached the ground. From a hundred miles it was natural to think of what would happen at a thousand miles, or at hundreds of thousands of miles. No doubt the intensity of the attraction becomes weaker with every increase in the altitude, but that action would still exist to some extent, however lofty might be the elevation which had been attained.

At Woolsthorpe, in 1666, Newton seemed to focus on the topic of gravity. Regardless of how much we believe the somewhat legendary tale about how the falling apple first caught the philosopher's attention to the fact that gravity must reach out into space, it seems certain that this serves as a great example of the reasoning he used. He reasoned this way: The earth attracts the apple; it would do so no matter how high the tree was from which the apple fell. Therefore, it seems logical that this force residing in the earth, which pulls all external objects toward it, extends far beyond the height of the tallest tree. In fact, there seems to be no limit to it. Even at the highest altitude ever reached, the earth's gravitational pull is still active, and although we can't conduct experiments at altitudes much more than a few miles above the earth, it's clear that gravity would extend to much greater heights. Newton concluded that if an apple were dropped from a point one hundred miles above the earth's surface, it would be pulled down by gravity and would continually gain speed until it hit the ground. From one hundred miles, it was natural to consider what would happen at a thousand miles, or even hundreds of thousands of miles. No doubt, the strength of the attraction weakens with every increase in height, but that force would still exist to some degree, no matter how high a point was reached.

It then occurred to Newton, that though the moon is at a distance of two hundred and forty thousand miles from the earth, yet the attractive power of the earth must extend to the moon. He was particularly led to think of the moon in this connection, not only because the moon is so much closer to the earth than are any other celestial bodies, but also because the moon is an appendage to the earth, always revolving around it. The moon is certainly attracted to the earth, and yet the moon does not fall down; how is this to be accounted for? The explanation was to be found in the character of the moon's present motion. If the moon were left for a moment at rest, there can be no doubt that the attraction of the earth would begin to draw the lunar globe in towards our globe. In the course of a few days our satellite would come down on the earth with a most fearful crash. This catastrophe is averted by the circumstance that the moon has a movement of revolution around the earth. Newton was able to calculate from the known laws of mechanics, which he had himself been mainly instrumental in discovering, what the attractive power of the earth must be, so that the moon shall move precisely as we find it to move. It then appeared that the very power which makes an apple fall at the earth's surface is the power which guides the moon in its orbit.

It then occurred to Newton that even though the moon is two hundred and forty thousand miles away from the earth, the earth's gravitational pull must still reach the moon. He specifically thought about the moon in this context, not only because it’s much closer to the earth than any other celestial bodies but also because it is tied to the earth, always revolving around it. The moon is definitely attracted to the earth, yet it doesn’t fall; how can this be explained? The answer lies in the nature of the moon's current motion. If the moon were suddenly to stop moving, there’s no doubt that the earth’s gravity would begin to pull it in toward us. Within a few days, our satellite would crash into the earth with a terrible impact. This disaster is prevented by the fact that the moon is in constant motion around the earth. Newton was able to calculate the gravitational force of the earth, using the mechanics laws he largely helped discover, to determine what that force must be for the moon to move exactly as we observe it. It became clear that the same force that makes an apple fall to the ground is the force that keeps the moon in its orbit.

SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S TELESCOPE.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S TELESCOPE.
Isaac Newton's telescope.

Once this step had been taken, the whole scheme of the universe might almost be said to have become unrolled before the eye of the philosopher. It was natural to suppose that just as the moon was guided and controlled by the attraction of the earth, so the earth itself, in the course of its great annual progress, should be guided and controlled by the supreme attractive power of the sun. If this were so with regard to the earth, then it would be impossible to doubt that in the same way the movements of the planets could be explained to be consequences of solar attraction.

Once this step was taken, the entire scheme of the universe could almost be said to have unfolded before the philosopher's eyes. It made sense to think that just as the moon is influenced and controlled by the pull of the earth, the earth itself, during its significant yearly journey, should be influenced and controlled by the sun's dominant gravitational force. If this was true for the earth, then it would be hard to deny that the movements of the planets could similarly be explained as results of the sun's attraction.

It was at this point that the great laws of Kepler became especially significant. Kepler had shown how each of the planets revolves in an ellipse around the sun, which is situated on one of the foci. This discovery had been arrived at from the interpretation of observations. Kepler had himself assigned no reason why the orbit of a planet should be an ellipse rather than any other of the infinite number of closed curves which might be traced around the sun. Kepler had also shown, and here again he was merely deducing the results from observation, that when the movements of two planets were compared together, the squares of the periodic times in which each planet revolved were proportional to the cubes of their mean distances from the sun. This also Kepler merely knew to be true as a fact, he gave no demonstration of the reason why nature should have adopted this particular relation between the distance and the periodic time rather than any other. Then, too, there was the law by which Kepler with unparalleled ingenuity, explained the way in which the velocity of a planet varies at the different points of its track, when he showed how the line drawn from the sun to the planet described equal areas around the sun in equal times. These were the materials with which Newton set to work. He proposed to infer from these the actual laws regulating the force by which the sun guides the planets. Here it was that his sublime mathematical genius came into play. Step by step Newton advanced until he had completely accounted for all the phenomena.

It was at this point that Kepler's great laws became especially important. Kepler demonstrated how each planet orbits the sun in an ellipse, with the sun located at one of the foci. This discovery came from analyzing observations. Kepler didn’t provide a reason why a planet’s orbit should be an ellipse instead of any other type of closed shape that could form around the sun. He also showed, again deducing results from observation, that when comparing the movements of two planets, the squares of their orbital periods are proportional to the cubes of their average distances from the sun. Kepler simply accepted this as a fact without explaining why nature would follow this specific relationship between distance and period instead of another. Additionally, he ingeniously explained how a planet's speed changes at different points in its orbit by showing that the line connecting the sun to the planet sweeps out equal areas in equal times. These were the foundations on which Newton began his work. He aimed to derive the actual laws governing the force that keeps the planets in orbit around the sun. This is where his remarkable mathematical genius was put to use. Newton progressed step by step until he had completely accounted for all the phenomena.

In the first place, he showed that as the planet describes equal areas in equal times about the sun, the attractive force which the sun exerts upon it must necessarily be directed in a straight line towards the sun itself. He also demonstrated the converse truth, that whatever be the nature of the force which emanated from a sun, yet so long as that force was directed through the sun's centre, any body which revolved around it must describe equal areas in equal times, and this it must do, whatever be the actual character of the law according to which the intensity of the force varies at different parts of the planet's journey. Thus the first advance was taken in the exposition of the scheme of the universe.

First, he showed that since the planet covers equal areas in equal times around the sun, the gravitational force the sun exerts on it must be directed in a straight line toward the sun itself. He also proved the opposite fact: no matter what kind of force comes from the sun, as long as that force is directed through the sun's center, any object that orbits it will cover equal areas in equal times. This will happen regardless of how the intensity of the force changes at different points in the planet's path. Thus, the first step was taken in explaining the structure of the universe.

The next step was to determine the law according to which the force thus proved to reside in the sun varied with the distance of the planet. Newton presently showed by a most superb effort of mathematical reasoning, that if the orbit of a planet were an ellipse and if the sun were at one of the foci of that ellipse, the intensity of the attractive force must vary inversely as the square of the planet's distance. If the law had any other expression than the inverse square of the distance, then the orbit which the planet must follow would not be an ellipse; or if an ellipse, it would, at all events, not have the sun in the focus. Hence he was able to show from Kepler's laws alone that the force which guided the planets was an attractive power emanating from the sun, and that the intensity of this attractive power varied with the inverse square of the distance between the two bodies.

The next step was to figure out the law that explains how the force coming from the sun changes with the planet's distance. Newton quickly demonstrated, through brilliant mathematical reasoning, that if a planet's orbit is an ellipse and the sun is located at one of the ellipse's foci, the strength of the attractive force must decrease with the square of the distance from the planet. If the law had any equation other than the inverse square of the distance, then the planet's orbit couldn't be an ellipse; or if it were an ellipse, the sun wouldn't be at the focus. Thus, he was able to show using just Kepler's laws that the force that moves the planets is an attractive power coming from the sun, and that this attractive power's strength changes with the inverse square of the distance between the two bodies.

These circumstances being known, it was then easy to show that the last of Kepler's three laws must necessarily follow. If a number of planets were revolving around the sun, then supposing the materials of all these bodies were equally affected by gravitation, it can be demonstrated that the square of the periodic time in which each planet completes its orbit is proportional to the cube of the greatest diameter in that orbit.

These circumstances being known, it was then easy to show that the last of Kepler's three laws must necessarily follow. If several planets were orbiting the sun, and assuming the materials of all these bodies were equally influenced by gravity, it can be demonstrated that the square of the time it takes for each planet to complete its orbit is proportional to the cube of the largest diameter in that orbit.

SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S ASTROLABE.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S ASTROLABE.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S ASTROLABE.

These superb discoveries were, however, but the starting point from which Newton entered on a series of researches, which disclosed many of the profoundest secrets in the scheme of celestial mechanics. His natural insight showed that not only large masses like the sun and the earth, and the moon, attract each other, but that every particle in the universe must attract every other particle with a force which varies inversely as the square of the distance between them. If, for example, the two particles were placed twice as far apart, then the intensity of the force which sought to bring them together would be reduced to one-fourth. If two particles, originally ten miles asunder, attracted each other with a certain force, then, when the distance was reduced to one mile, the intensity of the attraction between the two particles would be increased one-hundred-fold. This fertile principle extends throughout the whole of nature. In some cases, however, the calculation of its effect upon the actual problems of nature would be hardly possible, were it not for another discovery which Newton's genius enabled him to accomplish. In the case of two globes like the earth and the moon, we must remember that we are dealing not with particles, but with two mighty masses of matter, each composed of innumerable myriads of particles. Every particle in the earth does attract every particle in the moon with a force which varies inversely as the square of their distance. The calculation of such attractions is rendered feasible by the following principle. Assuming that the earth consists of materials symmetrically arranged in shells of varying densities, we may then, in calculating its attraction, regard the whole mass of the globe as concentrated at its centre. Similarly we may regard the moon as concentrated at the centre of its mass. In this way the earth and the moon can both be regarded as particles in point of size, each particle having, however, the entire mass of the corresponding globe. The attraction of one particle for another is a much more simple matter to investigate than the attraction of the myriad different points of the earth upon the myriad different points of the moon.

These amazing discoveries were just the beginning of Newton's research, which revealed many of the deepest secrets of celestial mechanics. His natural insight demonstrated that not only do large masses like the sun, the earth, and the moon attract each other, but every particle in the universe attracts every other particle with a force that decreases as the square of the distance between them increases. For example, if two particles are twice as far apart, the attraction force pulling them together would drop to one-fourth. If two particles that started ten miles apart attract each other with a certain force, when the distance is shortened to one mile, the attraction intensity would increase a hundred times. This valuable principle applies throughout nature. However, calculating its effects on real-world problems would be nearly impossible without another discovery made possible by Newton's brilliance. When considering two bodies like the earth and the moon, we need to remember that we're not just talking about particles, but about two massive objects, each made up of countless particles. Every particle in the earth attracts every particle in the moon with a force that varies inversely with the square of the distance between them. The calculations of such attractions can be made manageable through the following principle. Assuming the earth is made of materials arranged symmetrically in layers of different densities, we can treat the entire mass of the globe as if it is concentrated at its center when calculating its attraction. Likewise, we can consider the moon as concentrated at the center of its mass. This way, both the earth and the moon can be treated as point-like particles, with each particle representing the total mass of the respective globe. Investigating the attraction between two particles is much simpler than calculating the attraction between countless points on the earth and countless points on the moon.

Many great discoveries now crowded in upon Newton. He first of all gave the explanation of the tides that ebb and flow around our shores. Even in the earliest times the tides had been shown to be related to the moon. It was noticed that the tides were specially high during full moon or during new moon, and this circumstance obviously pointed to the existence of some connection between the moon and these movements of the water, though as to what that connection was no one had any accurate conception until Newton announced the law of gravitation. Newton then made it plain that the rise and fall of the water was simply a consequence of the attractive power which the moon exerted upon the oceans lying upon our globe. He showed also that to a certain extent the sun produces tides, and he was able to explain how it was that when the sun and the moon both conspire, the joint result was to produce especially high tides, which we call "spring tides"; whereas if the solar tide was low, while the lunar tide was high, then we had the phenomenon of "neap" tides.

Many significant discoveries became apparent to Newton. He was the first to explain the tides that rise and fall along our shores. Even in ancient times, it had been established that the tides were connected to the moon. People noticed that the tides were particularly high during the full moon or new moon, which clearly indicated some link between the moon and these water movements, though no one had a clear understanding of that connection until Newton introduced the law of gravitation. Newton clarified that the rise and fall of the water was simply the result of the gravitational pull the moon had on the oceans of our planet. He also demonstrated that the sun contributes to tides as well, and he was able to explain how, when the sun and moon align, the effect results in exceptionally high tides, known as "spring tides," while if the solar tide is low and the lunar tide is high, we experience "neap" tides.

But perhaps the most signal of Newton's applications of the law of gravitation was connected with certain irregularities in the movements of the moon. In its orbit round the earth our satellite is, of course, mainly guided by the great attraction of our globe. If there were no other body in the universe, then the centre of the moon must necessarily perform an ellipse, and the centre of the earth would lie in the focus of that ellipse. Nature, however, does not allow the movements to possess the simplicity which this arrangement would imply, for the sun is present as a source of disturbance. The sun attracts the moon, and the sun attracts the earth, but in different degrees, and the consequence is that the moon's movement with regard to the earth is seriously affected by the influence of the sun. It is not allowed to move exactly in an ellipse, nor is the earth exactly in the focus. How great was Newton's achievement in the solution of this problem will be appreciated if we realise that he not only had to determine from the law of gravitation the nature of the disturbance of the moon, but he had actually to construct the mathematical tools by which alone such calculations could be effected.

But perhaps the most significant application of Newton's law of gravitation was related to certain irregularities in the moon's movements. In its orbit around the Earth, our satellite is mainly influenced by the Earth's strong gravitational pull. If there were no other body in the universe, the moon would follow a precise elliptical path, with the Earth at one of the foci of that ellipse. However, nature doesn’t let such movements be that simple because the sun adds a source of disturbance. The sun attracts both the moon and the Earth, but in different strengths, which means the moon's movement relative to the Earth is significantly affected by the sun’s influence. The moon does not move in a perfect ellipse, nor is the Earth exactly at the focus. We can appreciate how great Newton's achievement was in solving this problem when we realize that he not only needed to determine how the moon was disturbed by the sun using the law of gravitation, but he actually had to create the mathematical tools that made such calculations possible.

The resources of Newton's genius seemed, however, to prove equal to almost any demand that could be made upon it. He saw that each planet must disturb the other, and in that way he was able to render a satisfactory account of certain phenomena which had perplexed all preceding investigators. That mysterious movement by which the pole of the earth sways about among the stars had been long an unsolved enigma, but Newton showed that the moon grasped with its attraction the protuberant mass at the equatorial regions of the earth, and thus tilted the earth's axis in a way that accounted for the phenomenon which had been known but had never been explained for two thousand years. All these discoveries were brought together in that immortal work, Newton's "Principia."

The resources of Newton's genius, however, seemed to meet almost any demand placed on it. He realized that each planet affected the others, which allowed him to explain certain phenomena that had puzzled all previous researchers. The mysterious movement where the earth's pole wobbles among the stars had been an unsolved puzzle for a long time, but Newton demonstrated that the moon, through its gravitational pull, influenced the bulging mass at the earth's equator, tilting the earth's axis in a way that clarified a phenomenon that had been known but never explained for two thousand years. All these discoveries were compiled in his groundbreaking work, Newton's "Principia."

Down to the year 1687, when the "Principia" was published, Newton had lived the life of a recluse at Cambridge, being entirely occupied with those transcendent researches to which we have referred. But in that year he issued from his seclusion under circumstances of considerable historical interest. King James the Second attempted an invasion of the rights and privileges of the University of Cambridge by issuing a command that Father Francis, a Benedictine monk, should be received as a Master of Arts in the University, without having taken the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. With this arbitrary command the University sternly refused to comply. The Vice-Chancellor was accordingly summoned to answer for an act of contempt to the authority of the Crown. Newton was one of nine delegates who were chosen to defend the independence of the University before the High Court. They were able to show that Charles the Second, who had issued a MANDAMUS under somewhat similar circumstances, had been induced after due consideration to withdraw it. This argument appeared satisfactory, and the University gained their case. Newton's next step in public life was his election, by a narrow majority, as member for the University, and during the years 1688 and 1689, he seems to have attended to his parliamentary duties with considerable regularity.

Up until 1687, when the "Principia" was published, Newton had lived a reclusive life at Cambridge, completely focused on those groundbreaking studies we mentioned earlier. But that year, he emerged from his isolation under circumstances of significant historical interest. King James II tried to invade the rights and privileges of the University of Cambridge by ordering that Father Francis, a Benedictine monk, be admitted as a Master of Arts in the University without having taken the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. The University firmly refused to comply with this arbitrary command. As a result, the Vice-Chancellor was summoned to explain an act of contempt towards the authority of the Crown. Newton was one of nine delegates chosen to defend the University’s independence before the High Court. They were able to demonstrate that Charles II, who had issued a MANDAMUS under similar circumstances, had been persuaded after careful consideration to withdraw it. This argument was found acceptable, and the University won their case. Newton's next move in public life was being elected, by a slim majority, as a member for the University, and during 1688 and 1689, he seems to have attended his parliamentary duties fairly regularly.

An incident which happened in 1692 was apparently the cause of considerable disturbance in Newton's equanimity, if not in his health. He had gone to early morning chapel, leaving a lighted candle among his papers on his desk. Tradition asserts that his little dog "Diamond" upset the candle; at all events, when Newton came back he found that many valuable papers had perished in a conflagration. The loss of these manuscripts seems to have had a serious effect. Indeed, it has been asserted that the distress reduced Newton to a state of mental aberration for a considerable time. This has, apparently, not been confirmed, but there is no doubt that he experienced considerable disquiet, for in writing on September 13th, 1693, to Mr. Pepys, he says:

An incident that took place in 1692 clearly upset Newton quite a bit, if not negatively impacted his health. He had gone to early morning chapel, leaving a lit candle among his papers on his desk. According to tradition, his little dog "Diamond" knocked the candle over; in any case, when Newton returned, he found that many important papers had been destroyed in a fire. The loss of these manuscripts seemed to have a serious impact on him. In fact, it has been claimed that the distress drove Newton into a state of mental instability for quite some time. This hasn't been confirmed, but it's clear he felt significant unease, as he mentioned in a letter on September 13th, 1693, to Mr. Pepys:

"I am extremely troubled at the embroilment I am in, and have neither ate nor slept well this twelve-month, nor have my former consistency of mind."

"I am really troubled by the situation I'm in, and I haven't eaten or slept well this whole year, nor do I have my usual clarity of mind."

Notwithstanding the fame which Newton had achieved, by the publication of his, "Principia," and by all his researches, the State had not as yet taken any notice whatever of the most illustrious man of science that this or any other country has ever produced. Many of his friends had exerted themselves to procure him some permanent appointment, but without success. It happened, however, that Mr. Montagu, who had sat with Newton in Parliament, was appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1694. Ambitious of distinction in his new office, Mr. Montagu addressed himself to the improvement of the current coin, which was then in a very debased condition. It fortunately happened that an opportunity occurred of appointing a new official in the Mint; and Mr. Montagu on the 19th of March, 1695, wrote to offer Mr. Newton the position of warden. The salary was to be five or six hundred a year, and the business would not require more attendance than Newton could spare. The Lucasian professor accepted this post, and forthwith entered upon his new duties.

Despite the fame Newton gained from publishing his "Principia" and his various research efforts, the State had yet to acknowledge the most prominent scientist this or any other country has ever seen. Many of his friends tried to secure him a permanent position, but they were unsuccessful. However, Mr. Montagu, who had served with Newton in Parliament, was appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1694. Eager to make a name for himself in his new role, Mr. Montagu focused on improving the current coin, which was in very poor condition at the time. Luckily, there was an opportunity to appoint a new official in the Mint; on March 19, 1695, Mr. Montagu wrote to offer Mr. Newton the position of warden. The salary would be five or six hundred a year, and the job wouldn’t require more of Newton’s time than he could manage. The Lucasian professor accepted the position and immediately began his new duties.

The knowledge of physics which Newton had acquired by his experiments was of much use in connection with his duties at the Mint. He carried out the re-coinage with great skill in the course of two years, and as a reward for his exertions, he was appointed, in 1697, to the Mastership of the Mint, with a salary between 1,200 Pounds and 1,500 Pounds per annum. In 1701, his duties at the Mint being so engrossing, he resigned his Lucasian professorship at Cambridge, and at the same time he had to surrender his fellowship at Trinity College. This closed his connection with the University of Cambridge. It should, however, be remarked that at a somewhat earlier stage in his career he was very nearly being appointed to an office which might have enabled the University to retain the great philosopher within its precincts. Some of his friends had almost succeeded in securing his nomination to the Provostship of King's College, Cambridge; the appointment, however, fell through, inasmuch as the statute could not be evaded, which required that the Provost of King's College should be in holy orders.

The knowledge of physics that Newton gained from his experiments proved to be very useful in his role at the Mint. He skillfully managed the re-coinage over two years, and as a reward for his efforts, he was appointed Master of the Mint in 1697, with a salary of between £1,200 and £1,500 a year. In 1701, due to the demands of his work at the Mint, he resigned from his Lucasian professorship at Cambridge and also had to give up his fellowship at Trinity College. This marked the end of his connection with the University of Cambridge. However, it should be noted that earlier in his career, he was very close to being appointed to a position that might have allowed the University to keep the great philosopher within its walls. Some of his friends nearly succeeded in getting him nominated for the Provostship of King's College, Cambridge; however, the appointment fell through because the rules required that the Provost of King's College be in holy orders.

In those days it was often the custom for illustrious mathematicians, when they had discovered a solution for some new and striking problem, to publish that problem as a challenge to the world, while withholding their own solution. A famous instance of this is found in what is known as the Brachistochrone problem, which was solved by John Bernouilli. The nature of this problem may be mentioned. It was to find the shape of the curve along which a body would slide down from one point (A) to another point (B) in the shortest time. It might at first be thought that the straight line from A to B, as it is undoubtedly the shortest distance between the points, would also be the path of quickest descent; but this is not so. There is a curved line, down which a bead, let us say, would run on a smooth wire from A to B in a shorter time than the same bead would require to run down the straight wire. Bernouilli's problem was to find out what that curve must be. Newton solved it correctly; he showed that the curve was a part of what is termed a cycloid—that is to say, a curve like that which is described by a point on the rim of a carriage-wheel as the wheel runs along the ground. Such was Newton's geometrical insight that he was able to transmit a solution of the problem on the day after he had received it, to the President of the Royal Society.

In those days, it was common for renowned mathematicians, after discovering a solution to a new and intriguing problem, to present that problem as a challenge to the world while keeping their solution to themselves. A well-known example of this is the Brachistochrone problem, which was solved by John Bernoulli. The essence of this problem is to determine the shape of the curve along which an object would slide down from one point (A) to another point (B) in the shortest time. At first glance, it might seem that the straight line from A to B, being the shortest distance between the two points, would also be the fastest route; however, that’s not the case. There exists a curved line along which a bead, for instance, would travel on a smooth wire from A to B in less time than it would take to slide down a straight wire. Bernoulli's challenge was to identify what that curve should be. Newton correctly solved it; he demonstrated that the curve is a segment of what’s known as a cycloid — like the path traced by a point on the edge of a carriage wheel as it rolls along the ground. Newton's geometrical insight was so sharp that he managed to send a solution to the problem to the President of the Royal Society the day after receiving it.

In 1703 Newton, whose world wide fame was now established, was elected President of the Royal Society. Year after year he was re-elected to this distinguished position, and his tenure, which lasted twenty-five years, only terminated with his life. It was in discharge of his duties as President of the Royal Society that Newton was brought into contact with Prince George of Denmark. In April, 1705, the Queen paid a visit to Cambridge as the guest of Dr. Bentley, the then Master of Trinity, and in a court held at Trinity Lodge on April 15th, 1705, the honour of knighthood was conferred upon the discoverer of gravitation.

In 1703, Newton, who had gained worldwide fame, was elected President of the Royal Society. Year after year, he was re-elected to this prestigious position, and his term, which lasted twenty-five years, only ended with his death. While fulfilling his duties as President of the Royal Society, Newton met Prince George of Denmark. In April 1705, the Queen visited Cambridge as the guest of Dr. Bentley, the current Master of Trinity, and during a court held at Trinity Lodge on April 15, 1705, the honor of knighthood was bestowed upon the discoverer of gravity.

Urged by illustrious friends, who sought the promotion of knowledge, Newton gave his attention to the publication of a new edition of the "Principia." His duties at the Mint, however, added to the supreme duty of carrying on his original investigations, left him but little time for the more ordinary task of the revision. He was accordingly induced to associate with himself for this purpose a distinguished young mathematician, Roger Coates, a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, who had recently been appointed Plumian Professor of Astronomy. On July 27th, 1713, Newton, by this time a favourite at Court, waited on the Queen, and presented her with a copy of the new edition of the "Principia."

Urged by prominent friends who wanted to promote knowledge, Newton focused on publishing a new edition of the "Principia." However, his responsibilities at the Mint, along with the vital task of continuing his original research, left him very little time for the more routine work of revision. As a result, he teamed up with a distinguished young mathematician, Roger Coates, a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, who had recently been appointed Plumian Professor of Astronomy. On July 27th, 1713, Newton, by this time a favorite at Court, met with the Queen and gave her a copy of the new edition of the "Principia."

Throughout his life Newton appears to have been greatly interested in theological studies, and he specially devoted his attention to the subject of prophecy. He left behind him a manuscript on the prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John, and he also wrote various theological papers. Many other subjects had from time to time engaged his attention. He studied the laws of heat; he experimented in pursuit of the dreams of the Alchymist; while the philosopher who had revealed the mechanism of the heavens found occasional relaxation in trying to interpret hieroglyphics. In the last few years of his life he bore with fortitude a painful ailment, and on Monday, March 20th, 1727, he died in the eighty-fifth year of his age. On Tuesday, March 28th, he was buried in Westminster Abbey.

Throughout his life, Newton seemed to have a strong interest in theology, particularly in the topic of prophecy. He left behind a manuscript on the prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John, and he also wrote various theological papers. Many other subjects caught his attention from time to time. He studied the laws of heat; he experimented in pursuit of the alchemist's dreams; while the philosopher who had uncovered the mechanics of the heavens occasionally found relaxation in interpreting hieroglyphics. In the last few years of his life, he bravely endured a painful illness, and on Monday, March 20th, 1727, he died at the age of eighty-five. On Tuesday, March 28th, he was buried in Westminster Abbey.

Though Newton lived long enough to receive the honour that his astonishing discoveries so justly merited, and though for many years of his life his renown was much greater than that of any of his contemporaries, yet it is not too much to say that, in the years which have since elapsed, Newton's fame has been ever steadily advancing, so that it never stood higher than it does at this moment.

Though Newton lived long enough to receive the honor that his amazing discoveries truly deserved, and although for many years of his life his reputation was much greater than that of any of his peers, it’s fair to say that in the years that have followed, Newton's fame has continued to grow steadily, reaching heights that have never been surpassed.

We hardly know whether to admire more the sublime discoveries at which he arrived, or the extraordinary character of the intellectual processes by which those discoveries were reached. Viewed from either standpoint, Newton's "Principia" is incomparably the greatest work on science that has ever yet been produced.

We can hardly decide whether to admire more the incredible discoveries he made or the remarkable way he arrived at them. From either perspective, Newton's "Principia" is without a doubt the greatest scientific work ever created.

SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SUN-DIAL IN THE ROYAL SOCIETY.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SUN-DIAL IN THE ROYAL SOCIETY.
SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S SUN-DIAL AT THE ROYAL SOCIETY.

FLAMSTEED.

Among the manuscripts preserved at Greenwich Observatory are certain documents in which Flamsteed gives an account of his own life. We may commence our sketch by quoting the following passage from this autobiography:—"To keep myself from idleness, and to recreate myself, I have intended here to give some account of my life, in my youth, before the actions thereof, and the providences of God therein, be too far passed out of my memory; and to observe the accidents of all my years, and inclinations of my mind, that whosoever may light upon these papers may see I was not so wholly taken up, either with my father's business or my mathematics, but that I both admitted and found time for other as weighty considerations."

Among the manuscripts preserved at Greenwich Observatory are certain documents in which Flamsteed shares his life story. We can start our overview by quoting the following passage from this autobiography:—"To keep myself busy and to refresh my mind, I intended to provide an account of my life in my youth, before the events and the workings of God in it fade too much from my memory; and to note the incidents of all my years and my mental inclinations, so that anyone who comes across these papers can see that I was not solely occupied with my father's work or my mathematics, but that I also allowed and made time for other important concerns."

The chief interest which attaches to the name of Flamsteed arises from the fact that he was the first of the illustrious series of Astronomers Royal who have presided over Greenwich Observatory. In that capacity Flamsteed was able to render material assistance to Newton by providing him with the observations which his lunar theory required.

The main reason people are interested in Flamsteed is that he was the first in the famous line of Astronomers Royal who led Greenwich Observatory. In that role, Flamsteed was able to help Newton significantly by providing the observations needed for his lunar theory.

John Flamsteed was born at Denby, in Derbyshire, on the 19th of August, 1646. His mother died when he was three years old, and the second wife, whom his father took three years later, only lived until Flamsteed was eight, there being also two younger sisters. In his boyhood the future astronomer tells us that he was very fond of those romances which affect boy's imagination, but as he writes, "At twelve years of age I left all the wild ones and betook myself to read the better sort of them, which, though they were not probable, yet carried no seeming impossibility in the picturing." By the time Flamsteed was fifteen years old he had embarked in still more serious work, for he had read Plutarch's "Lives," Tacitus' "Roman History," and many other books of a similar description. In 1661 he became ill with some serious rheumatic affection, which obliged him to be withdrawn from school. It was then for the first time that he received the rudiments of a scientific education. He had, however, attained his sixteenth year before he made any progress in arithmetic. He tells us how his father taught him "the doctrine of fractions," and "the golden rule of three"—lessons which he seemed to have learned easily and quickly. One of the books which he read at this time directed his attention to astronomical instruments, and he was thus led to construct for himself a quadrant, by which he could take some simple astronomical observations. He further calculated a table to give the sun's altitudes at different hours, and thus displayed those tastes for practical astronomy which he lived to develop so greatly. It appears that these scientific studies were discountenanced by his father, who designed that his son should follow a business career. Flamsteed's natural inclination, however, forced him to prosecute astronomical work, notwithstanding the impediments that lay in his path. Unfortunately, his constitutional delicacy seems to have increased, and he had just completed his eighteenth year, "when," to use his own words, "the winter came on and thrust me again into the chimney, whence the heat and the dryness of the preceding summer had happily once before withdrawn me. But, it not being a fit season for physic, it was thought fit to let me alone this winter, and try the skill of another physician on me in the spring."

John Flamsteed was born in Denby, Derbyshire, on August 19, 1646. His mother passed away when he was three, and his father's second wife, whom he married three years later, lived only until Flamsteed was eight; he also had two younger sisters. In his childhood, the future astronomer shared that he loved stories that captured a boy's imagination, but he wrote, "By the age of twelve, I left behind the wild stories and focused on the better ones, which, although not realistic, didn’t seem impossible in their depiction." By the time Flamsteed turned fifteen, he was engaged in more serious studies, having read Plutarch's "Lives," Tacitus' "Roman History," and many other similar works. In 1661, he fell seriously ill with rheumatism and had to leave school. It was during this time that he began to receive the basics of a scientific education. However, he hadn’t made any progress in arithmetic by the time he turned sixteen. He described how his father taught him "the doctrine of fractions" and "the golden rule of three"—lessons he seemed to grasp quickly and easily. One of the books he read during this period sparked his interest in astronomical instruments, leading him to create his own quadrant for taking simple astronomical observations. He also calculated a table for the sun's altitudes at different hours, showcasing the practical astronomy interests that he would later develop extensively. It seems that his father disapproved of these scientific pursuits, wanting his son to pursue a business career instead. Nevertheless, Flamsteed's natural passion compelled him to continue studying astronomy despite the obstacles he faced. Sadly, his health problems seemed to worsen, and just after he turned eighteen, he noted, "when winter arrived, it pushed me back into the warmth of the fireplace, from which the heat and dryness of the previous summer had luckily drawn me out once. But since it was not a good time for medicine, it was decided to leave me alone this winter and see how another doctor could help me in the spring."

It appears that at this time a quack named Valentine Greatrackes, was reputed to have effected most astonishing cures in Ireland merely by the stroke of his hands, without the application of any medicine whatever. Flamsteed's father, despairing of any remedy for his son from the legitimate branch of the profession, despatched him to Ireland on August 26th, 1665, he being then, as recorded with astronomical accuracy, "nineteen years, six days, and eleven hours old." The young astronomer, accompanied by a friend, arrived on a Tuesday at Liverpool but the wind not being favourable, they remained there till the following Friday, when a shift of the wind to the east took place. They embarked accordingly on a vessel called the SUPPLY at noon, and on Saturday night came in sight of Dublin. Ere they could land, however, they were nearly being wrecked on Lambay Island. This peril safely passed, there was a long delay for quarantine before they were at last allowed on shore. On Thursday, September 6th, they set out from Dublin, where they had been sojourning at the "Ship" Hotel, in Dame Street, towards Assaune, where Greatrackes received his patients.

It seems that around this time, a charlatan named Valentine Greatrackes was known for performing incredible healings in Ireland just by the touch of his hands, without using any medicine at all. Flamsteed's father, losing hope for a cure from legitimate medical professionals, sent him to Ireland on August 26, 1665. He was then, as recorded with precise detail, "nineteen years, six days, and eleven hours old." The young astronomer, along with a friend, arrived in Liverpool on a Tuesday, but because the wind was not in their favor, they stayed there until the following Friday when the wind shifted to the east. They then boarded a ship called the SUPPLY at noon, and by Saturday night, they spotted Dublin. However, before they could land, they nearly got wrecked on Lambay Island. After safely navigating that danger, they faced a long quarantine delay before finally being allowed to disembark. On Thursday, September 6, they set out from Dublin, where they had been staying at the "Ship" Hotel on Dame Street, heading toward Assaune, where Greatrackes treated his patients.

FLAMSTEED'S HOUSE.
FLAMSTEED'S HOUSE.
FLAMSTEED'S HOME.

Flamsteed gives an interesting account of his travels in Ireland. They dined at Naas on the first day, and on September 8th they reached Carlow, a town which is described as one of the fairest they saw on their journey. By Sunday morning, September 10th, having lost their way several times, they reached Castleton, called commonly Four Mile Waters. Flamsteed inquired of the host in the inn where they might find a church, but was told that the minister lived twelve miles away, and that they had no sermon except when he came to receive his tithes once a year, and a woman added that "they had plenty enough of everything necessary except the word of God." The travellers accordingly went on to Cappoquin, which lies up the river Blackwater, on the road to Lismore, eight miles from Youghal. Thence they immediately started on foot to Assaune. About a mile from Cappoquin, and entering into the house of Mr. Greatrackes, they saw him touch several patients, "whereof some were nearly cured, others were on the mending hand, and some on whom his strokes had no effect." Flamsteed was touched by the famous quack on the afternoon of September 11th, but we are hardly surprised to hear his remark that "he found not his disease to stir." Next morning the astronomer came again to see Mr. Greatrackes, who had "a kind of majestical yet affable presence, and a composed carriage." Even after the third touching had been submitted to, no benefit seems to have been derived. We must, however record, to the credit of Mr. Greatrackes, that he refused to accept any payment from Flamsteed, because he was a stranger.

Flamsteed shares an intriguing account of his travels in Ireland. They had dinner in Naas on the first day, and on September 8th, they arrived in Carlow, which is described as one of the most beautiful towns they encountered on their journey. By Sunday morning, September 10th, after getting lost several times, they reached Castleton, commonly known as Four Mile Waters. Flamsteed asked the innkeeper where they could find a church, but was informed that the minister lived twelve miles away, and that there were no sermons except when he came to collect his tithes once a year. A woman added that "they had plenty of everything necessary except the word of God." The travelers then continued on to Cappoquin, situated up the Blackwater River, on the road to Lismore, eight miles from Youghal. From there, they set off on foot to Assaune. About a mile from Cappoquin, they entered the house of Mr. Greatrackes, where they saw him touch several patients, "some of whom were nearly cured, others were improving, and some showed no response to his treatment." Flamsteed was touched by the famous healer on the afternoon of September 11th, but it's no surprise that he noted, "he found his condition unchanged." The next morning, the astronomer returned to see Mr. Greatrackes, who had "a sort of majestic yet friendly presence, and a calm demeanor." Even after the third touching, it seems no benefit was gained. However, we must note that, to his credit, Mr. Greatrackes refused to accept any payment from Flamsteed simply because he was a stranger.

Finding it useless to protract his stay any longer, Flamsteed and his friend set out on their return to Dublin. In the course of his journey he seems to have been much impressed with Clonmel, which he describes as an "exceedingly pleasantly seated town." But in those days a journey to Ireland was so serious an enterprise that when Flamsteed did arrive safely back at Derby after an absence of a month, he adds, "For God's providence in this journey, His name be praised, Amen."

Finding it pointless to extend his visit any further, Flamsteed and his friend began their journey back to Dublin. During the trip, he appears to have been quite taken with Clonmel, which he calls an "exceedingly pleasantly seated town." However, at that time, a trip to Ireland was a significant undertaking, so when Flamsteed finally returned to Derby after being away for a month, he remarked, "For God's providence in this journey, His name be praised, Amen."

As to the expected benefits to his health from the expedition we may quote his own words: "In the winter following I was indifferent hearty, and my disease was not so violent as it used to be at that time formerly. But whether through God's mercy I received this through Mr. Greatrackes' touch, or my journey and vomiting at sea, I am uncertain; but, by some circumstances, I guess that I received a benefit from both."

As for the expected health benefits from the trip, we can use his own words: "In the winter that followed, I felt a lot better, and my illness wasn't as severe as it used to be. But whether this was due to God's mercy through Mr. Greatrackes' touch or my journey and vomiting at sea, I'm not sure; however, given the circumstances, I think I benefitted from both."

It is evident that by this time Flamsteed's interest in all astronomical matters had greatly increased. He studied the construction of sun-dials, he formed a catalogue of seventy of the fixed stars, with their places on the heavens, and he computed the circumstances of the solar eclipse which was to happen on June 22nd, 1666. It is interesting to note that even in those days the doctrines of the astrologers still found a considerable degree of credence, and Flamsteed spent a good deal of his time in astrological studies and computations. He investigated the methods of casting a nativity, but a suspicion, or, indeed, rather more than a suspicion, seems to have crossed his mind as to the value of these astrological predictions, for he says in fine, "I found astrology to give generally strong conjectural hints, not perfect declarations."

It’s clear that by this time, Flamsteed's interest in astronomy had really grown. He looked into how to build sundials, created a catalog of seventy fixed stars along with their positions in the sky, and calculated the details of the solar eclipse set to occur on June 22, 1666. It’s worth noting that even back then, the beliefs of astrologers still held a significant amount of credibility, and Flamsteed spent a lot of his time studying and calculating astrology. He explored the techniques for casting horoscopes, but it seems he had some doubts—more than just a few, in fact—about the accuracy of these astrological predictions. He stated, “I found astrology to give generally strong conjectural hints, not perfect declarations.”

All this time, however, the future Astronomer Royal was steadily advancing in astronomical inquiries of a recondite nature. He had investigated the obliquity of the ecliptic with extreme care, so far as the circumstances of astronomical observation would at that time permit. He had also sought to discover the sun's distance from the earth in so far as it could be obtained by determining when the moon was exactly half illuminated, and he had measured, with much accuracy, the length of the tropical year. It will thus be seen that, even at the age of twenty, Flamsteed had made marked progress, considering how much his time had been interfered with by ill-health.

All this time, though, the future Astronomer Royal was steadily making progress in complex astronomical research. He carefully studied the tilt of the ecliptic as much as the conditions of astronomical observation allowed at that time. He also tried to determine the sun's distance from the earth by figuring out when the moon was exactly half illuminated, and he accurately measured the length of the tropical year. So, even at just twenty, Flamsteed had made significant strides, especially considering how much his health issues had disrupted his work.

Other branches of astronomy began also to claim his attention. We learn that in 1669 and 1670 he compared the planets Jupiter and Mars with certain fixed stars near which they passed. His instrumental means, though very imperfect, were still sufficient to enable him to measure the intervals on the celestial sphere between the planets and the stars. As the places of the stars were known, Flamsteed was thus able to obtain the places of the planets. This is substantially the way in which astronomers of the present day still proceed when they desire to determine the places of the planets, inasmuch as, directly or indirectly those places are always obtained relatively to the fixed stars. By his observations at this early period, Flamsteed was, it is true, not able to obtain any great degree of accuracy; he succeeded, however, in proving that the tables by which the places of the planets were ordinarily given were not to be relied upon.

Other branches of astronomy also started to capture his interest. We learn that in 1669 and 1670, he compared the planets Jupiter and Mars with certain fixed stars they passed by. His instruments, while quite basic, were still enough for him to measure the distances on the celestial sphere between the planets and the stars. Since the positions of the stars were already known, Flamsteed was able to determine the positions of the planets. This is basically how today's astronomers still work when they want to find the locations of the planets, as those positions are always measured relative to the fixed stars, either directly or indirectly. While Flamsteed wasn't able to achieve a high level of accuracy with his observations during this early time, he did manage to show that the tables commonly used to track the planets' positions were not reliable.

FLAMSTEED.
FLAMSTEED.
FLAMSTEED.

Flamsteed's labours in astronomy and in the allied branches of science were now becoming generally known, and he gradually came to correspond with many distinguished men of learning. One of the first occasions which brought the talents of the young astronomer into fame was the publication of some calculations concerning certain astronomical phenomena which were to happen in the year 1670. In the monthly revolution of the moon its disc passes over those stars which lie along its track. The disappearance of a star by the interposition of the moon is called an "occultation." Owing to the fact that our satellite is comparatively near us, the position which the moon appears to occupy on the heavens varies from different parts of the earth, it consequently happens that a star which would be occulted to an observer in one locality, would often not be occulted to an observer who was situated elsewhere. Even when an occultation is visible from both places, the times at which the star disappears from view will, generally speaking, be different. Much calculation is therefore necessary to decide the circumstances under which the occultations of stars may be visible from any particular station. Having a taste for such computations, Flamsteed calculated the occultations which were to happen in the year 1670, it being the case that several remarkable stars would be passed over by the moon during this year. Of course at the present time, we find such information duly set forth in the NAUTICAL ALMANAC, but a couple of centuries ago there was no such source of astronomical knowledge as is now to be found in that invaluable publication, which astronomers and navigators know so well. Flamsteed accordingly sent the results of his work to the President of the Royal Society. The paper which contained them was received very favourably, and at once brought Flamsteed into notice among the most eminent members of that illustrious body, one of whom, Mr. Collins, became through life his faithful friend and constant correspondent. Flamsteed's father was naturally gratified with the remarkable notice which his son was receiving from the great and learned; accordingly he desired him to go to London, that he might make the personal acquaintance of those scientific friends whom he had only known by correspondence previously. Flamsteed was indeed glad to avail himself of this opportunity. Thus he became acquainted with Dr. Barrow, and especially with Newton, who was then Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge. It seems to have been in consequence of this visit to London that Flamsteed entered himself as a member of Jesus College, Cambridge. We have but little information as to his University career, but at all events he took his degree of M.A. on June 5th, 1674.

Flamsteed's work in astronomy and related sciences was starting to gain recognition, and he gradually began to correspond with many renowned scholars. One of the first occasions that brought the young astronomer's talents to light was when he published some calculations about certain astronomical events expected in 1670. As the moon orbits the Earth, its disk crosses over the stars in its path. When the moon covers a star, it's called an "occultation." Because our moon is relatively close to us, its position in the sky appears different from various locations on Earth. This means that a star that is occulted for someone in one place may not be for someone in another. Even if an occultation can be seen from both locations, the times when the star disappears will generally vary. Therefore, extensive calculations are required to determine when the occultations of stars can be seen from a specific location. With a knack for such calculations, Flamsteed figured out the occultations predicted for 1670, as several notable stars were set to be covered by the moon that year. Nowadays, we find this type of information in the NAUTICAL ALMANAC, but a couple of centuries ago, there was no similar source of astronomical data like that invaluable publication, which is well-known among astronomers and navigators today. Flamsteed sent the results of his work to the President of the Royal Society. The paper was well-received and quickly brought Flamsteed to the attention of many prominent members of that esteemed group, one of whom, Mr. Collins, became a lifelong friend and constant correspondent. Flamsteed’s father was pleased by the notable recognition his son was receiving from such distinguished individuals, so he encouraged him to travel to London to meet the scientific friends he had previously only known through letters. Flamsteed was eager to take this opportunity. He met Dr. Barrow and especially Newton, who was then the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge. It seems that this visit to London led Flamsteed to enroll as a member of Jesus College, Cambridge. We don't have much information about his time at university, but he did earn his M.A. degree on June 5th, 1674.

Up to this time it would seem that Flamsteed had been engaged, to a certain extent, in the business carried on by his father. It is true that he does not give any explicit details, yet there are frequent references to journeys which he had to take on business matters. But the time now approached when Flamsteed was to start on an independent career, and it appears that he took his degree in Cambridge with the object of entering into holy orders, so that he might settle in a small living near Derby, which was in the gift of a friend of his father, and would be at the disposal of the young astronomer. This scheme was, however, not carried out, but Flamsteed does not tell us why it failed, his only remark being, that "the good providence of God that had designed me for another station ordered it otherwise."

Up to this point, it seems Flamsteed had been somewhat involved in his father's business. While he doesn’t provide many specific details, he often mentions trips he needed to take for work. However, the time was approaching for Flamsteed to embark on his own independent career. It looks like he earned his degree at Cambridge with the intention of entering the clergy so he could settle in a small parish near Derby, which was available through a friend of his father's and would be given to the young astronomer. This plan didn’t go through, though Flamsteed doesn’t explain why it fell apart, only stating that “the good providence of God that had designed me for another station ordered it otherwise.”

Sir Jonas Moore, one of the influential friends whom Flamsteed's talents had attracted, seems to have procured for him the position of king's astronomer, with a salary of 100 pounds per annum. A larger salary appears to have been designed at first for this office, which was now being newly created, but as Flamsteed was resolved on taking holy orders, a lesser salary was in his case deemed sufficient. The building of the observatory, in which the first Astronomer Royal was to be installed, seems to have been brought about, or, at all events, its progress was accelerated, in a somewhat curious manner.

Sir Jonas Moore, one of the influential friends attracted by Flamsteed's talents, seems to have secured him the role of king's astronomer, with an annual salary of £100. Initially, a higher salary was intended for this newly created position, but since Flamsteed was determined to pursue holy orders, a lower salary was considered adequate for him. The construction of the observatory, where the first Astronomer Royal was to be appointed, appears to have been initiated, or at least its progress sped up, in a rather interesting way.

A Frenchman, named Le Sieur de S. Pierre, came over to London to promulgate a scheme for discovering longitudes, then a question of much importance. He brought with him introductions to distinguished people, and his mission attracted a great deal of attention. The proposals which he made came under Flamsteed's notice, who pointed out that the Frenchman's projects were quite inapplicable in the present state of astronomical science, inasmuch as the places of the stars were not known with the degree of accuracy which would be necessary if such methods were to be rendered available. Flamsteed then goes on to say:—"I heard no more of the Frenchman after this; but was told that my letters had been shown King Charles. He was startled at the assertion of the fixed stars' places being false in the catalogue, and said, with some vehemence, he must have them anew observed, examined, and corrected, for the use of his seamen."

A Frenchman named Le Sieur de S. Pierre came to London to promote a plan for finding longitudes, which was a big deal at the time. He had introductions to important people, and his mission got a lot of attention. His proposals caught Flamsteed's interest, who pointed out that the Frenchman's ideas were not feasible given the current state of astronomical science because the positions of the stars weren't known with the accuracy needed for those methods to work. Flamsteed then continued, "I didn't hear anything more about the Frenchman after that; however, I was informed that my letters had been shown to King Charles. He was shocked by the claim that the fixed stars' positions were incorrect in the catalog and insisted, quite passionately, that they needed to be re-observed, examined, and corrected for his sailors' use."

The first question to be settled was the site for the new observatory. Hyde Park and Chelsea College were both mentioned as suitable localities, but, at Sir Christopher Wren's suggestion, Greenwich Hill was finally resolved upon. The king made a grant of five hundred pounds of money. He gave bricks from Tilbury Fort, while materials, in the shape of wood, iron, and lead, were available from a gatehouse demolished in the Tower. The king also promised whatever further material aid might be shown to be necessary. The first stone of the Royal Observatory was laid on August 10th, 1675, and within a few years a building was erected in which the art of modern practical astronomy was to be created. Flamsteed strove with extraordinary diligence, and in spite of many difficulties, to obtain a due provision of astronomical instruments, and to arrange for the carrying on of his observations. Notwithstanding the king's promises, the astronomer was, however, but scantily provided with means, and he had no assistants to help him in his work. It follows that all the observations, as well as the reductions, and, indeed, all the incidental work of the observatory, had to be carried on by himself alone. Flamsteed, as we have seen, had, however, many staunch friends. Sir Jonas Moore in particular at all times rendered him most valuable assistance, and encouraged him by the warm sympathy and keen interest which he showed in astronomy. The work of the first Astronomer Royal was frequently interrupted by recurrent attacks of the complaints to which we have already referred. He says himself that "his distempers stick so close that that he cannot remove them," and he lost much time by prostration from headaches, as well as from more serious affections.

The first decision to be made was where to put the new observatory. Hyde Park and Chelsea College were both suggested as suitable locations, but at Sir Christopher Wren's recommendation, Greenwich Hill was ultimately chosen. The king granted five hundred pounds and provided bricks from Tilbury Fort, while materials such as wood, iron, and lead came from a gatehouse that had been torn down at the Tower. The king also promised to provide any additional materials that might be deemed necessary. The first stone of the Royal Observatory was laid on August 10th, 1675, and within a few years, a building was constructed where the foundations of modern practical astronomy would be established. Flamsteed worked incredibly hard and, despite many challenges, managed to secure a proper supply of astronomical instruments and organize his observations. However, despite the king's promises, the astronomer found himself with very limited resources and no assistants to help with his work. As a result, all the observations, calculations, and various tasks at the observatory had to be done solely by him. Flamsteed, as we've noted, did have several loyal friends. Sir Jonas Moore, in particular, consistently provided him with invaluable support and encouraged him with his strong interest and enthusiasm for astronomy. The work of the first Astronomer Royal was often interrupted by recurring health issues that we've already mentioned. He noted that "his ailments cling so closely that he cannot shake them off," and he lost a lot of time due to debilitating headaches and more serious health problems.

The year 1678 found him in the full tide of work in his observatory. He was specially engaged on the problem of the earth's motion, which he sought to derive from observations of the sun and of Venus. But this, as well as many other astronomical researches which he undertook, were only subsidiary to that which he made the main task of his life, namely, the formation of a catalogue of fixed stars. At the time when Flamsteed commenced his career, the only available catalogue of fixed stars was that of Tycho Brahe. This work had been published at the commencement of the seventeenth century, and it contained about a thousand stars. The positions assigned to these stars, though obtained with wonderful skill, considering the many difficulties under which Tycho laboured, were quite inaccurate when judged by our modern standards. Tycho's instruments were necessarily most rudely divided, and he had, of course, no telescopes to aid him. Consequently it was merely by a process of sighting that he could obtain the places of the stars. It must further be remembered that Tycho had no clocks, and no micrometers. He had, indeed, but little correct knowledge of the motions of the heavenly bodies to guide him. To determine the longitudes of a few principal stars he conceived the ingenious idea of measuring by day the position of Venus with respect to the sun, an observation which the exceptional brightness of this planet rendered possible without telescopic aid, and then by night he observed the position of Venus with regard to the stars.

The year 1678 found him fully immersed in work at his observatory. He was particularly focused on the problem of the Earth's motion, which he aimed to understand through observations of the sun and Venus. However, this, like many other astronomical studies he took on, was only secondary to his main life’s project: creating a catalogue of fixed stars. At the start of Flamsteed's career, the only existing catalogue of fixed stars was Tycho Brahe’s. This catalogue was published at the beginning of the seventeenth century and included about a thousand stars. The positions assigned to these stars, although remarkably accurate given the challenges Tycho faced, were quite off by today’s standards. Tycho’s instruments were very rudimentary, and he obviously had no telescopes to help. As a result, he could only determine the positions of stars through direct sighting. It’s also important to note that Tycho had no clocks or micrometers, and he had limited knowledge of the movements of celestial bodies to inform his observations. To figure out the longitudes of a few key stars, he came up with the clever idea of measuring Venus’ position in relation to the sun during the day—something made possible by the planet’s exceptional brightness, which allowed for observations without a telescope—and then observed Venus' position relative to the stars at night.

It has been well remarked by Mr. Baily, in his introduction to the "British Catalogue of Stars," that "Flamsteed's observations, by a fortunate combination of circumstances, commenced a new and a brilliant era. It happened that, at that period, the powerful mind of Newton was directed to this subject; a friendly intercourse then existed between these two distinguished characters; and thus the first observations that could lay any claim to accuracy were at once brought in aid of those deep researches in which our illustrious geometer was then engaged. The first edition of the 'Principia' bears testimony to the assistance afforded by Flamsteed to Newton in these inquiries; although the former considers that the acknowledgment is not so ample as it ought to have been."

It has been pointed out by Mr. Baily, in his introduction to the "British Catalogue of Stars," that "Flamsteed's observations, by a fortunate combination of circumstances, marked the start of a new and brilliant era. At that time, Newton's powerful mind was focused on this subject; there was a friendly relationship between these two distinguished figures; and so the first observations that could claim any accuracy were quickly used to support the deep research being conducted by our renowned mathematician. The first edition of the 'Principia' shows the help that Flamsteed gave to Newton in these inquiries, although Flamsteed believes that the acknowledgment isn't as generous as it should have been."

Although Flamsteed's observations can hardly be said to possess the accuracy of those made in more recent times, when instruments so much superior to his have been available, yet they possess an interest of a special kind from their very antiquity. This circumstance renders them of particular importance to the astronomer, inasmuch as they are calculated to throw light on the proper motions of the stars. Flamsteed's work may, indeed, be regarded as the origin of all subsequent catalogues, and the nomenclature which he adopted, though in some respects it can hardly be said to be very defensible, is, nevertheless, that which has been adopted by all subsequent astronomers. There were also a great many errors, as might be expected in a work of such extent, composed almost entirely of numerical detail. Many of these errors have been corrected by Baily himself, the assiduous editor of "Flamsteed's Life and Works," for Flamsteed was so harassed from various causes in the latter part of his life, and was so subject to infirmities all through his career, that he was unable to revise his computations with the care that would have been necessary. Indeed, he observed many additional stars which he never included in the British Catalogue. It is, as Baily well remarks, "rather a matter of astonishment that he accomplished so much, considering his slender means, his weak frame, and the vexations which he constantly experienced."

Although Flamsteed's observations can't really be compared to the accuracy of those made today with far superior instruments, they hold a unique interest because of their age. This makes them particularly important for astronomers, as they help illuminate the proper motions of the stars. Flamsteed's work can be seen as the foundation for all subsequent catalogues, and while the naming system he used isn't always defensible, it has nonetheless been adopted by all later astronomers. There were also many errors, which is expected in such a vast work mainly filled with numerical data. Many of these errors have been corrected by Baily, the dedicated editor of "Flamsteed's Life and Works," since Flamsteed faced numerous challenges in the latter part of his life and struggled with health issues throughout his career, making it difficult for him to revise his calculations as carefully as needed. In fact, he observed many additional stars that he never included in the British Catalogue. As Baily notes, "it's quite astonishing that he achieved so much, considering his limited resources, his fragile health, and the frustrations he dealt with constantly."

Flamsteed had the misfortune, in the latter part of his life, to become estranged from his most eminent scientific contemporaries. He had supplied Newton with places of the moon, at the urgent solicitation of the author of the "Principia," in order that the lunar theory should be carefully compared with observation. But Flamsteed appears to have thought that in Newton's further request for similar information, he appeared to be demanding as a right that which Flamsteed considered he was only called upon to render as a favour. A considerable dispute grew out of this matter, and there are many letters and documents, bearing on the difficulties which subsequently arose, that are not, perhaps, very creditable to either party.

Flamsteed unfortunately became estranged from his most prominent scientific peers in the later part of his life. He had provided Newton with data on the moon, at the strong request of the "Principia" author, so that the lunar theory could be thoroughly compared with observations. However, Flamsteed seemed to feel that when Newton asked for similar information again, it came off as him demanding something that Flamsteed thought he was only expected to provide as a favor. This led to a significant dispute, and many letters and documents that addressed the issues that arose later exist, which may not reflect very well on either party.

Notwithstanding his feeble constitution, Flamsteed lived to the age of seventy-three, his death occurring on the last day of the year 1719.

Despite his fragile health, Flamsteed lived to be seventy-three years old, passing away on the last day of the year 1719.

HALLEY.

Isaac Newton was just fourteen years of age when the birth of Edmund Halley, who was destined in after years to become Newton's warmly attached friend, and one of his most illustrious scientific contemporaries, took place. There can be little doubt that the fame as an astronomer which Halley ultimately acquired, great as it certainly was, would have been even greater still had it not been somewhat impaired by the misfortune that he had to shine in the same sky as that which was illumined by the unparalleled genius of Newton.

Isaac Newton was only fourteen years old when Edmund Halley was born. Halley would go on to be Newton's close friend and one of his most distinguished scientific peers. It's clear that Halley's reputation as an astronomer, impressive as it was, might have been even greater if he hadn't had to compete with the extraordinary brilliance of Newton.

Edmund Halley was born at Haggerston, in the Parish of St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, on October 29th, 1656. His father, who bore the same name as his famous son, was a soap-boiler in Winchester Street, London, and he had conducted his business with such success that he accumulated an ample fortune. I have been unable to obtain more than a very few particulars with respect to the early life of the future astronomer. It would, however, appear that from boyhood he showed considerable aptitude for the acquisition of various kinds of learning, and he also had some capacity for mechanical invention. Halley seems to have received a sound education at St. Paul's School, then under the care of Dr. Thomas Gale.

Edmund Halley was born in Haggerston, in the Parish of St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, on October 29, 1656. His father, who shared his name with his famous son, was a soap maker on Winchester Street, London, and he ran his business so successfully that he built up a substantial fortune. I've been able to find out only a few details about the early life of the future astronomer. However, it seems that from a young age he showed a significant talent for learning different subjects and had some skill in mechanical invention. Halley appears to have received a solid education at St. Paul's School, which was then overseen by Dr. Thomas Gale.

Here, the young philosopher rapidly distanced his competitors in the various branches of ordinary school instruction. His superiority was, however, most conspicuous in mathematical studies, and, as a natural development of such tastes, we learn that by the time he had left school he had already made good progress in astronomy. At the age of seventeen he was entered as a commoner at Queen's College, Oxford, and the reputation that he brought with him to the University may be inferred from the remark of the writer of "Athenae Oxonienses," that Halley came to Oxford "with skill in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and such a knowledge of geometry as to make a complete dial." Though his studies were thus of a somewhat multifarious nature, yet it is plain that from the first his most favourite pursuit was astronomy. His earliest efforts in practical observation were connected with an eclipse which he observed from his father's house in Winchester Street. It also appears that he had studied theoretical branches of astronomy so far as to be conversant with the application of mathematics to somewhat abstruse problems.

Here, the young philosopher quickly pulled ahead of his competitors in various normal school subjects. His advantage was most evident in mathematics, and naturally, we find out that by the time he finished school, he had already made significant strides in astronomy. At seventeen, he enrolled as a commoner at Queen's College, Oxford, and his reputation at the University is highlighted by the comment from the writer of "Athenae Oxonienses," who noted that Halley arrived at Oxford "with skill in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and such knowledge of geometry that he could create a complete sundial." Although his studies covered a variety of topics, it’s clear that from the beginning, his favorite pursuit was astronomy. His initial attempts at practical observation involved an eclipse he watched from his father’s house on Winchester Street. It also seems he had studied theoretical aspects of astronomy enough to understand how mathematics applied to rather complex problems.

Up to the time of Kepler, philosophers had assumed almost as an axiom that the heavenly bodies must revolve in circles and that the motion of the planet around the orbit which it described must be uniform. We have already seen how that great philosopher, after very persevering labour, succeeded in proving that the orbits of the planets were not circles, but that they were ellipses of small eccentricity. Kepler was, however, unable to shake himself free from the prevailing notion that the angular motion of the planet ought to be of a uniform character around some point. He had indeed proved that the motion round the focus of the ellipse in which the sun lies is not of this description. One of his most important discoveries even related to the fact that at some parts of its orbit a planet swings around the sun with greater angular velocity than at others. But it so happens that in elliptic tracks which differ but little from circles, as is the case with all the more important planetary orbits, the motion round the empty focus of the ellipse is very nearly uniform. It seemed natural to assume, that this was exactly the case, in which event each of the two foci of the ellipse would have had a special significance in relation to the movement of the planet. The youthful Halley, however, demonstrated that so far as the empty focus was concerned, the movement of the planet around it, though so nearly uniform, was still not exactly so, and at the age of nineteen, he published a treatise on the subject which at once placed him in the foremost rank amongst theoretical astronomers.

Up until Kepler's time, philosophers almost universally accepted as a fundamental truth that heavenly bodies must move in circles and that a planet's motion around its orbit must be consistent. We’ve already seen how this great philosopher, after diligent effort, proved that the orbits of planets are not circles but rather ellipses with slight eccentricity. However, Kepler couldn’t break free from the dominant idea that a planet's angular motion should be uniform around some point. He did demonstrate that the motion around the ellipse's focus where the sun is located doesn’t fit this description. One of his key discoveries was that at certain points in its orbit, a planet travels around the sun with a faster angular velocity than at others. Yet, it turns out that in elliptical paths that closely resemble circles, which applies to all the major planetary orbits, the motion around the empty focus of the ellipse is quite nearly uniform. It seemed reasonable to think that this might be true, leading to the conclusion that each of the ellipse's two foci could hold special significance regarding the planet's movement. However, the young Halley proved that concerning the empty focus, the planet's motion around it, while nearly uniform, was still not perfectly so, and at just nineteen years old, he published a paper on the topic that quickly established him among the top theoretical astronomers.

But Halley had no intention of being merely an astronomer with his pen. He longed to engage in the practical work of observing. He saw that the progress of exact astronomy must depend largely on the determination of the positions of the stars with all attainable accuracy. He accordingly determined to take up this branch of work, which had been so successfully initiated by Tycho Brahe.

But Halley had no plans to be just an astronomer with his pen. He wanted to get involved in the actual work of observing. He realized that the advancement of precise astronomy would rely heavily on accurately determining the positions of the stars. So, he decided to pursue this area of work, which had been successfully started by Tycho Brahe.

At the present day, astronomers of the great national observatories are assiduously engaged in the determination of the places of the stars. A knowledge of the exact positions of these bodies is indeed of the most fundamental importance, not alone for the purposes of scientific astronomy, but also for navigation and for extensive operations of surveying in which accuracy is desired. The fact that Halley determined to concentrate himself on this work shows clearly the scientific acumen of the young astronomer.

Nowadays, astronomers at major national observatories are diligently focused on pinpointing the locations of the stars. Understanding the exact positions of these celestial bodies is critical, not just for scientific astronomy, but also for navigation and large-scale surveying where precision is essential. The fact that Halley chose to specialize in this work clearly highlights the scientific insight of the young astronomer.

Halley, however, found that Hevelius, at Dantzig, and Flamsteed, the Astronomer Royal at Greenwich, were both engaged on work of this character. He accordingly determined to direct his energies in a way that he thought would be more useful to science. He resigned to the two astronomers whom I have named the investigation of the stars in the northern hemisphere, and he sought for himself a field hitherto almost entirely unworked. He determined to go to the southern hemisphere, there to measure and survey those stars which were invisible in Europe, so that his work should supplement the labours of the northern astronomers, and that the joint result of his labours and of theirs might be a complete survey of the most important stars on the surface of the heavens.

Halley, however, realized that Hevelius in Dantzig and Flamsteed, the Astronomer Royal at Greenwich, were both working on similar projects. He decided to focus his efforts in a way that he believed would be more beneficial to science. He handed over the study of the stars in the northern hemisphere to the two astronomers I just mentioned and looked for a field that had been largely overlooked. He chose to travel to the southern hemisphere to measure and map the stars that were not visible from Europe, ensuring that his work would complement the efforts of the northern astronomers. The combined results of his work and theirs would provide a complete survey of the most significant stars in the sky.

In these days, after so many ardent students everywhere have devoted themselves to the study of Nature, it seems difficult for a beginner to find a virgin territory in which to commence his explorations. Halley may, however, be said to have enjoyed the privilege of commencing to work in a magnificent region, the contents of which were previously almost entirely unknown. Indeed none of the stars which were so situated as to have been invisible from Tycho Brahe's observatory at Uraniborg, in Denmark, could be said to have been properly observed. There was, no doubt, a rumour that a Dutchman had observed southern stars from the island of Sumatra, and certain stars were indicated in the southern heavens on a celestial globe. On examination, however, Halley found that no reliance could be placed on the results which had been obtained, so that practically the field before him may be said to have been unworked.

In today's world, after so many passionate students everywhere have dedicated themselves to studying Nature, it seems challenging for a beginner to discover a new area to begin their explorations. Halley, however, can be said to have had the privilege of starting work in an impressive region whose content was previously almost completely unknown. In fact, none of the stars located in such a way that they were invisible from Tycho Brahe's observatory at Uraniborg in Denmark can be considered to have been properly observed. There was, no doubt, a rumor that a Dutchman had seen southern stars from the island of Sumatra, and some stars were marked in the southern sky on a celestial globe. Upon investigation, however, Halley found that the results obtained were not reliable, so practically the field in front of him could be considered uncharted.

At the age of twenty, without having even waited to take that degree at the university which the authorities would have been glad to confer on so promising an undergraduate, this ardent student of Nature sought his father's permission to go to the southern hemisphere for the purpose of studying the stars which lie around the southern pole. His father possessed the necessary means, and he had likewise the sagacity to encourage the young astronomer. He was indeed most anxious to make everything as easy as possible for so hopeful a son. He provided him with an allowance of 300 pounds a year, which was regarded as a very munificent provision in those days. Halley was also furnished with letters of recommendation from King Charles II., as well as from the directors of the East India Company. He accordingly set sail with his instruments in the year 1676, in one of the East India Company's ships, for the island of St. Helena, which he had selected as the scene of his labours.

At the age of twenty, without even waiting to earn his degree from the university, which the authorities would have been happy to give to such a promising student, this passionate learner of Nature asked his father's permission to travel to the southern hemisphere to study the stars near the southern pole. His father had the financial means and the wisdom to support the young astronomer. He was eager to make everything as easy as possible for his hopeful son. He provided him with an allowance of 300 pounds a year, which was considered quite generous at that time. Halley was also given letters of recommendation from King Charles II, as well as from the directors of the East India Company. As a result, he set sail with his instruments in 1676 on one of the East India Company's ships, heading for the island of St. Helena, which he chose as the location for his work.

HALLEY.
HALLEY.
Halley.

After an uneventful voyage of three months, the astronomer landed on St. Helena, with his sextant of five and a half feet radius, and a telescope 24 feet long, and forthwith plunged with ardour into his investigation of the southern skies. He met, however, with one very considerable disappointment. The climate of this island had been represented to him as most favourable for astronomical observation; but instead of the pure blue skies he had been led to expect, he found that they were almost always more or less clouded, and that rain was frequent, so that his observations were very much interrupted. On this account he only remained at St. Helena for a single year, having, during that time, and in spite of many difficulties, accomplished a piece of work which earned for him the title of "our southern Tycho." Thus did Halley establish his fame as an astronomer on the same lonely rock in mid-Atlantic, which nearly a century and a-half later became the scene of Napoleon's imprisonment, when his star, in which he believed so firmly, had irretrievably set.

After a quiet three-month journey, the astronomer arrived on St. Helena, equipped with his five-and-a-half-foot-radius sextant and a 24-foot-long telescope, and immediately threw himself into his study of the southern skies with enthusiasm. However, he faced one major disappointment. The climate of the island had been described to him as very suitable for astronomical observation; but instead of the clear blue skies he expected, he found that they were nearly always cloudy, and rain was frequent, which greatly interrupted his observations. Because of this, he only stayed on St. Helena for a year, during which he managed, despite many challenges, to produce work that earned him the title "our southern Tycho." In this way, Halley made a name for himself as an astronomer on the same isolated rock in the mid-Atlantic, which nearly a century and a half later became the site of Napoleon's imprisonment, when his star, which he believed in so strongly, had irreversibly set.

On his return to England, Halley prepared a map which showed the result of his labours, and he presented it to the king, in 1677. Like his great predecessor Tycho, Halley did not altogether disdain the arts of the courtier, for he endeavoured to squeeze a new constellation into the group around the southern pole which he styled "The Royal Oak," adding a description to the effect that the incidents of which "The Royal Oak" was a symbol were of sufficient importance to be inscribed on the surface of the heavens.

On his return to England, Halley created a map that showcased the results of his work, and he presented it to the king in 1677. Like his great predecessor Tycho, Halley didn’t completely overlook the skills needed at court, as he tried to squeeze a new constellation into the group around the southern pole, which he named "The Royal Oak." He added a description stating that the events symbolized by "The Royal Oak" were significant enough to be recorded in the sky.

There is reason to think that Charles II. duly appreciated the scientific renown which one of his subjects had achieved, and it was probably through the influence of the king that Halley was made a Master of Arts at Oxford on November 18th, 1678. Special reference was made on the occasion to his observations at St. Helena, as evidence of unusual attainments in mathematics and astronomy. This degree was no small honour to such a young man, who, as we have seen, quitted his university before he had the opportunity of graduating in the ordinary manner.

There’s reason to believe that Charles II appreciated the scientific fame one of his subjects had gained, and it was likely through the king’s influence that Halley was made a Master of Arts at Oxford on November 18, 1678. Special mention was made at the event of his observations at St. Helena, as proof of his exceptional skills in mathematics and astronomy. This degree was a significant honor for such a young man, who, as we’ve noted, left university before he had the chance to graduate in the usual way.

On November 30th, in the same year, the astronomer received a further distinction in being elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. From this time forward he took a most active part in the affairs of the Society, and the numerous papers which he read before it form a very valuable part of that notable series of volumes known as the "Philosophical Transactions." He was subsequently elected to the important office of secretary to the Royal Society, and he discharged the duties of his post until his appointment to Greenwich necessitated his resignation.

On November 30th of the same year, the astronomer received another honor by being elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. From then on, he was very involved in the Society's activities, and the many papers he presented became an important part of the well-known series of volumes called the "Philosophical Transactions." He was later elected to the key position of secretary of the Royal Society, and he fulfilled his responsibilities until he had to resign when he was appointed to Greenwich.

Within a year of Halley's election as a Fellow of the Royal Society, he was chosen by the Society to represent them in a discussion which had arisen with Hevelius. The nature of this discussion, or rather the fact that any discussion should have been necessary, may seem strange to modern astronomers, for the point is one on which it would now seem impossible for there to be any difference of opinion. We must, however, remember that the days of Halley were, comparatively speaking, the days of infancy as regards the art of astronomical observation, and issues that now seem obvious were often, in those early times, the occasions of grave and anxious consideration. The particular question on which Halley had to represent the Royal Society may be simply stated. When Tycho Brahe made his memorable investigations into the places of the stars, he had no telescopes to help him. The famous instruments at Uraniborg were merely provided with sights, by which the telescope was pointed to a star on the same principle as a rifle is sighted for a target. Shortly after Tycho's time, Galileo invented the telescope. Of course every one admitted at once the extraordinary advantages which the telescope had to offer, so far as the mere question of the visibility of objects was concerned. But the bearing of Galileo's invention upon what we may describe as the measuring part of astronomy was not so immediately obvious. If a star be visible to the unaided eye, we can determine its place by such instruments as those which Tycho used, in which no telescope is employed. We can, however, also avail ourselves of an instrument in which we view the star not directly but through the intervention of the telescope. Can the place of the star be determined more accurately by the latter method than it can when the telescope is dispensed with? With our present knowledge, of course, there is no doubt about the answer; every one conversant with instruments knows that we can determine the place of a star far more accurately with the telescope than is possible by any mere sighting apparatus. In fact an observer would be as likely to make an error of a minute with the sighting apparatus in Tycho's instrument, as he would be to make an error of a second with the modern telescope, or, to express the matter somewhat differently, we may say, speaking quite generally, that the telescopic method of determining the places of the stars does not lead to errors more than one-sixtieth part as great as which are unavoidable when we make use of Tycho's method.

Within a year of Halley's election as a Fellow of the Royal Society, he was selected by the Society to represent them in a discussion that had come up with Hevelius. The nature of this discussion, or rather the fact that any discussion was necessary at all, might seem odd to today's astronomers, as it now seems impossible for there to be any disagreement on this point. However, we must remember that Halley's time was, relatively speaking, the beginning stages of astronomical observation, and issues that currently seem obvious were often the subject of serious and anxious debate in those early days. The specific question Halley had to address for the Royal Society can be stated simply. When Tycho Brahe conducted his famous investigations into the positions of the stars, he had no telescopes to assist him. The well-known instruments at Uraniborg were only equipped with sights, through which the telescope was aimed at a star in the same way a rifle is aimed at a target. Shortly after Tycho's era, Galileo invented the telescope. Naturally, everyone immediately recognized the incredible advantages that the telescope provided, at least in terms of seeing objects. However, the implications of Galileo's invention for what we might call the measurement aspect of astronomy were not so immediately clear. If a star can be seen with the naked eye, we can determine its position using the types of instruments that Tycho used, which did not employ telescopes. However, we can also use an instrument that allows us to view the star not directly but through the telescope. Can we determine the position of the star more accurately by this latter method than without the telescope? With our current knowledge, there is, of course, no doubt about the answer; anyone familiar with instruments knows that we can pinpoint a star's location much more accurately with a telescope than with any simple sighting apparatus. In fact, an observer would be just as likely to make an error of a minute with the sighting apparatus in Tycho's instrument as they would be to make an error of a second with a modern telescope. To put it somewhat differently, we can generally say that the telescopic method of finding the positions of stars does not lead to errors more than one-sixtieth as large as the unavoidable errors we encounter when using Tycho's method.

But though this is so apparent to the modern astronomer, it was not at all apparent in the days of Halley, and accordingly he was sent off to discuss the question with the Continental astronomers. Hevelius, as the representative of the older method, which Tycho had employed with such success, maintained that an instrument could be pointed more accurately at a star by the use of sights than by the use of a telescope, and vigorously disputed the claims put forward by those who believed that the latter method was the more suitable. On May 14th, 1679, Halley started for Dantzig, and the energetic character of the man may be judged from the fact that on the very night of his arrival he commenced to make the necessary observations. In those days astronomical telescopes had only obtained a fractional part of the perfection possessed by the instruments in our modern observatories, and therefore it may not be surprising that the results of the trial were not immediately conclusive. Halley appears to have devoted much time to the investigation; indeed, he remained at Dantzig for more than a twelve-month. On his return to England, he spoke highly of the skill which Hevelius exhibited in the use of his antiquated methods, but Halley was nevertheless too sagacious an observer to be shaken in his preference for the telescopic method of observation.

But while this is obvious to today's astronomers, it wasn't at all clear during Halley's time, so he was sent to discuss the issue with the continental astronomers. Hevelius, representing the older method that Tycho had successfully used, argued that an instrument could be aimed more accurately at a star using sights rather than a telescope, and he strongly contested the claims made by those who believed the latter method was better. On May 14th, 1679, Halley set off for Dantzig, and his determined nature is evident from the fact that he began making the necessary observations on the very night of his arrival. Back then, astronomical telescopes were only a fraction as advanced as the instruments we have in modern observatories, so it's not surprising that the trial results were not immediately conclusive. Halley seems to have spent a lot of time on his investigation; indeed, he stayed in Dantzig for over a year. Upon returning to England, he praised Hevelius for his skill in using his outdated methods, but Halley was too insightful as an observer to be swayed from his preference for the telescopic method of observation.

The next year we find our young astronomer starting for a Continental tour, and we, who complain if the Channel passage lasts more than an hour or two, may note Halley's remark in writing to Hooke on June 15th, 1680: "Having fallen in with bad weather we took forty hours in the journey from Dover to Calais." The scientific distinction which he had already attained was such that he was received in Paris with marked attention. A great deal of his time seems to have been passed in the Paris observatory, where Cassini, the presiding genius, himself an astronomer of well-deserved repute, had extended a hearty welcome to his English visitor. They made observations together of the place of the splendid comet which was then attracting universal attention, and Halley found the work thus done of much use when he subsequently came to investigate the path pursued by this body. Halley was wise enough to spare no pains to derive all possible advantages from his intercourse with the distinguished savants of the French capital. In the further progress of his tour he visited the principal cities of the Continent, leaving behind him everywhere the memory of an amiable disposition and of a rare intelligence.

The next year, we find our young astronomer heading out for a trip across Europe, and we, who complain if the Channel crossing takes more than an hour or two, might take note of Halley's comment in a letter to Hooke on June 15th, 1680: "After encountering bad weather, we took forty hours to travel from Dover to Calais." The scientific acclaim he had already achieved was so significant that he received notable attention in Paris. He spent a lot of time at the Paris observatory, where Cassini, the leading figure and a well-respected astronomer, warmly welcomed his English guest. They worked together on observations of the brilliant comet that was capturing everyone's interest, and Halley found the data they collected to be very useful when he later studied the comet's trajectory. Halley was smart enough to make the most of his interactions with the distinguished scholars in the French capital. As he continued his journey, he visited the major cities across Europe, leaving behind a reputation for his friendly nature and exceptional intellect.

After Halley's return to England, in 1682, he married a young lady named Mary Tooke, with whom he lived happily, till her death fifty-five years later. On his marriage, he took up his abode in Islington, where he erected his instruments and recommenced his observations.

After Halley's return to England in 1682, he married a young woman named Mary Tooke, and they lived happily together until her death fifty-five years later. After getting married, he settled in Islington, where he built his instruments and resumed his observations.

It has often been the good fortune of astronomers to render practical services to humanity by their investigations, and Halley's achievements in this respect deserve to be noted. A few years after he had settled in England, he published an important paper on the variation of the magnetic compass, for so the departure of the needle from the true north is termed. This subject had indeed early engaged his attention, and he continued to feel much interest in it up to the end of his life. With respect to his labours in this direction, Sir John Herschel says: "To Halley we owe the first appreciation of the real complexity of the subject of magnetism. It is wonderful indeed, and a striking proof of the penetration and sagacity of this extraordinary man, that with his means of information he should have been able to draw such conclusions, and to take so large and comprehensive a view of the subject as he appears to have done." In 1692, Halley explained his theory of terrestrial magnetism, and begged captains of ships to take observations of the variations of the compass in all parts of the world, and to communicate them to the Royal Society, "in order that all the facts may be readily available to those who are hereafter to complete this difficult and complicated subject."

It has often been the fortunate chance of astronomers to provide useful services to humanity through their research, and Halley's contributions in this area deserve recognition. A few years after he moved to England, he published an important paper on how the magnetic compass varies, which is how we describe the needle's deviation from true north. This topic had certainly caught his attention early on, and he remained interested in it for the rest of his life. Regarding his work in this field, Sir John Herschel says: "To Halley we owe the first understanding of the real complexity of the subject of magnetism. It is truly remarkable, and a clear testament to the insight and intelligence of this extraordinary man, that with the information available to him, he could draw such conclusions and have such a broad and comprehensive view of the topic as he seemed to have done." In 1692, Halley outlined his theory of terrestrial magnetism and urged ship captains to observe the variations of the compass in all parts of the world and share their findings with the Royal Society, "so that all the facts may be easily accessible to those who will eventually tackle this challenging and intricate subject."

The extent to which Halley was in advance of his contemporaries, in the study of terrestrial magnetism, may be judged from the fact that the subject was scarcely touched after his time till the year 1811. The interest which he felt in it was not of a merely theoretical kind, nor was it one which could be cultivated in an easy-chair. Like all true investigators, he longed to submit his theory to the test of experiment, and for that purpose Halley determined to observe the magnetic variation for himself. He procured from King William III. the command of a vessel called the "Paramour Pink," with which he started for the South Seas in 1694. This particular enterprise was not, however, successful; for, on crossing the line, some of his men fell sick and one of his lieutenants mutinied, so that he was obliged to return the following year with his mission unaccomplished. The government cashiered the lieutenant, and Halley having procured a second smaller vessel to accompany the "Paramour Pink," started once more in September, 1699. He traversed the Atlantic to the 52nd degree of southern latitude, beyond which his further advance was stopped. "In these latitudes," he writes to say, "we fell in with great islands of ice of so incredible height and magnitude, that I scarce dare write my thoughts of it."

The extent to which Halley was ahead of his peers in the study of terrestrial magnetism can be seen in the fact that the topic was barely addressed after his time until 1811. His interest in it wasn't just theoretical, nor could it be explored comfortably from an easy-chair. Like all genuine researchers, he wanted to test his theories through experimentation, and to do that, Halley decided to observe magnetic variation himself. He obtained permission from King William III to command a ship called the "Paramour Pink," and set off for the South Seas in 1694. However, this venture was not successful; upon crossing the equator, some of his crew became ill, and one of his lieutenants mutinied, forcing him to return the following year without achieving his goals. The government dismissed the lieutenant, and Halley managed to get a second, smaller vessel to join the "Paramour Pink," setting out again in September 1699. He sailed across the Atlantic to the 52nd degree of southern latitude, beyond which he was unable to go further. "In these latitudes," he wrote, "we encountered massive ice islands of such incredible height and size that I can hardly express my thoughts about it."

On his return in 1700, Halley published a general chart, showing the variation of the compass at the different places which he had visited. On these charts he set down lines connecting those localities at which the magnetic variation was identical. He thus set an example of the graphic representation of large masses of complex facts, in such a manner as to appeal at once to the eye, a method of which we make many applications in the present day.

On his return in 1700, Halley published a general chart showing the compass variation at the different places he had visited. On these charts, he drew lines connecting locations where the magnetic variation was the same. In doing this, he set an example of graphically representing large amounts of complex information in a way that immediately captures the eye, a method we use in many ways today.

But probably the greatest service which Halley ever rendered to human knowledge was the share in which he took in bringing Newton's "Principia" before the world. In fact, as Dr. Glaisher, writing in 1888, has truly remarked, "but for Halley the 'Principia' would not have existed."

But probably the biggest contribution Halley ever made to human knowledge was his role in bringing Newton's "Principia" to the public. In fact, as Dr. Glaisher noted in 1888, "without Halley, the 'Principia' would not have existed."

It was a visit from Halley in the year 1684 which seems to have first suggested to Newton the idea of publishing the results of his investigations on gravitation. Halley, and other scientific contemporaries, had no doubt some faint glimmering of the great truth which only Newton's genius was able fully to reveal. Halley had indeed shown how, on the assumptions that the planets move in circular orbits round the sun, and that the squares of their periodic times are proportional to the cubes of their mean distances, it may be proved that the force acting on each planet must vary inversely as the square of its distance from the sun. Since, however, each of the planets actually moves in an ellipse, and therefore, at continually varying distances from the sun, it becomes a much more difficult matter to account mathematically for the body's motions on the supposition that the attractive force varies inversely as the square of the distance. This was the question with which Halley found himself confronted, but which his mathematical abilities were not adequate to solve. It would seem that both Hooke and Sir Christopher Wren were interested in the same problem; in fact, the former claimed to have arrived at a solution, but declined to make known his results, giving as an excuse his desire that others having tried and failed might learn to value his achievements all the more. Halley, however, confessed that his attempts at the solution were unsuccessful, and Wren, in order to encourage the other two philosophers to pursue the inquiry, offered to present a book of forty shillings value to either of them who should in the space of two months bring him a convincing proof of it. Such was the value which Sir Christopher set on the Law of Gravitation, upon which the whole fabric of modern astronomy may be said to stand.

It was a visit from Halley in 1684 that seems to have first inspired Newton to consider publishing the results of his research on gravitation. Halley and other scientists of the time likely had some vague notion of the significant truth that only Newton's genius could fully uncover. Halley had indeed demonstrated that, assuming the planets move in circular orbits around the sun and that the squares of their orbital periods are proportional to the cubes of their average distances, it can be proven that the force acting on each planet must decrease with the square of its distance from the sun. However, since each planet actually moves in an ellipse, resulting in continually changing distances from the sun, it becomes much more challenging to mathematically explain the body's motions under the assumption that the attractive force decreases with the square of the distance. This was the issue Halley faced, but he lacked the mathematical skills to solve it. It appears that both Hooke and Sir Christopher Wren were also interested in the same problem; in fact, Hooke claimed to have found a solution but refused to share it, saying he wanted others who had tried and failed to appreciate his achievements even more. Halley, however, admitted that his attempts to solve it were unsuccessful, and Wren, to motivate the other two philosophers to continue the inquiry, offered to give a book worth forty shillings to either of them who could provide him with convincing proof within two months. Such was the value Sir Christopher placed on the Law of Gravitation, which can be said to support the entire structure of modern astronomy.

Finding himself unequal to the task, Halley went down to Cambridge to see Newton on the subject, and was delighted to learn that the great mathematician had already completed the investigation. He showed Halley that the motions of all the planets could be completely accounted for on the hypothesis of a force of attraction directed towards the sun, which varies inversely as the square of the distance from that body.

Finding himself unable to handle the task, Halley went down to Cambridge to talk with Newton about it and was thrilled to find out that the great mathematician had already finished the research. He demonstrated to Halley that the movements of all the planets could be fully explained by the idea of a force of attraction pulling towards the sun, which decreases with the square of the distance from that body.

Halley had the genius to perceive the tremendous importance of Newton's researches, and he ceased not to urge upon the recluse man of science the necessity for giving his new discoveries publication. He paid another visit to Cambridge with the object of learning more with regard to the mathematical methods which had already conducted Newton to such sublime truths, and he again encouraged the latter both to pursue his investigations, and to give some account of them to the world. In December of the same year Halley had the gratification of announcing to the Royal Society that Newton had promised to send that body a paper containing his researches on Gravitation.

Halley recognized the huge significance of Newton's research, and he didn't stop pushing the reclusive scientist to publish his new findings. He visited Cambridge again to learn more about the mathematical methods that had led Newton to such profound truths, and he continued to motivate Newton to keep exploring and share his work with the world. In December of that year, Halley had the pleasure of announcing to the Royal Society that Newton had promised to submit a paper detailing his studies on Gravitation.

It seems that at this epoch the finances of the Royal Society were at a very low ebb. This impecuniosity was due to the fact that a book by Willoughby, entitled "De Historia Piscium," had been recently printed by the society at great expense. In fact, the coffers were so low that they had some difficulty in paying the salaries of their permanent officials. It appears that the public did not care about the history of fishes, or at all events the volume did not meet with the ready demand which was expected for it. Indeed, it has been recorded that when Halley had undertaken to measure the length of a degree of the earth's surface, at the request of the Royal Society, it was ordered that his expenses be defrayed either in 50 pounds sterling, or in fifty books of fishes. Thus it happened that on June 2nd, the Council, after due consideration of ways and means in connection with the issue of the Principia, "ordered that Halley should undertake the business of looking after the book and printing it at his own charge," which he engaged to do.

It seems that during this time, the Royal Society's finances were really struggling. This shortage was mainly because they had recently spent a lot of money printing a book by Willoughby titled "De Historia Piscium." In fact, their funds were so low that they had trouble paying the salaries of their permanent staff. It looks like the public wasn’t interested in the history of fish, or at least the book didn't sell as well as they had hoped. It's even noted that when Halley agreed to measure the length of a degree of the Earth's surface at the request of the Royal Society, it was decided that his expenses would be covered with either 50 pounds sterling or fifty copies of the fish book. So on June 2nd, the Council, after considering various options for publishing the Principia, "ordered that Halley should take charge of the book and print it at his own expense," which he agreed to do.

It was, as we have elsewhere mentioned, characteristic of Newton that he detested controversies, and he was, in fact, inclined to suppress the third book of the "Principia" altogether rather than have any conflict with Hooke with respect to the discoveries there enunciated. He also thought of changing the name of the work to De Motu Corporum Libri Duo, but upon second thoughts, he retained the original title, remarking, as he wrote to Halley, "It will help the sale of the book, which I ought not to diminish, now it is yours," a sentence which shows conclusively, if further proof were necessary, that Halley had assumed the responsibility of its publication.

It was, as we’ve mentioned elsewhere, typical of Newton to avoid arguments, and he actually considered leaving out the third book of the "Principia" entirely to avoid any conflict with Hooke regarding the discoveries outlined in it. He also thought about changing the title of the work to De Motu Corporum Libri Duo, but eventually decided to keep the original title, stating in a letter to Halley, "It will help the sale of the book, which I shouldn’t reduce, now that it’s yours," a statement that clearly indicates, if more evidence was needed, that Halley had taken on the responsibility for its publication.

Halley spared no pains in pushing forward the publication of his illustrious friend's great work, so that in the same year he was in a position to present a complete copy to King James II., with a proper discourse of his own. Halley also wrote a set of Latin hexameters in praise of Newton's genius, which he printed at the beginning of the work. The last line of this specimen of Halley's poetic muse may be thus rendered: "Nor mortals nearer may approach the gods."

Halley put in a lot of effort to advance the publication of his famous friend's major work, so that in the same year he was able to present a complete copy to King James II., along with a proper discourse of his own. Halley also wrote a set of Latin hexameters praising Newton's genius, which he printed at the beginning of the work. The last line of this example of Halley's poetic talent can be translated as: "Nor mortals may come closer to the gods."

The intimate friendship between the two greatest astronomers of the time continued without interruption till the death of Newton. It has, indeed, been alleged that some serious cause of estrangement arose between them. There is, however, no satisfactory ground for this statement; indeed, it may be regarded as effectually disposed of by the fact that, in the year 1727, Halley took up the defence of his friend, and wrote two learned papers in support of Newton's "System of Chronology," which had been seriously attacked by a certain ecclesiastic. It is quite evident to any one who has studied these papers that Halley's friendship for Newton was as ardent as ever.

The close friendship between the two greatest astronomers of the time continued without interruption until Newton's death. Some have claimed that a serious issue caused a rift between them. However, there's no solid evidence to support this claim; in fact, it can be effectively dismissed by noting that in 1727, Halley came to his friend’s defense and wrote two scholarly papers supporting Newton's "System of Chronology," which had faced serious criticism from a certain clergyman. It is clear to anyone who has read these papers that Halley's friendship for Newton was as strong as ever.

The generous zeal with which Halley adopted and defended the doctrines of Newton with regard to the movements of the celestial bodies was presently rewarded by a brilliant discovery, which has more than any of his other researches rendered his name a familiar one to astronomers. Newton, having explained the movement of the planets, was naturally led to turn his attention to comets. He perceived that their journeyings could be completely accounted for as consequences of the attraction of the sun, and he laid down the principles by which the orbit of a comet could be determined, provided that observations of its positions were obtained at three different dates. The importance of these principles was by no one more quickly recognised than by Halley, who saw at once that it provided the means of detecting something like order in the movements of these strange wanderers. The doctrine of Gravitation seemed to show that just as the planets revolved around the sun in ellipses, so also must the comets. The orbit, however, in the case of the comet, is so extremely elongated that the very small part of the elliptic path within which the comet is both near enough and bright enough to be seen from the earth, is indistinguishable from a parabola. Applying these principles, Halley thought it would be instructive to study the movements of certain bright comets, concerning which reliable observations could be obtained. At the expense of much labour, he laid down the paths pursued by twenty-four of these bodies, which had appeared between the years 1337 and 1698. Amongst them he noticed three, which followed tracks so closely resembling each other, that he was led to conclude the so called three comets could only have been three different appearances of the same body. The first of these occurred in 1531, the second was seen by Kepler in 1607, and the third by Halley himself in 1682. These dates suggested that the observed phenomena might be due to the successive returns of one and the same comet after intervals of seventy-five or seventy-six years. On the further examination of ancient records, Halley found that a comet had been seen in the year 1456, a date, it will be observed, seventy-five years before 1531. Another had been observed seventy-six years earlier than 1456, viz., in 1380, and another seventy-five years before that, in 1305.

The enthusiastic commitment with which Halley embraced and defended Newton's theories about the movements of celestial bodies soon led to a remarkable discovery, making his name well-known among astronomers more than any of his other work. After explaining how the planets moved, Newton naturally turned his focus to comets. He realized that their paths could be fully explained by the sun's gravitational pull, and he established the principles that would allow the orbit of a comet to be calculated, as long as its positions were observed on three different occasions. Halley quickly recognized the significance of these principles, realizing they could help identify a pattern in the movements of these mysterious visitors. The principle of Gravitation suggested that just as the planets revolve around the sun in elliptical orbits, so do comets. However, in the case of comets, their orbits are so elongated that the small section of the elliptical path that is visible and bright enough to be seen from Earth appears indistinguishable from a parabola. By applying these principles, Halley thought it would be useful to look into the movements of certain bright comets for which reliable observations were available. After a great deal of effort, he outlined the paths of twenty-four of these comets that had appeared between 1337 and 1698. Among these, he identified three that had trajectories so similar that he concluded they could only be different appearances of the same comet. The first sighting was in 1531, the second was observed by Kepler in 1607, and the third was seen by Halley himself in 1682. These dates indicated that the phenomena observed might have been due to the recurring appearances of the same comet every seventy-five or seventy-six years. Further investigation of historical records revealed that a comet had been spotted in 1456, which was seventy-five years prior to 1531. Another had been observed seventy-six years before 1456, in 1380, and another seventy-five years before that, in 1305.

As Halley thus found that a comet had been recorded on several occasions at intervals of seventy-five or seventy-six years, he was led to the conclusion that these several apparitions related to one and the same object, which was an obedient vassal of the sun, performing an eccentric journey round that luminary in a period of seventy-five or seventy-six years. To realise the importance of this discovery, it should be remembered that before Halley's time a comet, if not regarded merely as a sign of divine displeasure, or as an omen of intending disaster, had at least been regarded as a chance visitor to the solar system, arriving no one knew whence, and going no one knew whither.

As Halley discovered that a comet had been recorded multiple times at intervals of seventy-five or seventy-six years, he concluded that these sightings referred to the same object, which traveled in an eccentric orbit around the sun every seventy-five or seventy-six years. To appreciate the significance of this discovery, it's important to note that before Halley's time, a comet was often viewed either as a sign of divine anger or as a warning of impending disaster, or at the very least, as an unpredictable visitor to the solar system, arriving from nowhere and leaving for no known destination.

A supreme test remained to be applied to Halley's theory. The question arose as to the date at which this comet would be seen again. We must observe that the question was complicated by the fact that the body, in the course of its voyage around the sun, was exposed to the incessant disturbing action produced by the attraction of the several planets. The comet therefore, does not describe a simple ellipse as it would do if the attraction of the sun were the only force by which its movement were controlled. Each of the planets solicits the comet to depart from its track, and though the amount of these attractions may be insignificant in comparison with the supreme controlling force of the sun, yet the departure from the ellipse is quite sufficient to produce appreciable irregularities in the comet's movement. At the time when Halley lived, no means existed of calculating with precision the effect of the disturbance a comet might experience from the action of the different planets. Halley exhibited his usual astronomical sagacity in deciding that Jupiter would retard the return of the comet to some extent. Had it not been for this disturbance the comet would apparently have been due in 1757 or early in 1758. But the attraction of the great planet would cause delay, so that Halley assigned, for the date of its re-appearance, either the end of 1758 or the beginning of 1759. Halley knew that he could not himself live to witness the fulfilment of his prediction, but he says: "If it should return, according to our predictions, about the year 1758, impartial posterity will not refuse to acknowledge that this was first discovered by an Englishman." This was, indeed, a remarkable prediction of an event to occur fifty-three years after it had been uttered. The way in which it was fulfilled forms one of the most striking episodes in the history of astronomy. The comet was first seen on Christmas Day, 1758, and passed through its nearest point to the sun on March 13th, 1759. Halley had then been lying in his grave for seventeen years, yet the verification of his prophecy reflects a glory on his name which will cause it to live for ever in the annals of astronomy. The comet paid a subsequent visit in 1835, and its next appearance is due about 1910.

A major test still needed to be applied to Halley's theory. The question arose about when this comet would be seen again. It's important to note that this question was complicated because, during its orbit around the sun, the comet was constantly affected by the gravitational pull of various planets. As a result, the comet doesn't follow a simple ellipse as it would if the sun's attraction were the only force acting on it. Each planet pulls the comet off its path, and while these gravitational influences might seem minor compared to the sun's overwhelming force, they are enough to create noticeable irregularities in the comet's motion. Back in Halley's time, there were no accurate methods to calculate how much a comet's path could be disturbed by the other planets' gravity. Halley wisely concluded that Jupiter would slow down the comet’s return. Without this disturbance, the comet would likely have appeared in 1757 or early 1758. However, due to the pull of Jupiter, Halley suggested the comet would reappear either at the end of 1758 or the beginning of 1759. Halley realized he wouldn't live to see his prediction come true, but he remarked, "If it should return, according to our predictions, about the year 1758, impartial posterity will not refuse to acknowledge that this was first discovered by an Englishman." This was an impressive prediction of an event set to happen fifty-three years later. The way it came true is one of the most remarkable moments in the history of astronomy. The comet was first spotted on Christmas Day, 1758, and reached its closest point to the sun on March 13, 1759. Halley had been in his grave for seventeen years, yet the fulfillment of his prediction brought lasting honor to his name, ensuring it will be remembered forever in astronomical history. The comet made another appearance in 1835, and it's expected to show up again around 1910.

Halley next entered upon a labour which, if less striking to the imagination than his discoveries with regard to comets, is still of inestimable value in astronomy. He undertook a series of investigations with the object of improving our knowledge of the movements of the planets. This task was practically finished in 1719, though the results of it were not published until after his death in 1749. In the course of it he was led to investigate closely the motion of Venus, and thus he came to recognise for the first time the peculiar importance which attaches to the phenomenon of the transit of this planet across the sun. Halley saw that the transit, which was to take place in the year 1761, would afford a favourable opportunity for determining the distance of the sun, and thus learning the scale of the solar system. He predicted the circumstances of the phenomenon with an astonishing degree of accuracy, considering his means of information, and it is unquestionably to the exertions of Halley in urging the importance of the matter upon astronomers that we owe the unexampled degree of interest taken in the event, and the energy which scientific men exhibited in observing it. The illustrious astronomer had no hope of being himself a witness of the event, for it could not happen till many years after his death. This did not, however, diminish his anxiety to impress upon those who would then be alive, the importance of the occurrence, nor did it lead him to neglect anything which might contribute to the success of the observations. As we now know, Halley rather over-estimated the value of the transit of Venus, as a means of determining the solar distance. The fact is that the circumstances are such that the observation of the time of contact between the edge of the planet and the edge of the sun cannot be made with the accuracy which he had expected.

Halley then took on a task that, while perhaps less captivating than his discoveries about comets, is still incredibly valuable to astronomy. He began a series of investigations aimed at enhancing our understanding of the movements of the planets. This work was mostly completed in 1719, although the results weren't published until after his death in 1749. During this process, he closely examined the motion of Venus and recognized for the first time the unique significance of the phenomenon of this planet passing across the sun. Halley realized that the transit, set to occur in 1761, would provide a great opportunity to determine the distance to the sun and thus understand the scale of the solar system. He predicted the details of this event with remarkable accuracy, considering the limited information he had. We undoubtedly owe the exceptional interest in the event and the enthusiasm shown by scientists in observing it to Halley’s efforts in emphasizing its importance. The renowned astronomer had no expectation of witnessing the event himself, as it would happen many years after his death. However, this didn’t lessen his desire to impress upon those who would be alive then the significance of the occurrence, nor did it stop him from doing everything possible to ensure the observations' success. As we now know, Halley slightly over-estimated the value of the transit of Venus for determining the solar distance. The truth is that the circumstances made it impossible to observe the time of contact between the edge of the planet and the edge of the sun with the accuracy he had anticipated.

In 1691, Halley became a candidate for the Savilian Professorship of Astronomy at Oxford. He was not, however, successful, for his candidature was opposed by Flamsteed, the Astronomer Royal of the time, and another was appointed. He received some consolation for this particular disappointment by the fact that, in 1696, owing to Newton's friendly influence, he was appointed deputy Controller of the Mint at Chester, an office which he did not retain for long, as it was abolished two years later. At last, in 1703, he received what he had before vainly sought, and he was appointed to the Savilian chair.

In 1691, Halley ran for the Savilian Professorship of Astronomy at Oxford. However, he was not successful because his candidacy was opposed by Flamsteed, the Astronomer Royal at that time, and someone else was chosen. He found some comfort from this disappointment in 1696 when, thanks to Newton's support, he was appointed deputy Controller of the Mint in Chester, a position he didn't hold for long since it was abolished two years later. Finally, in 1703, he got what he had previously sought in vain, and he was appointed to the Savilian chair.

His observations of the eclipse of the sun, which occurred in 1715, added greatly to Halley's reputation. This phenomenon excited special attention, inasmuch as it was the first total eclipse of the sun which had been visible in London since the year 1140. Halley undertook the necessary calculations, and predicted the various circumstances with a far higher degree of precision than the official announcement. He himself observed the phenomenon from the Royal Society's rooms, and he minutely describes the outer atmosphere of the sun, now known as the corona; without, however, offering an opinion as to whether it was a solar or a lunar appendage.

His observations of the solar eclipse that took place in 1715 significantly enhanced Halley's reputation. This event attracted a lot of attention because it was the first total solar eclipse visible in London since 1140. Halley performed the necessary calculations and predicted the various details with much greater accuracy than the official announcement. He personally observed the event from the Royal Society's rooms and carefully described the sun's outer atmosphere, now referred to as the corona; however, he did not express an opinion on whether it was a solar or lunar feature.

At last Halley was called to the dignified office which he of all men was most competent to fill. On February 9th, 1720, he was appointed Astronomer Royal in succession to Flamsteed. He found things at the Royal Observatory in a most unsatisfactory state. Indeed, there were no instruments, nor anything else that was movable; for such things, being the property of Flamsteed, had been removed by his widow, and though Halley attempted to purchase from that lady some of the instruments which his predecessor had employed, the unhappy personal differences which had existed between him and Flamsteed, and which, as we have already seen, prevented his election as Savilian Professor of Astronomy, proved a bar to the negotiation. Greenwich Observatory wore a very different appearance in those days, from that which the modern visitor, who is fortunate enough to gain admission, may now behold. Not only did Halley find it bereft of instruments, we learn besides that he had no assistants, and was obliged to transact the whole business of the establishment single-handed.

At last, Halley was called to the prestigious position that he was most qualified to hold. On February 9, 1720, he was appointed Astronomer Royal, succeeding Flamsteed. He discovered that the Royal Observatory was in a very unsatisfactory condition. In fact, there were no instruments or anything else movable; these items, being Flamsteed’s property, had been taken by his widow. Although Halley tried to buy some of the instruments that his predecessor had used from her, the unfortunate personal conflicts between him and Flamsteed, which had previously hindered his election as Savilian Professor of Astronomy, blocked the negotiation. Greenwich Observatory looked very different back then from how it appears today to the modern visitor who is fortunate enough to get in. Not only did Halley find it without instruments, but we also learn that he had no assistants and had to handle all the operations of the establishment on his own.

In 1721, however, he obtained a grant of 500 pounds from the Board of Ordnance, and accordingly a transit instrument was erected in the same year. Some time afterwards he procured an eight-foot quadrant, and with these instruments, at the age of sixty-four, he commenced a series of observations on the moon. He intended, if his life was spared, to continue his observations for a period of eighteen years, this being, as astronomers know, a very important cycle in connection with lunar movements. The special object of this vast undertaking was to improve the theory of the moon's motion, so that it might serve more accurately to determine longitudes at sea. This self-imposed task Halley lived to carry to a successful termination, and the tables deduced from his observations, and published after his death, were adopted almost universally by astronomers, those of the French nation being the only exception.

In 1721, he received a grant of 500 pounds from the Board of Ordnance, and a transit instrument was set up that same year. Later, he acquired an eight-foot quadrant, and with these tools, at sixty-four years old, he started a series of observations of the moon. He planned, if he lived long enough, to continue his observations for eighteen years, which, as astronomers know, is a crucial cycle connected to lunar movements. The main goal of this huge project was to enhance the theory of the moon's motion, so it could be used more accurately to determine longitudes at sea. Halley completed this self-imposed task successfully, and the tables derived from his observations, published after his death, were nearly universally accepted by astronomers, with the French being the only exception.

Throughout his life Halley had been singularly free from illness of every kind, but in 1737 he had a stroke of paralysis. Notwithstanding this, however, he worked diligently at his telescope till 1739, after which his health began rapidly to give way. He died on January 14th, 1742, in the eighty-sixth year of his age, retaining his mental faculties to the end. He was buried in the cemetery of the church of Lee in Kent, in the same grave as his wife, who had died five years previously. We are informed by Admiral Smyth that Pond, a later Astronomer Royal, was afterwards laid in the same tomb.

Throughout his life, Halley had been remarkably free from all kinds of illness, but in 1737, he suffered a stroke. Despite this, he continued to work diligently at his telescope until 1739, after which his health started to decline rapidly. He died on January 14, 1742, at the age of eighty-six, remaining mentally sharp until the end. He was buried in the cemetery of the church of Lee in Kent, in the same grave as his wife, who had passed away five years earlier. Admiral Smyth informs us that Pond, a later Astronomer Royal, was later interred in the same tomb.

Halley's disposition seems to have been generous and candid, and wholly free from anything like jealousy or rancour. In person he was rather above the middle height, and slight in build; his complexion was fair, and he is said to have always spoken, as well as acted, with uncommon sprightliness. In the eloge pronounced upon him at the Paris Academie Des Sciences, of which Halley had been made a member in 1719 it was said, "he possessed all the qualifications which were necessary to please princes who were desirous of instruction, with a great extent of knowledge and a constant presence of mind; his answers were ready, and at the same time pertinent, judicious, polite and sincere."

Halley's personality seems to have been kind and open, completely free from any jealousy or bitterness. He was slightly taller than average and had a slim build; his complexion was fair, and it’s said he always spoke and acted with exceptional energy. In the tribute given to him at the Paris Académie des Sciences, where Halley became a member in 1719, it was stated, "He had all the qualities needed to impress princes seeking knowledge, with a vast range of understanding and a constant alertness; his responses were quick yet relevant, wise, polite, and genuine."

GREENWICH OBSERVATORY IN HALLEY'S TIME.
GREENWICH OBSERVATORY IN HALLEY'S TIME.
GREENWICH OBSERVATORY DURING HALLEY'S TIME.

Thus we find that Peter the Great was one of his most ardent admirers. He consulted the astronomer on matters connected with shipbuilding, and invited him to his own table. But Halley possessed nobler qualifications than the capacity of pleasing Princes. He was able to excite and to retain the love and admiration of his equals. This was due to the warmth of his attachments, the unselfishness of his devotion to his friends, and to a vein of gaiety and good-humour which pervaded all his conversation.

Thus, we see that Peter the Great was one of his biggest fans. He consulted the astronomer on shipbuilding matters and invited him to dine with him. However, Halley had more admirable qualities than just the ability to please royalty. He could inspire and maintain the love and admiration of his peers. This was because of his deep connections, the selflessness of his commitment to his friends, and a sense of cheerfulness and good humor that flowed through all his conversations.

BRADLEY.

James Bradley was descended from an ancient family in the county of Durham. He was born in 1692 or 1693, at Sherbourne, in Gloucestershire, and was educated in the Grammar School at Northleach. From thence he proceeded in due course to Oxford, where he was admitted a commoner at Balliol College, on March 15th, 1711. Much of his time, while an undergraduate, was passed in Essex with his maternal uncle, the Rev. James Pound, who was a well-known man of science and a diligent observer of the stars. It was doubtless by intercourse with his uncle that young Bradley became so expert in the use of astronomical instruments, but the immortal discoveries he subsequently made show him to have been a born astronomer.

James Bradley came from an old family in County Durham. He was born in 1692 or 1693 in Sherbourne, Gloucestershire, and attended the Grammar School in Northleach. From there, he eventually went to Oxford, where he became a commoner at Balliol College on March 15th, 1711. Much of his time as an undergraduate was spent in Essex with his maternal uncle, the Rev. James Pound, a well-known scientist and dedicated star-gazer. It was probably through his time with his uncle that young Bradley became skilled at using astronomical instruments, but the groundbreaking discoveries he made later prove that he was a natural-born astronomer.

The first exhibition of Bradley's practical skill seems to be contained in two observations which he made in 1717 and 1718. They have been published by Halley, whose acuteness had led him to perceive the extraordinary scientific talents of the young astronomer. Another illustration of the sagacity which Bradley manifested, even at the very commencement of his astronomical career, is contained in a remark of Halley's, who says: "Dr. Pound and his nephew, Mr. Bradley, did, myself being present, in the last opposition of the sun and Mars this way demonstrate the extreme minuteness of the sun's parallax, and that it was not more than twelve seconds nor less than nine seconds." To make the significance of this plain, it should be observed that the determination of the sun's parallax is equivalent to the determination of the distance from the earth to the sun. At the time of which we are now writing, this very important unit of celestial measurement was only very imperfectly known, and the observations of Pound and Bradley may be interpreted to mean that, from their observations, they had come to the conclusion that the distance from the earth to the sun must be more than 94 millions of miles, and less than 125 millions. We now, of course, know that they were not exactly right, for the true distance of the sun is about 93 millions of miles. We cannot, however, but think that it was a very remarkable approach for the veteran astronomer and his brilliant nephew to make towards the determination of a magnitude which did not become accurately known till fifty years later.

The first exhibition of Bradley's practical skill seems to be found in two observations he made in 1717 and 1718. These were published by Halley, who had the insight to recognize the incredible scientific talent of the young astronomer. Another example of Bradley's cleverness, even at the start of his astronomical career, is captured in a remark by Halley, who states: "Dr. Pound and his nephew, Mr. Bradley, did, with me present, during the last opposition of the sun and Mars, demonstrate the extreme smallness of the sun's parallax, showing it was no more than twelve seconds and no less than nine seconds." To clarify the importance of this, it's essential to note that determining the sun's parallax is the same as figuring out the distance from the earth to the sun. At the time we're discussing, this crucial celestial measurement was only poorly understood, and Pound and Bradley's observations suggest they concluded that the distance from the earth to the sun must be over 94 million miles and under 125 million. We now, of course, know they weren’t exactly right, as the actual distance to the sun is about 93 million miles. However, it's impressive that the experienced astronomer and his talented nephew got so close to determining a measurement that wouldn’t be accurately established until fifty years later.

Among the earliest parts of astronomical work to which Bradley's attention was directed, were the eclipses of Jupiter's satellites. These phenomena are specially attractive inasmuch as they can be so readily observed, and Bradley found it extremely interesting to calculate the times at which the eclipses should take place, and then to compare his observations with the predicted times. From the success that he met with in this work, and from his other labours, Bradley's reputation as an astronomer increased so greatly that on November the 6th, 1718, he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society.

Among the first areas of astronomical work that captured Bradley's attention were the eclipses of Jupiter's moons. These events are particularly appealing because they can be easily observed, and Bradley found it very interesting to calculate when the eclipses would occur and then compare his observations with the predicted times. The success he achieved in this project, along with his other efforts, greatly boosted Bradley's reputation as an astronomer, leading to his election as a Fellow of the Royal Society on November 6th, 1718.

Up to this time the astronomical investigations of Bradley had been more those of an amateur than of a professional astronomer, and as it did not at first seem likely that scientific work would lead to any permanent provision, it became necessary for the youthful astronomer to choose a profession. It had been all along intended that he should enter the Church, though for some reason which is not told us, he did not take orders as soon as his age would have entitled him to do so. In 1719, however, the Bishop of Hereford offered Bradley the Vicarage of Bridstow, near Ross, in Monmouthshire, and on July 25th, 1720, he having then taken priest's orders, was duly instituted in his vicarage. In the beginning of the next year, Bradley had some addition to his income from the proceeds of a Welsh living, which, being a sinecure, he was able to hold with his appointment at Bridstow. It appears, however, that his clerical occupations were not very exacting in their demands upon his time, for he was still able to pay long and often-repeated visits to his uncle at Wandsworth, who, being himself a clergyman, seems to have received occasional assistance in his ministerial duties from his astronomical nephew.

Up to this point, Bradley's astronomical research had been more like that of an enthusiast than a professional astronomer. Since it didn't initially seem probable that his scientific work would lead to any lasting security, he needed to choose a career. It was always intended for him to join the Church, though for some unspecified reason, he didn't take orders as soon as he was eligible. In 1719, the Bishop of Hereford offered Bradley the position of Vicar of Bridstow, near Ross in Monmouthshire, and on July 25, 1720, after he had been ordained, he was officially installed in his vicarage. At the beginning of the next year, Bradley received some additional income from a Welsh living, which he was able to hold along with his position at Bridstow since it was a sinecure. However, it seems that his clerical duties were not very demanding, as he still had the time to make long and frequent visits to his uncle in Wandsworth, who, being a clergyman himself, occasionally received help with his ministerial tasks from his astronomy-enthusiast nephew.

The time, however, soon arrived when Bradley was able to make a choice between continuing to exercise his profession as a divine, or devoting himself to a scientific career. The Savilian Professorship of Astronomy in the University of Oxford became vacant by the death of Dr. John Keill. The statutes forbade that the Savilian Professor should also hold a clerical appointment, and Mr. Pound would certainly have been elected to the professorship had he consented to surrender his preferments in the Church. But Pound was unwilling to sacrifice his clerical position, and though two or three other candidates appeared in the field, yet the talents of Bradley were so conspicuous that he was duly elected, his willingness to resign the clerical profession having been first ascertained.

The time soon came when Bradley had to choose between continuing his career as a minister or pursuing a path in science. The Savilian Professorship of Astronomy at the University of Oxford became available following the death of Dr. John Keill. The rules stated that the Savilian Professor couldn’t also hold a church position, and Mr. Pound would have likely been chosen for the professorship if he had agreed to give up his church roles. However, Pound didn't want to give up his clerical position. Although a few other candidates came forward, Bradley’s talents were so impressive that he was elected, after it was confirmed that he was willing to leave the church.

There can be no doubt that, with such influential friends as Bradley possessed, he would have made great advances had he adhered to his profession as a divine. Bishop Hoadly, indeed, with other marks of favour, had already made the astronomer his chaplain. The engrossing nature of Bradley's interest in astronomy decided him, however, to sacrifice all other prospects in comparison with the opening afforded by the Savilian Professorship. It was not that Bradley found himself devoid of interest in clerical matters, but he felt that the true scope for such abilities as he possessed would be better found in the discharge of the scientific duties of the Oxford chair than in the spiritual charge of a parish. On April the 26th, 1722, Bradley read his inaugural lecture in that new position on which he was destined to confer such lustre.

There’s no doubt that with influential friends like Bradley had, he would have made significant progress if he had stuck with his career as a clergyman. Bishop Hoadly, among other favors, had already appointed the astronomer as his chaplain. However, Bradley’s intense passion for astronomy led him to sacrifice all other opportunities in favor of the opening for the Savilian Professorship. It wasn’t that Bradley lacked interest in church matters, but he felt that his true talents would be better utilized in fulfilling the scientific responsibilities of the Oxford chair rather than in the spiritual leadership of a parish. On April 26, 1722, Bradley gave his inaugural lecture in that new role, which he was destined to elevate.

It must, of course, be remembered that in those early days the art of constructing the astronomical telescope was very imperfectly understood. The only known method for getting over the peculiar difficulties presented in the construction of the refracting telescope, was to have it of the most portentous length. In fact, Bradley made several of his observations with an instrument of two hundred and twelve feet focus. In such a case, no tube could be used, and the object glass was merely fixed at the top of a high pole. Notwithstanding the inconvenience and awkwardness of such an instrument, Bradley by its means succeeded in making many careful measurements. He observed, for example, the transit of Mercury over the sun's disc, on October 9th, 1723; he also observed the dimensions of the planet Venus, while a comet which Halley discovered on October the 9th, 1723, was assiduously observed at Wanstead up to the middle of the ensuing month. The first of Bradley's remarkable contributions to the "Philosophical Transactions" relates to this comet, and the extraordinary amount of work that he went through in connection therewith may be seen from an examination of his book of Calculations which is still extant.

It should be noted that in those early days, the art of building astronomical telescopes was not very well understood. The only known way to tackle the specific challenges in making a refracting telescope was to make it extremely long. In fact, Bradley made several of his observations with a telescope that had a focal length of two hundred and twelve feet. In this situation, no tube could be used, and the objective lens was simply mounted at the top of a tall pole. Despite the inconvenience and awkwardness of such a device, Bradley was able to make many precise measurements with it. For instance, he observed the transit of Mercury across the sun's disc on October 9th, 1723; he also measured the size of the planet Venus while a comet discovered by Halley on the same date was meticulously observed at Wanstead until the middle of the following month. The first of Bradley's notable contributions to the "Philosophical Transactions" is about this comet, and the impressive amount of work he did in relation to it can be seen by reviewing his book of calculations, which still exists today.

The time was now approaching when Bradley was to make the first of those two great discoveries by which his name has acquired a lustre that has placed him in the very foremost rank of astronomical discoverers. As has been often the case in the history of science, the first of these great successes was attained while he was pursuing a research intended for a wholly different purpose. It had long been recognised that as the earth describes a vast orbit, nearly two hundred million miles in diameter, in its annual journey round the sun, the apparent places of the stars should alter, to some extent, in correspondence with the changes in the earth's position. The nearer the star the greater the shift in its apparent place on the heavens, which must arise from the fact that it was seen from different positions in the earth's orbit. It had been pointed out that these apparent changes in the places of the stars, due to the movement of the earth, would provide the means of measuring the distances of the stars. As, however, these distances are enormously great in comparison with the orbit which the earth describes around the sun, the attempt to determine the distances of the stars by the shift in their positions had hitherto proved ineffectual. Bradley determined to enter on this research once again; he thought that by using instruments of greater power, and by making measurements of increased delicacy, he would be able to perceive and to measure displacements which had proved so small as to elude the skill of the other astronomers who had previously made efforts in the same direction. In order to simplify the investigation as much as possible, Bradley devoted his attention to one particular star, Beta Draconis, which happened to pass near his zenith. The object of choosing a star in this position was to avoid the difficulties which would be introduced by refraction had the star occupied any other place in the heavens than that directly overhead.

The time was nearing when Bradley was about to make the first of two major discoveries that would elevate his name among the top ranks of astronomical discoverers. As has often happened in the history of science, his first major success came while he was working on research intended for a completely different purpose. It had long been known that as the Earth travels along a vast orbit, nearly two hundred million miles in diameter, in its annual journey around the sun, the apparent positions of the stars should change somewhat based on the shifts in the Earth's position. The closer the star, the larger the shift in its apparent position in the sky, due to being observed from different spots in Earth's orbit. It had been noted that these apparent changes in stellar positions, resulting from Earth's movement, would provide a way to measure the distances to the stars. However, since these distances are extremely vast compared to Earth's orbit around the sun, attempts to determine the distances based on the change in positions had previously proven ineffective. Bradley decided to revisit this research; he believed that by using more powerful instruments and taking more precise measurements, he could detect and measure displacements that had previously been too small for other astronomers to discern. To simplify the investigation as much as possible, Bradley focused on one particular star, Beta Draconis, which happened to be close to his zenith. He chose a star in this position to avoid the complications that would arise from refraction if the star were located anywhere else in the sky besides directly overhead.

We are still able to identify the very spot on which the telescope stood which was used in this memorable research. It was erected at the house then occupied by Molyneux, on the western extremity of Kew Green. The focal length was 24 feet 3 inches, and the eye-glass was 3 and a half feet above the ground floor. The instrument was first set up on November 26th, 1725. If there had been any appreciable disturbance in the place of Beta Draconis in consequence of the movement of the earth around the sun, the star must appear to have the smallest latitude when in conjunction with the sun, and the greatest when in opposition. The star passed the meridian at noon in December, and its position was particularly noticed by Molyneux on the third of that month. Any perceptible displacement by parallax—for so the apparent change in position, due to the earth's motion, is called—would would have made the star shift towards the north. Bradley, however, when observing it on the 17th, was surprised to find that the apparent place of the star, so far from shifting towards the north, as they had perhaps hoped it would, was found to lie a little more to the south than when it was observed before. He took extreme care to be sure that there was no mistake in his observation, and, true astronomer as he was, he scrutinized with the utmost minuteness all the circumstances of the adjustment of his instruments. Still the star went to the south, and it continued so advancing in the same direction until the following March, by which time it had moved no less than twenty seconds south from the place which it occupied when the first observation was made. After a brief pause, in which no apparent movement was perceptible, the star by the middle of April appeared to be returning to the north. Early in June it reached the same distance from the zenith which it had in December. By September the star was as much as thirty-nine seconds more to the north than it had been in March, then it returned towards the south, regaining in December the same situation which it had occupied twelve months before.

We can still pinpoint the exact spot where the telescope was set up for this significant research. It was located in the house occupied by Molyneux, at the western end of Kew Green. The focal length was 24 feet 3 inches, with the eyepiece positioned 3 and a half feet above the ground floor. The instrument was first installed on November 26th, 1725. If there had been any noticeable shift in the position of Beta Draconis due to the Earth's movement around the sun, the star should have appeared to have the least latitude when aligned with the sun, and the most when it was in opposition. The star crossed the meridian at noon in December, and Molyneux specifically noted its position on the third of that month. Any observable displacement due to parallax—what we call the apparent change in position from the Earth's motion—would have made the star shift northwards. However, when Bradley observed it on the 17th, he was surprised to see that instead of shifting north as they had hoped, the star was actually found to be slightly south of its previous position. He took great care to ensure there was no error in his observation and, as a true astronomer, he meticulously checked all the details of his instrument adjustments. Still, the star continued to move south and kept advancing in that direction until the following March, by which time it had shifted a full twenty seconds south from where it was during the first observation. After a brief pause with no noticeable movement, by mid-April the star appeared to start moving back north. By early June, it had reached the same distance from the zenith that it had in December. By September, the star was thirty-nine seconds further north than it had been in March, after which it headed back south, returning in December to the same position it held a year earlier.

This movement of the star being directly opposite to the movements which would have been the consequence of parallax, seemed to show that even if the star had any parallax its effects upon the apparent place were entirely masked by a much larger motion of a totally different description. Various attempts were made to account for the phenomenon, but they were not successful. Bradley accordingly determined to investigate the whole subject in a more thorough manner. One of his objects was to try whether the same movements which he had observed in one star were in any similar degree possessed by other stars. For this purpose he set up a new instrument at Wanstead, and there he commenced a most diligent scrutiny of the apparent places of several stars which passed at different distances from the zenith. He found in the course of this research that other stars exhibited movements of a similar description to those which had already proved so perplexing. For a long time the cause of these apparent movements seemed a mystery. At last, however, the explanation of these remarkable phenomena dawned upon him, and his great discovery was made.

This movement of the star being directly opposite to the movements that would have resulted from parallax seemed to show that even if the star had any parallax, its effects on the apparent position were completely overshadowed by a much larger motion of a completely different kind. Various attempts were made to explain the phenomenon, but they weren't successful. Bradley then decided to investigate the entire subject more thoroughly. One of his goals was to see if the same movements he observed in one star were similarly present in other stars. To do this, he set up a new instrument at Wanstead and began a very careful examination of the apparent positions of several stars that passed at different distances from the zenith. During this research, he found that other stars displayed movements similar to those that had already been so confusing. For a long time, the cause of these apparent movements remained a mystery. Eventually, however, the explanation for these remarkable phenomena became clear to him, leading to his major discovery.

One day when Bradley was out sailing he happened to remark that every time the boat was laid on a different tack the vane at the top of the boat's mast shifted a little, as if there had been a slight change in the direction of the wind. After he had noticed this three or four times he made a remark to the sailors to the effect that it was very strange the wind should always happen to change just at the moment when the boat was going about. The sailors, however, said there had been no change in the wind, but that the alteration in the vane was due to the fact that the boat's course had been altered. In fact, the position of the vane was determined both by the course of the boat and the direction of the wind, and if either of these were altered there would be a corresponding change in the direction of the vane. This meant, of course, that the observer in the boat which was moving along would feel the wind coming from a point different from that in which the wind appeared to be blowing when the boat was at rest, or when it was sailing in some different direction. Bradley's sagacity saw in this observation the clue to the Difficulty which had so long troubled him.

One day while Bradley was out sailing, he noticed that every time the boat changed direction, the vane at the top of the mast shifted slightly, as if the wind had changed direction. After noticing this three or four times, he mentioned to the sailors that it was strange how the wind always seemed to change right when the boat was turning. The sailors, however, explained that there hadn’t been any change in the wind; rather, the movement of the vane was simply because the boat’s course had changed. In fact, the position of the vane was influenced by both the boat’s direction and the wind’s direction, so if either of these changed, the vane would also point differently. This meant that someone on the moving boat would perceive the wind coming from a different point than it seemed to be blowing when the boat was stationary or sailing in a different direction. Bradley's insight led him to see this observation as the key to the problem that had long puzzled him.

It had been discovered before the time of Bradley that the passage of light through space is not an instantaneous phenomenon. Light requires time for its journey. Galileo surmised that the sun may have reached the horizon before we see it there, and it was indeed sufficiently obvious that a physical action, like the transmission of light, could hardly take place without requiring some lapse of time. The speed with which light actually travelled was, however, so rapid that its determination eluded all the means of experimenting which were available in those days. The penetration of Roemer had previously detected irregularities in the observed times of the eclipses of Jupiter's satellites, which were undoubtedly due to the interval which light required for stretching across the interplanetary spaces. Bradley argued that as light can only travel with a certain speed, it may in a measure be regarded like the wind, which he noticed in the boat. If the observer were at rest, that is to say, if the earth were a stationary object, the direction in which the light actually does come would be different from that in which it appears to come when the earth is in motion. It is true that the earth travels but eighteen miles a second, while the velocity with which light is borne along attains to as much as 180,000 miles a second. The velocity of light is thus ten thousand times greater than the speed of the earth. But even though the wind blew ten thousand times faster than the speed with which the boat was sailing there would still be some change, though no doubt a very small change, in the position of the vane when the boat was in progress from the position it would have if the boat were at rest. It therefore occurred to this most acute of astronomers that when the telescope was pointed towards a star so as to place it apparently in the centre of the field of view, yet it was not generally the true position of the star. It was not, in fact, the position in which the star would have been observed had the earth been at rest. Provided with this suggestion, he explained the apparent movements of the stars by the principle known as the "aberration of light." Every circumstance was accounted for as a consequence of the relative movements of the earth and of the light from the star. This beautiful discovery not only established in the most forcible manner the nature of the movement of light; not only did it illustrate the truth of the Copernican theory which asserted that the earth revolved around the sun, but it was also of the utmost importance in the improvement of practical astronomy. Every observer now knows that, generally speaking, the position which the star appears to have is not exactly the position in which the star does actually lie. The observer is, however, able, by the application of the principles which Bradley so clearly laid down, to apply to an observation the correction which is necessary to obtain from it the true place in which the object is actually situated. This memorable achievement at once conferred on Bradley the highest astronomical fame. He tested his discovery in every way, but only to confirm its truth in the most complete manner.

It had been discovered before Bradley's time that light traveling through space is not an instant process. Light needs time to reach us. Galileo guessed that the sun might have already dipped below the horizon before we actually see it there, and it was quite clear that a physical action, like light transmission, couldn't happen without some time passing. However, the speed at which light travels was so fast that no experiments of that time could determine it accurately. Roemer had previously noticed inconsistencies in the timing of Jupiter's moons' eclipses, which were definitely caused by the time light takes to cross the distances between planets. Bradley pointed out that since light can only travel at a certain speed, we can think of it like wind, which he observed while in a boat. If the observer is stationary, meaning if the Earth were not moving, the direction that light actually comes from would be different from the direction it seems to come from when Earth is in motion. It’s true that Earth moves at about eighteen miles per second, while light travels at up to 180,000 miles per second. Thus, light's speed is about ten thousand times faster than Earth's speed. But even if the wind blew ten thousand times faster than the speed of the boat, there would still be some change, even if it’s very slight, in the position of the vane while the boat is moving compared to what it would be if the boat were standing still. This sharp-minded astronomer realized that when the telescope is aimed at a star so it looks centered in the field of view, it’s usually not the actual position of the star. It isn’t where the star would be seen if the Earth were at rest. With this insight, he explained the apparent motion of the stars through the principle called "aberration of light." Every factor was accounted for as a result of the relative movements of Earth and the light from the star. This remarkable discovery not only firmly established the nature of light's movement; it also supported the Copernican theory that the Earth orbits the sun and played a crucial role in advancing practical astronomy. Every observer now knows that generally, the position a star appears to be in is not exactly where it truly is. However, with the principles that Bradley clearly laid out, an observer can apply the necessary corrections to get the true position of the star. This landmark achievement instantly gave Bradley the highest recognition in astronomy. He tested his discovery in various ways, confirming its accuracy in every instance.

Halley, the Astronomer Royal, died on the 14th, January, 1742, and Bradley was immediately pointed out as his successor. He was accordingly appointed Astronomer Royal in February, 1742. On first taking up his abode at Greenwich he was unable to conduct his observations owing to the wretched condition in which he found the instruments. He devoted himself, however, assiduously to their repair, and his first transit observation is recorded on the 25th July, 1742. He worked with such energy that on one day it appears that 255 transit observations were taken by himself alone, and in September, 1747, he had completed the series of observations which established his second great discovery, the nutation of the earth's axis. The way in which he was led to the detection of the nutation is strikingly illustrative of the extreme care with which Bradley conducted his observations. He found that in the course of a twelve-month, when the star had completed the movement which was due to aberration, it did not return exactly to the same position which it had previously occupied. At first he thought this must be due to some instrumental error, but after closer examination and repeated study of the effect as manifested by many different stars, he came to the conclusion that its origin must be sought in some quite different source. The fact is that a certain change takes place in the apparent position of the stars which is not due to the movement of the star itself, but is rather to be attributed to changes in the points from which the star's positions are measured.

Halley, the Astronomer Royal, died on January 14, 1742, and Bradley was immediately identified as his successor. He was officially appointed Astronomer Royal in February 1742. When he first moved to Greenwich, he couldn't conduct his observations because the instruments were in terrible shape. However, he devoted himself to repairing them, and his first transit observation was recorded on July 25, 1742. He worked so diligently that one day he managed to take 255 transit observations all by himself, and by September 1747, he had completed the series of observations that confirmed his second major discovery, the nutation of the Earth's axis. The way he discovered nutation clearly shows how carefully Bradley conducted his observations. He noticed that over the course of a year, when the star had finished its movement due to aberration, it didn't return exactly to the same position it had occupied before. Initially, he thought this must have been an instrumental error, but after closer examination and repeated studies with many different stars, he concluded that its cause had to be something completely different. The truth is that a certain change occurs in the apparent position of stars that isn’t caused by the stars’ own movement, but rather attributed to changes in the locations from which the star's positions are measured.

We may explain the matter in this way. As the earth is not a sphere, but has protuberant parts at the equator, the attraction of the moon exercises on those protuberant parts a pulling effect which continually changes the direction of the earth's axis, and consequently the position of the pole must be in a state of incessant fluctuation. The pole to which the earth's axis points on the sky is, therefore, slowly changing. At present it happens to lie near the Pole Star, but it will not always remain there. It describes a circle around the pole of the Ecliptic, requiring about 25,000 years for a complete circuit. In the course of its progress the pole will gradually pass now near one star and now near another, so that many stars will in the lapse of ages discharge the various functions which the present Pole Star does for us. In about 12,000 years, for instance, the pole will have come near the bright star, Vega. This movement of the pole had been known for ages. But what Bradley discovered was that the pole, instead of describing an uniform movement as had been previously supposed, followed a sinuous course now on one side and now on the other of its mean place. This he traced to the fluctuations of the moon's orbit, which undergoes a continuous change in a period of nineteen years. Thus the efficiency with which the moon acts on the protuberant mass of the earth varies, and thus the pole is caused to oscillate.

We can explain this like this: the earth isn't a perfect sphere; it has bulging parts at the equator. The moon's gravitational pull affects these bulging areas, which continuously alters the direction of the earth's axis. As a result, the position of the pole is always shifting. The pole that the earth's axis points to in the sky is slowly changing. Right now, it's close to the Pole Star, but it won't always be there. It traces a circle around the Ecliptic pole, taking about 25,000 years to complete one full rotation. Over time, the pole will gradually move near different stars, so many stars will eventually take on the roles that the current Pole Star plays for us. For example, in about 12,000 years, the pole will be near the bright star Vega. People have known about this movement of the pole for ages. However, what Bradley discovered was that the pole doesn’t move in a steady manner, as was previously thought, but rather follows a wavy path, shifting from one side to the other of its average position. He linked this to the variations in the moon's orbit, which changes continuously over a nineteen-year cycle. This means the way the moon influences the earth's bulging mass varies, causing the pole to wobble.

This subtle discovery, if perhaps in some ways less impressive than Bradley's earlier achievements of the detection of the aberration of light, is regarded by astronomers as testifying even in a higher degree to his astonishing care and skill as an observer, and justly entitles him to a unique place among the astronomers whose discoveries have been effected by consummate practical skill in the use of astronomical instruments.

This subtle discovery, while maybe less impressive than Bradley's earlier achievements in detecting the aberration of light, is still seen by astronomers as a testament to his remarkable attention to detail and skill as an observer. It justly earns him a special place among astronomers whose discoveries were made through exceptional practical skill in using astronomical instruments.

Of Bradley's private or domestic life there is but little to tell. In 1744, soon after he became Astronomer Royal, he married a daughter of Samuel Peach, of Chalford, in Gloucestershire. There was but one child, a daughter, who became the wife of her cousin, Rev. Samuel Peach, rector of Compton, Beauchamp, in Berkshire.

Of Bradley's personal life, there isn't much to share. In 1744, shortly after he became Astronomer Royal, he married a daughter of Samuel Peach from Chalford, Gloucestershire. They had just one child, a daughter, who married her cousin, Rev. Samuel Peach, the rector of Compton Beauchamp in Berkshire.

Bradley's last two years of life were clouded by a melancholy depression of spirits, due to an apprehension that he should survive his rational faculties. It seems, however, that the ill he dreaded never came upon him, for he retained his mental powers to the close. He died on 13th July, 1762, aged seventy, and was buried at Michinghamton.

Bradley's last two years of life were marked by a deep sadness, stemming from his fear that he would lose his mental abilities. However, it seems that the misfortune he feared never happened, as he kept his mental faculties until the end. He died on July 13, 1762, at the age of seventy, and was buried in Michinghamton.

WILLIAM HERSCHEL.

William Herschel, one of the greatest astronomers that has ever lived, was born at Hanover, on the 15th November, 1738. His father, Isaac Herschel, was a man evidently of considerable ability, whose life was devoted to the study and practice of music, by which he earned a somewhat precarious maintenance. He had but few worldly goods to leave to his children, but he more than compensated for this by bequeathing to them a splendid inheritance of genius. Touches of genius were, indeed, liberally scattered among the members of Isaac's large family, and in the case of his forth child, William, and of a sister several years younger, it was united with that determined perseverance and rigid adherence to principle which enabled genius to fulfil its perfect work.

William Herschel, one of the greatest astronomers to ever live, was born in Hanover on November 15, 1738. His father, Isaac Herschel, was clearly a talented man whose life was dedicated to studying and practicing music, which earned him a somewhat uncertain living. He had few material possessions to leave his children, but he more than made up for it by passing on a remarkable legacy of talent. There were indeed traces of genius sprinkled throughout Isaac's large family, and in the case of his fourth child, William, and a sister several years younger, it was combined with a strong perseverance and strict adherence to principles that allowed their genius to realize its full potential.

A faithful chronicler has given us an interesting account of the way in which Isaac Herschel educated his sons; the narrative is taken from the recollections of one who, at the time we are speaking of, was an unnoticed little girl five or six years old. She writes:—

A dedicated storyteller has shared an intriguing account of how Isaac Herschel raised his sons; the story comes from the memories of someone who, at that time, was an overlooked little girl around five or six years old. She writes:—

"My brothers were often introduced as solo performers and assistants in the orchestra at the Court, and I remember that I was frequently prevented from going to sleep by the lively criticisms on music on coming from a concert. Often I would keep myself awake that I might listen to their animating remarks, for it made me so happy to see them so happy. But generally their conversation would branch out on philosophical subjects, when my brother William and my father often argued with such warmth that my mother's interference became necessary, when the names—Euler, Leibnitz, and Newton—sounded rather too loud for the repose of her little ones, who had to be at school by seven in the morning." The child whose reminiscences are here given became afterwards the famous Caroline Herschel. The narrative of her life, by Mrs. John Herschel, is a most interesting book, not only for the account it contains of the remarkable woman herself, but also because it provides the best picture we have of the great astronomer to whom Caroline devoted her life.

"My brothers were often introduced as solo performers and helpers in the orchestra at the Court, and I remember that I frequently struggled to fall asleep because of the lively music critiques that came from the concert. Often, I would stay awake just to listen to their exciting discussions because it made me so happy to see them so happy. But usually, their conversation would shift to philosophical topics, where my brother William and my father would often argue so passionately that my mother had to step in when the names—Euler, Leibnitz, and Newton—were mentioned a bit too loudly for the peace of her little ones, who had to be up for school by seven in the morning." The child whose memories are shared here later became the famous Caroline Herschel. The narrative of her life, written by Mrs. John Herschel, is a fascinating book, not only for the story of the remarkable woman herself but also because it offers the best glimpse we have of the great astronomer to whom Caroline dedicated her life.

This modest family circle was, in a measure, dispersed at the outbreak of the Seven Years' War in 1756. The French proceeded to invade Hanover, which, it will be remembered, belonged at this time to the British dominions. Young William Herschel had already obtained the position of a regular performer in the regimental band of the Hanoverian Guards, and it was his fortune to obtain some experience of actual warfare in the disastrous battle of Hastenbeck. He was not wounded, but he had to spend the night after the battle in a ditch, and his meditations on the occasion convinced him that soldiering was not the profession exactly adapted to his tastes. We need not attempt to conceal the fact that he left his regiment by the very simple but somewhat risky process of desertion. He had, it would seem, to adopt disguises to effect his escape. At all events, by some means he succeeded in eluding detection and reached England in safety. It is interesting to have learned on good authority that many years after this offence was committed it was solemnly forgiven. When Herschel had become the famous astronomer, and as such visited King George at Windsor, the King at their first meeting handed to him his pardon for deserting from the army, written out in due form by his Majesty himself.

This modest family circle was, to some extent, broken apart when the Seven Years' War started in 1756. The French began to invade Hanover, which, as a reminder, was part of the British territories at the time. Young William Herschel had already become a regular performer in the regimental band of the Hanoverian Guards, and he gained some firsthand experience in actual combat during the disastrous battle of Hastenbeck. He was not injured, but he had to spend the night after the battle in a ditch, and his reflections during that time convinced him that being a soldier wasn't really the right fit for him. We can't hide the fact that he left his regiment through the relatively straightforward but somewhat risky act of desertion. It seems he had to use disguises to escape. In any case, he managed to avoid detection and made it back to England safely. It's fascinating to learn from reliable sources that many years after this offense took place, it was officially pardoned. When Herschel had risen to fame as an astronomer and visited King George at Windsor, the King handed him his pardon for deserting the army at their first meeting, written formally by His Majesty himself.

It seems that the young musician must have had some difficulty in providing for his maintenance during the first few years of his abode in England. It was not until he had reached the age of twenty-two that he succeeded in obtaining any regular appointment. He was then made Instructor of Music to the Durham Militia. Shortly afterwards, his talents being more widely recognised, he was appointed as organist at the parish church at Halifax, and his prospects in life now being fairly favourable, and the Seven Years' War being over, he ventured to pay a visit to Hanover to see his father. We can imagine the delight with which old Isaac Herschel welcomed his promising son, as well as his parental pride when a concert was given at which some of William's compositions were performed. If the father was so intensely gratified on this occasion, what would his feelings have been could he have lived to witness his son's future career? But this pleasure was not to be his, for he died many years before William became an astronomer.

It seems that the young musician struggled to support himself during the first few years of his time in England. It wasn’t until he turned twenty-two that he landed a regular position. He was then appointed as the Music Instructor for the Durham Militia. Shortly after that, as his talents gained more recognition, he became the organist at the parish church in Halifax. With his life prospects looking fairly good and the Seven Years' War coming to an end, he decided to visit Hanover to see his father. We can imagine the joy with which old Isaac Herschel greeted his talented son, along with his pride when a concert featuring some of William’s compositions took place. If the father felt such deep satisfaction on that occasion, just think how he would have felt if he could have lived to see his son’s future achievements! But that joy was not meant for him, as he passed away many years before William became an astronomer.

In 1766, about a couple of years after his return to England from This visit to his old home, we find that Herschel had received a further promotion to be organist in the Octagon Chapel, at Bath. Bath was then, as now, a highly fashionable resort, and many notable personages patronised the rising musician. Herschel had other points in his favour besides his professional skill; his appearance was good, his address was prepossessing, and even his nationality was a distinct advantage, inasmuch as he was a Hanoverian in the reign of King George the Third. On Sundays he played the organ, to the great delight of the congregation, and on week-days he was occupied by giving lessons to private pupils, and in preparation for public performances. He thus came to be busily employed, and seems to have been in the enjoyment of comfortable means.

In 1766, a couple of years after returning to England from his visit to his old home, Herschel received a promotion to become the organist at the Octagon Chapel in Bath. Bath was, as it is now, a trendy resort, and many prominent figures supported the up-and-coming musician. Herschel had other advantages besides his musical talent; he looked good, had a charming demeanor, and even his nationality was a plus since he was a Hanoverian during the reign of King George the Third. On Sundays, he played the organ, delighting the congregation, and during the week, he taught private lessons and prepared for public performances. He was thus very busy and seemed to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle.

7, NEW KING STREET, BATH, WHERE HERSCHEL LIVED.
7, NEW KING STREET, BATH, WHERE HERSCHEL LIVED.
7 New King Street, Bath, where Herschel lived.

From his earliest youth Herschel had been endowed with that invaluable characteristic, an eager curiosity for knowledge. He was naturally desirous of perfecting himself in the theory of music, and thus he was led to study mathematics. When he had once tasted the charms of mathematics, he saw vast regions of knowledge unfolded before him, and in this way he was induced to direct his attention to astronomy. More and more this pursuit seems to have engrossed his attention, until at last it had become an absorbing passion. Herschel was, however, still obliged, by the exigency of procuring a livelihood, to give up the best part of his time to his profession as a musician; but his heart was eagerly fixed on another science, and every spare moment was steadily devoted to astronomy. For many years, however, he continued to labour at his original calling, nor was it until he had attained middle age and become the most celebrated astronomer of the time, that he was enabled to concentrate his attention exclusively on his favourite pursuit.

From a young age, Herschel was blessed with that priceless trait, a strong curiosity for knowledge. He naturally wanted to perfect himself in music theory, which led him to study mathematics. Once he experienced the allure of mathematics, he discovered vast areas of knowledge opening up before him, which encouraged him to focus on astronomy. Slowly, this pursuit started to consume his attention, until it eventually turned into an all-consuming passion. However, Herschel still had to devote most of his time to his job as a musician in order to make a living; yet, his heart was set on another science, and every free moment was dedicated to astronomy. For many years, he continued to work in his original profession, and it wasn't until he reached middle age and became the most renowned astronomer of his time that he could focus entirely on his favorite pursuit.

It was with quite a small telescope which had been lent him by a friend that Herschel commenced his career as an observer. However, he speedily discovered that to see all he wanted to see, a telescope of far greater power would be necessary, and he determined to obtain this more powerful instrument by actually making it with his own hands. At first it may seem scarcely likely that one whose occupation had previously been the study and practice of music should meet with success in so technical an operation as the construction of a telescope. It may, however, be mentioned that the kind of instrument which Herschel designed to construct was formed on a very different principle from the refracting telescopes with which we are ordinarily familiar. His telescope was to be what is termed a reflector. In this type of instrument the optical power is obtained by the use of a mirror at the bottom of the tube, and the astronomer looks down through the tube TOWARDS HIS MIRROR and views the reflection of the stars with its aid. Its efficiency as a telescope depends entirely on the accuracy with which the requisite form has been imparted to the mirror. The surface has to be hollowed out a little, and this has to be done so truly that the slightest deviation from good workmanship in this essential particular would be fatal to efficient performance of the telescope.

Herschel started his journey as an observer with a small telescope lent to him by a friend. However, he quickly realized that to see everything he wanted, he would need a much more powerful telescope, and he decided to build this stronger instrument himself. At first, it might seem surprising that someone whose background was in music would succeed in such a technical task as making a telescope. However, it's worth noting that the type of telescope Herschel planned to create was based on a very different principle than the refracting telescopes we usually know. His telescope was going to be a reflector. In this kind of instrument, the optical power is generated by a mirror at the bottom of the tube, and the astronomer looks down the tube TOWARDS HIS MIRROR to see the reflection of the stars. Its effectiveness as a telescope relies completely on how accurately the mirror has been shaped. The surface must be slightly hollowed out, and this needs to be done so precisely that even the tiniest mistake in this crucial aspect could ruin the telescope's performance.

WILLIAM HERSCHEL.
WILLIAM HERSCHEL.
William Herschel.

The mirror that Herschel employed was composed of a mixture of two parts of copper to one of tin; the alloy thus obtained is an intensely hard material, very difficult to cast into the proper shape, and very difficult to work afterwards. It possesses, however, when polished, a lustre hardly inferior to that of silver itself. Herschel has recorded hardly any particulars as to the actual process by which he cast and figured his reflectors. We are however, told that in later years, after his telescopes had become famous, he made a considerable sum of money by the manufacture and sale of great instruments. Perhaps this may be the reason why he never found it expedient to publish any very explicit details as to the means by which his remarkable successes were obtained.

The mirror that Herschel used was made from a mixture of two parts copper and one part tin; this alloy is extremely hard, making it very difficult to cast into the right shape and to work with afterward. However, when polished, it has a shine that is nearly as good as silver. Herschel hasn’t shared many specifics about the actual process he used to cast and shape his reflectors. We do know that in later years, after his telescopes gained fame, he made a significant amount of money from making and selling large instruments. Perhaps that’s why he never thought it was necessary to publish any detailed information about how he achieved such remarkable success.

CAROLINE HERSCHEL.
CAROLINE HERSCHEL.
Caroline Herschel.

Since Herschel's time many other astronomers, notably the late Earl of Rosse, have experimented in the same direction, and succeeded in making telescopes certainly far greater, and probably more perfect, than any which Herschel appears to have constructed. The details of these later methods are now well known, and have been extensively practised. Many amateurs have thus been able to make telescopes by following the instructions so clearly laid down by Lord Rosse and the other authorities. Indeed, it would seem that any one who has a little mechanical skill and a good deal of patience ought now to experience no great difficulty in constructing a telescope quite as powerful as that which first brought Herschel into fame. I should, however, mention that in these modern days the material generally used for the mirror is of a more tractable description than the metallic substance which was employed by Herschel and by Lord Rosse. A reflecting telescope of the present day would not be fitted with a mirror composed of that alloy known as speculum metal, whose composition I have already mentioned. It has been found more advantageous to employ a glass mirror carefully figured and polished, just as a metallic mirror would have been, and then to impart to the polished glass surface a fine coating of silver laid down by a chemical process. The silver-on-glass mirrors are so much lighter and so much easier to construct that the more old-fashioned metallic mirrors may be said to have fallen into almost total disuse. In one respect however, the metallic mirror may still claim the advantage that, with reasonable care, its surface will last bright and untarnished for a much longer period than can the silver film on the glass. However, the operation of re-silvering a glass has now become such a simple one that the advantage this indicates is not relatively so great as might at first be supposed.

Since Herschel's time, many other astronomers, especially the late Earl of Rosse, have experimented in the same area and succeeded in creating telescopes that are definitely larger and likely more advanced than any that Herschel appears to have built. The specifics of these newer techniques are now well-known and have been widely practiced. Many hobbyists have been able to build telescopes by following the clear instructions provided by Lord Rosse and other experts. In fact, it seems that anyone with a bit of mechanical skill and a lot of patience should have no trouble building a telescope that is just as powerful as the one that first made Herschel famous. However, I should note that nowadays, the materials typically used for the mirror are much easier to work with than the metallic substance that Herschel and Lord Rosse used. A modern reflecting telescope wouldn't have a mirror made from that alloy known as speculum metal, which I mentioned earlier. It has proven to be more beneficial to use a glass mirror that is carefully shaped and polished, just like a metallic mirror would have been, and then to apply a fine layer of silver to the polished glass surface through a chemical process. Silver-on-glass mirrors are significantly lighter and much easier to create, so the older metallic mirrors are now almost completely out of use. However, in one respect, the metallic mirror still has an edge: with some proper care, its surface can stay bright and untarnished for a much longer time than the silver coating on glass. Still, the process of re-silvering a glass mirror has become so straightforward that this advantage is not as significant as one might initially think.

STREET VIEW, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
STREET VIEW, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
Street view, Herschel House, Slough.

Some years elapsed after Herschel's attention had been first directed to astronomy, before he reaped the reward of his exertions in the possession of a telescope which would adequately reveal some of the glories of the heavens. It was in 1774, when the astronomer was thirty-six years old, that he obtained his first glimpse of the stars with an instrument of his own construction. Night after night, as soon as his musical labours were ended, his telescopes were brought out, sometimes into the small back garden of his house at Bath, and sometimes into the street in front of his hall-door. It was characteristic of him that he was always endeavouring to improve his apparatus. He was incessantly making fresh mirrors, or trying new lenses, or combinations of lenses to act as eye-pieces, or projecting alterations in the mounting by which the telescope was supported. Such was his enthusiasm that his house, we are told, was incessantly littered with the usual indications of the workman's presence, greatly to the distress of his sister, who, at this time, had come to take up her abode with him and look after his housekeeping. Indeed, she complained that in his astronomical ardour he sometimes omitted to take off, before going into his workshop, the beautiful lace ruffles which he wore while conducting a concert, and that consequently they became soiled with the pitch employed in the polishing of his mirrors.

Some years passed after Herschel first got interested in astronomy before he finally got a telescope that could truly show him some of the wonders of the skies. In 1774, when he was thirty-six, he had his first real look at the stars through a telescope he had built himself. Night after night, once he finished his music work, he would set up his telescopes, sometimes in the small backyard of his home in Bath and other times right outside his front door. It was typical of him to constantly try to improve his equipment. He was always making new mirrors, experimenting with different lenses or combinations of lenses for eye-pieces, or designing modifications to the telescope's mount. His enthusiasm was so intense that his house was reportedly always cluttered with the usual signs of a workshop, which greatly troubled his sister, who had recently moved in to help manage the household. She even complained that in his excitement for astronomy, he sometimes forgot to remove his beautiful lace ruffles, which he wore while conducting concerts, before heading into his workshop, resulting in them getting stained with pitch from polishing his mirrors.

This sister, who occupies such a distinct place in scientific history is the same little girl to whom we have already referred. From her earliest days she seems to have cherished a passionate admiration for her brilliant brother William. It was the proudest delight of her childhood as well as of her mature years to render him whatever service she could; no man of science was ever provided with a more capable or energetic helper than William Herschel found in this remarkable woman. Whatever work had to be done she was willing to bear her share in it, or even to toil at it unassisted if she could be allowed to do so. She not only managed all his domestic affairs, but in the grinding of the lenses and in the polishing of the mirrors she rendered every assistance that was possible. At one stage of the very delicate operation of fashioning a reflector, it is necessary for the workman to remain with his hand on the mirror for many hours in succession. When such labours were in progress, Caroline used to sit by her brother, and enliven the time by reading stories aloud, sometimes pausing to feed him with a spoon while his hands were engaged on the task from which he could not desist for a moment.

This sister, who holds a unique place in scientific history, is the same little girl we've already mentioned. From a young age, she seems to have had a deep admiration for her brilliant brother William. It was the greatest joy of her childhood as well as her adult years to help him in any way she could; no scientist was ever given a more capable or energetic assistant than William Herschel had in this remarkable woman. Whatever work needed to be done, she was ready to take on her share or even do it alone if she could. She not only took care of all his household responsibilities but also helped in grinding the lenses and polishing the mirrors as much as she could. During a particularly delicate part of making a reflector, the worker had to keep his hand on the mirror for many hours straight. During these times, Caroline would sit by her brother and keep them entertained by reading stories aloud, sometimes stopping to feed him with a spoon while his hands were busy with the task that required his full attention.

When mathematical work had to be done Caroline was ready for it; she had taught herself sufficient to enable her to perform the kind of calculations, not, perhaps, very difficult ones, that Herschel's work required; indeed, it is not too much to say that the mighty life-work which this man was enabled to perform could never have been accomplished had it not been for the self-sacrifice of this ever-loving and faithful sister. When Herschel was at the telescope at night, Caroline sat by him at her desk, pen in hand, ready to write down the notes of the observations as they fell from her brother's lips. This was no insignificant toil. The telescope was, of course, in the open air, and as Herschel not unfrequently continued his observations throughout the whole of a long winter's night, there were but few women who could have accomplished the task which Caroline so cheerfully executed. From dusk till dawn, when the sky was clear, were Herschel's observing hours, and what this sometimes implied we can realise from the fact that Caroline assures us she had sometimes to desist because the ink had actually frozen in her pen. The night's work over, a brief rest was taken, and while William had his labours for the day to attend to, Caroline carefully transcribed the observations made during the night before, reduced all the figures and prepared everything in readiness for the observations that were to follow on the ensuing evening.

When it was time to do some math, Caroline was always ready. She had taught herself enough to handle the calculations that Herschel's work needed—maybe not the toughest calculations, but still significant. In fact, it’s not an exaggeration to say that without the selflessness and dedication of this loving and loyal sister, Herschel could never have achieved the incredible work he did. While Herschel was at the telescope at night, Caroline would sit by her desk, pen in hand, ready to jot down the notes from his observations. This wasn’t a small task. The telescope was outdoors, and since Herschel often continued his observations for an entire long winter night, very few women could have managed the job Caroline handled so willingly. From dusk until dawn, when the sky was clear, were Herschel’s observing hours, and we can understand what this sometimes meant when Caroline tells us that she often had to stop because the ink had actually frozen in her pen. After they finished for the night, they took a short break, and while William had his day’s work to do, Caroline carefully transcribed the night’s observations, processed all the figures, and got everything ready for the next evening’s observations.

But we have here been anticipating a little of the future which lay before the great astronomer; we must now revert to the history of his early work, at Bath, in 1774, when Herschel's scrutiny of the skies first commenced with an instrument of his own manufacture. For some few years he did not attain any result of importance; no doubt he made a few interesting observations, but the value of the work during those years is to be found, not in any actual discoveries which were accomplished, but in the practice which Herschel obtained in the use of his instruments. It was not until 1782 that the great achievement took place by which he at once sprang into fame.

But we have been looking a bit into the future that awaited the great astronomer; now we need to go back to the history of his early work, in Bath, in 1774, when Herschel began his observations of the skies with a telescope he built himself. For a few years, he didn't achieve any significant results; he certainly made some interesting observations, but the value of his work during that time lay not in any actual discoveries, but in the experience Herschel gained from using his instruments. It wasn't until 1782 that his major achievement occurred, which launched him into fame.

GARDEN VIEW, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
GARDEN VIEW, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
Garden View, Herschel House, Slough.

It is sometimes said that discoveries are made by accident, and, no doubt, to a certain extent, but only, I fancy to a very small extent, this statement may be true. It is, at all events, certain that such lucky accidents do not often fall to the lot of people unless those people have done much to deserve them. This was certainly the case with Herschel. He appears to have formed a project for making a close examination of all the stars above a certain magnitude. Perhaps he intended to confine this research to a limited region of the sky, but, at all events, he seems to have undertaken the work energetically and systematically. Star after star was brought to the centre of the field of view of his telescope, and after being carefully examined was then displaced, while another star was brought forward to be submitted to the same process. In the great majority of cases such observations yield really nothing of importance; no doubt even the smallest star in the heavens would, if we could find out all about it, reveal far more than all the astronomers that were ever on the earth have even conjectured. What we actually learn about the great majority of stars is only information of the most meagre description. We see that the star is a little point of light, and we see nothing more.

It’s often said that discoveries happen by accident, and while this is true to some extent, I believe it’s a very small part of the whole picture. What’s certain is that these lucky accidents usually don’t come to those who haven’t worked hard to earn them. Herschel is a perfect example of this. He seemed to have a plan to closely examine all the stars above a certain brightness. He might have aimed to focus this research on a specific area of the sky, but either way, he approached the task with a lot of energy and organization. One by one, he brought star after star into the center of his telescope’s view, carefully examined them, and then moved on to the next star for the same process. Most of the time, these observations don’t reveal anything significant; even the tiniest star in the sky would probably tell us much more than all the astronomers throughout history have ever imagined. What we actually learn about most stars is pretty minimal. We see that the star is just a tiny point of light, and we don’t learn anything more.

In the great review which Herschel undertook he doubtless examined hundreds, or perhaps thousands of stars, allowing them to pass away without note or comment. But on an ever-memorable night in March, 1782, it happened that he was pursuing his task among the stars in the Constellation of Gemini. Doubtless, on that night, as on so many other nights, one star after another was looked at only to be dismissed, as not requiring further attention. On the evening in question, however, one star was noticed which, to Herschel's acute vision seemed different from the stars which in so many thousands are strewn over the sky. A star properly so called appears merely as a little point of light, which no increase of magnifying power will ever exhibit with a true disc. But there was something in the star-like object which Herschel saw that immediately arrested his attention and made him apply to it a higher magnifying power. This at once disclosed the fact that the object possessed a disc, that is, a definite, measurable size, and that it was thus totally different from any one of the hundreds and thousands of stars which exist elsewhere in space. Indeed, we may say at once that this little object was not a star at all; it was a planet. That such was its true nature was confirmed, after a little further observation, by perceiving that the body was shifting its place on the heavens relatively to the stars. The organist at the Octagon Chapel at Bath had, therefore, discovered a new planet with his home-made telescope.

In the extensive review Herschel conducted, he likely looked at hundreds, if not thousands, of stars, letting many pass by without any notes or comments. But on a memorable night in March 1782, he was working among the stars in the constellation Gemini. That night, just like on many others, he checked one star after another, dismissing them as not needing further attention. However, on that particular evening, he noticed one star that, to his keen eye, seemed different from the countless others scattered across the sky. A true star only appears as a tiny point of light, which no amount of magnification can turn into a real disc. But there was something about the star-like object that caught Herschel's attention and prompted him to use a higher magnification. This immediately revealed that the object had a disc, meaning it had a definite, measurable size and was completely unlike the countless stars found in space. In fact, we can say right away that this small object was not a star at all; it was a planet. This conclusion was further confirmed after some additional observation, as he noticed the body was moving relative to the stars. So, the organist at the Octagon Chapel in Bath had discovered a new planet using his homemade telescope.

I can imagine some one will say, "Oh, there was nothing so wonderful in that; are not planets always being discovered? Has not M. Palisa, for instance, discovered about eighty of such objects, and are there not hundreds of them known nowadays?" This is, to a certain extent, quite true. I have not the least desire to detract from the credit of those industrious and sharp-sighted astronomers who have in modern days brought so many of these little objects within our cognisance. I think, however, it must be admitted that such discoveries have a totally different importance in the history of science from that which belongs to the peerless achievement of Herschel. In the first place, it must be observed that the minor planets now brought to light are so minute that if a score of them were rolled to together into one lump it would not be one-thousandth part of the size of the grand planet discovered by Herschel. This is, nevertheless, not the most important point. What marks Herschel's achievement as one of the great epochs in the history of astronomy is the fact that the detection of Uranus was the very first recorded occasion of the discovery of any planet whatever.

I can imagine someone saying, "Oh, there was nothing so amazing about that; aren’t planets always being discovered? Didn’t M. Palisa, for example, discover around eighty of these objects, and aren’t there hundreds known today?" This is, to some extent, quite true. I don’t want to downplay the achievements of those hardworking and observant astronomers who have recently made so many of these small objects known to us. However, it must be acknowledged that these discoveries have a completely different significance in the history of science compared to the unmatched accomplishment of Herschel. First of all, it should be noted that the minor planets now uncovered are so tiny that if a dozen of them were gathered into one lump, it would still be less than one-thousandth the size of the grand planet discovered by Herschel. Nonetheless, this is not the most crucial point. What makes Herschel's discovery stand out as one of the great milestones in the history of astronomy is that detecting Uranus was the very first recorded instance of discovering any planet at all.

For uncounted ages those who watched the skies had been aware of the existence of the five old planets—Jupiter, Mercury, Saturn, Venus, and Mars. It never seems to have occurred to any of the ancient philosophers that there could be other similar objects as yet undetected over and above the well-known five. Great then was the astonishment of the scientific world when the Bath organist announced his discovery that the five planets which had been known from all antiquity must now admit the company of a sixth. And this sixth planet was, indeed, worthy on every ground to be received into the ranks of the five glorious bodies of antiquity. It was, no doubt, not so large as Saturn, it was certainly very much less than Jupiter; on the other hand, the new body was very much larger than Mercury, than Venus, or than Mars, and the earth itself seemed quite an insignificant object in comparison with this newly added member of the Solar System. In one respect, too, Herschel's new planet was a much more imposing object than any one of the older bodies; it swept around the sun in a majestic orbit, far outside that of Saturn, which had previously been regarded as the boundary of the Solar System, and its stately progress required a period of not less than eighty-one years.

For countless ages, those who observed the skies were aware of the five known planets—Jupiter, Mercury, Saturn, Venus, and Mars. It never seemed to cross the minds of ancient philosophers that there could be other similar objects yet to be discovered beyond the well-known five. So, the scientific community was greatly astonished when the Bath organist announced his discovery that the five planets known since antiquity must now include a sixth. This sixth planet was certainly worthy in every way to join the ranks of the five glorious bodies of the past. While it was undoubtedly smaller than Saturn and certainly much less than Jupiter, this new celestial body was significantly larger than Mercury, Venus, or Mars, and the Earth itself seemed quite small in comparison to this newly added member of the Solar System. In one way, Herschel's new planet was also a more impressive object than any of the older bodies; it orbited the sun in a grand trajectory, far beyond that of Saturn, which had been previously considered the edge of the Solar System, and its majestic journey took not less than eighty-one years.

King George the Third, hearing of the achievements of the Hanoverian musician, felt much interest in his discovery, and accordingly Herschel was bidden to come to Windsor, and to bring with him the famous telescope, in order to exhibit the new planet to the King, and to tell his Majesty all about it. The result of the interview was to give Herschel the opportunity for which he had so long wished, of being able to devote himself exclusively to science for the rest of his life.

King George III, learning about the achievements of the Hanoverian musician, took a great interest in his discovery. As a result, Herschel was invited to come to Windsor and bring the famous telescope to show the new planet to the King and explain it to His Majesty. The outcome of this meeting gave Herschel the chance he'd longed for to dedicate himself entirely to science for the rest of his life.

VIEW OF THE OBSERVATORY, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
VIEW OF THE OBSERVATORY, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
VIEW OF THE OBSERVATORY, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.

The King took so great a fancy to the astronomer that he first, as I have already mentioned, duly pardoned his desertion from the army, some twenty-five years previously. As a further mark of his favour the King proposed to confer on Herschel the title of his Majesty's own astronomer, to assign to him a residence near Windsor, to provide him with a salary, and to furnish such funds as might be required for the erection of great telescopes, and for the conduct of that mighty scheme of celestial observation on which Herschel was so eager to enter. Herschel's capacity for work would have been much impaired if he had been deprived of the aid of his admirable sister, and to her, therefore, the King also assigned a salary, and she was installed as Herschel's assistant in his new post.

The King was so taken with the astronomer that he first, as I mentioned earlier, officially forgave him for leaving the army about twenty-five years ago. As a further sign of his support, the King decided to give Herschel the title of His Majesty's Astronomer, arrange for him to live near Windsor, provide him with a salary, and supply the funds needed to build large telescopes and to carry out the ambitious celestial observation project that Herschel was so eager to pursue. Herschel's ability to work would have been greatly affected if he didn't have the support of his wonderful sister, so the King also granted her a salary, and she was appointed as Herschel's assistant in his new position.

With his usually impulsive determination, Herschel immediately cut himself free from all his musical avocations at Bath, and at once entered on the task of making and erecting the great telescopes at Windsor. There, for more than thirty years, he and his faithful sister prosecuted with unremitting ardour their nightly scrutiny of the sky. Paper after paper was sent to the Royal Society, describing the hundreds, indeed the thousands, of objects such as double stars; nebulae and clusters, which were first revealed to human gaze during those midnight vigils. To the end of his life he still continued at every possible opportunity to devote himself to that beloved pursuit in which he had such unparalleled success. No single discovery of Herschel's later years was, however, of the same momentous description as that which first brought him to fame.

With his usual impulsive determination, Herschel quickly freed himself from all his musical commitments in Bath and immediately focused on making and setting up the great telescopes at Windsor. For over thirty years, he and his dedicated sister tirelessly worked each night to observe the sky. Paper after paper was sent to the Royal Society, detailing the hundreds, even thousands, of objects like double stars, nebulae, and clusters that were revealed to human eyes during those late-night sessions. Until the end of his life, he continued to seize every opportunity to engage in that beloved pursuit in which he experienced such unmatched success. However, no single discovery in Herschel's later years matched the significance of the one that first brought him fame.

THE 40-FOOT TELESCOPE AS IT WAS IN THE YEAR 1863, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
THE 40-FOOT TELESCOPE AS IT WAS IN THE YEAR 1863, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.
THE 40-FOOT TELESCOPE IN 1863, HERSCHEL HOUSE, SLOUGH.

Herschel married when considerably advanced in life and he lived to enjoy the indescribable pleasure of finding that his only son, afterwards Sir John Herschel, was treading worthily in his footsteps, and attaining renown as an astronomical observer, second only to that of his father. The elder Herschel died in 1822, and his illustrious sister Caroline then returned to Hanover, where she lived for many years to receive the respect and attention which were so justly hers. She died at a very advanced age in 1848.

Herschel married later in life and was able to experience the incredible joy of seeing that his only son, who later became Sir John Herschel, was honorably following in his footsteps and gaining recognition as an astronomer, second only to his father's fame. The elder Herschel passed away in 1822, and his esteemed sister Caroline then went back to Hanover, where she lived for many years receiving the respect and admiration that she truly deserved. She passed away at a very old age in 1848.

LAPLACE.

The author of the "Mecanique Celeste" was born at Beaumont-en-Auge, near Honfleur, in 1749, just thirteen years later than his renowned friend Lagrange. His father was a farmer, but appears to have been in a position to provide a good education for a son who seemed promising. Considering the unorthodoxy in religious matters which is generally said to have characterized Laplace in later years, it is interesting to note that when he was a boy the subject which first claimed his attention was theology. He was, however, soon introduced to the study of mathematics, in which he presently became so proficient, that while he was still no more than eighteen years old, he obtained employment as a mathematical teacher in his native town.

The author of "Mecanique Celeste" was born in Beaumont-en-Auge, near Honfleur, in 1749, just thirteen years after his famous friend Lagrange. His father was a farmer but seemed to be able to provide a decent education for his promising son. Considering the unorthodox views on religion that Laplace is often said to have had later in life, it's interesting to note that as a child, the subject that first caught his attention was theology. However, he was quickly introduced to mathematics, and he became so skilled in it that by the time he was just eighteen years old, he was working as a math teacher in his hometown.

Desiring wider opportunities for study and for the acquisition of fame than could be obtained in the narrow associations of provincial life, young Laplace started for Paris, being provided with letters of introduction to D'Alembert, who then occupied the most prominent position as a mathematician in France, if not in the whole of Europe. D'Alembert's fame was indeed so brilliant that Catherine the Great wrote to ask him to undertake the education of her Son, and promised the splendid income of a hundred thousand francs. He preferred, however, a quiet life of research in Paris, although there was but a modest salary attached to his office. The philosopher accordingly declined the alluring offer to go to Russia, even though Catherine wrote again to say: "I know that your refusal arises from your desire to cultivate your studies and your friendships in quiet. But this is of no consequence: bring all your friends with you, and I promise you that both you and they shall have every accommodation in my power." With equal firmness the illustrious mathematician resisted the manifold attractions with which Frederick the Great sought to induce him, to take up his residence at Berlin. In reading of these invitations we cannot but be struck at the extraordinary respect which was then paid to scientific distinction. It must be remembered that the discoveries of such a man as D'Alembert were utterly incapable of being appreciated except by those who possessed a high degree of mathematical culture. We nevertheless find the potentates of Russia and Prussia entreating and, as it happens, vainly entreating, the most distinguished mathematician in France to accept the positions that they were proud to offer him.

Wanting broader opportunities for study and fame than could be found in the limited circles of provincial life, young Laplace headed to Paris, equipped with letters of introduction to D'Alembert, who held the leading position as a mathematician in France, if not all of Europe. D'Alembert's reputation was so impressive that Catherine the Great wrote to ask him to educate her son, offering the lavish salary of a hundred thousand francs. However, he preferred a quiet life of research in Paris, despite the modest salary that came with his position. The philosopher declined the tempting offer to move to Russia, even when Catherine wrote again, saying, "I know your refusal comes from your wish to cultivate your studies and friendships in peace. But that doesn't matter: bring all your friends with you, and I promise you and they will have everything I can provide." With equal determination, the renowned mathematician resisted various appeals from Frederick the Great to settle in Berlin. When we read about these invitations, it's striking how much respect was given to scientific achievement back then. It's important to remember that the discoveries of someone like D'Alembert could only be truly appreciated by those with a high level of mathematical understanding. Still, we see the leaders of Russia and Prussia eagerly and, as it turns out, unsuccessfully inviting the most distinguished mathematician in France to accept the prestigious positions they offered.

It was to D'Alembert, the profound mathematician, that young Laplace, the son of the country farmer, presented his letters of introduction. But those letters seem to have elicited no reply, whereupon Laplace wrote to D'Alembert submitting a discussion on some point in Dynamics. This letter instantly produced the desired effect. D'Alembert thought that such mathematical talent as the young man displayed was in itself the best of introductions to his favour. It could not be overlooked, and accordingly he invited Laplace to come and see him. Laplace, of course, presented himself, and ere long D'Alembert obtained for the rising philosopher a professorship of mathematics in the Military School in Paris. This gave the brilliant young mathematician the opening for which he sought, and he quickly availed himself of it.

It was to D'Alembert, the brilliant mathematician, that young Laplace, the son of a farmer, submitted his letters of introduction. However, those letters seemed to get no response, so Laplace wrote to D'Alembert discussing a point in Dynamics. This letter immediately had the desired effect. D'Alembert believed that the mathematical talent the young man demonstrated was in itself the best introduction to his favor. It couldn't be ignored, and so he invited Laplace to come meet him. Laplace naturally accepted the invitation, and soon after, D'Alembert secured a mathematics professorship for the aspiring philosopher at the Military School in Paris. This provided the talented young mathematician with the opportunity he was looking for, and he quickly took advantage of it.

Laplace was twenty-three years old when his first memoir on a profound mathematical subject appeared in the Memoirs of the Academy at Turin. From this time onwards we find him publishing one memoir after another in which he attacks, and in many cases successfully vanquishes, profound difficulties in the application of the Newtonian theory of gravitation to the explanation of the solar system. Like his great contemporary Lagrange, he loftily attempted problems which demanded consummate analytical skill for their solution. The attention of the scientific world thus became riveted on the splendid discoveries which emanated from these two men, each gifted with extraordinary genius.

Laplace was just twenty-three when his first paper on a complex mathematical topic was published in the Memoirs of the Academy at Turin. From that point on, he published one paper after another, tackling and often overcoming significant challenges in applying Newton's theory of gravitation to explain the solar system. Like his renowned contemporary Lagrange, he boldly pursued problems that required exceptional analytical skills to solve. The scientific community’s attention was captivated by the remarkable discoveries coming from these two individuals, each possessing extraordinary talent.

Laplace's most famous work is, of course, the "Mecanique Celeste," in which he essayed a comprehensive attempt to carry out the principles which Newton had laid down, into much greater detail than Newton had found practicable. The fact was that Newton had not only to construct the theory of gravitation, but he had to invent the mathematical tools, so to speak, by which his theory could be applied to the explanation of the movements of the heavenly bodies. In the course of the century which had elapsed between the time of Newton and the time of Laplace, mathematics had been extensively developed. In particular, that potent instrument called the infinitesimal calculus, which Newton had invented for the investigation of nature, had become so far perfected that Laplace, when he attempted to unravel the movements of the heavenly bodies, found himself provided with a calculus far more efficient than that which had been available to Newton. The purely geometrical methods which Newton employed, though they are admirably adapted for demonstrating in a general way the tendencies of forces and for explaining the more obvious phenomena by which the movements of the heavenly bodies are disturbed, are yet quite inadequate for dealing with the more subtle effects of the Law of Gravitation. The disturbances which one planet exercises upon the rest can only be fully ascertained by the aid of long calculation, and for these calculations analytical methods are required.

Laplace's most famous work is, of course, the "Mécanique Céleste," where he made a thorough attempt to expand on the principles that Newton established, going into much more detail than Newton found feasible. The reality was that Newton not only had to develop the theory of gravitation, but he also had to create the mathematical tools that would allow his theory to be applied to explain the movements of the heavenly bodies. By the time Laplace came along, a century had passed since Newton's work, and mathematics had advanced significantly. In particular, the powerful tool known as infinitesimal calculus, which Newton had created to explore nature, had been refined to the point that when Laplace tried to analyze the movements of celestial bodies, he had access to a calculus far more effective than what Newton had available. The purely geometrical methods that Newton used, while excellent for generally demonstrating force tendencies and explaining the more obvious phenomena affecting the movements of heavenly bodies, are ultimately insufficient for addressing the more complex effects of the Law of Gravitation. The disturbances one planet causes to another can only be fully understood through extensive calculations, and analytical methods are necessary for these calculations.

With an armament of mathematical methods which had been perfected since the days of Newton by the labours of two or three generations of consummate mathematical inventors, Laplace essayed in the "Mecanique Celeste" to unravel the mysteries of the heavens. It will hardly be disputed that the book which he has produced is one of the most difficult books to understand that has ever been written. In great part, of course, this difficulty arises from the very nature of the subject, and is so far unavoidable. No one need attempt to read the "Mecanique Celeste" who has not been naturally endowed with considerable mathematical aptitude which he has cultivated by years of assiduous study. The critic will also note that there are grave defects in Laplace's method of treatment. The style is often extremely obscure, and the author frequently leaves great gaps in his argument, to the sad discomfiture of his reader. Nor does it mend matters to say, as Laplace often does say, that it is "easy to see" how one step follows from another. Such inferences often present great difficulties even to excellent mathematicians. Tradition indeed tells us that when Laplace had occasion to refer to his own book, it sometimes happened that an argument which he had dismissed with his usual formula, "Il est facile a voir," cost the illustrious author himself an hour or two of hard thinking before he could recover the train of reasoning which had been omitted. But there are certain parts of this great work which have always received the enthusiastic admiration of mathematicians. Laplace has, in fact, created whole tracts of science, some of which have been subsequently developed with much advantage in the prosecution of the study of Nature.

With a set of mathematical techniques that had been refined since Newton's time by the efforts of two or three generations of brilliant mathematicians, Laplace attempted in the "Mecanique Celeste" to uncover the secrets of the universe. It's hard to argue against the fact that the book he produced is one of the most challenging texts to comprehend that has ever been created. Much of this difficulty stems from the nature of the subject itself, which is largely unavoidable. Anyone wanting to read the "Mecanique Celeste" should have a natural aptitude for mathematics and have honed it through years of dedicated study. Critics will also point out significant flaws in Laplace's approach. His writing is often quite unclear, and he frequently leaves large gaps in his reasoning, which frustrates the reader. It doesn't help that Laplace often remarks that it's "easy to see" how one point follows from another. Such conclusions can present considerable challenges even for skilled mathematicians. There’s a tradition that says when Laplace referenced his own work, he sometimes found that an argument he had brushed aside with his usual phrase, "Il est facile a voir," would take him an hour or two of intense thought to reconstruct the reasoning he had skipped. However, there are certain sections of this great work that have always garnered the passionate admiration of mathematicians. Laplace indeed laid the groundwork for entire areas of science, some of which have been further developed with great success in the exploration of nature.

Judged by a modern code the gravest defect of Laplace's great work is rather of a moral than of a mathematical nature. Lagrange and he advanced together in their study of the mechanics of the heavens, at one time perhaps along parallel lines, while at other times they pursued the same problem by almost identical methods. Sometimes the important result was first reached by Lagrange, sometimes it was Laplace who had the good fortune to make the discovery. It would doubtless be a difficult matter to draw the line which should exactly separate the contributions to astronomy made by one of these illustrious mathematicians, and the contributions made by the other. But in his great work Laplace in the loftiest manner disdained to accord more than the very barest recognition to Lagrange, or to any of the other mathematicians, Newton alone excepted, who had advanced our knowledge of the mechanism of the heavens. It would be quite impossible for a student who confined his reading to the "Mecanique Celeste" to gather from any indications that it contains whether the discoveries about which he was reading had been really made by Laplace himself or whether they had not been made by Lagrange, or by Euler, or by Clairaut. With our present standard of morality in such matters, any scientific man who now brought forth a work in which he presumed to ignore in this wholesale fashion the contributions of others to the subject on which he was writing, would be justly censured and bitter controversies would undoubtedly arise. Perhaps we ought not to judge Laplace by the standard of our own time, and in any case I do not doubt that Laplace might have made a plausible defence. It is well known that when two investigators are working at the same subjects, and constantly publishing their results, it sometimes becomes difficult for each investigator himself to distinguish exactly between what he has accomplished and that which must be credited to his rival. Laplace may probably have said to himself that he was going to devote his energies to a great work on the interpretation of Nature, that it would take all his time and all his faculties, and all the resources of knowledge that he could command, to deal justly with the mighty problems before him. He would not allow himself to be distracted by any side issue. He could not tolerate that pages should be wasted in merely discussing to whom we owe each formula, and to whom each deduction from such formula is due. He would rather endeavour to produce as complete a picture as he possibly could of the celestial mechanics, and whether it were by means of his mathematics alone, or whether the discoveries of others may have contributed in any degree to the result, is a matter so infinitesimally insignificant in comparison with the grandeur of his subject that he would altogether neglect it. "If Lagrange should think," Laplace might say, "that his discoveries had been unduly appropriated, the proper course would be for him to do exactly what I have done. Let him also write a "Mecanique Celeste," let him employ those consummate talents which he possesses in developing his noble subject to the utmost. Let him utilise every result that I or any other mathematician have arrived at, but not trouble himself unduly with unimportant historical details as to who discovered this, and who discovered that; let him produce such a work as he could write, and I shall heartily welcome it as a splendid contribution to our science." Certain it is that Laplace and Lagrange continued the best of friends, and on the death of the latter it was Laplace who was summoned to deliver the funeral oration at the grave of his great rival.

Judged by today's standards, the biggest flaw in Laplace's important work is more about ethics than mathematics. Lagrange and he worked together on understanding the mechanics of the heavens, sometimes exploring similar paths and other times tackling the same problems with nearly identical methods. At times, Lagrange achieved significant results first, while at other times it was Laplace who had the luck to make the discovery. It would certainly be hard to accurately pinpoint the contributions to astronomy made by each of these brilliant mathematicians. However, in his monumental work, Laplace arrogantly gave barely a nod to Lagrange or any other mathematicians, except for Newton, who had advanced our knowledge of celestial mechanics. A student who only read the "Mecanique Celeste" would find it nearly impossible to determine whether the discoveries mentioned were made by Laplace himself or by Lagrange, Euler, or Clairaut. With our current ethical standards, any scientist today who published a work that ignored the contributions of others so massively would face serious criticism and likely spark fierce debates. Perhaps we shouldn't judge Laplace by our standards, and I believe Laplace could have provided a convincing explanation. It's well-known that when two researchers work on the same topics and consistently publish their findings, it can become difficult for each to clearly distinguish what they have achieved from what should be credited to their rival. Laplace might have told himself that he was dedicating his efforts to a significant work on interpreting Nature, that it would require all his time, abilities, and knowledge to tackle the immense challenges ahead. He would not let himself be sidetracked by side issues. He couldn’t accept that pages should be wasted debating who is responsible for each formula and deduction. He preferred to create the most comprehensive picture of celestial mechanics possible, regardless of whether it was through his own mathematics or if other discoveries contributed to the outcome, which he saw as minuscule compared to the greatness of his subject. “If Lagrange feels,” Laplace might say, “that his discoveries have been unfairly claimed, he should do exactly what I have done. He should write his own 'Mecanique Celeste,' using his outstanding talents to develop the subject to its fullest. He can use any results I or other mathematicians have achieved without getting bogged down with unimportant historical details about who discovered what; he should create a work he’s capable of, and I would gladly welcome it as a fantastic addition to our field.” It’s clear that Laplace and Lagrange remained good friends, and after Lagrange’s death, it was Laplace who was asked to give the eulogy at the grave of his great rival.

The investigations of Laplace are, generally speaking, of too technical a character to make it possible to set forth any account of them in such a work as the present. He did publish, however, one treatise, called the "Systeme du Monde," in which, without introducing mathematical symbols, he was able to give a general account of the theories of the celestial movements, and of the discoveries to which he and others had been led. In this work the great French astronomer sketched for the first time that remarkable doctrine by which his name is probably most generally known to those readers of astronomical books who are not specially mathematicians. It is in the "Systeme du Monde" that Laplace laid down the principles of the Nebular Theory which, in modern days, has been generally accepted by those philosophers who are competent to judge, as substantially a correct expression of a great historical fact.

The investigations of Laplace are generally too technical for a work like this to cover in detail. However, he did publish a treatise called the "Systeme du Monde," in which he provided a general overview of theories about celestial movements and the discoveries he and others made, all without using mathematical symbols. In this work, the great French astronomer first outlined that remarkable doctrine by which he is most commonly recognized among readers of astronomical literature who aren’t specialized mathematicians. It's in the "Systeme du Monde" that Laplace established the principles of the Nebular Theory, which, in modern times, is widely accepted by philosophers qualified to assess it as essentially a correct representation of a significant historical fact.

LAPLACE.
LAPLACE.
LAPLACE.

The Nebular Theory gives a physical account of the origin of the solar system, consisting of the sun in the centre, with the planets and their attendant satellites. Laplace perceived the significance of the fact that all the planets revolved in the same direction around the sun; he noticed also that the movements of rotation of the planets on their axes were performed in the same direction as that in which a planet revolves around the sun; he saw that the orbits of the satellites, so far at least as he knew them, revolved around their primaries also in the same direction. Nor did it escape his attention that the sun itself rotated on its axis in the same sense. His philosophical mind was led to reflect that such a remarkable unanimity in the direction of the movements in the solar system demanded some special explanation. It would have been in the highest degree improbable that there should have been this unanimity unless there had been some physical reason to account for it. To appreciate the argument let us first concentrate our attention on three particular bodies, namely the earth, the sun, and the moon. First the earth revolves around the sun in a certain direction, and the earth also rotates on its axis. The direction in which the earth turns in accordance with this latter movement might have been that in which it revolves around the sun, or it might of course have been opposite thereto. As a matter of fact the two agree. The moon in its monthly revolution around the earth follows also the same direction, and our satellite rotates on its axis in the same period as its monthly revolution, but in doing so is again observing this same law. We have therefore in the earth and moon four movements, all taking place in the same direction, and this is also identical with that in which the sun rotates once every twenty-five days. Such a coincidence would be very unlikely unless there were some physical reason for it. Just as unlikely would it be that in tossing a coin five heads or five tails should follow each other consecutively. If we toss a coin five times the chances that it will turn up all heads or all tails is but a small one. The probability of such an event is only one-sixteenth.

The Nebular Theory offers a scientific explanation for the origin of the solar system, centered around the sun, with planets and their moons. Laplace recognized the importance of all the planets revolving in the same direction around the sun; he also noticed that the planets' rotation on their axes happened in the same direction as their orbit around the sun. He observed that the orbits of the moons, at least as far as he knew them, revolved around their planets in the same direction. Additionally, he noted that the sun itself rotated on its axis in the same way. His philosophical mindset led him to think that such remarkable agreement in the direction of movements within the solar system required a special explanation. It would be highly improbable for this agreement to exist without some physical reason behind it. To understand the argument, let's first focus on three specific bodies: the earth, the sun, and the moon. The earth revolves around the sun in a certain direction, and it also rotates on its axis. The direction in which the earth turns with this rotation could have been the same as its orbit around the sun, or it could have been the opposite. In reality, the two align. The moon, in its monthly orbit around the earth, also follows the same direction, and our satellite rotates on its axis in the same timeframe as its monthly cycle, again adhering to the same principle. Thus, in the earth and moon, we have four movements all occurring in the same direction, which also matches the direction of the sun's rotation every twenty-five days. Such a coincidence would be very unlikely unless there is some physical explanation for it. It would be equally improbable if, when tossing a coin, you ended up with five heads or five tails in a row. If we toss a coin five times, the chances of it showing all heads or all tails is quite low. The probability of such an outcome is only one-sixteenth.

There are, however, in the solar system many other bodies besides the three just mentioned which are animated by this common movement. Among them are, of course, the great planets, Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, Venus, and Mercury, and the satellites which attend on these planets. All these planets rotate on their axes in the same direction as they revolve around the sun, and all their satellites revolve also in the same way. Confining our attention merely to the earth, the sun, and the five great planets with which Laplace was acquainted, we have no fewer than six motions of revolution and seven motions of rotation, for in the latter we include the rotation of the sun. We have also sixteen satellites of the planets mentioned whose revolutions round their primaries are in the same direction. The rotation of the moon on its axis may also be reckoned, but as to the rotations of the satellites of the other planets we cannot speak with any confidence, as they are too far off to be observed with the necessary accuracy. We have thus thirty circular movements in the solar system connected with the sun and moon and those great planets than which no others were known in the days of Laplace. The significant fact is that all these thirty movements take place in the same direction. That this should be the case without some physical reason would be just as unlikely as that in tossing a coin thirty times it should turn up all heads or all tails every time without exception.

There are, however, many other objects in the solar system besides the three just mentioned that share this common movement. Among them are, of course, the major planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, Venus, and Mercury, along with the moons that orbit these planets. All these planets spin on their axes in the same direction that they orbit the sun, and their moons also revolve in the same way. Focusing only on the Earth, the sun, and the five major planets that Laplace knew, we find a total of six orbital motions and seven rotational motions, including the sun's rotation. We also have sixteen moons of the mentioned planets whose orbits around their parent planets are in the same direction. The moon's spin on its axis can also be counted, but we can't confidently speak about the spins of other planets' moons, as they are too distant to observe accurately. Thus, we have thirty circular movements in the solar system associated with the sun, the moon, and those major planets that were known in Laplace's time. The important fact is that all these thirty movements occur in the same direction. It's just as unlikely for this to happen without some physical explanation as it is to flip a coin thirty times and have it land on heads or tails every single time.

We can express the argument numerically. Calculation proves that such an event would not generally happen oftener than once out of five hundred millions of trials. To a philosopher of Laplace's penetration, who had made a special study of the theory of probabilities, it seemed well-nigh inconceivable that there should have been such unanimity in the celestial movements, unless there had been some adequate reason to account for it. We might, indeed, add that if we were to include all the objects which are now known to belong to the solar system, the argument from probability might be enormously increased in strength. To Laplace the argument appeared so conclusive that he sought for some physical cause of the remarkable phenomenon which the solar system presented. Thus it was that the famous Nebular Hypothesis took its rise. Laplace devised a scheme for the origin of the sun and the planetary system, in which it would be a necessary consequence that all the movements should take place in the same direction as they are actually observed to do.

We can express the argument with numbers. Calculations show that such an event would generally happen no more often than once in five hundred million trials. For a philosopher like Laplace, who had deeply studied probability theory, it seemed almost inconceivable that there was such agreement in how celestial bodies moved unless there was a good reason for it. We could also say that if we included all the objects currently known to be part of the solar system, the probability argument would be significantly stronger. To Laplace, the argument was so convincing that he looked for some physical explanation for the remarkable way the solar system worked. This is how the famous Nebular Hypothesis was born. Laplace came up with a theory for the origin of the sun and the planetary system, where it would be necessary for all movements to occur in the same direction as we actually observe.

Let us suppose that in the beginning there was a gigantic mass of nebulous material, so highly heated that the iron and other substances which now enter into the composition of the earth and planets were then suspended in a state of vapour. There is nothing unreasonable in such a supposition indeed, we know as a matter of fact that there are thousands of such nebulae to be discerned at present through our telescopes. It would be extremely unlikely that any object could exist without possessing some motion of rotation; we may in fact assert that for rotation to be entirety absent from the great primeval nebula would be almost infinitely improbable. As ages rolled on, the nebula gradually dispersed away by radiation its original stores of heat, and, in accordance with well-known physical principles, the materials of which it was formed would tend to coalesce. The greater part of those materials would become concentrated in a mighty mass surrounded by outlying uncondensed vapours. There would, however, also be regions throughout the extent of the nebula, in which subsidiary centres of condensation would be found. In its long course of cooling, the nebula would, therefore, tend ultimately to form a mighty central body with a number of smaller bodies disposed around it. As the nebula was initially endowed with a movement of rotation, the central mass into which it had chiefly condensed would also revolve, and the subsidiary bodies would be animated by movements of revolution around the central body. These movements would be all pursued in one common direction, and it follows, from well-known mechanical principles, that each of the subsidiary masses, besides participating in the general revolution around the central body, would also possess a rotation around its axis, which must likewise be performed in the same direction. Around the subsidiary bodies other objects still smaller would be formed, just as they themselves were formed relatively to the great central mass.

Let’s say that at the beginning there was a massive cloud of gas and dust, so hot that the iron and other materials that make up the Earth and planets were suspended as vapor. There’s nothing unreasonable about this idea; in fact, we know that there are thousands of such nebulae visible today through our telescopes. It would be very unlikely for any object to exist without some sort of rotational motion; we can really say that it would be almost infinitely improbable for the original nebula to have no rotation at all. As time passed, the nebula gradually lost its initial heat through radiation, and according to well-known physical principles, the materials it was made of would start to clump together. Most of those materials would concentrate into a massive core surrounded by uncondensed vapor. However, there would also be areas throughout the nebula where smaller regions of condensation would form. As the nebula cooled over time, it would ultimately create a large central body with several smaller bodies orbiting around it. Since the nebula initially had rotational movement, the central mass it condensed into would also rotate, and the smaller bodies would orbit around it. All these movements would happen in the same direction, and according to well-known mechanical principles, each of the smaller bodies, in addition to orbiting the central mass, would also rotate around its own axis in the same direction. Even smaller objects would form around these smaller bodies, just as they themselves were formed in relation to the large central mass.

As the ages sped by, and the heat of these bodies became gradually dissipated, the various objects would coalesce, first into molten liquid masses, and thence, at a further stage of cooling, they would assume the appearance of solid masses, thus producing the planetary bodies such as we now know them. The great central mass, on account of its preponderating dimensions, would still retain, for further uncounted ages, a large quantity of its primeval heat, and would thus display the splendours of a glowing sun. In this way Laplace was able to account for the remarkable phenomena presented in the movements of the bodies of the solar system. There are many other points also in which the nebular theory is known to tally with the facts of observation. In fact, each advance in science only seems to make it more certain that the Nebular Hypothesis substantially represents the way in which our solar system has grown to its present form.

As time went on and the heat from these bodies gradually faded, the various objects would merge, first into molten liquid forms, and then, as they cooled further, they would take on the appearance of solid masses, creating the planetary bodies we recognize today. The central mass, due to its larger size, would continue to hold a significant amount of its original heat for countless ages, glowing like a bright sun. This is how Laplace was able to explain the remarkable phenomena observed in the movements of the solar system's bodies. There are also many other aspects where the nebular theory aligns with observed facts. In fact, with each advancement in science, it seems increasingly likely that the Nebular Hypothesis accurately reflects how our solar system has developed into its current shape.

Not satisfied with a career which should be merely scientific, Laplace sought to connect himself with public affairs. Napoleon appreciated his genius, and desired to enlist him in the service of the State. Accordingly he appointed Laplace to be Minister of the Interior. The experiment was not successful, for he was not by nature a statesman. Napoleon was much disappointed at the ineptitude which the great mathematician showed for official life, and, in despair of Laplace's capacity as an administrator, declared that he carried the spirit of his infinitesimal calculus into the management of business. Indeed, Laplace's political conduct hardly admits of much defence. While he accepted the honours which Napoleon showered on him in the time of his prosperity, he seems to have forgotten all this when Napoleon could no longer render him service. Laplace was made a Marquis by Louis XVIII., a rank which he transmitted to his son, who was born in 1789. During the latter part of his life the philosopher lived in a retired country place at Arcueile. Here he pursued his studies, and by strict abstemiousness, preserved himself from many of the infirmities of old age. He died on March the 5th, 1827, in his seventy-eighth year, his last words being, "What we know is but little, what we do not know is immense."

Not happy with a career that was just scientific, Laplace wanted to get involved in public affairs. Napoleon recognized his talent and wanted him to work for the State. So, he appointed Laplace as Minister of the Interior. The experiment didn't go well because he wasn't naturally suited to being a politician. Napoleon was very disappointed with the great mathematician’s lack of skill in official life and, frustrated with Laplace's ability as an administrator, remarked that he brought the mindset of his infinitesimal calculus into running things. In fact, Laplace's political behavior is hard to defend. While he accepted the honors Napoleon gave him during his rise, he seemed to forget all of that when Napoleon could no longer help him. Laplace was made a Marquis by Louis XVIII, a title he passed on to his son, who was born in 1789. In the later part of his life, the philosopher lived in a quiet country house in Arcueil. There, he continued his studies, and through strict self-discipline, kept himself from many of the weaknesses of old age. He died on March 5th, 1827, at the age of seventy-eight, with his last words being, "What we know is but little, what we do not know is immense."

BRINKLEY.

Provost Baldwin held absolute sway in the University of Dublin for forty-one years. His memory is well preserved there. The Bursar still dispenses the satisfactory revenues which Baldwin left to the College. None of us ever can forget the marble angels round the figure of the dying Provost on which we used to gaze during the pangs of the Examination Hall.

Provost Baldwin had complete control over the University of Dublin for forty-one years. His legacy is still strong there. The Bursar continues to manage the generous funds Baldwin provided to the College. None of us can ever forget the marble angels surrounding the statue of the dying Provost that we used to stare at during the stress of exams.

Baldwin died in 1785, and was succeeded by Francis Andrews, a Fellow of seventeen years' standing. As to the scholastic acquirements of Andrews, all I can find is a statement that he was complimented by the polite Professors of Padua on the elegance and purity with which he discoursed to them in Latin. Andrews was also reputed to be a skilful lawyer. He was certainly a Privy Councillor and a prominent member of the Irish House of Commons, and his social qualities were excellent. Perhaps it was Baldwin's example that stimulated a desire in Andrews to become a benefactor to his college. He accordingly bequeathed a sum of 3,000 pounds and an annual income of 250 pounds wherewith to build and endow an astronomical Observatory in the University. The figures just stated ought to be qualified by the words of cautious Ussher (afterwards the first Professor of Astronomy), that "this money was to arise from an accumulation of a part of his property, to commence upon a particular contingency happening to his family." The astronomical endowment was soon in jeopardy by litigation. Andrews thought he had provided for his relations by leaving to them certain leasehold interests connected with the Provost's estate. The law courts, however, held that these interests were not at the disposal of the testator, and handed them over to Hely Hutchinson, the next Provost. The disappointed relations then petitioned the Irish Parliament to redress this grievance by transferring to them the moneys designed by Andrews for the Observatory. It would not be right, they contended, that the kindly intentions of the late Provost towards his kindred should be frustrated for the sake of maintaining what they described as "a purely ornamental institution." The authorities of the College protested against this claim. Counsel were heard, and a Committee of the House made a report declaring the situation of the relations to be a hard one. Accordingly, a compromise was made, and the dispute terminated.

Baldwin died in 1785 and was succeeded by Francis Andrews, who had been a Fellow for seventeen years. As for Andrews's academic achievements, all I could find was that the esteemed Professors of Padua praised him for the elegance and clarity with which he spoke Latin. Andrews was also known to be a skilled lawyer. He definitely held the position of Privy Councillor and was a prominent member of the Irish House of Commons, with excellent social qualities. Perhaps Baldwin's example inspired Andrews to become a benefactor to his college. He left a bequest of £3,000 and an annual income of £250 to build and fund an astronomical Observatory at the University. These amounts should be clarified by the cautious words of Ussher (who later became the first Professor of Astronomy), stating that "this money was to be generated from an accumulation of part of his property, contingent on a specific event occurring for his family." However, the astronomical endowment soon faced legal challenges. Andrews believed he had secured his family's future by leaving them certain leasehold interests related to the Provost's estate. The courts, however, ruled that these interests were not within the testator's control and transferred them to Hely Hutchinson, the next Provost. The disappointed family members then petitioned the Irish Parliament to address this issue by transferring to them the funds Andrews had intended for the Observatory. They argued that it wouldn't be fair for the late Provost's generous intentions toward his relatives to be thwarted simply to maintain what they referred to as "a purely ornamental institution." The College authorities opposed this claim. Legal counsel was presented, and a Committee of the House reported that the relatives' situation was indeed difficult. Consequently, a compromise was reached, and the dispute was resolved.

The selection of a site for the new astronomical Observatory was made by the Board of Trinity College. The beautiful neighbourhood of Dublin offered a choice of excellent localities. On the north side of the Liffey an Observatory could have been admirably placed, either on the remarkable promontory of Howth or on the elevation of which Dunsink is the summit. On the south side of Dublin there are several eminences that would have been suitable: the breezy heaths at Foxrock combine all necessary conditions; the obelisk hill at Killiney would have given one of the most picturesque sites for an Observatory in the world; while near Delgany two or three other good situations could be mentioned. But the Board of those pre-railway days was naturally guided by the question of proximity. Dunsink was accordingly chosen as the most suitable site within the distance of a reasonable walk from Trinity College.

The Board of Trinity College selected the location for the new astronomical Observatory. The scenic area around Dublin offered several fantastic options. On the north side of the Liffey, an Observatory could have been perfectly situated on the notable promontory of Howth or at the high point of Dunsink. On the south side of Dublin, there are many elevated spots that would have been appropriate: the open heaths at Foxrock meet all the necessary requirements; the obelisk hill at Killiney would have provided one of the most stunning locations for an Observatory worldwide; and there are a couple of other good spots near Delgany that could be mentioned. However, the Board in those pre-railway days was naturally influenced by how close the site was. Therefore, Dunsink was chosen as the most suitable location that was a reasonable walking distance from Trinity College.

The northern boundary of the Phoenix Park approaches the little river Tolka, which winds through a succession of delightful bits of sylvan scenery, such as may be found in the wide demesne of Abbotstown and the classic shades of Glasnevin. From the banks of the Tolka, on the opposite side of the park, the pastures ascend in a gentle slope to culminate at Dunsink, where at a distance of half a mile from the stream, of four miles from Dublin, and at a height of 300 feet above the sea, now stands the Observatory. From the commanding position of Dunsink a magnificent view is obtained. To the east the sea is visible, while the southern prospect over the valley of the Liffey is bounded by a range of hills and mountains extending from Killiney to Bray Head, thence to the little Sugar Loaf, the Two Rock and the Three Rock Mountains, over the flank of which the summit of the Great Sugar Loaf is just perceptible. Directly in front opens the fine valley of Glenasmole, with Kippure Mountain, while the range can be followed to its western extremity at Lyons. The climate of Dunsink is well suited for astronomical observation. No doubt here, as elsewhere in Ireland, clouds are abundant, but mists or haze are comparatively unusual, and fogs are almost unknown.

The northern edge of Phoenix Park runs alongside the little river Tolka, which meanders through a series of lovely wooded landscapes, like those found in the expansive grounds of Abbotstown and the historic shade of Glasnevin. From the banks of the Tolka, on the park's opposite side, the pastures rise gently to reach Dunsink, where the Observatory stands half a mile from the stream, four miles from Dublin, and at 300 feet above sea level. From Dunsink's elevated position, there’s a stunning view. To the east, the sea is visible, while the southern view over the Liffey Valley is framed by a line of hills and mountains stretching from Killiney to Bray Head, then to the small Sugar Loaf, the Two Rock and the Three Rock Mountains, above which the peak of the Great Sugar Loaf can just be seen. Right in front lies the beautiful Glenasmole valley, with Kippure Mountain, and the mountain range can be traced to its western end at Lyons. The climate of Dunsink is ideal for astronomical observations. While clouds are common here, as in the rest of Ireland, mists or haze are relatively rare, and fog is almost non-existent.

The legal formalities to be observed in assuming occupation exacted a delay of many months; accordingly, it was not until the 10th December, 1782, that a contract could be made with Mr. Graham Moyers for the erection of a meridian-room and a dome for an equatorial, in conjunction with a becoming residence for the astronomer. Before the work was commenced at Dunsink, the Board thought it expedient to appoint the first Professor of Astronomy. They met for this purpose on the 22nd January, 1783, and chose the Rev. Henry Ussher, a Senior Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin. The wisdom of the appointment was immediately shown by the assiduity with which Ussher engaged in founding the observatory. In three years he had erected the buildings and equipped them with instruments, several of which were of his own invention. On the 19th of February, 1785, a special grant of 200 pounds was made by the Board to Dr. Ussher as some recompense for his labours. It happened that the observatory was not the only scientific institution which came into being in Ireland at this period; the newly-kindled ardour for the pursuit of knowledge led, at the same time, to the foundation of the Royal Irish Academy. By a fitting coincidence, the first memoir published in the "Transactions Of The Royal Irish Academy," was by the first Andrews, Professor of Astronomy. It was read on the 13th of June, 1785, and bore the title, "Account of the Observatory belonging to Trinity College," by the Rev. H. Ussher, D.D., M.R.I.A., F.R.S. This communication shows the extensive design that had been originally intended for Dunsink, only a part of which was, however, carried out. For instance, two long corridors, running north and south from the central edifice, which are figured in the paper, never developed into bricks and mortar. We are not told why the original scheme had to be contracted; but perhaps the reason may be not unconnected with a remark of Ussher's, that the College had already advanced from its own funds a sum considerably exceeding the original bequest. The picture of the building shows also the dome for the South equatorial, which was erected many years later.

The legal requirements for taking possession caused a delay of several months; therefore, it wasn't until December 10, 1782, that a contract could be made with Mr. Graham Moyers for the construction of a meridian room and a dome for an equatorial telescope, along with an appropriate residence for the astronomer. Before the work began at Dunsink, the Board decided it was necessary to appoint the first Professor of Astronomy. They met for this purpose on January 22, 1783, and chose Rev. Henry Ussher, a Senior Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin. The wisdom of this choice quickly became evident through the dedication with which Ussher worked to establish the observatory. In three years, he had built the structures and outfitted them with instruments, several of which he had invented himself. On February 19, 1785, the Board awarded Dr. Ussher a special grant of 200 pounds as some recognition for his efforts. It turned out that the observatory was not the only scientific institution to emerge in Ireland during this time; the newly ignited passion for knowledge also led to the founding of the Royal Irish Academy. In a fitting coincidence, the first article published in the "Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy" was by the first Andrews, Professor of Astronomy. It was presented on June 13, 1785, titled "Account of the Observatory belonging to Trinity College," by Rev. H. Ussher, D.D., M.R.I.A., F.R.S. This communication illustrates the ambitious plan originally intended for Dunsink, though only part of it was realized. For instance, two long corridors, extending north and south from the central building, as depicted in the paper, were never constructed. We aren't told why the original project had to be scaled back, but perhaps it is related to Ussher's remark that the College had already advanced a sum significantly exceeding the original donation from its own funds. The drawing of the building also shows the dome for the South equatorial, which was built many years later.

Ussher died in 1790. During his brief career at the observatory, he observed eclipses, and is stated to have done other scientific work. The minutes of the Board declare that the infant institution had already obtained celebrity by his labours, and they urge the claims of his widow to a pension, on the ground that the disease from which he died had been contracted by his nightly vigils. The Board also promised a grant of fifty guineas as a help to bring out Dr. Ussher's sermons. They advanced twenty guineas to his widow towards the publication of his astronomical papers. They ordered his bust to be executed for the observatory, and offered "The Death of Ussher" as the subject of a prize essay; but, so far as I can find, neither the sermons nor the papers, neither the bust nor the prize essay, ever came into being.

Ussher died in 1790. During his short time at the observatory, he observed eclipses and was known to have worked on other scientific projects. The minutes from the Board state that the young institution had already gained recognition due to his efforts, and they advocated for his widow to receive a pension because the illness that led to his death was believed to have been caused by his late-night observations. The Board also promised a grant of fifty guineas to help publish Dr. Ussher's sermons. They advanced twenty guineas to his widow to support the publication of his astronomical papers. They commissioned a bust of him for the observatory and suggested "The Death of Ussher" as the topic for a prize essay; however, based on my research, neither the sermons nor the papers, nor the bust or the prize essay, ever materialized.

There was keen competition for the chair of Astronomy which the death of Ussher vacated. The two candidates were Rev. John Brinkley, of Caius College, Cambridge, a Senior Wrangler (born at Woodbridge, Suffolk, in 1763), and Mr. Stack, Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, and author of a book on Optics. A majority of the Board at first supported Stack, while Provost Hely Hutchinson and one or two others supported Brinkley. In those days the Provost had a veto at elections, so that ultimately Stack was withdrawn and Brinkley was elected. This took place on the 11th December, 1790. The national press of the day commented on the preference shown to the young Englishman, Brinkley, over his Irish rival. An animated controversy ensued. The Provost himself condescended to enter the lists and to vindicate his policy by a long letter in the "Public Register" or "Freeman's Journal," of 21st December, 1790. This letter was anonymous, but its authorship is obvious. It gives the correspondence with Maskelyne and other eminent astronomers, whose advice and guidance had been sought by the Provost. It also contends that "the transactions of the Board ought not to be canvassed in the newspapers." For this reference, as well as for much other information, I am indebted to my friend, the Rev. John Stubbs, D.D.

There was intense competition for the Astronomy chair that became vacant after Ussher's death. The two candidates were Rev. John Brinkley from Caius College, Cambridge, a Senior Wrangler (born in Woodbridge, Suffolk, in 1763), and Mr. Stack, a Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, and author of a book on Optics. Initially, most of the Board supported Stack, while Provost Hely Hutchinson and a few others backed Brinkley. At that time, the Provost had the power to veto at elections, which ultimately led to Stack being withdrawn and Brinkley being elected. This happened on December 11, 1790. The national press at the time commented on the preference for the young Englishman, Brinkley, over his Irish competitor. A lively debate followed. The Provost himself took the time to defend his decision with a long letter in the "Public Register" or "Freeman's Journal" on December 21, 1790. This letter was anonymous, but it was clearly written by him. It includes correspondence with Maskelyne and other prominent astronomers, whose advice and guidance the Provost sought. It also argues that "the actions of the Board shouldn't be discussed in the newspapers." For this reference, as well as for much other information, I am grateful to my friend, Rev. John Stubbs, D.D.

THE OBSERVATORY, DUNSINK. From a Photograph by W. Lawrence, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin.
THE OBSERVATORY, DUNSINK. From a Photograph by W. Lawrence, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin.
THE OBSERVATORY, DUNSINK. From a photo by W. Lawrence, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin.

The next event in the history of the Observatory was the issue of Letters Patent (32 Geo. III., A.D. 1792), in which it is recited that "We grant and ordain that there shall be forever hereafter a Professor of Astronomy, on the foundation of Dr. Andrews, to be called and known by the name of the Royal Astronomer of Ireland." The letters prescribe the various duties of the astronomer and the mode of his election. They lay down regulations as to the conduct of the astronomical work, and as to the choice of an assistant. They direct that the Provost and the Senior Fellows shall make a thorough inspection of the observatory once every year in June or July; and this duty was first undertaken on the 5th of July, 1792. It may be noted that the date on which the celebration of the tercentenary of the University was held happens to coincide with the centenary of the first visitation of the observatory. The visitors on the first occasion were A. Murray, Matthew Young, George Hall, and John Barrett. They record that they find the buildings, books and instruments in good condition; but the chief feature in this report, as well as in many which followed it, related to a circumstance to which we have not yet referred.

The next milestone in the history of the Observatory was the issuance of Letters Patent (32 Geo. III., A.D. 1792), which stated that "We grant and ordain that there shall be forever hereafter a Professor of Astronomy, established by Dr. Andrews, to be called and known as the Royal Astronomer of Ireland." The letters outline the various responsibilities of the astronomer and the process for their election. They set regulations for how astronomical work should be conducted and for selecting an assistant. It is mandated that the Provost and the Senior Fellows must conduct a thorough inspection of the observatory once each year in June or July, with this responsibility first undertaken on July 5, 1792. It’s worth noting that the date for the celebration of the university's tercentenary coincides with the centenary of the observatory's first inspection. The visitors during the initial occasion included A. Murray, Matthew Young, George Hall, and John Barrett. They reported that the buildings, books, and instruments were in good condition, but the main highlight of this report, as well as many subsequent ones, was an issue we have not yet addressed.

In the original equipment of the observatory, Ussher, with the natural ambition of a founder, desired to place in it a telescope of more magnificent proportions than could be found anywhere else. The Board gave a spirited support to this enterprise, and negotiations were entered into with the most eminent instrument-maker of those days. This was Jesse Ramsden (1735-1800), famous as the improver of the sextant, as the constructor of the great theodolite used by General Roy in the English Survey, and as the inventor of the dividing engine for graduating astronomical instruments. Ramsden had built for Sir George Schuckburgh the largest and most perfect equatorial ever attempted. He had constructed mural quadrants for Padua and Verona, which elicited the wonder of astronomers when Dr. Maskelyne declared he could detect no error in their graduation so large as two seconds and a half. But Ramsden maintained that even better results would be obtained by superseding the entire quadrant by the circle. He obtained the means of testing this prediction when he completed a superb circle for Palermo of five feet diameter. Finding his anticipations were realised, he desired to apply the same principles on a still grander scale. Ramsden was in this mood when he met with Dr. Ussher. The enthusiasm of the astronomer and the instrument-maker communicated itself to the Board, and a tremendous circle, to be ten feet in diameter, was forthwith projected.

In the original setup of the observatory, Ussher, driven by the natural ambition of a founder, wanted to install a telescope that was more impressive than any found elsewhere. The Board enthusiastically supported this project, and discussions began with the leading instrument maker of the time. This was Jesse Ramsden (1735-1800), known for improving the sextant, creating the large theodolite used by General Roy in the English Survey, and inventing the dividing engine for marking astronomical instruments. Ramsden had built the largest and most refined equatorial telescope ever attempted for Sir George Schuckburgh. He also made mural quadrants for Padua and Verona, which amazed astronomers when Dr. Maskelyne announced he could find no error larger than two and a half seconds in their graduation. Ramsden argued that even better results could be achieved by replacing the entire quadrant with a circle. He had the chance to test this idea when he completed a magnificent five-foot diameter circle for Palermo. After finding that his predictions were accurate, he wanted to apply the same concepts on a larger scale. Ramsden was in this mindset when he met Dr. Ussher. The excitement of both the astronomer and the instrument maker inspired the Board, leading to the immediate planning of a massive ten-foot diameter circle.

Projected, but never carried out. After Ramsden had to some extent completed a 10-foot circle, he found such difficulties that he tried a 9-foot, and this again he discarded for an 8-foot, which was ultimately accomplished, though not entirely by himself. Notwithstanding the contraction from the vast proportions originally designed, the completed instrument must still be regarded as a colossal piece of astronomical workmanship. Even at this day I do not know that any other observatory can show a circle eight feet in diameter graduated all round.

Projected, but never finished. After Ramsden somewhat completed a 10-foot circle, he encountered so many challenges that he attempted a 9-foot one, which he then abandoned for an 8-foot circle that he ultimately completed, although not entirely on his own. Despite scaling down from the grand designs originally intended, the finished instrument should still be seen as an impressive example of astronomical craftsmanship. Even today, I don't think there's another observatory that can display a circle eight feet in diameter graduated all the way around.

I think it is Professor Piazzi Smith who tells us how grateful he was to find a large telescope he had ordered finished by the opticians on the very day they had promised it. The day was perfectly correct; it was only the year that was wrong. A somewhat remarkable experience in this direction is chronicled by the early reports of the visitors to Dunsink Observatory. I cannot find the date on which the great circle was ordered from Ramsden, but it is fixed with sufficient precision by an allusion in Ussher's paper to the Royal Irish Academy, which shows that by the 13th June, 1785, the order had been given, but that the abandonment of the 10-foot scale had not then been contemplated. It was reasonable that the board should allow Ramsden ample time for the completion of a work at once so elaborate and so novel. It could not have been finished in a year, nor would there have been much reason for complaint if the maker had found he required two or even three years more.

I believe it was Professor Piazzi Smith who mentioned how thankful he was to receive a large telescope he had ordered, completed by the opticians right on the day they promised. The day was spot on; it was just the year that was off. A rather interesting incident related to this is detailed in the early reports from visitors to Dunsink Observatory. I can't pinpoint the exact date when the great circle was ordered from Ramsden, but it is fairly well established by a reference in Ussher's paper to the Royal Irish Academy, indicating that by June 13, 1785, the order had been placed, even though the idea of abandoning the 10-foot scale hadn't been considered yet. It was reasonable for the board to give Ramsden enough time to complete such a complex and innovative piece of work. It wouldn’t have been finished in a year, and there wouldn't have been much reason to complain if the maker found he needed two or even three more years.

Seven years gone, and still no telescope, was the condition in which the Board found matters at their first visitation in 1792. They had, however, assurances from Ramsden that the instrument would be completed within the year; but, alas for such promises, another seven years rolled on, and in 1799 the place for the great circle was still vacant at Dunsink. Ramsden had fallen into bad health, and the Board considerately directed that "inquiries should be made." Next year there was still no progress, so the Board were roused to threaten Ramsden with a suit at law; but the menace was never executed, for the malady of the great optician grew worse, and he died that year.

Seven years had passed, and there was still no telescope, which was the situation the Board encountered during their first inspection in 1792. They did, however, receive assurances from Ramsden that the instrument would be finished within the year; but, unfortunately, another seven years went by, and by 1799, the spot for the great circle was still empty at Dunsink. Ramsden's health had declined, and the Board wisely decided that "inquiries should be made." The following year, there was still no progress, so the Board felt the need to threaten Ramsden with legal action; however, that threat was never carried out, as the great optician's condition worsened, and he died that year.

Affairs had now assumed a critical aspect, for the college had advanced much money to Ramsden during these fifteen years, and the instrument was still unfinished. An appeal was made by the Provost to Dr. Maskelyne, the Astronomer Royal of England, for his advice and kindly offices in this emergency. Maskelyne responds—in terms calculated to allay the anxiety of the Bursar—"Mr. Ramsden has left property behind him, and the College can be in no danger of losing both their money and the instrument." The business of Ramsden was then undertaken by Berge, who proceeded to finish the circle quite as deliberately as his predecessor. After four years Berge promised the instrument in the following August, but it did not come. Two years later (1806) the professor complains that he can get no answer from Berge. In 1807, it is stated that Berge will send the telescope in a month. He did not; but in the next year (1808), about twenty-three years after the great circle was ordered, it was erected at Dunsink, where it is still to be seen.

Affairs had taken a serious turn, as the college had lent a lot of money to Ramsden over the past fifteen years, and the instrument was still incomplete. The Provost reached out to Dr. Maskelyne, the Astronomer Royal of England, for his advice and assistance in this situation. Maskelyne replied—in a way meant to ease the Bursar's worries—"Mr. Ramsden has left property behind, and the College is not at risk of losing both their money and the instrument." Ramsden's work was then taken over by Berge, who went on to finish the circle with the same careful approach as his predecessor. After four years, Berge promised to deliver the instrument the following August, but it never arrived. Two years later (1806), the professor complained that he hadn’t received any response from Berge. In 1807, it was said that Berge would send the telescope in a month. He didn’t; but the following year (1808), nearly twenty-three years after the great circle was ordered, it was set up at Dunsink, where it can still be seen today.

The following circumstances have been authenticated by the signatures of Provosts, Proctors, Bursars, and other College dignitaries:—In 1793 the Board ordered two of the clocks at the observatory to be sent to Mr. Crosthwaite for repairs. Seven years later, in 1800, Mr. Crosthwaite was asked if the clocks were ready. This impatience was clearly unreasonable, for even in four more years, 1804, we find the two clocks were still in hand. Two years later, in 1806, the Board determined to take vigorous action by asking the Bursar to call upon Crosthwaite. This evidently produced some effect, for in the following year, 1807, the Professor had no doubt that the clocks would be speedily returned. After eight years more, in 1815, one of the clocks was still being repaired, and so it was in 1816, which is the last record we have of these interesting time-pieces. Astronomers are, however, accustomed to deal with such stupendous periods in their calculations, that even the time taken to repair a clock seems but small in comparison.

The following circumstances have been confirmed by the signatures of Provosts, Proctors, Bursars, and other College officials: In 1793, the Board ordered two of the clocks at the observatory to be sent to Mr. Crosthwaite for repairs. Seven years later, in 1800, Mr. Crosthwaite was asked if the clocks were ready. This impatience was clearly unreasonable, as we find that even four more years later, in 1804, the two clocks were still being worked on. Two years later, in 1806, the Board decided to take action by asking the Bursar to follow up with Crosthwaite. This seemed to have some effect, because in the following year, 1807, the Professor was confident that the clocks would be returned soon. After another eight years, in 1815, one of the clocks was still being repaired, and that was the case in 1816, which is the last record we have of these fascinating timepieces. Astronomers, however, are used to dealing with such long periods in their calculations that even the time taken to repair a clock seems relatively short in comparison.

The long tenure of the chair of Astronomy by Brinkley is divided into two nearly equal periods by the year in which the great circle was erected. Brinkley was eighteen years waiting for his telescope, and he had eighteen years more in which to use it. During the first of these periods Brinkley devoted himself to mathematical research; during the latter he became a celebrated astronomer. Brinkley's mathematical labours procured for their author some reputation as a mathematician. They appear to be works of considerable mathematical elegance, but not indicating any great power of original thought. Perhaps it has been prejudicial to Brinkley's fame in this direction, that he was immediately followed in his chair by so mighty a genius as William Rowan Hamilton.

The long time that Brinkley held the chair of Astronomy can be split into two almost equal parts, marked by the year the great circle was established. Brinkley waited eighteen years for his telescope and had another eighteen years to use it. During the first part of this period, Brinkley focused on mathematical research; in the second, he gained fame as an astronomer. His mathematical work earned him some recognition as a mathematician. These works are quite elegant but don't show much original thought. It might have hurt Brinkley’s reputation in this area that he was succeeded in his position by the incredibly talented William Rowan Hamilton.

After the great circle had been at last erected, Brinkley was able to begin his astronomical work in earnest. Nor was there much time to lose. He was already forty-five years old, a year older than was Herschel when he commenced his immortal career at Slough. Stimulated by the consciousness of having the command of an instrument of unique perfection, Brinkley loftily attempted the very highest class of astronomical research. He resolved to measure anew with his own eye and with his own hand the constants of aberration and of nutation. He also strove to solve that great problem of the universe, the discovery of the distance of a fixed star.

After the great circle was finally set up, Brinkley was ready to dive into his astronomical work. There wasn't much time to waste. He was already forty-five, a year older than Herschel was when he started his legendary career in Slough. Motivated by the knowledge that he was in charge of a uniquely perfect instrument, Brinkley boldly aimed for the highest level of astronomical research. He decided to measure again, with his own eyes and hands, the constants of aberration and nutation. He also worked to tackle the significant challenge of discovering the distance to a fixed star.

These were noble problems, and they were nobly attacked. But to appraise with justice this work of Brinkley, done seventy years ago, we must not apply to it the same criterion as we would think right to apply to similar work were it done now. We do not any longer use Brinkley's constant of aberration, nor do we now think that Brinkley's determinations of the star distances were reliable. But, nevertheless, his investigations exercised a marked influence on the progress of science; they stimulated the study of the principles on which exact measurements were to be conducted.

These were significant challenges, and they were addressed in a commendable way. However, to fairly evaluate Brinkley's work from seventy years ago, we shouldn't use the same standards we would apply to similar work done today. We no longer rely on Brinkley's constant of aberration, nor do we believe that his measurements of star distances were accurate. Nonetheless, his research had a notable impact on the advancement of science; it encouraged the study of the principles needed for accurate measurements.

Brinkley had another profession in addition to that of an astronomer. He was a divine. When a man endeavours to pursue two distinct occupations concurrently, it will be equally easy to explain why his career should be successful, or why it should be the reverse. If he succeeds, he will, of course, exemplify the wisdom of having two strings to his bow. Should he fail, it is, of course, because he has attempted to sit on two stools at once. In Brinkley's case, his two professions must be likened to the two strings rather than to the two stools. It is true that his practical experience of his clerical life was very slender. He had made no attempt to combine the routine of a parish with his labours in the observatory. Nor do we associate a special eminence in any department of religious work with his name. If, however, we are to measure Brinkley's merits as a divine by the ecclesiastical preferment which he received, his services to theology must have rivalled his services to astronomy. Having been raised step by step in the Church, he was at last appointed to the See of Cloyne, in 1826, as the successor of Bishop Berkeley.

Brinkley had another job besides being an astronomer. He was also a clergyman. When someone tries to juggle two different careers at the same time, it’s easy to see why they might either succeed or fail. If they succeed, it shows the benefit of having multiple skills. If they fail, it’s because they tried to balance too much at once. In Brinkley’s case, his two jobs were more like having extra skills than trying to manage two separate roles. It’s true that his experience as a clergyman was quite limited. He never tried to merge parish duties with his work at the observatory. Also, we don’t really think of him as having made any significant contributions to religious work. However, if we’re judging Brinkley’s value as a clergyman by the positions he held, then his contributions to theology must have been on par with those in astronomy. He was gradually promoted in the Church and eventually became the Bishop of Cloyne in 1826, succeeding Bishop Berkeley.

Now, though it was permissible for the Archdeacon to be also the Andrews Professor, yet when the Archdeacon became a Bishop, it was understood that he should transfer his residence from the observatory to the palace. The chair of Astronomy accordingly became vacant. Brinkley's subsequent career seems to have been devoted entirely to ecclesiastical matters, and for the last ten years of his life he did not contribute a paper to any scientific society. Arago, after a characteristic lament that Brinkley should have forsaken the pursuit of science for the temporal and spiritual attractions of a bishopric, pays a tribute to the conscientiousness of the quondam astronomer, who would not even allow a telescope to be brought into the palace lest his mind should be distracted from his sacred duties.

Now, while it was allowed for the Archdeacon to also hold the title of the Andrews Professor, once the Archdeacon became a Bishop, it was expected that he would move from the observatory to the palace. As a result, the chair of Astronomy became vacant. Brinkley’s later career appears to have focused entirely on church matters, and for the last ten years of his life, he did not submit any papers to scientific societies. Arago, after expressing his disappointment that Brinkley had left the field of science for the worldly and spiritual duties of a bishop, pays tribute to the dedication of the former astronomer, who wouldn’t even permit a telescope in the palace to avoid any distractions from his sacred responsibilities.

The good bishop died on the 13th September, 1835. He was buried in the chapel of Trinity College, and a fine monument to his memory is a familiar object at the foot of the noble old staircase of the library. The best memorial of Brinkley is his admirable book on the "Elements of Plane Astronomy." It passed through many editions in his lifetime, and even at the present day the same work, revised first by Dr. Luby, and more recently by the Rev. Dr. Stubbs and Dr. Brunnow, has a large and well-merited circulation.

The good bishop passed away on September 13, 1835. He was laid to rest in the chapel of Trinity College, and a beautiful monument in his honor is a familiar sight at the base of the grand old staircase of the library. The best tribute to Brinkley is his excellent book on the "Elements of Plane Astronomy." It went through many editions during his lifetime, and even today, the same work, first revised by Dr. Luby and more recently by Rev. Dr. Stubbs and Dr. Brunnow, enjoys a wide and well-deserved readership.

JOHN HERSCHEL.

This illustrious son of an illustrious father was born at Slough, near Windsor, on the 7th March, 1792. He was the only child of Sir William Herschel, who had married somewhat late in life, as we have already mentioned.

This famous son of a famous father was born in Slough, near Windsor, on March 7, 1792. He was the only child of Sir William Herschel, who had married somewhat later in life, as previously mentioned.

ASTRONOMETER MADE BY SIR J. HERSCHEL to compare the light of certain stars by the intervention of the moon.
ASTRONOMETER MADE BY SIR J. HERSCHEL to compare the light of certain stars by the intervention of the moon.
Astronometer created by Sir J. Herschel to compare the brightness of specific stars using the moon as a filter.

The surroundings among which the young astronomer was reared afforded him an excellent training for that career on which he was to enter, and in which he was destined to attain a fame only less brilliant than that of his father. The circumstances of his youth permitted him to enjoy one great advantage which was denied to the elder Herschel. He was able, from his childhood, to devote himself almost exclusively to intellectual pursuits. William Herschel, in the early part of his career, had only been able to snatch occasional hours for study from his busy life as a professional musician. But the son, having been born with a taste for the student's life, was fortunate enough to have been endowed with the leisure and the means to enjoy it from the commencement. His early years have been so well described by the late Professor Pritchard in the "Report of the Council of the Royal Astronomical Society for 1872," that I venture to make an extract here:—

The environment in which the young astronomer grew up provided him with excellent training for the career he would pursue, one in which he would gain fame only slightly less remarkable than his father's. The circumstances of his youth gave him a significant advantage that the older Herschel didn't have. From childhood, he was able to focus almost entirely on intellectual activities. William Herschel, in the early years of his career, could only squeeze in occasional study hours amid his busy life as a professional musician. However, the son, having been born with a passion for scholarly pursuits, was lucky enough to have the time and resources to fully embrace it from the start. The late Professor Pritchard described his early years so well in the "Report of the Council of the Royal Astronomical Society for 1872" that I feel compelled to include an excerpt here:—

"A few traits of John Herschel's boyhood, mentioned by himself in his maturer life, have been treasured up by those who were dear to him, and the record of some of them may satisfy a curiosity as pardonable as inevitable, which craves to learn through what early steps great men or great nations become illustrious. His home was singular, and singularly calculated to nurture into greatness any child born as John Herschel was with natural gifts, capable of wide development. At the head of the house there was the aged, observant, reticent philosopher, and rarely far away his devoted sister, Caroline Herschel, whose labours and whose fame are still cognisable as a beneficent satellite to the brighter light of her illustrious brother. It was in the companionship of these remarkable persons, and under the shadow of his father's wonderful telescope, that John Herschel passed his boyish years. He saw them, in silent but ceaseless industry, busied about things which had no apparent concern with the world outside the walls of that well-known house, but which, at a later period of his life, he, with an unrivalled eloquence, taught his countrymen to appreciate as foremost among those living influences which but satisfy and elevate the noblest instincts of our nature. What sort of intercourse passed between the father and the boy may be gathered from an incident or two which he narrated as having impressed themselves permanently on the memory of his youth. He once asked his father what he thought was the oldest of all things. The father replied, after the Socratic method, by putting another question: 'And what do you yourself suppose is the oldest of all things?' The boy was not successful in his answers, thereon the old astronomer took up a small stone from the garden walk: 'There, my child, there is the oldest of all the things that I certainly know.' On another occasion his father is said to have asked the boy, 'What sort of things, do you think, are most alike?' The delicate, blue-eyed boy, after a short pause, replied, 'The leaves of the same tree are most like each other.' 'Gather, then, a handful of leaves of that tree,' rejoined the philosopher, 'and choose two that are alike.' The boy failed; but he hid the lesson in his heart, and his thoughts were revealed after many days. These incidents may be trifles; nor should we record them here had not John Herschel himself, though singularly reticent about his personal emotions, recorded them as having made a strong impression on his mind. Beyond all doubt we can trace therein, first, that grasp and grouping of many things in one, implied in the stone as the oldest of things; and, secondly, that fine and subtle discrimination of each thing out of many like things as forming the main features which characterized the habit of our venerated friend's philosophy."

A few traits from John Herschel's childhood, shared by him later in life, have been cherished by those close to him, and some of these accounts may satisfy a curiosity that is both understandable and natural, wanting to know how great individuals or nations become exceptional. His home was unique and perfectly suited to nurture greatness in any child like John Herschel, who was born with natural talents ready for expansive growth. At the head of the household was his wise, observant, and reserved father, alongside his devoted sister, Caroline Herschel, whose contributions and recognition are still acknowledged as a valuable complement to her brilliant brother's accomplishments. It was in the company of these extraordinary figures, and under his father's remarkable telescope, that John Herschel spent his childhood. He witnessed their silent yet tireless work engaged in pursuits seemingly unrelated to the outside world, but which, later in life, he passionately taught his fellow countrymen to recognize as vital influences that fulfill and uplift our highest instincts. The interactions between father and son can be gleaned from a couple of incidents he recounted that made a lasting impression on his youthful memory. He once asked his father what he thought was the oldest thing in existence. The father responded with a question of his own: "And what do you think is the oldest thing?" The boy struggled to answer, prompting the old astronomer to pick up a small stone from the garden path: "There, my child, is the oldest thing I know for sure." On another occasion, the father is said to have asked, "What do you think is most alike?" The delicate, blue-eyed boy replied after a brief pause, "The leaves of the same tree are most alike." "Then gather a handful of leaves from that tree and pick two that are alike," the philosopher replied. The boy couldn't succeed, but he tucked the lesson away in his heart, and his thoughts surfaced after many days. These moments might seem trivial; we wouldn't include them here if John Herschel himself hadn't recorded them as impactful experiences. Without a doubt, we can trace in them, firstly, the concept of gathering and understanding many things as one, reflected in the stone as the oldest of all things, and secondly, the subtle ability to differentiate each thing from many similar ones, which highlights the defining traits of our esteemed friend's philosophy.

John Herschel entered St. John's College, Cambridge, when he was seventeen years of age. His university career abundantly fulfilled his father's eager desire, that his only son should develop a capacity for the pursuit of science. After obtaining many lesser distinctions, he finally came out as Senior Wrangler in 1813. It was, indeed, a notable year in the mathematical annals of the University. Second on that list, in which Herschel's name was first, appeared that of the illustrious Peacock, afterwards Dean of Ely, who remained throughout life one of Herschel's most intimate friends.

John Herschel started at St. John's College, Cambridge, when he was seventeen. His time at university fully satisfied his father's strong wish for his only son to excel in science. After achieving several smaller honors, he emerged as the Senior Wrangler in 1813. It was a remarkable year in the university's mathematical history. Second on that list, with Herschel's name leading, was the distinguished Peacock, who later became Dean of Ely and remained one of Herschel's closest friends for life.

Almost immediately after taking his degree, Herschel gave evidence of possessing a special aptitude for original scientific investigation. He sent to the Royal Society a mathematical paper which was published in the PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. Doubtless the splendour that attached to the name he bore assisted him in procuring early recognition of his own great powers. Certain it is that he was made a Fellow of the Royal Society at the unprecedentedly early age of twenty-one. Even after this remarkable encouragement to adopt a scientific career as the business of his life, it does not seem that John Herschel at first contemplated devoting himself exclusively to science. He commenced to prepare for the profession of the Law by entering as a student at the Middle Temple, and reading with a practising barrister.

Almost right after earning his degree, Herschel showed he had a unique talent for original scientific research. He submitted a mathematical paper to the Royal Society, which was published in the PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. It's likely that the prestige associated with his name helped him gain early recognition for his exceptional abilities. It's certain that he became a Fellow of the Royal Society at the remarkably young age of twenty-one. Even after this impressive encouragement to pursue a scientific career, it seems that John Herschel initially didn’t plan to focus solely on science. He started preparing for a career in law by enrolling as a student at the Middle Temple and studying under a practicing barrister.

But a lawyer John Herschel was not destined to become. Circumstances brought him into association with some leading scientific men. He presently discovered that his inclinations tended more and more in the direction of purely scientific pursuits. Thus it came to pass that the original intention as to the calling which he should follow was gradually abandoned. Fortunately for science Herschel found its pursuit so attractive that he was led, as his father had been before him, to give up his whole life to the advancement of knowledge. Nor was it unnatural that a Senior Wrangler, who had once tasted the delights of mathematical research, should have been tempted to devote much time to this fascinating pursuit. By the time John Herschel was twenty-nine he had published so much mathematical work, and his researches were considered to possess so much merit, that the Royal Society awarded him the Copley Medal, which was the highest distinction it was capable of conferring.

But John Herschel was not meant to be a lawyer. Circumstances brought him into contact with some prominent scientists. He soon discovered that his true interests leaned more and more toward scientific endeavors. As a result, he gradually abandoned his original plans for a career. Fortunately for science, Herschel found its pursuit so engaging that he, like his father before him, dedicated his entire life to the advancement of knowledge. It was also natural that a Senior Wrangler, who had once enjoyed the pleasures of mathematical research, would be drawn to spend a lot of time on this captivating field. By the time John Herschel turned twenty-nine, he had published a significant amount of mathematical work, and his research was regarded as highly valuable, earning him the Copley Medal from the Royal Society, the highest honor it could bestow.

At the death of his father in 1822, John Herschel, with his tastes already formed for a scientific career, found himself in the possession of ample means. To him also passed all his father's great telescopes and apparatus. These material aids, together with a dutiful sense of filial obligation, decided him to make practical astronomy the main work of his life. He decided to continue to its completion that great survey of the heavens which had already been inaugurated, and, indeed, to a large extent accomplished, by his father.

At the time of his father's death in 1822, John Herschel, already inclined toward a scientific career, inherited significant wealth. He also received all of his father’s impressive telescopes and equipment. These resources, along with a strong sense of obligation to his father, motivated him to make practical astronomy the focus of his life’s work. He chose to carry on and complete the extensive survey of the skies that his father had started and largely achieved.

The first systematic piece of practical astronomical work which John Herschel undertook was connected with the measurement of what are known as "Double Stars." It should be observed, that there are in the heavens a number of instances in which two stars are seen in very close association. In the case of those objects to which the expression "Double Stars" is generally applied, the two luminous points are so close together that even though they might each be quite bright enough to be visible to the unaided eye, yet their proximity is such that they cannot be distinguished as two separate objects without optical aid. The two stars seem fused together into one. In the telescope, however, the bodies may be discerned separately, though they are frequently so close together that it taxes the utmost power of the instrument to indicate the division between them.

The first systematic practical astronomical work that John Herschel undertook was related to measuring what we call "Double Stars." It's important to note that there are many instances in the sky where two stars are seen very close together. In the case of what we refer to as "Double Stars," these two shining points are so near each other that even if each one is bright enough to be seen with the naked eye, their closeness makes it impossible to tell them apart without some optical assistance. The two stars appear to blend into one. However, through a telescope, the two bodies can often be seen separately, although they are frequently so close that it requires the maximum power of the instrument to show the division between them.

The appearance presented by a double star might arise from the circumstance that the two stars, though really separated from each other by prodigious distances, happened to lie nearly in the same line of vision, as seen from our point of view. No doubt, many of the so-called double stars could be accounted for on this supposition. Indeed, in the early days when but few double stars were known, and when telescopes were not powerful enough to exhibit the numerous close doubles which have since been brought to light, there seems to have been a tendency to regard all double stars as merely such perspective effects. It was not at first suggested that there could be any physical connection between the components of each pair. The appearance presented was regarded as merely due to the circumstance that the line joining the two bodies happened to pass near the earth.

The way a double star looks could come from the fact that the two stars, even though they are really far apart, appear to be almost in the same line of sight from our perspective. Many of the so-called double stars could likely be explained this way. In the early days, when only a few double stars were known and telescopes weren’t strong enough to reveal the many close doubles that have since been discovered, people tended to think of all double stars as just perspective illusions. At first, it wasn’t considered that there might be any physical connection between the stars in each pair. The way they appeared was simply seen as a result of the line connecting the two bodies passing close to Earth.

SIR JOHN HERSCHEL.
SIR JOHN HERSCHEL.
Sir John Herschel.

In the early part of his career, Sir William Herschel seems to have entertained the view then generally held by other astronomers with regard to the nature of these stellar pairs. The great observer thought that the double stars could therefore be made to afford a means of solving that problem in which so many of the observers of the skies had been engaged, namely, the determination of the distances of the stars from the earth. Herschel saw that the displacement of the earth in its annual movement round the sun would produce an apparent shift in the place of the nearer of the two stars relatively to the other, supposed to be much more remote. If this shift could be measured, then the distance of the nearer of the stars could be estimated with some degree of precision.

In the early part of his career, Sir William Herschel seemed to share the view commonly held by other astronomers about these star pairs. The great observer believed that double stars could help solve a problem many skywatchers were tackling, which was figuring out how far the stars are from Earth. Herschel realized that the Earth's movement around the sun would cause an apparent shift in the position of the closer star compared to the other one, which was thought to be much farther away. If this shift could be measured, then the distance to the closer star could be estimated with a certain degree of accuracy.

As has not unfrequently happened in the history of science, an effect was perceived of a very different nature from that which had been anticipated. If the relative places of the two stars had been apparently deranged merely in consequence of the motion of the earth, then the phenomenon would be an annual one. After the lapse of a year the two stars would have regained their original relative positions. This was the effect for which William Herschel was looking. In certain of the so called double stars, he, no doubt, did find a movement. He detected the remarkable fact that both the apparent distance and the relative positions of the two bodies were changing. But what was his surprise to observe that these alterations were not of an annually periodic character. It became evident then that in some cases one of the component stars was actually revolving around the other, in an orbit which required many years for its completion. Here was indeed a remarkable discovery. It was clearly impossible to suppose that movements of this kind could be mere apparent displacements, arising from the annual shift in our point of view, in consequence of the revolution of the earth. Herschel's discovery established the interesting fact that, in certain of these double stars, or binary stars, as these particular objects are more expressively designated, there is an actual orbital revolution of a character similar to that which the earth performs around the sun. Thus it was demonstrated that in these particular double stars the nearness of the two components was not merely apparent. The objects must actually lie close together at a distance which is small in comparison with the distance at which either of them is separated from the earth. The fact that the heavens contain pairs of twin suns in mutual revolution was thus brought to light.

As often happens in the history of science, an effect was observed that was very different from what was expected. If the relative positions of the two stars had seemed to change solely due to the motion of the Earth, then the phenomenon would occur every year. After a year, the two stars would have returned to their original relative positions. This was the effect that William Herschel was hoping to find. In some of the so-called double stars, he indeed detected a movement. He noted the surprising fact that both the apparent distance and the relative positions of the two bodies were changing. But he was shocked to see that these changes were not happening on a yearly basis. It soon became clear that in some cases, one of the stars was actually orbiting around the other, taking many years to complete its orbit. This was a remarkable discovery. It was impossible to think that such movements were just apparent shifts caused by the annual change in our viewpoint due to the Earth's revolution. Herschel's discovery revealed the intriguing fact that in certain double stars, or binary stars, as these particular objects are more accurately called, there is a true orbital revolution similar to how the Earth orbits the Sun. Thus, it was shown that in these specific double stars, the closeness of the two components was not just an illusion. The stars must actually be close together, at a distance that is small compared to how far each is from the Earth. The existence of pairs of twin suns in mutual orbit was thus uncovered.

In consequence of this beautiful discovery, the attention of astronomers was directed to the subject of double stars with a degree of interest which these objects had never before excited. It was therefore not unnatural that John Herschel should have been attracted to this branch of astronomical work. Admiration for his father's discovery alone might have suggested that the son should strive to develop this territory newly opened up to research. But it also happened that the mathematical talents of the younger Herschel inclined his inquiries in the same direction. He saw clearly that, when sufficient observations of any particular binary star had been accumulated, it would then be within the power of the mathematician to elicit from those observations the shape and the position in space of the path which each of the revolving stars described around the other. Indeed, in some cases he would be able to perform the astonishing feat of determining from his calculations the weight of these distant suns, and thus be enabled to compare them with the mass of our own sun.

As a result of this amazing discovery, astronomers became more interested in double stars than ever before. So, it was natural for John Herschel to get drawn into this area of astronomy. His admiration for his father's discovery might have motivated him to explore this new research field. Additionally, the younger Herschel's mathematical skills directed his inquiries in the same direction. He realized that once enough observations of a particular binary star were gathered, a mathematician could derive the shape and position of each star's orbit around the other. In fact, in some instances, he could even determine the mass of these distant suns through his calculations, allowing for comparisons with the mass of our own sun.

NEBULA IN SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE, drawn by Sir John Herschel.
NEBULA IN SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE, drawn by Sir John Herschel.
NEBULA IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE, illustrated by Sir John Herschel.

But this work must follow the observations, it could not precede them. The first step was therefore to observe and to measure with the utmost care the positions and distances of those particular double stars which appear to offer the greatest promise in this particular research. In 1821, Herschel and a friend of his, Mr. James South, agreed to work together with this object. South was a medical man with an ardent devotion to science, and possessed of considerable wealth. He procured the best astronomical instruments that money could obtain, and became a most enthusiastic astronomer and a practical observer of tremendous energy.

But this work must come after the observations; it couldn't happen before them. The first step was to carefully observe and measure the positions and distances of those specific double stars that seemed most promising for this research. In 1821, Herschel and his friend Mr. James South decided to collaborate on this project. South was a medical professional with a strong passion for science and significant wealth. He acquired the best astronomical instruments available and became a highly enthusiastic astronomer and a practical observer with tremendous energy.

South and John Herschel worked together for two years in the observation and measurement of the double stars discovered by Sir William Herschel. In the course of this time their assiduity was rewarded by the accumulation of so great a mass of careful measurements that when published, they formed quite a volume in the "Philosophical Transactions." The value and accuracy of the work, when estimated by standards which form proper criteria for that period, is universally recognised. It greatly promoted the progress of sidereal astronomy, and the authors were in consequence awarded medals from the Royal Society, and the Royal Astronomical Society, as well as similar testimonials from various foreign institutions.

South and John Herschel worked together for two years to observe and measure the double stars discovered by Sir William Herschel. During this time, their hard work resulted in a substantial collection of precise measurements that, when published, made up a significant volume in the "Philosophical Transactions." The value and accuracy of their work, when judged by the standards appropriate for that time, are widely recognized. It significantly advanced the field of sidereal astronomy, and as a result, the authors received medals from the Royal Society, the Royal Astronomical Society, and similar acknowledgments from various international institutions.

This work must, however, be regarded as merely introductory to the main labours of John Herschel's life. His father devoted the greater part of his years as an observer to what he called his "sweeps" of the heavens. The great reflecting telescope, twenty feet long, was moved slowly up and down through an arc of about two degrees towards and from the pole, while the celestial panorama passed slowly in the course of the diurnal motion before the keenly watching eye of the astronomer. Whenever a double star traversed the field Herschel described it to his sister Caroline, who, as we have already mentioned, was his invariable assistant in his midnight watches. When a nebula appeared, then he estimated its size and its brightness, he noticed whether it had a nucleus, or whether it had stars disposed in any significant manner with regard to it. He also dictated any other circumstance which he deemed worthy of record. These observations were duly committed to writing by the same faithful and indefatigable scribe, whose business it also was to take a memorandum of the exact position of the object as indicated by a dial placed in front of her desk, and connected with the telescope.

This work should be seen as just an introduction to the main efforts of John Herschel's life. His father spent most of his years observing what he called his "sweeps" of the sky. The large reflecting telescope, twenty feet long, was moved slowly up and down through an arc of about two degrees toward and away from the pole, as the celestial panorama gradually passed before the sharp eyes of the astronomer due to the Earth’s rotation. Whenever a double star crossed the field, Herschel described it to his sister Caroline, who, as we've already mentioned, was always his assistant during his late-night observations. When a nebula appeared, he estimated its size and brightness, noted whether it had a nucleus, or if it had stars arranged in any significant way around it. He also dictated any other details he thought were worth recording. These observations were faithfully written down by the same diligent scribe, who also noted the exact position of the object using a dial placed in front of her desk, connected to the telescope.

John Herschel undertook the important task of re-observing the various double stars and nebulae which had been discovered during these memorable vigils. The son, however, lacked one inestimable advantage which had been possessed by the father. John Herschel had no assistant to discharge all those duties which Caroline had so efficiently accomplished. He had, therefore, to modify the system of sweeping previously adopted in order to enable all the work both of observing and of recording to be done by himself. This, in many ways, was a great drawback to the work of the younger astronomer. The division of labour between the observer and the scribe enables a greatly increased quantity of work to be got through. It is also distinctly disadvantageous to an observer to have to use his eye at the telescope directly after he has been employing it for reading the graduations on a circle, by the light of a lamp, or for entering memoranda in a note book. Nebulae, especially, are often so excessively faint that they can only be properly observed by an eye which is in that highly sensitive condition which is obtained by long continuance in darkness. The frequent withdrawal of the eye from the dark field of the telescope, and the application of it to reading by artificial light, is very prejudicial to its use for the more delicate purpose. John Herschel, no doubt, availed himself of every precaution to mitigate the ill effects of this inconvenience as much as possible, but it must have told upon his labours as compared with those of his father.

John Herschel took on the important job of re-observing the various double stars and nebulae that had been discovered during those memorable nights. However, he lacked one invaluable advantage that his father had. John Herschel didn't have an assistant to handle the tasks that Caroline had efficiently managed. He had to adapt the sweeping method that was previously used so he could do all the observing and recording himself. This, in many ways, was a significant setback for the younger astronomer. When the observer and the scribe share the workload, a lot more can be accomplished. It's also really challenging for an observer to switch from using their eyes at the telescope to reading the markings on a circle under a lamp or writing notes. Nebulae, in particular, can be so incredibly faint that they can only be observed properly by eyes that are highly sensitive from prolonged darkness. Frequently pulling the eye away from the dark view of the telescope to read by artificial light is very detrimental for more delicate observations. John Herschel likely took every precaution to lessen the negative impact of this issue as much as possible, but it must have affected his work compared to that of his father.

But nevertheless John Herschel did great work during his "sweeps." He was specially particular to note all the double stars which presented themselves to his observation. Of course some little discretion must be allowed in deciding as to what degree of proximity in adjacent stars does actually bring them within the category of "double stars." Sir John set down all such objects as seemed to him likely to be of interest, and the results of his discoveries in this branch of astronomy amount to some thousands. Six or seven great memoirs in the TRANSACTIONS of the Royal Astronomical Society have been devoted to giving an account of his labours in this department of astronomy.

But still, John Herschel did impressive work during his "sweeps." He was particularly careful to note all the double stars that came into his view. Naturally, some discretion is needed when deciding what level of closeness in nearby stars qualifies them as "double stars." Sir John recorded all objects that he thought might be interesting, and the outcome of his discoveries in this area of astronomy amounts to several thousand. Six or seven major papers in the TRANSACTIONS of the Royal Astronomical Society are dedicated to detailing his efforts in this field of astronomy.

THE CLUSTER IN THE CENTAUR, drawn by Sir John Herschel.
THE CLUSTER IN THE CENTAUR, drawn by Sir John Herschel.
THE CLUSTER IN THE CENTAUR, illustrated by Sir John Herschel.

One of the achievements by which Sir John Herschel is best known is his invention of a method by which the orbits of binary stars could be determined. It will be observed that when one star revolves around another in consequence of the law of gravitation, the orbit described must be an ellipse. This ellipse, however, generally speaking, appears to us more or less foreshortened, for it is easily seen that only under highly exceptional circumstances would the plane in which the stars move happen to be directly square to the line of view. It therefore follows that what we observe is not exactly the track of one star around the other; it is rather the projection of that track as seen on the surface of the sky. Now it is remarkable that this apparent path is still an ellipse. Herschel contrived a very ingenious and simple method by which he could discover from the observations the size and position of the ellipse in which the revolution actually takes place. He showed how, from the study of the apparent orbit of the star, and from certain measurements which could easily be effected upon it, the determination of the true ellipse in which the movement is performed could be arrived at. In other words, Herschel solved in a beautiful manner the problem of finding the true orbits of double stars. The importance of this work may be inferred from the fact that it has served as the basis on which scores of other investigators have studied the fascinating subject of the movement of binary stars.

One of the achievements that Sir John Herschel is most famous for is his invention of a method for determining the orbits of binary stars. It's important to note that when one star revolves around another due to the law of gravitation, the orbit formed must be an ellipse. However, this ellipse often appears more or less squished from our perspective because it’s clear that the plane in which the stars move is rarely perfectly aligned with our line of sight. As a result, what we see isn’t exactly the path of one star around the other; it’s more like the projection of that path onto the sky. Interestingly, this apparent path still forms an ellipse. Herschel devised a clever and straightforward method to find out, based on observations, the size and position of the actual ellipse in which the revolution occurs. He demonstrated how, by studying the apparent orbit of the star and taking certain measurements that were easy to obtain, he could determine the true ellipse in which the motion happens. In short, Herschel beautifully solved the problem of finding the true orbits of double stars. The significance of this work can be seen in the fact that it has laid the groundwork for numerous other researchers studying the intriguing topic of binary star movements.

The labours, both in the discovery and measurement of the double stars, and in the discussion of the observations with the object of finding the orbits of such stars as are in actual revolution, received due recognition in yet another gold medal awarded by the Royal Society. An address was delivered on the occasion by the Duke of Sussex (30th November, 1833), in the course of which, after stating that the medal had been conferred on Sir John Herschel, he remarks:—

The work done in finding and measuring double stars, as well as discussing the observations to determine the orbits of stars that are actually moving, was acknowledged with another gold medal given by the Royal Society. On this occasion, the Duke of Sussex gave a speech (30th November, 1833), during which he noted that the medal was awarded to Sir John Herschel and remarked:—

"It has been said that distance of place confers the same privilege as distance of time, and I should gladly avail myself of the privilege which is thus afforded me by Sir John Herschel's separation from his country and friends, to express my admiration of his character in stronger terms than I should otherwise venture to use; for the language of panegyric, however sincerely it may flow from the heart, might be mistaken for that of flattery, if it could not thus claim somewhat of an historical character; but his great attainments in almost every department of human knowledge, his fine powers as a philosophical writer, his great services and his distinguished devotion to science, the high principles which have regulated his conduct in every relation of life, and, above all, his engaging modesty, which is the crown of all his other virtues, presenting such a model of an accomplished philosopher as can rarely be found beyond the regions of fiction, demand abler pens than mine to describe them in adequate terms, however much inclined I might feel to undertake the task."

"It’s been said that physical distance offers the same benefit as temporal distance, and I would happily take advantage of the privilege that comes from Sir John Herschel being away from his country and friends to express my admiration for his character in stronger terms than I might usually feel comfortable using; because, even if my praise comes sincerely from the heart, it could be mistaken for flattery unless it has some historical context. However, his remarkable achievements in nearly every area of human knowledge, his exceptional skills as a philosophical writer, his significant contributions, and his deep commitment to science, along with the high principles that have guided his actions in every aspect of life, and especially his admirable modesty that crowns all his other virtues—presenting such a model of an accomplished philosopher that is rarely found outside of fiction—deserve much more capable writers than me to describe them properly, no matter how much I’d like to take on the task."

The first few lines of the eulogium just quoted allude to Herschel's absence from England. This was not merely an episode of interest in the career of Herschel, it was the occasion of one of the greatest scientific expeditions in the whole history of astronomy.

The first few lines of the eulogy just quoted mention Herschel's absence from England. This wasn't just an interesting moment in Herschel's career; it was the start of one of the most significant scientific expeditions in the entire history of astronomy.

Herschel had, as we have seen, undertaken a revision of his father's "sweeps" for new objects, in those skies which are visible from our latitudes in the northern hemisphere. He had well-nigh completed this task. Zone by zone the whole of the heavens which could be observed from Windsor had passed under his review. He had added hundreds to the list of nebulae discovered by his father. He had announced thousands of double stars. At last, however, the great survey was accomplished. The contents of the northern hemisphere, so far at least as they could be disclosed by his telescope of twenty feet focal length, had been revealed.

Herschel had, as we’ve seen, taken on the task of revising his father’s "sweeps" for new objects in the skies visible from our latitudes in the northern hemisphere. He was just about finished with this job. Zone by zone, he had examined the entire sky that could be observed from Windsor. He had added hundreds to the list of nebulae discovered by his father and announced thousands of double stars. Finally, though, the major survey was complete. The contents of the northern hemisphere, at least as much as his twenty-foot focal length telescope could show, had been revealed.

SIR JOHN HERSCHEL'S OBSERVATORY AT FELDHAUSEN, Cape of Good Hope.
SIR JOHN HERSCHEL'S OBSERVATORY AT FELDHAUSEN, Cape of Good Hope.
SIR JOHN HERSCHEL'S OBSERVATORY AT FELDHAUSEN, Cape of Good Hope.

But Herschel felt that this mighty task had to be supplemented by another of almost equal proportions, before it could be said that the twenty-foot telescope had done its work. It was only the northern half of the celestial sphere which had been fully explored. The southern half was almost virgin territory, for no other astronomer was possessed of a telescope of such power as those which the Herschels had used. It is true, of course, that as a certain margin of the southern hemisphere was visible from these latitudes, it had been more or less scrutinized by observers in northern skies. And the glimpses which had thus been obtained of the celestial objects in the southern sky, were such as to make an eager astronomer long for a closer acquaintance with the celestial wonders of the south. The most glorious object in the sidereal heavens, the Great Nebula in Orion, lies indeed in that southern hemisphere to which the younger Herschel's attention now became directed. It fortunately happens, however, for votaries of astronomy all the world over, that Nature has kindly placed her most astounding object, the great Nebula in Orion, in such a favoured position, near the equator, that from a considerable range of latitudes, both north and south, the wonders of the Nebula can be explored. There are grounds for thinking that the southern heavens contain noteworthy objects which, on the whole, are nearer to the solar system than are the noteworthy objects in the northern skies. The nearest star whose distance is known, Alpha Centauri, lies in the southern hemisphere, and so also does the most splendid cluster of stars.

But Herschel believed that this huge task needed to be complemented by another one of nearly equal importance before the twenty-foot telescope could be considered to have fulfilled its purpose. They had only fully explored the northern half of the celestial sphere. The southern half remained almost untouched, as no other astronomer had a telescope as powerful as the ones used by the Herschels. It's true that a certain portion of the southern hemisphere was visible from these latitudes, so it had been somewhat examined by observers in the north. The glimpses they had gotten of celestial objects in the southern sky made eager astronomers long for a closer look at the southern wonders. The most magnificent object in the night sky, the Great Nebula in Orion, is indeed located in that southern hemisphere that the younger Herschel was now focusing on. Fortunately for astronomy enthusiasts around the world, Nature has placed her most amazing object, the Great Nebula in Orion, in such a favorable spot near the equator that it can be observed from a wide range of latitudes, both north and south. There are reasons to believe that the southern skies hold significant objects that are, overall, closer to our solar system than many notable objects in the northern sky. The closest known star, Alpha Centauri, is in the southern hemisphere, as is the most dazzling star cluster.

Influenced by the desire to examine these objects, Sir John Herschel determined to take his great telescope to a station in the southern hemisphere, and thus complete his survey of the sidereal heavens. The latitude of the Cape of Good Hope is such that a suitable site could be there found for his purpose. The purity of the skies in South Africa promised to provide for the astronomer those clear nights which his delicate task of surveying the nebulae would require.

Driven by the wish to explore these objects, Sir John Herschel decided to take his powerful telescope to a location in the southern hemisphere to finish his survey of the starry sky. The latitude of the Cape of Good Hope was ideal for his needs. The clear skies in South Africa promised to offer the astronomer the clear nights necessary for the intricate job of mapping the nebulae.

On November 13, 1833, Sir John Herschel, who had by this time received the honour of knighthood from William IV., sailed from Portsmouth for the Cape of Good Hope, taking with him his gigantic instruments. After a voyage of two months, which was considered to be a fair passage in those days, he landed in Table Bay, and having duly reconnoitred various localities, he decided to place his observatory at a place called Feldhausen, about six miles from Cape Town, near the base of the Table Mountain. A commodious residence was there available, and in it he settled with his family. A temporary building was erected to contain the equatorial, but the great twenty-foot telescope was accommodated with no more shelter than is provided by the open canopy of heaven.

On November 13, 1833, Sir John Herschel, who had by then been knighted by William IV, set sail from Portsmouth for the Cape of Good Hope, taking along his massive instruments. After a two-month voyage, which was considered a decent trip at that time, he arrived in Table Bay. After exploring various locations, he chose to establish his observatory at a spot called Feldhausen, about six miles from Cape Town, at the foot of Table Mountain. A comfortable home was available there, and he moved in with his family. A temporary building was constructed to house the equatorial telescope, but the large twenty-foot telescope had no more protection than the open sky.

As in his earlier researches at home, the attention of the great astronomer at the Cape of Good Hope was chiefly directed to the measurement of the relative positions and distances apart of the double stars, and to the close examination of the nebulae. In the delineation of the form of these latter objects Herschel found ample employment for his skilful pencil. Many of the drawings he has made of the celestial wonders in the southern sky are admirable examples of celestial portraiture.

As in his earlier research at home, the attention of the great astronomer at the Cape of Good Hope was mainly focused on measuring the relative positions and distances of the double stars, as well as closely examining the nebulae. In capturing the shape of these latter objects, Herschel found plenty of work for his skilled pencil. Many of the drawings he made of the celestial wonders in the southern sky are excellent examples of celestial portraiture.

The number of the nebulae and of those kindred objects, the star clusters, which Herschel studied in the southern heavens, during four years of delightful labour, amount in all to one thousand seven hundred and seven. His notes on their appearance, and the determinations of their positions, as well as his measurements of double stars, and much other valuable astronomical research, were published in a splendid volume, brought out at the cost of the Duke of Northumberland. This is, indeed, a monumental work, full of interesting and instructive reading for any one who has a taste for astronomy.

The number of nebulae and related objects, like star clusters, that Herschel studied in the southern skies over four years of enjoyable work totals one thousand seven hundred and seven. His notes on their appearance, the determinations of their positions, measurements of double stars, and a lot of other valuable astronomical research were published in an impressive volume funded by the Duke of Northumberland. This is truly a landmark work, filled with fascinating and informative content for anyone interested in astronomy.

Herschel had the good fortune to be at the Cape on the occasion of the periodical return of Halley's great comet in 1833. To the study of this body he gave assiduous attention, and the records of his observations form one of the most interesting chapters in that remarkable volume to which we have just referred.

Herschel was lucky to be at the Cape during Halley's great comet's periodic return in 1833. He focused intently on studying this comet, and his observation records make up one of the most fascinating chapters in that remarkable volume we just mentioned.

COLUMN AT FELDHAUSEN, CAPE TOWN, to commemorate Sir John Herschel's survey of the Southern Heavens.
COLUMN AT FELDHAUSEN, CAPE TOWN, to commemorate Sir John Herschel's survey of the Southern Heavens.
COLUMN AT FELDHAUSEN, CAPE TOWN, to honor Sir John Herschel's survey of the Southern Sky.

Early in 1838 Sir John Herschel returned to England. He had made many friends at the Cape, who deeply sympathised with his self- imposed labours while he was resident among them. They desired to preserve the recollection of this visit, which would always, they considered, be a source of gratification in the colony. Accordingly, a number of scientific friends in that part of the world raised a monument with a suitable inscription, on the spot which had been occupied by the great twenty-foot reflector at Feldhausen.

Early in 1838, Sir John Herschel returned to England. He had made many friends at the Cape who really appreciated his dedication to his self-imposed work while he was living there. They wanted to keep the memory of his visit alive, believing it would always bring joy to the colony. As a result, a group of scientific friends in that region built a monument with a fitting inscription at the location where the impressive twenty-foot reflector had been at Feldhausen.

His return to England after five years of absence was naturally an occasion for much rejoicing among the lovers of astronomy. He was entertained at a memorable banquet, and the Queen, at her coronation, made him a baronet. His famous aunt Caroline, at that time aged eighty, was still in the enjoyment of her faculties, and was able to estimate at its true value the further lustre which was added to the name she bore. But there is reason to believe that her satisfaction was not quite unmixed with other feelings. With whatever favour she might regard her nephew, he was still not the brother to whom her life had been devoted. So jealous was this vigorous old lady of the fame of the great brother William, that she could hardly hear with patience of the achievements of any other astronomer, and this failing existed in some degree even when that other astronomer happened to be her illustrious nephew.

His return to England after five years away was naturally a cause for celebration among astronomy enthusiasts. He was honored at a memorable banquet, and the Queen, during her coronation, made him a baronet. His famous aunt Caroline, who was eighty at the time, was still sharp and could fully appreciate the added prestige to the name she carried. However, it’s reasonable to believe that her happiness was mixed with other feelings. No matter how much she admired her nephew, he was still not the brother to whom she had devoted her life. This spirited old woman was so protective of the legacy of her great brother William that she could hardly tolerate hearing about the accomplishments of any other astronomer, and this tendency persisted even when that other astronomer happened to be her celebrated nephew.

With Sir John Herschel's survey of the Southern Hemisphere it may be said that his career as an observing astronomer came to a close. He did not again engage in any systematic telescopic research. But it must not be inferred from this statement that he desisted from active astronomical work. It has been well observed that Sir John Herschel was perhaps the only astronomer who has studied with success, and advanced by original research, every department of the great science with which his name is associated. It was to some other branches of astronomy besides those concerned with looking through telescopes, that the rest of the astronomer's life was to be devoted.

With Sir John Herschel's survey of the Southern Hemisphere, it can be said that his career as an observational astronomer came to an end. He didn’t take part in any more systematic telescopic research. However, this doesn’t mean he stopped engaging in active astronomical work. It's been noted that Sir John Herschel was perhaps the only astronomer who successfully studied and made original contributions to every area of the vast science to which his name is linked. In the later part of his life, he focused on other branches of astronomy beyond just looking through telescopes.

To the general student Sir John Herschel is best known by the volume which he published under the title of "Outlines of Astronomy." This is, indeed, a masterly work, in which the characteristic difficulties of the subject are resolutely faced and expounded with as much simplicity as their nature will admit. As a literary effort this work is admirable, both on account of its picturesque language and the ennobling conceptions of the universe which it unfolds. The student who desires to become acquainted with those recondite departments of astronomy, in which the effects of the disturbing action of one planet upon the motions of another planet are considered, will turn to the chapters in Herschel's famous work on the subject. There he will find this complex matter elucidated, without resort to difficult mathematics. Edition after edition of this valuable work has appeared, and though the advances of modern astronomy have left it somewhat out of date in certain departments, yet the expositions it contains of the fundamental parts of the science still remain unrivalled.

To most students, Sir John Herschel is best known for his book titled "Outlines of Astronomy." This is truly an impressive work, where the distinct challenges of the subject are tackled and explained with as much simplicity as possible. As a piece of writing, it is excellent, thanks to its vivid language and the uplifting ideas of the universe it presents. Students who want to understand the complex areas of astronomy, particularly how one planet's disturbances affect another's movements, will look to the chapters in Herschel's well-known work on the topic. There, they will find this intricate subject clarified without the need for complex math. Numerous editions of this essential book have been published, and even though modern advancements in astronomy have made some parts a bit outdated, the explanations of the fundamental aspects of the science are still unmatched.

Another great work which Sir John undertook after his return from the Cape, was a natural climax to those labours on which his father and he had been occupied for so many years. We have already explained how the work of both these observers had been mainly devoted to the study of the nebulae and the star clusters. The results of their discoveries had been announced to the world in numerous isolated memoirs. The disjointed nature of these publications made their use very inconvenient. But still it was necessary for those who desired to study the marvellous objects discovered by the Herschels, to have frequent recourse to the original works. To incorporate all the several observations of nebular into one great systematic catalogue, seemed, therefore, to be an indispensable condition of progress in this branch of knowledge. No one could have been so fitted for this task as Sir John Herschel. He, therefore, attacked and carried through the great undertaking. Thus at last a grand catalogue of nebulae and clusters was produced. Never before was there so majestic an inventory. If we remember that each of the nebulae is an object so vast, that the whole of the solar system would form an inconsiderable speck by comparison, what are we to think of a collection in which these objects are enumerated in thousands? In this great catalogue we find arranged in systematic order all the nebulae and all the clusters which had been revealed by the diligence of the Herschels, father and son, in the Northern Hemisphere, and of the son alone in the Southern Hemisphere. Nor should we omit to mention that the labours of other astronomers were likewise incorporated. It was unavoidable that the descriptions given to each of the objects should be very slight. Abbreviations are used, which indicate that a nebula is bright, or very bright, or extremely bright, or faint, or very faint, or extremely faint. Such phrases have certainly but a relative and technical meaning in such a catalogue. The nebulae entered as extremely bright by the experienced astronomer are only so described by way of contrast to the great majority of these delicate telescopic objects. Most of the nebulae, indeed, are so difficult to see, that they admit of but very slight description. It should be observed that Herschel's catalogue augmented the number of known nebulous objects to more than ten times that collected into any catalogue which had ever been compiled before the days of William Herschel's observing began. But the study of these objects still advances, and the great telescopes now in use could probably show at least twice as many of these objects as are contained in the list of Herschel, of which a new and enlarged edition has since been brought out by Dr. Dreyer.

Another significant project that Sir John took on after returning from the Cape was a natural progression from the work he and his father had been involved in for many years. We've already noted how both observers focused primarily on studying nebulae and star clusters. The findings from their discoveries had been shared with the world in many separate papers. The fragmented nature of these publications made them quite inconvenient to use. However, for those interested in studying the incredible objects discovered by the Herschels, it was essential to frequently refer back to the original works. Therefore, compiling all the various observations of nebulae into one comprehensive systematic catalog seemed crucial for furthering knowledge in this field. No one was better suited for this task than Sir John Herschel. Accordingly, he tackled and completed this significant project. In the end, an extensive catalog of nebulae and clusters was produced. Never before had there been such an impressive inventory. Considering that each nebula is so vast that our entire solar system would seem like a tiny speck in comparison, what should we think of a collection that lists these objects in the thousands? In this expansive catalog, we see all the nebulae and star clusters documented by the hard work of the Herschels, both father and son, in the Northern Hemisphere, and by the son alone in the Southern Hemisphere. We should also mention that the efforts of other astronomers were included as well. It was inevitable that the descriptions for each object would be quite brief. Abbreviations were used to indicate whether a nebula is bright, very bright, extremely bright, faint, very faint, or extremely faint. These terms have a relative and technical meaning within such a catalog. The nebulae classified as extremely bright by the experienced astronomer are only labeled that way in contrast to the majority of these faint telescopic objects. Most nebulae are indeed so difficult to observe that they can only receive very minimal descriptions. It’s worth noting that Herschel's catalog increased the count of known nebulous objects to more than ten times that of any catalog that existed before William Herschel began his observations. Yet, the study of these objects continues to progress, and the large telescopes we have today could likely reveal at least double the number of objects listed in Herschel's catalog, which has since been updated and expanded by Dr. Dreyer.

One of the best illustrations of Sir John Herschel's literary powers is to be found in the address which he delivered at the Royal Astronomical Society, on the occasion of presenting a medal to Mr. Francis Baily, in recognition of his catalogue of stars. The passage I shall here cite places in its proper aspect the true merit of the laborious duty involved in such a task as that which Mr. Baily had carried through with such success:—

One of the best examples of Sir John Herschel's literary abilities can be found in the speech he gave at the Royal Astronomical Society when he awarded a medal to Mr. Francis Baily for his star catalog. The excerpt I’ll quote here properly highlights the true value of the challenging work that Mr. Baily accomplished so successfully:—

"If we ask to what end magnificent establishments are maintained by states and sovereigns, furnished with masterpieces of art, and placed under the direction of men of first-rate talent and high-minded enthusiasm, sought out for those qualities among the foremost in the ranks of science, if we demand QUI BONO? for what good a Bradley has toiled, or a Maskelyne or a Piazzi has worn out his venerable age in watching, the answer is—not to settle mere speculative points in the doctrine of the universe; not to cater for the pride of man by refined inquiries into the remoter mysteries of nature; not to trace the path of our system through space, or its history through past and future eternities. These, indeed, are noble ends and which I am far from any thought of depreciating; the mind swells in their contemplation, and attains in their pursuit an expansion and a hardihood which fit it for the boldest enterprise. But the direct practical utility of such labours is fully worthy of their speculative grandeur. The stars are the landmarks of the universe; and, amidst the endless and complicated fluctuations of our system, seem placed by its Creator as guides and records, not merely to elevate our minds by the contemplation of what is vast, but to teach us to direct our actions by reference to what is immutable in His works. It is, indeed, hardly possible to over-appreciate their value in this point of view. Every well-determined star, from the moment its place is registered, becomes to the astronomer, the geographer, the navigator, the surveyor, a point of departure which can never deceive or fail him, the same for ever and in all places, of a delicacy so extreme as to be a test for every instrument yet invented by man, yet equally adapted for the most ordinary purposes; as available for regulating a town clock as for conducting a navy to the Indies; as effective for mapping down the intricacies of a petty barony as for adjusting the boundaries of Transatlantic empires. When once its place has been thoroughly ascertained and carefully recorded, the brazen circle with which that useful work was done may moulder, the marble pillar may totter on its base, and the astronomer himself survive only in the gratitude of posterity; but the record remains, and transfuses all its own exactness into every determination which takes it for a groundwork, giving to inferior instruments—nay, even to temporary contrivances, and to the observations of a few weeks or days—all the precision attained originally at the cost of so much time, labour, and expense."

"If we ask why magnificent institutions are maintained by governments and leaders, filled with masterpieces of art, and run by talented and passionate individuals chosen for their expertise among the best in science, if we question QUI BONO?—for what benefit has a Bradley labored, or a Maskelyne or a Piazzi spent their long years observing, the answer is—not just to resolve theoretical issues about the universe; not merely to satisfy human pride through complex inquiries into the deeper mysteries of nature; not to navigate our system through space, or its history across past and future eternities. These are indeed noble goals, and I do not mean to belittle them; the mind expands in contemplating them and grows bolder in pursuing them, preparing it for the most daring ventures. However, the direct practical value of such efforts is equally deserving of their speculative significance. The stars serve as the landmarks of the universe; amidst the endless and complex changes of our system, they appear to be established by their Creator as guides and records, not only to elevate our minds through the contemplation of the vast, but to teach us how to direct our actions by referring to what is unchangeable in His creations. It's truly hard to overstate their worth from this perspective. Every well-defined star, from the moment its location is recorded, becomes, to the astronomer, geographer, navigator, and surveyor, a reference point that can never mislead or fail them, constant in all places, possessing a precision so extreme that it serves as a standard for every instrument man has ever created, yet is equally suited for the most basic tasks; as useful for setting a town clock as it is for guiding a fleet to the Indies; as effective for mapping the complexities of a small region as it is for determining the boundaries of transatlantic nations. Once its position has been thoroughly established and accurately recorded, the brass circle used for that important work may decay, the marble pillar may wobble on its base, and the astronomer may exist only in the gratitude of future generations; but the record endures, infusing all its accuracy into every determination based on it, providing lesser instruments—even temporary setups, and observations conducted over a few weeks or days—with all the precision originally achieved at such great cost of time, effort, and resources."

Sir John Herschel wrote many other works besides those we have mentioned. His "Treatise on Meteorology" is, indeed, a standard work on this subject, and numerous articles from the same pen on miscellaneous subjects, which have been collected and reprinted, seemed as a relaxation from his severe scientific studies. Like certain other great mathematicians Herschel was also a poet, and he published a translation of the Iliad into blank verse.

Sir John Herschel wrote many other works in addition to those we've mentioned. His "Treatise on Meteorology" is a standard reference on this topic, and many articles on various subjects that he wrote have been collected and reprinted, appearing to be a break from his intense scientific studies. Like some other great mathematicians, Herschel was also a poet, and he published a translation of the Iliad in blank verse.

In his later years Sir John Herschel lived a retired life. For a brief period he had, indeed, been induced to accept the office of Master of the Mint. It was, however, evident that the routine of such an occupation was not in accordance with his tastes, and he gladly resigned it, to return to the seclusion of his study in his beautiful home at Collingwood, in Kent.

In his later years, Sir John Herschel lived a quiet life. For a short time, he had been convinced to take the position of Master of the Mint. However, it was clear that the day-to-day tasks of that job didn't suit him, and he happily stepped down to return to the solitude of his study in his lovely home at Collingwood, in Kent.

His health having gradually failed, he died on the 11th May, 1871, in the seventy-ninth year of his age.

His health had slowly deteriorated, and he died on May 11, 1871, at the age of seventy-nine.

THE EARL OF ROSSE.

The subject of our present sketch occupies quite a distinct position in scientific history. Unlike many others who have risen by their scientific discoveries from obscurity to fame, the great Earl of Rosse was himself born in the purple. His father, who, under the title of Sir Lawrence Parsons, had occupied a distinguished position in the Irish Parliament, succeeded on the death of his father to the Earldom which had been recently created. The subject of our present memoir was, therefore, the third of the Earls of Rosse, and he was born in York on June 17, 1800. Prior to his father's death in 1841, he was known as Lord Oxmantown.

The subject of our current sketch holds a unique place in scientific history. Unlike many others who have risen from obscurity to fame through their scientific discoveries, the great Earl of Rosse was born into privilege. His father, known as Sir Lawrence Parsons, held a prominent role in the Irish Parliament and inherited the Earldom created shortly before his father’s death. Therefore, the subject of our memoir was the third Earl of Rosse, born in York on June 17, 1800. Before his father's death in 1841, he was referred to as Lord Oxmantown.

The University education of the illustrious astronomer was begun in Dublin and completed at Oxford. We do not hear in his case of any very remarkable University career. Lord Rosse was, however, a diligent student, and obtained a first-class in mathematics. He always took a great deal of interest in social questions, and was a profound student of political economy. He had a seat in the House of Commons, as member for King's County, from 1821 to 1834, his ancestral estate being situated in this part of Ireland.

The famous astronomer's university education started in Dublin and finished at Oxford. There aren't any notable achievements during his time at university. However, Lord Rosse was a hardworking student and earned a first-class degree in mathematics. He was always very interested in social issues and was a serious student of political economy. He served in the House of Commons as the representative for King's County from 1821 to 1834, as his family estate was located in that area of Ireland.

THE EARL OF ROSSE.
THE EARL OF ROSSE.
The Earl of Rosse.

Lord Rosse was endowed by nature with a special taste for mechanical pursuits. Not only had he the qualifications of a scientific engineer, but he had the manual dexterity which qualified him personally to carry out many practical arts. Lord Rosse was, in fact, a skilful mechanic, an experienced founder, and an ingenious optician. His acquaintances were largely among those who were interested in mechanical pursuits, and it was his delight to visit the works or engineering establishments where refined processes in the arts were being carried on. It has often been stated—and as I have been told by members of his family, truly stated—that on one occasion, after he had been shown over some large works in the north of England, the proprietor bluntly said that he was greatly in want of a foreman, and would indeed be pleased if his visitor, who had evinced such extraordinary capacity for mechanical operations, would accept the post. Lord Rosse produced his card, and gently explained that he was not exactly the right man, but he appreciated the compliment, and this led to a pleasant dinner, and was the basis of a long friendship.

Lord Rosse had a natural talent for mechanical activities. He not only had the skills of a scientific engineer but also the hands-on ability to carry out many practical tasks himself. In fact, Lord Rosse was a skilled mechanic, an experienced metal caster, and a talented optician. Most of his friends were people who shared his interest in mechanical endeavors, and he loved visiting factories or engineering firms where refined techniques were in use. It’s often said—and confirmed by his family—that one time, after touring some large facilities in northern England, the owner bluntly mentioned that he was in desperate need of a foreman and would be thrilled if his visitor, who had shown such remarkable skill in mechanical work, would take the position. Lord Rosse handed over his card and politely explained that he wasn’t quite the right fit for the job, but he appreciated the compliment; this led to a nice dinner and the start of a long friendship.

I remember on one occasion hearing Lord Rosse explain how it was that he came to devote his attention to astronomy. It appears that when he found himself in the possession of leisure and of means, he deliberately cast around to think how that means and that leisure could be most usefully employed. Nor was it surprising that he should search for a direction which would offer special scope for his mechanical tastes. He came to the conclusion that the building of great telescopes was an art which had received no substantial advance since the great days of William Herschel. He saw that to construct mighty instruments for studying the heavens required at once the command of time and the command of wealth, while he also felt that this was a subject the inherent difficulties of which would tax to the uttermost whatever mechanical skill he might possess. Thus it was he decided that the construction of great telescopes should become the business of his life.

I remember hearing Lord Rosse describe how he got into astronomy. It seems that when he found himself with some free time and resources, he thoughtfully considered how to best use them. It wasn’t surprising that he looked for an endeavor that would match his mechanical interests. He concluded that building large telescopes was an art that hadn’t seen much progress since the time of William Herschel. He realized that creating powerful instruments to explore the heavens required both time and money, and he felt that this field's challenges would fully challenge his mechanical skills. So, he decided that constructing large telescopes would be his life's work.

BIRR CASTLE.
BIRR CASTLE.
BIRR CASTLE.

THE MALL, PARSONSTOWN.
THE MALL, PARSONSTOWN.
The Mall, Parsonstown.

In the centre of Ireland, seventy miles from Dublin, on the border between King's County and Tipperary, is a little town whereof we must be cautious before writing the name. The inhabitants of that town frequently insist that its name is Birr,[*] while the official designation is Parsonstown, and to this day for every six people who apply one name to the town, there will be half a dozen who use the other. But whichever it may be, Birr or Parsonstown—and I shall generally call it by the latter name—it is a favourable specimen of an Irish county town. The widest street is called the Oxmantown Mall. It is bordered by the dwelling-houses of the chief residents, and adorned with rows of stately trees. At one end of this distinctly good feature in the town is the Parish Church, while at the opposite end are the gates leading into Birr Castle, the ancestral home of the house of Parsons. Passing through the gates the visitor enters a spacious demesne, possessing much beauty of wood and water, one of the most pleasing features being the junction of the two rivers, which unite at a spot ornamented by beautiful timber. At various points illustrations of the engineering skill of the great Earl will be observed. The beauty of the park has been greatly enhanced by the construction of an ample lake, designed with the consummate art by which art is concealed. Even in mid-summer it is enlivened by troops of wild ducks preening themselves in that confidence which they enjoy in those happy localities where the sound of a gun is seldom heard. The water is led into the lake by a tube which passes under one of the two rivers just mentioned, while the overflow from the lake turns a water-wheel, which works a pair of elevators ingeniously constructed for draining the low-lying parts of the estate.

In the center of Ireland, seventy miles from Dublin, on the border between King's County and Tipperary, there's a small town that we need to be careful about naming. The people who live there often insist that it's called Birr,[*] while the official name is Parsonstown. Even today, for every six people who use one name for the town, there are half a dozen who prefer the other. But no matter which name you go with, Birr or Parsonstown—and I'll usually refer to it as Parsonstown—it’s a good example of an Irish county town. The widest street is called the Oxmantown Mall. It's lined with the homes of the main residents and decorated with rows of impressive trees. At one end of this distinctly nice feature of the town is the Parish Church, and at the other end are the gates leading into Birr Castle, the ancestral home of the Parsons family. As you pass through the gates, you enter a spacious estate that is beautiful with woods and water. One of the most attractive features is where two rivers meet in a spot surrounded by lovely trees. You’ll notice examples of the engineering skill of the great Earl at various points. The beauty of the park has been enhanced by a large lake, designed with such skill that its art is subtly integrated into the landscape. Even in mid-summer, it’s lively with groups of wild ducks enjoying themselves in peace, far from the noise of hunting. Water flows into the lake through a pipe that goes under one of the two rivers mentioned earlier, while the overflow from the lake powers a waterwheel that drives a pair of cleverly designed elevators to drain the lower parts of the estate.

[*] Considering the fame acquired by Parsonstown from Lord Rosse's mirrors, it may be interesting to note the following extract from "The Natural History of Ireland," by Dr. Gerard Boate, Thomas Molyneux M.D., F.R.S., and others, which shows that 150 years ago Parsonstown was famous for its glass:—

[*] Given the reputation Parsonstown gained from Lord Rosse's mirrors, it’s worth noting the following excerpt from "The Natural History of Ireland," by Dr. Gerard Boate, Thomas Molyneux M.D., F.R.S., and others, which highlights that 150 years ago, Parsonstown was renowned for its glass:—

"We shall conclude this chapter with the glass, there having been several glasshouses set up by the English in Ireland, none in Dublin or other cities, but all of them in the country; amongst which the principal was that of Birre, a market town, otherwise called Parsonstown, after one Sir Lawrence Parsons, who, having purchased that lordship, built a goodly house upon it; his son William Parsons having succeeded him in the possession of it; which town is situate in Queen's County, about fifty miles (Irish) to the southwest of Dublin, upon the borders of the two provinces of Leinster and Munster; from this place Dublin was furnished with all sorts of window and drinking glasses, and such other as commonly are in use. One part of the materials, viz., the sand, they had out of England; the other, to wit the ashes, they made in the place of ash-tree, and used no other. The chiefest difficulty was to get the clay for the pots to melt the materials in; this they had out of the north."—Chap. XXI., Sect. VIII. "Of the Glass made in Ireland."

"We’ll finish this chapter talking about glass, as there were several glasshouses established by the English in Ireland, none in Dublin or other cities, but all located in the countryside. The most notable among them was in Birre, a market town also known as Parsonstown, named after Sir Lawrence Parsons, who bought the lordship and built a nice house there. His son, William Parsons, inherited it. This town is situated in Queen's County, about fifty miles southwest of Dublin, on the borders of the provinces of Leinster and Munster. From this location, Dublin was supplied with all kinds of window and drinking glasses and other common items. One type of material, the sand, was sourced from England; the other, the ashes, were made from local ash trees, and they didn’t use anything else. The biggest challenge was obtaining the clay needed for the pots to melt the materials, which they sourced from the north."—Chap. XXI., Sect. VIII. "Of the Glass made in Ireland."

Birr Castle itself is a noble mansion with reminiscences from the time of Cromwell. It is surrounded by a moat and a drawbridge of modern construction, and from its windows beautiful views can be had over the varied features of the park. But while the visitors to Parsonstown will look with great interest on this residence of an Irish landlord, whose delight it was to dwell in his own country, and among his own people, yet the feature which they have specially come to observe is not to be found in the castle itself. On an extensive lawn, sweeping down from the moat towards the lake, stand two noble masonry walls. They are turreted and clad with ivy, and considerably loftier than any ordinary house. As the visitor approaches, he will see between those walls what may at first sight appear to him to be the funnel of a steamer lying down horizontally. On closer approach he will find that it is an immense wooden tube, sixty feet long, and upwards of six feet in diameter. It is in fact large enough to admit of a tall man entering into it and walking erect right through from one end to the other. This is indeed the most gigantic instrument which has ever been constructed for the purpose of exploring the heavens. Closely adjoining the walls between which the great tube swings, is a little building called "The Observatory." In this the smaller instruments are contained, and there are kept the books which are necessary for reference. The observatory also offers shelter to the observers, and provides the bright fire and the cup of warm tea, which are so acceptable in the occasional intervals of a night's observation passed on the top of the walls with no canopy but the winter sky.

Birr Castle is a stately mansion with reminders from the time of Cromwell. It's surrounded by a moat and a modern drawbridge, and its windows offer stunning views of the diverse features of the park. While visitors to Parsonstown are certainly interested in this residence of an Irish landlord, who loved living in his own country and among his own people, the main attraction they come to see is not found inside the castle itself. On a large lawn that slopes down from the moat towards the lake, there are two impressive masonry walls. They are topped with turrets and covered in ivy, standing significantly taller than any typical house. As visitors get closer, they might first think they see the funnel of a steamer lying flat. However, upon closer inspection, they'll realize it's a massive wooden tube, sixty feet long and more than six feet in diameter. It's actually big enough for a tall person to enter and walk through upright from one end to the other. This is indeed the largest instrument ever built for exploring the heavens. Right next to the walls supporting the great tube is a small building called "The Observatory." This is where the smaller instruments are kept, along with the reference books needed. The observatory also provides shelter for the observers, along with a cozy fire and warm tea, which are much appreciated during the long hours of night observation spent atop the walls under the winter sky.

Almost the first point which would strike the visitor to Lord Rosse's telescope is that the instrument at which he is looking is not only enormously greater than anything of the kind that he has ever seen before, but also that it is something of a totally different nature. In an ordinary telescope he is accustomed to find a tube with lenses of glass at either end, while the large telescopes that we see in our observatories are also in general constructed on the same principle. At one end there is the object-glass, and at the other end the eye-piece, and of course it is obvious that with an instrument of this construction it is to the lower end of the tube that the eye of the observer must be placed when the telescope is pointed to the skies. But in Lord Rosse's telescope you would look in vain for these glasses, and it is not at the lower end of the instrument that you are to take your station when you are going to make your observations. The astronomer at Parsonstown has rather to avail himself of the ingenious system of staircases and galleries, by which he is enabled to obtain access to the mouth of the great tube. The colossal telescope which swings between the great walls, like Herschel's great telescope already mentioned, is a reflector, the original invention of which is due of course to Newton. The optical work which is accomplished by the lenses in the ordinary telescope is effected in the type of instrument constructed by Lord Rosse by a reflecting mirror which is placed at the lower end of the vast tube. The mirror in this instrument is made of a metal consisting of two parts of copper to one of tin. As we have already seen, this mixture forms an alloy of a very peculiar nature. The copper and the tin both surrender their distinctive qualities, and unite to form a material of a very different physical character. The copper is tough and brown, the tin is no doubt silvery in hue, but soft and almost fibrous in texture. When the two metals are mixed together in the proportions I have stated, the alloy obtained is intensely hard and quite brittle being in both these respects utterly unlike either of the two ingredients of which it is composed. It does, however, resemble the tin in its whiteness, but it acquires a lustre far brighter than tin; in fact, this alloy hardly falls short of silver itself in its brilliance when polished.

Almost the first thing that would catch the visitor's eye at Lord Rosse's telescope is that the device they're looking at is not only way bigger than anything they’ve ever seen before, but it’s also of a completely different kind. In a regular telescope, they usually find a tube with glass lenses at both ends, and the large telescopes we see in observatories generally follow the same design. There’s the object glass at one end and the eyepiece at the other, and of course it’s clear that with an instrument like this, the observer must look through the lower end when aiming it at the sky. But in Lord Rosse's telescope, you won't find those lenses, and it's not at the lower end of the instrument where you take your position for observations. The astronomer in Parsonstown has to use a clever system of staircases and galleries to reach the opening of the huge tube. The massive telescope, which swings between the great walls, like Herschel's well-known telescope mentioned earlier, is a reflector, originally invented by Newton. The optical work done by the lenses in a standard telescope is performed in Lord Rosse's design by a reflecting mirror located at the lower end of the large tube. This mirror is made of a metal that consists of two parts copper to one part tin. As we’ve already seen, this mixture creates an alloy with very unique properties. The copper and the tin lose their distinct qualities and combine to form a material with a very different physical makeup. The copper is tough and brown, while the tin is silvery but soft and almost fibrous. When these two metals are mixed as I mentioned, the resulting alloy is incredibly hard and quite brittle, making it completely different from either of the original materials. It does, however, resemble tin in its whiteness, but it gains a shine far brighter than tin; in fact, this alloy comes very close to silver in its brilliance when polished.

LORD ROSSE'S TELESCOPE. From a photograph by W. Lawrence, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin.
LORD ROSSE'S TELESCOPE. From a photograph by W. Lawrence, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin.
LORD ROSSE'S TELESCOPE. From a photograph by W. Lawrence, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin.

The first duty that Lord Rosse had to undertake was the construction of this tremendous mirror, six feet across, and about four or five inches thick. The dimensions were far in excess of those which had been contemplated in any previous attempt of the same kind. Herschel had no doubt fashioned one mirror of four feet in diameter, and many others of smaller dimensions, but the processes which he employed had never been fully published, and it was obvious that, with a large increase in dimensions, great additional difficulties had to be encountered. Difficulties began at the very commencement of the process, and were experienced in one form or another at every subsequent stage. In the first place, the mere casting of a great disc of this mixture of tin and copper, weighing something like three or four tons, involved very troublesome problems. No doubt a casting of this size, if the material had been, for example, iron, would have offered no difficulties beyond those with which every practical founder is well acquainted, and which he has to encounter daily in the course of his ordinary work. But speculum metal is a material of a very intractable description. There is, of course, no practical difficulty in melting the copper, nor in adding the proper proportion of tin when the copper has been melted. There may be no great difficulty in arranging an organization by which several crucibles, filled with the molten material, shall be poured simultaneously so as to obtain the requisite mass of metal, but from this point the difficulties begin. For speculum metal when cold is excessively brittle, and were the casting permitted to cool like an ordinary copper or iron casting, the mirror would inevitably fly into pieces. Lord Rosse, therefore, found it necessary to anneal the casting with extreme care by allowing it to cool very slowly. This was accomplished by drawing the disc of metal as soon as it had entered into the solid state, though still glowing red, into an annealing oven. There the temperature was allowed to subside so gradually, that six weeks elapsed before the mirror had reached the temperature of the external air. The necessity for extreme precaution in the operation of annealing will be manifest if we reflect on one of the accidents which happened. On a certain occasion, after the cooling of a great casting had been completed, it was found, on withdrawing the speculum, that it was cracked into two pieces. This mishap was eventually traced to the fact that one of the walls of the oven had only a single brick in its thickness, and that therefore the heat had escaped more easily through that side than through the other sides which were built of double thickness. The speculum had, consequently, not cooled uniformly, and hence the fracture had resulted. Undeterred, however, by this failure, as well as by not a few other difficulties, into a description of which we cannot now enter, Lord Rosse steadily adhered to his self-imposed task, and at last succeeded in casting two perfect discs on which to commence the tedious processes of grinding and polishing. The magnitude of the operations involved may perhaps be appreciated if I mention that the value of the mere copper and tin entering into the composition of each of the mirrors was about 500 pounds.

The first task that Lord Rosse had to tackle was building this huge mirror, six feet across and about four or five inches thick. The size was much larger than anything attempted before. Herschel had managed to create a four-foot diameter mirror and several smaller ones, but the methods he used were never fully shared, and it was clear that increasing the size brought many new challenges. Problems started right at the beginning and continued to arise at every stage after that. First, just casting such a large disc made of a mix of tin and copper, weighing around three or four tons, came with significant challenges. If the material had been, say, iron, casting this size wouldn’t have presented much trouble beyond what any experienced metalworker faces daily. However, speculum metal is quite tricky to handle. There’s no real issue in melting the copper or adding the right amount of tin once the copper is melted. Coordinating multiple crucibles of melted material to pour at once to create the required mass isn’t overly complicated, but from that point, the challenges begin. Speculum metal becomes extremely brittle when cold, and if the casting was allowed to cool like a typical copper or iron casting, the mirror would definitely shatter. Therefore, Lord Rosse had to carefully anneal the casting by letting it cool very slowly. He did this by moving the disc of metal into an annealing oven as soon as it had solidified, even while it was still glowing red. The temperature was allowed to drop so gradually that it took six weeks for the mirror to match the temperature of the outside air. The need for such careful annealing is obvious when considering one of the mishaps that occurred. At one point, after a large casting had cooled, it was discovered that the speculum had cracked into two pieces. This mistake was traced back to one of the oven walls being only one brick thick, allowing the heat to escape more easily from that side compared to the double-thick walls. Consequently, the speculum didn’t cool uniformly, leading to the fracture. Undeterred by this setback and various other challenges, which we can’t detail here, Lord Rosse remained committed to his task and eventually succeeded in casting two perfect discs to start the lengthy process of grinding and polishing. The scale of the work can be understood when I mention that the value of the copper and tin used in each mirror was about 500 pounds.

In no part of his undertaking was Lord Rosse's mechanical ingenuity more taxed than in the devising of the mechanism for carrying out the delicate operations of grinding and polishing the mirrors, whose casting we have just mentioned. In the ordinary operations of the telescope-maker, such processes had hitherto been generally effected by hand, but, of course, such methods became impossible when dealing with mirrors which were as large as a good-sized dinner table, and whose weight was measured by tons. The rough grinding was effected by means of a tool of cast iron about the same size as the mirror, which was moved by suitable machinery both backwards and forwards, and round and round, plenty of sand and water being supplied between the mirror and the tool to produce the necessary attrition. As the process proceeded and as the surface became smooth, emery was used instead of sand; and when this stage was complete, the grinding tool was removed and the polishing tool was substituted. The essential part of this was a surface of pitch, which, having been temporarily softened by heat, was then placed on the mirror, and accepted from the mirror the proper form. Rouge was then introduced as the polishing powder, and the operation was continued about nine hours, by which time the great mirror had acquired the appearance of highly polished silver. When completed, the disc of speculum metal was about six feet across and four inches thick. The depression in the centre was about half an inch. Mounted on a little truck, the great speculum was then conveyed to the instrument, to be placed in its receptacle at the bottom of the tube, the length of which was sixty feet, this being the focal distance of the mirror. Another small reflector was inserted in the great tube sideways, so as to direct the gaze of the observer down upon the great reflector. Thus was completed the most colossal instrument for the exploration of the heavens which the art of man has ever constructed.

In no part of his project was Lord Rosse's mechanical skill more challenged than in creating the mechanism for the delicate tasks of grinding and polishing the mirrors we just mentioned. Typically, telescope makers did these processes by hand, but that was obviously impossible for mirrors as large as a good-sized dinner table and weighing tons. The rough grinding was done using a cast iron tool about the same size as the mirror, which was moved by machinery back and forth and in circles, with plenty of sand and water between the mirror and the tool to create the needed friction. As the process went on and the surface became smoother, emery replaced the sand; once this stage was done, the grinding tool was taken off and the polishing tool was put in place. The key part of this was a surface of pitch, which was temporarily softened by heat, then placed on the mirror to take the correct shape from it. Rouge was then added as the polishing powder, and the process continued for about nine hours, by which time the large mirror looked like highly polished silver. When finished, the disc of speculum metal measured about six feet across and four inches thick, with a half-inch depression in the center. Mounted on a small truck, the great speculum was then transported to the instrument to be fitted into its holder at the bottom of a sixty-foot tube, which was the focal distance of the mirror. Another small reflector was added to the great tube on the side, directing the observer's view down onto the large reflector. This completed the most massive instrument for exploring the heavens ever built by human hands.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AT PARSONSTOWN.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AT PARSONSTOWN.
Roman Catholic Church in Parsonstown.

It was once my privilege to be one of those to whom the illustrious builder of the great telescope entrusted its use. For two seasons in 1865 and 1866 I had the honour of being Lord Rosse's astronomer. During that time I passed many a fine night in the observer's gallery, examining different objects in the heavens with the aid of this remarkable instrument. At the time I was there, the objects principally studied were the nebulae, those faint stains of light which lie on the background of the sky. Lord Rosse's telescope was specially suited for the scrutiny of these objects, inasmuch as their delicacy required all the light-grasping power which could be provided.

It was once my privilege to be one of the few entrusted with the use of the famous builder of the great telescope. For two seasons in 1865 and 1866, I had the honor of being Lord Rosse's astronomer. During that time, I spent many wonderful nights in the observer's gallery, looking at different objects in the sky with the help of this amazing instrument. While I was there, the main focus of our studies was the nebulae, those faint patches of light against the backdrop of the sky. Lord Rosse's telescope was particularly well-suited for examining these objects, as their delicacy required all the light-gathering power available.

One of the greatest discoveries made by Lord Rosse, when his huge instrument was first turned towards the heavens, consisted in the detection of the spiral character of some of the nebulous forms. When the extraordinary structure of these objects was first announced, the discovery was received with some degree of incredulity. Other astronomers looked at the same objects, and when they failed to discern—and they frequently did fail to discern—the spiral structure which Lord Rosse had indicated, they drew the conclusion that this spiral structure did not exist. They thought it must be due possibly to some instrumental defect or to the imagination of the observer. It was, however, hardly possible for any one who was both willing and competent to examine into the evidence, to doubt the reality of Lord Rosse's discoveries. It happens, however, that they have been recently placed beyond all doubt by testimony which it is impossible to gainsay. A witness never influenced by imagination has now come forward, and the infallible photographic plate has justified Lord Rosse. Among the remarkable discoveries which Dr. Isaac Roberts has recently made in the application of his photographic apparatus to the heavens, there is none more striking than that which declares, not only that the nebulae which Lord Rosse described as spirals, actually do possess the character so indicated, but that there are many others of the same description. He has even brought to light the astonishingly interesting fact that there are invisible objects of this class which have never been seen by human eye, but whose spiral character is visible to the peculiar delicacy of the photographic telescope.

One of the biggest discoveries made by Lord Rosse when he first pointed his massive instrument at the sky was the detection of the spiral shape of some nebulous forms. When this incredible structure was first announced, it was met with some skepticism. Other astronomers observed the same objects, and when they failed to see—and often did fail to see—the spiral structure that Lord Rosse had pointed out, they concluded that the spiral structure didn’t actually exist. They thought it must be due, perhaps, to some flaw in the instrument or to the observer's imagination. However, it was nearly impossible for anyone willing and capable of examining the evidence to doubt the validity of Lord Rosse's discoveries. Recently, though, they have been confirmed beyond all doubt by evidence that cannot be contested. A witness who is unaffected by imagination has now come forward, and the undeniable photographic plates have validated Lord Rosse. Among the remarkable discoveries that Dr. Isaac Roberts has made by using his photographic equipment on the sky, none is more striking than the assertion that not only do the nebulae Lord Rosse described as spirals actually have that shape, but there are many others with the same characteristics. He has even revealed the astonishing fact that there are invisible objects of this kind that have never been seen by the human eye, but whose spiral shapes can be detected by the remarkable sensitivity of the photographic telescope.

In his earlier years, Lord Rosse himself used to be a diligent observer of the heavenly bodies with the great telescope which was completed in the year 1845. But I think that those who knew Lord Rosse well, will agree that it was more the mechanical processes incidental to the making of the telescope which engaged his interest than the actual observations with the telescope when it was completed. Indeed one who was well acquainted with him believed Lord Rosse's special interest in the great telescope ceased when the last nail had been driven into it. But the telescope was never allowed to lie idle, for Lord Rosse always had associated with him some ardent young astronomer, whose delight it was to employ to the uttermost the advantages of his position in exploring the wonders of the sky. Among those who were in this capacity in the early days of the great telescope, I may mention my esteemed friend Dr. Johnston Stoney.

In his younger years, Lord Rosse was a dedicated observer of celestial bodies with the large telescope that was finished in 1845. However, I believe that those who knew Lord Rosse well would agree that his main interest lay more in the mechanics involved in building the telescope than in the actual observations made once it was finished. In fact, someone who was close to him thought that Lord Rosse's special interest in the telescope faded as soon as the last nail was driven in. Nevertheless, the telescope was never left unused, as Lord Rosse always had a passionate young astronomer nearby, eager to make the most of the telescope's capabilities to explore the wonders of the sky. Among those who served in this role during the early days of the great telescope, I would like to mention my respected friend Dr. Johnston Stoney.

Such was the renown of Lord Rosse himself, brought about by his consummate mechanical genius and his astronomical discoveries, and such the interest which gathered around the marvellous workshops at Birr castle, wherein his monumental exhibitions of optical skill were constructed, that visitors thronged to see him from all parts of the world. His home at Parsonstown became one of the most remarkable scientific centres in Great Britain; thither assembled from time to time all the leading men of science in the country, as well as many illustrious foreigners. For many years Lord Rosse filled with marked distinction the exalted position of President of the Royal Society, and his advice and experience in practical mechanical matters were always at the disposal of those who sought his assistance. Personally and socially Lord Rosse endeared himself to all with whom he came in contact. I remember one of the attendants telling me that on one occasion he had the misfortune to let fall and break one of the small mirrors on which Lord Rosse had himself expended many hours of hard personal labour. The only remark of his lordship was that "accidents will happen."

Such was the reputation of Lord Rosse, thanks to his incredible mechanical talent and astronomical discoveries, and the fascination surrounding the amazing workshops at Birr Castle, where his remarkable optical creations were made, that visitors flocked to see him from all over the world. His home in Parsonstown became one of the most notable scientific hubs in Great Britain; it occasionally hosted all the leading scientists from the country, along with many distinguished foreigners. For many years, Lord Rosse served with great distinction as President of the Royal Society, and his advice and expertise in practical mechanical issues were always available to anyone who sought his help. Personally and socially, Lord Rosse was beloved by everyone he met. I remember one of the attendants telling me that on one occasion he accidentally dropped and broke one of the small mirrors that Lord Rosse himself had spent many hours working on. His only response was, "Accidents will happen."

The latter years of his life Lord Rosse passed in comparative seclusion; he occasionally went to London for a brief sojourn during the season, and he occasionally went for a cruise in his yacht; but the greater part of the year he spent at Birr Castle, devoting himself largely to the study of political and social questions, and rarely going outside the walls of his demesne, except to church on Sunday mornings. He died on October 31, 1867.

In the later years of his life, Lord Rosse lived in relative seclusion; he occasionally traveled to London for a short stay during the season, and he sometimes took his yacht out for a cruise; but most of the year, he stayed at Birr Castle, focusing mainly on studying political and social issues, and seldom leaving his estate, except to go to church on Sunday mornings. He died on October 31, 1867.

He was succeeded by his eldest son, the present Earl of Rosse, who has inherited his father's scientific abilities, and done much notable work with the great telescope.

He was succeeded by his oldest son, the current Earl of Rosse, who has inherited his father's scientific talents and has accomplished a lot of significant work with the great telescope.

AIRY.

In our sketch of the life of Flamsteed, we have referred to the circumstances under which the famous Observatory that crowns Greenwich Hill was founded. We have also had occasion to mention that among the illustrious successors of Flamsteed both Halley and Bradley are to be included. But a remarkable development of Greenwich Observatory from the modest establishment of early days took place under the direction of the distinguished astronomer whose name is at the head of this chapter. By his labours this temple of science was organised to such a degree of perfection that it has served in many respects as a model for other astronomical establishments in various parts of the world. An excellent account of Airy's career has been given by Professor H. H. Turner, in the obituary notice published by the Royal Astronomical Society. To this I am indebted for many of the particulars here to be set down concerning the life of the illustrious Astronomer Royal.

In our outline of Flamsteed's life, we've discussed the circumstances that led to the establishment of the famous Observatory atop Greenwich Hill. We've also mentioned that among Flamsteed's notable successors are Halley and Bradley. However, a significant transformation of Greenwich Observatory from its humble beginnings occurred under the guidance of the distinguished astronomer whose name heads this chapter. Thanks to his efforts, this center of science was organized to such a high standard that it has become a model for other astronomical institutions worldwide. Professor H. H. Turner provided an excellent overview of Airy's career in the obituary notice published by the Royal Astronomical Society. I have relied on this for many of the details regarding the life of the esteemed Astronomer Royal that will be detailed here.

The family from which Airy took his origin came from Kentmere, in Westmoreland. His father, William Airy, belonged to a Lincolnshire branch of the same stock. His mother's maiden name was Ann Biddell, and her family resided at Playford, near Ipswich. William Airy held some small government post which necessitated an occasional change of residence to different parts of the country, and thus it was that his son, George Biddell, came to be born at Alnwick, on 27th July, 1801. The boy's education, so far as his school life was concerned was partly conducted at Hereford and partly at Colchester. He does not, however, seem to have derived much benefit from the hours which he passed in the schoolroom. But it was delightful to him to spend his holidays on the farm at Playford, where his uncle, Arthur Biddell, showed him much kindness. The scenes of his early youth remained dear to Airy throughout his life, and in subsequent years he himself owned a house at Playford, to which it was his special delight to resort for relaxation during the course of his arduous career. In spite of the defects of his school training he seems to have manifested such remarkable abilities that his uncle decided to enter him in Cambridge University. He accordingly joined Trinity College as a sizar in 1819, and after a brilliant career in mathematical and physical science he graduated as Senior Wrangler in 1823. It may be noted as an exceptional circumstance that, notwithstanding the demands on his time in studying for his tripos, he was able, after his second term of residence, to support himself entirely by taking private pupils. In the year after he had taken his degree he was elected to a Fellowship at Trinity College.

The family that Airy came from originated in Kentmere, Westmoreland. His father, William Airy, was part of a Lincolnshire branch of the same family. His mother's maiden name was Ann Biddell, and her family lived in Playford, near Ipswich. William Airy held a minor government position that required him to move around the country occasionally, which is how his son, George Biddell, was born in Alnwick on July 27, 1801. George's education during his school years took place partly in Hereford and partly in Colchester. However, he doesn’t seem to have gained much from his time in the classroom. He loved spending his holidays on the farm in Playford, where his uncle, Arthur Biddell, treated him generously. The memories of his early childhood remained precious to Airy throughout his life, and later on, he owned a house in Playford, where he enjoyed retreating for relaxation during his demanding career. Despite the shortcomings of his schooling, he demonstrated such exceptional talents that his uncle decided to enroll him at Cambridge University. He joined Trinity College as a sizar in 1819 and had a stellar academic career in mathematics and physical science, graduating as Senior Wrangler in 1823. It's worth mentioning that, despite the intense demands of preparing for his tripos, he managed to fully support himself by tutoring private students after his second term. The year after graduating, he was elected to a Fellowship at Trinity College.

Having thus gained an independent position, Airy immediately entered upon that career of scientific work which he prosecuted without intermission almost to the very close of his life. One of his most interesting researches in these early days is on the subject of Astigmatism, which defect he had discovered in his own eyes. His investigations led him to suggest a means of correcting this defect by using a pair of spectacles with lenses so shaped as to counteract the derangement which the astigmatic eye impressed upon the rays of light. His researches on this subject were of a very complete character, and the principles he laid down are to the present day practically employed by oculists in the treatment of this malformation.

Having gained his independence, Airy immediately began a career in scientific work that he pursued without interruption almost until the end of his life. One of his most fascinating early studies was on astigmatism, a condition he discovered he had in his own eyes. His research led him to propose a way to correct this issue by using glasses with lenses specifically shaped to counteract the distortion that the astigmatic eye causes to light rays. His work on this topic was thorough, and the principles he established are still practically used by eye doctors today in treating this condition.

On the 7th of December, 1826, Airy was elected to the Lucasian Professorship of Mathematics in the University of Cambridge, the chair which Newton's occupancy had rendered so illustrious. His tenure of this office only lasted for two years, when he exchanged it for the Plumian Professorship. The attraction which led him to desire this change is doubtless to be found in the circumstance that the Plumian Professorship of Astronomy carried with it at that time the appointment of director of the new astronomical observatory, the origin of which must now be described.

On December 7, 1826, Airy was elected to the Lucasian Professorship of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, a position that had become famous because of Newton. He held this role for only two years before moving on to the Plumian Professorship. The reason for his desire to make this switch was likely because the Plumian Professorship of Astronomy included the role of director of the new astronomical observatory, which needs to be explained now.

Those most interested in the scientific side of University life decided in 1820 that it would be proper to found an astronomical observatory at Cambridge. Donations were accordingly sought for this purpose, and upwards of 6,000 pounds were contributed by members of the University and the public. To this sum 5,000 pounds were added by a grant from the University chest, and in 1824 further sums amounting altogether to 7,115 pounds were given by the University for the same object. The regulations as to the administration of the new observatory placed it under the management of the Plumian Professor, who was to be provided with two assistants. Their duties were to consist in making meridian observations of the sun, moon, and the stars, and the observations made each year were to be printed and published. The observatory was also to be used in the educational work of the University, for it was arranged that smaller instruments were to be provided by which students could be instructed in the practical art of making astronomical observations.

Those who were most interested in the scientific aspects of university life decided in 1820 that it would be appropriate to establish an astronomical observatory at Cambridge. Donations were requested for this purpose, and over 6,000 pounds were contributed by members of the university and the public. Additionally, 5,000 pounds were added through a grant from the university fund, and in 1824, further contributions totaling 7,115 pounds were provided by the university for the same goal. The rules for managing the new observatory placed it under the supervision of the Plumian Professor, who was to be assisted by two helpers. Their responsibilities included making meridian observations of the sun, moon, and stars, and the observations made each year were to be printed and published. The observatory was also intended for educational use at the university, as it was planned that smaller instruments would be provided so that students could learn the practical skills needed for making astronomical observations.

The building of the Cambridge Astronomical Observatory was completed in 1824, but in 1828, when Airy entered on the discharge of his duties as Director, the establishment was still far from completion, in so far as its organisation was concerned. Airy commenced his work so energetically that in the next year after his appointment he was able to publish the first volume of "Cambridge Astronomical Observations," notwithstanding that every part of the work, from the making of observations to the revising of the proof-sheets, had to be done by himself.

The Cambridge Astronomical Observatory was finished in 1824, but in 1828, when Airy took over as Director, the setup was still incomplete in terms of organization. Airy started his role with such energy that by the following year, he managed to publish the first volume of "Cambridge Astronomical Observations," even though he had to handle everything himself, from making observations to reviewing the proof-sheets.

It may here be remarked that these early volumes of the publications of the Cambridge Observatory contained the first exposition of those systematic methods of astronomical work which Airy afterwards developed to such a great extent at Greenwich, and which have been subsequently adopted in many other places. No more profitable instruction for the astronomical beginner can be found than that which can be had by the study of these volumes, in which the Plumian Professor has laid down with admirable clearness the true principles on which meridian work should be conducted.

It’s worth noting that the early volumes from the Cambridge Observatory contained the first clear explanation of the systematic methods of astronomical work that Airy later expanded significantly at Greenwich, which have since been adopted in many other locations. There’s no better instruction for those starting out in astronomy than what can be gained from studying these volumes, where the Plumian Professor has outlined the true principles of how meridian work should be done with remarkable clarity.

SIR GEORGE AIRY. From a Photograph by Mr. E.P. Adams, Greenwich.
SIR GEORGE AIRY. From a Photograph by Mr. E.P. Adams, Greenwich.
SIR GEORGE AIRY. From a photo by Mr. E.P. Adams, Greenwich.

Airy gradually added to the instruments with which the observatory was originally equipped. A mural circle was mounted in 1832, and in the same year a small equatorial was erected by Jones. This was made use of by Airy in a well-known series of observations of Jupiter's fourth satellite for the determination of the mass of the great planet. His memoir on this subject fully expounds the method of finding the weight of a planet from observations of the movements of a satellite by which the planet is attended. This is, indeed, a valuable investigation which no student of astronomy can afford to neglect. The ardour with which Airy devoted himself to astronomical studies may be gathered from a remarkable report on the progress of astronomy during the present century, which he communicated to the British Association at its second meeting in 1832. In the early years of his life at Cambridge his most famous achievement was connected with a research in theoretical astronomy for which consummate mathematical power was required. We can only give a brief account of the Subject, for to enter into any full detail with regard to it would be quite out of the question.

Airy gradually expanded the equipment that the observatory was originally set up with. A mural circle was installed in 1832, and that same year, a small equatorial was put up by Jones. Airy utilized this for a well-known series of observations of Jupiter's fourth moon to determine the mass of the giant planet. His paper on this topic thoroughly explains the method of calculating a planet's weight based on observations of the movements of its satellites. This is, indeed, a valuable study that no student of astronomy can afford to overlook. The enthusiasm with which Airy dedicated himself to astronomical research can be seen in a remarkable report on the progress of astronomy during this century, which he presented to the British Association at its second meeting in 1832. In his early years at Cambridge, his most notable achievement was linked to research in theoretical astronomy, which required exceptional mathematical skills. We can only give a brief overview of the subject, as fully detailing it would be quite difficult.

Venus is a planet of about the same size and the same weight as the earth, revolving in an orbit which lies within that described by our globe. Venus, consequently, takes less time than the earth to accomplish one revolution round the sun, and it happens that the relative movements of Venus and the earth are so proportioned that in the time in which our earth accomplishes eight of her revolutions the other planet will have accomplished almost exactly thirteen. It, therefore, follows that if the earth and Venus are in line with the sun at one date, then in eight years later both planets will again be found at the same points in their orbits. In those eight years the earth has gone round eight times, and has, therefore, regained its original position, while in the same period Venus has accomplished thirteen complete revolutions, and, therefore, this planet also has reached the same spot where it was at first. Venus and the earth, of course, attract each other, and in consequence of these mutual attractions the earth is swayed from the elliptic track which it would otherwise pursue. In like manner Venus is also forced by the attraction of the earth to revolve in a track which deviates from that which it would otherwise follow. Owing to the fact that the sun is of such preponderating magnitude (being, in fact, upwards of 300,000 times as heavy as either Venus or the earth), the disturbances induced in the motion of either planet, in consequence of the attraction of the other, are relatively insignificant to the main controlling agency by which each of the movements is governed. It is, however, possible under certain circumstances that the disturbing effects produced upon one planet by the other can become so multiplied as to produce peculiar effects which attain measurable dimensions. Suppose that the periodic times in which the earth and Venus revolved had no simple relation to each other, then the points of their tracks in which the two planets came into line with the sun would be found at different parts of the orbits, and consequently the disturbances would to a great extent neutralise each other, and produce but little appreciable effect. As, however, Venus and the earth come back every eight years to nearly the same positions at the same points of their track, an accumulative effect is produced. For the disturbance of one planet upon the other will, of course, be greatest when those two planets are nearest, that is, when they lie in line with the sun and on the same side of it. Every eight years a certain part of the orbit of the earth is, therefore, disturbed by the attraction of Venus with peculiar vigour. The consequence is that, owing to the numerical relation between the movements of the planets to which I have referred, disturbing effects become appreciable which would otherwise be too small to permit of recognition. Airy proposed to himself to compute the effects which Venus would have on the movement of the earth in consequence of the circumstance that eight revolutions of the one planet required almost the same time as thirteen revolutions of the other. This is a mathematical inquiry of the most arduous description, but the Plumian Professor succeeded in working it out, and he had, accordingly, the gratification of announcing to the Royal Society that he had detected the influence which Venus was thus able to assert on the movement of our earth around the sun. This remarkable investigation gained for its author the gold medal of the Royal Astronomical Society in the year 1832.

Venus is about the same size and weight as Earth, orbiting in a path that is inside the one traced by our planet. As a result, Venus takes less time than Earth to complete one orbit around the sun, and the relative motions of Venus and Earth are arranged such that while Earth makes eight orbits, Venus makes almost exactly thirteen. This means that if Earth and Venus are aligned with the sun on one date, they will again be at the same positions in their orbits eight years later. During those eight years, Earth has completed eight revolutions, returning to its original position, while Venus has completed thirteen revolutions and has also returned to its starting point. Earth and Venus attract each other, and this mutual attraction causes Earth to deviate from the elliptical path it would otherwise follow. Similarly, Venus is affected by Earth's gravity, causing it to follow a different track than it otherwise would. Since the sun is significantly larger (over 300,000 times heavier than either Venus or Earth), the disruptions caused by each planet's attraction to the other are relatively minor compared to the main force controlling their movements. However, under certain conditions, the effects of one planet on the other can accumulate enough to produce noticeable changes. If the orbital periods of Earth and Venus had no simple relationship, the points where they align with the sun would be at different spots in their orbits, largely canceling out any disturbances and causing minimal effect. However, because Venus and Earth return to nearly the same positions every eight years, an accumulative effect occurs. The gravitational influence one planet has on the other is greatest when they are closest, meaning when they align with the sun on the same side. Every eight years, a specific portion of Earth's orbit is disturbed by Venus's attraction more strongly. As a result of the numerical relationship between the movements of the planets, these disturbances become noticeable, which would otherwise be too small to detect. Airy aimed to calculate the effects Venus would have on Earth's movement due to the fact that eight revolutions of one planet take almost the same time as thirteen revolutions of the other. This was a complex mathematical task, but the Plumian Professor managed to work it out, allowing him to report to the Royal Society that he had detected the influence Venus exerts on Earth's orbit around the sun. This significant investigation earned him the gold medal of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1832.

In consequence of his numerous discoveries, Airy's scientific fame had become so well recognised that the Government awarded him a special pension, and in 1835, when Pond, who was then Astronomer Royal, resigned, Airy was offered the post at Greenwich. There was in truth, no scientific inducement to the Plumian Professor to leave the comparatively easy post he held at Cambridge, in which he had ample leisure to devote himself to those researches which specially interested him, and accept that of the much more arduous observatory at Greenwich. There were not even pecuniary inducements to make the change; however, he felt it to be his duty to accede to the request which the Government had made that he would take up the position which Pond had vacated, and accordingly Airy went to Greenwich as Astronomer Royal on October 1st, 1835.

As a result of his many discoveries, Airy's scientific reputation became so well established that the Government gave him a special pension. In 1835, when Pond, the Astronomer Royal at the time, resigned, Airy was offered the position at Greenwich. In truth, there was no scientific reason for the Plumian Professor to leave his relatively easy role at Cambridge, where he had plenty of time to focus on the research that truly interested him, and to take on the much more demanding observatory at Greenwich. There weren't even financial incentives to make the switch; however, he felt it was his duty to accept the Government's request to take over the position Pond had left open, so Airy took up the role of Astronomer Royal at Greenwich on October 1st, 1835.

He immediately began with his usual energy to organise the systematic conduct of the business of the National Observatory. To realise one of the main characteristics of Airy's great work at Greenwich, it is necessary to explain a point that might not perhaps be understood without a little explanation by those who have no practical experience in an observatory. In the work of an establishment such as Greenwich, an observation almost always consists of a measurement of some kind. The observer may, for instance, be making a measurement of the time at which a star passes across a spider line stretched through the field of view; on another occasion his object may be the measurement of an angle which is read off by examining through a microscope the lines of division on a graduated circle when the telescope is so pointed that the star is placed on a certain mark in the field of view. In either case the immediate result of the astronomical observation is a purely numerical one, but it rarely happens, indeed we may say it never happens, that the immediate numerical result which the observation gives expresses directly the quantity which we are really seeking for. No doubt the observation has been so designed that the quantity we want to find can be obtained from the figures which the measurement gives, but the object sought is not those figures, for there are always a multitude of other influences by which those figures are affected. For example, if an observation were to be perfect, then the telescope with which the observation is made should be perfectly placed in the exact position which it ought to occupy; this is, however, never the case, for no mechanic can ever construct or adjust a telescope so perfectly as the wants of the astronomer demand. The clock also by which we determine the time of the observation should be correct, but this is rarely if ever the case. We have to correct our observations for such errors, that is to say, we have to determine the errors in the positions of our telescopes and the errors in the going of our clocks, and then we have to determine what the observations would have been had our telescopes been absolutely perfect, and had our clocks been absolutely correct. There are also many other matters which have to be attended to in order to reduce our observations so as to obtain from the figures as yielded to the observer at the telescope the actual quantities which it is his object to determine.

He immediately got to work with his usual energy to organize the systematic operation of the National Observatory. To understand one of the key aspects of Airy's significant contributions at Greenwich, it’s important to clarify something that might not be clear to those without practical experience in an observatory. In a facility like Greenwich, an observation almost always involves some kind of measurement. For example, the observer might be measuring the time a star passes across a spider line set up in the field of view; at another time, he might be measuring an angle by looking through a microscope to examine the lines on a graduated circle when the telescope is aimed so that the star appears at a specific mark in the field of view. In either case, the immediate result of the astronomical observation is purely numerical, but it almost never happens that this immediate numerical result directly represents the quantity we are truly trying to find. While the observation has been designed such that we can derive the quantity we want from the measurement figures, the actual goal is not just those figures since there are many other factors that influence them. For example, for an observation to be perfect, the telescope used should be positioned precisely as needed; however, this is never the case because no mechanic can construct or adjust a telescope with the perfection demanded by astronomers. The clock we use to mark the time of the observation should also be accurate, but this is rarely, if ever, true. We must correct our observations for such errors, meaning we need to identify the inaccuracies in the placement of our telescopes and the timing of our clocks, and then we must determine what the observations would have been if our telescopes were absolutely perfect and our clocks completely accurate. Additionally, many other factors must be considered to reduce our observations, so we can extract the actual quantities we aim to determine from the figures observed at the telescope.

The work of effecting these reductions is generally a very intricate and laborious matter, so that it has not unfrequently happened that while observations have accumulated in an observatory, yet the tedious duty of reducing these observations has been allowed to fall into arrear. When Airy entered on his duties at Greenwich he found there an enormous mass of observations which, though implicitly containing materials of the greatest value to astronomers, were, in their unreduced form, entirely unavailable for any useful purpose. He, therefore, devoted himself to coping with the reduction of the observations of his predecessors. He framed systematic methods by which the reductions were to be effected, and he so arranged the work that little more than careful attention to numerical accuracy would be required for the conduct of the operations. Encouraged by the Admiralty, for it is under this department that Greenwich Observatory is placed, the Astronomer Royal employed a large force of computers to deal with the work. BY his energy and admirable organisation he managed to reduce an extremely valuable series of planetary observations, and to publish the results, which have been of the greatest importance to astronomical investigation.

The process of making these reductions is usually very complex and time-consuming, so it's not uncommon for the tedious task of processing these observations to fall behind, even as they pile up in an observatory. When Airy started his job at Greenwich, he discovered a massive amount of observations that, although containing incredibly valuable information for astronomers, were completely useless in their raw form. He then focused on tackling the reduction of the observations collected by those before him. He developed systematic methods for carrying out the reductions and organized the work so that all that was needed was careful attention to numerical accuracy. Supported by the Admiralty, as Greenwich Observatory falls under this department, the Astronomer Royal employed a large team of assistants to handle the task. Through his energy and excellent organization, he was able to process a highly valuable series of planetary observations and publish the results, which have been extremely important for astronomical research.

The Astronomer Royal was a capable, practical engineer as well as an optician, and he presently occupied himself by designing astronomical instruments of improved pattern, which should replace the antiquated instruments he found in the observatory. In the course of years the entire equipment underwent a total transformation. He ordered a great meridian circle, every part of which may be said to have been formed from his own designs. He also designed the mounting for a fine equatorial telescope worked by a driving clock, which he had himself invented. Gradually the establishment at Greenwich waxed great under his incessant care. It was the custom for the observatory to be inspected every year by a board of visitors, whose chairman was the President of the Royal Society. At each annual visitation, held on the first Saturday in June, the visitors received a report from the Astronomer Royal, in which he set forth the business which had been accomplished during the past year. It was on these occasions that applications were made to the Admiralty, either for new instruments or for developing the work of the observatory in some other way. After the more official business of the inspection was over, the observatory was thrown open to visitors, and hundreds of people enjoyed on that day the privilege of seeing the national observatory. These annual gatherings are happily still continued, and the first Saturday in June is known to be the occasion of one of the most interesting reunions of scientific men which takes place in the course of the year.

The Astronomer Royal was a skilled, practical engineer and optician, and he busied himself by designing advanced astronomical instruments to replace the outdated ones he found in the observatory. Over the years, the entire equipment underwent a complete transformation. He commissioned a large meridian circle, every part of which was based on his own designs. He also designed the mount for a high-quality equatorial telescope operated by a clock mechanism he invented himself. Gradually, the establishment at Greenwich thrived under his relentless attention. It was customary for the observatory to be inspected annually by a board of visitors, chaired by the President of the Royal Society. During each annual visit, held on the first Saturday in June, the visitors received a report from the Astronomer Royal, outlining the work accomplished in the past year. It was on these occasions that requests were made to the Admiralty for new instruments or for further development of the observatory's work. After the official inspection was complete, the observatory opened its doors to visitors, and hundreds of people enjoyed the chance to see the national observatory that day. These annual gatherings thankfully continue, and the first Saturday in June is recognized as one of the most interesting reunions of scientists during the year.

Airy's scientific work was, however, by no means confined to the observatory. He interested himself largely in expeditions for the observation of eclipses and in projects for the measurement of arcs on the earth. He devoted much attention to the collection of magnetic observations from various parts of the world. Especially will it be remembered that the circumstances of the transits of Venus, which occurred in 1874 and in 1882, were investigated by him, and under his guidance expeditions were sent forth to observe the transits from those localities in remote parts of the earth where observations most suitable for the determination of the sun's distance from the earth could be obtained. The Astronomer Royal also studied tidal phenomena, and he rendered great service to the country in the restoration of the standards of length and weight which had been destroyed in the great fire at the House of Parliament in October, 1834. In the most practical scientific matters his advice was often sought, and was as cheerfully rendered. Now we find him engaged in an investigation of the irregularities of the compass in iron ships, with a view to remedying its defects; now we find him reporting on the best gauge for railways. Among the most generally useful developments of the observatory must be mentioned the telegraphic method for the distribution of exact time. By arrangement with the Post Office, the astronomers at Greenwich despatch each morning a signal from the observatory to London at ten o'clock precisely. By special apparatus, this signal is thence distributed automatically over the country, so as to enable the time to be known everywhere accurately to a single second. It was part of the same system that a time ball should be dropped daily at one o'clock at Deal, as well as at other places, for the purpose of enabling ship's chronometers to be regulated.

Airy's scientific work wasn’t limited to the observatory. He was heavily involved in expeditions to observe eclipses and in projects to measure arcs on the earth. He spent a lot of time collecting magnetic observations from various parts of the world. Notably, he investigated the circumstances of the transits of Venus that occurred in 1874 and 1882, and under his guidance, expeditions were sent out to observe the transits from remote locations where the best data for determining the sun's distance from the earth could be obtained. The Astronomer Royal also studied tidal phenomena and provided significant assistance to the country in restoring the standards of length and weight that were lost in the great fire at the House of Parliament in October 1834. His advice was often sought in practical scientific matters, and he provided it willingly. At one moment, he was working on the compass irregularities in iron ships to fix its flaws; at another, he was reporting on the best gauge for railways. One of the most widely useful developments from the observatory was the telegraphic method for distributing precise time. In collaboration with the Post Office, the astronomers at Greenwich send out a signal every morning from the observatory to London at exactly ten o'clock. This signal is then automatically distributed across the country, allowing the time to be known precisely to the second everywhere. It was part of this system that a time ball was dropped daily at one o'clock at Deal and other locations to help regulate ship's chronometers.

Airy's writings were most voluminous, and no fewer than forty-eight memoirs by him are mentioned in the "Catalogue of Scientific Memoirs," published by the Royal Society up to the year 1873, and this only included ten years out of an entire life of most extraordinary activity. Many other subjects besides those of a purely scientific character from time to time engaged his attention. He wrote, for instance, a very interesting treatise on the Roman invasion of Britain, especially with a view of determining the port from which Caesar set forth from Gaul, and the point at which he landed on the British coast. Airy was doubtless led to this investigation by his study of the tidal phenomena in the Straits of Dover. Perhaps the Astronomer Royal is best known to the general reading public by his excellent lectures on astronomy, delivered at the Ipswich Museum in 1848. This book has passed through many editions, and it gives a most admirable account of the manner in which the fundamental problems in astronomy have to be attacked.

Airy's writings were extensive, with at least forty-eight papers credited to him listed in the "Catalogue of Scientific Memoirs," published by the Royal Society up to 1873, and this only covers a decade of his exceptionally active life. He was engaged in many other topics beyond strictly scientific ones over the years. For example, he penned a fascinating treatise on the Roman invasion of Britain, particularly aiming to identify the port from which Caesar departed from Gaul and the landing spot on the British coast. Airy was likely drawn to this research due to his studies of tidal patterns in the Straits of Dover. The general public probably knows the Astronomer Royal best from his outstanding lectures on astronomy given at the Ipswich Museum in 1848. This book has gone through multiple editions, offering an excellent explanation of how to tackle fundamental problems in astronomy.

As years rolled by almost every honour and distinction that could be conferred upon a scientific man was awarded to Sir George Airy. He was, indeed, the recipient of other honours not often awarded for scientific distinction. Among these we may mention that in 1875 he received the freedom of the City of London, "as a recognition of his indefatigable labours in astronomy, and of his eminent services in the advancement of practical science, whereby he has so materially benefited the cause of commerce and civilisation."

As the years went by, almost every honor and award possible for a scientist was given to Sir George Airy. In fact, he also received other honors that are not usually given for scientific achievement. For example, in 1875, he was granted the freedom of the City of London, "in recognition of his tireless work in astronomy, and his significant contributions to the advancement of practical science, which have greatly benefited commerce and civilization."

Until his eightieth year Airy continued to discharge his labours at Greenwich with unflagging energy. At last, on August 15th, 1881, he resigned the office which he had held so long with such distinction to himself and such benefit to his country. He had married in 1830 the daughter of the Rev. Richard Smith, of Edensor. Lady Airy died in 1875, and three sons and three daughters survived him. One daughter is the wife of Dr. Routh, of Cambridge, and his other daughters were the constant companions of their father during the declining years of his life. Up to the age of ninety he enjoyed perfect physical health, but an accidental fall which then occurred was attended with serious results. He died on Saturday, January 2nd, 1892, and was buried in the churchyard at Playford.

Until his eightieth year, Airy continued to work at Greenwich with unwavering energy. Finally, on August 15th, 1881, he stepped down from the position he had held for so long with such distinction and for the benefit of his country. He married in 1830 the daughter of Rev. Richard Smith from Edensor. Lady Airy passed away in 1875, and he was survived by three sons and three daughters. One daughter is married to Dr. Routh from Cambridge, while his other daughters were his constant companions during the later years of his life. Up until the age of ninety, he enjoyed perfect physical health, but an accidental fall at that age led to serious complications. He died on Saturday, January 2nd, 1892, and was buried in the churchyard at Playford.

HAMILTON.

William Rowan Hamilton was born at midnight between the 3rd and 4th of August, 1805, at Dublin, in the house which was then 29, but subsequently 36, Dominick Street. His father, Archibald Hamilton, was a solicitor, and William was the fourth of a family of nine. With reference to his descent, it may be sufficient to notice that his ancestors appear to have been chiefly of gentle Irish families, but that his maternal grandmother was of Scottish birth. When he was about a year old, his father and mother decided to hand over the education of the child to his uncle, James Hamilton, a clergyman of Trim, in County Meath. James Hamilton's sister, Sydney, resided with him, and it was in their home that the days of William's childhood were passed.

William Rowan Hamilton was born at midnight between August 3rd and 4th, 1805, in Dublin, at a house that was initially numbered 29 but later changed to 36 Dominick Street. His father, Archibald Hamilton, was a solicitor, and William was the fourth of nine children. Regarding his background, it’s worth mentioning that his ancestors were primarily from respectable Irish families, although his maternal grandmother was Scottish. When he was about a year old, his parents decided to let his uncle, James Hamilton, a clergyman from Trim in County Meath, take charge of his education. James Hamilton’s sister, Sydney, lived with him, and it was in their home that William spent his childhood.

In Mr. Graves' "Life of Sir William Rowan Hamilton" a series of letters will be found, in which Aunt Sydney details the progress of the boy to his mother in Dublin. Probably there is no record of an infant prodigy more extraordinary than that which these letters contain. At three years old his aunt assured the mother that William is "a hopeful blade," but at that time it was his physical vigour to which she apparently referred; for the proofs of his capacity, which she adduces, related to his prowess in making boys older than himself fly before him. In the second letter, a month later, we hear that William is brought in to read the Bible for the purpose of putting to shame other boys double his age who could not read nearly so well. Uncle James appears to have taken much pains with William's schooling, but his aunt said that "how he picks up everything is astonishing, for he never stops playing and jumping about." When he was four years and three months old, we hear that he went out to dine at the vicar's, and amused the company by reading for them equally well whether the book was turned upside down or held in any other fashion. His aunt assures the mother that "Willie is a most sensible little creature, but at the same time has a great deal of roguery." At four years and five months old he came up to pay his mother a visit in town, and she writes to her sister a description of the boy;—

In Mr. Graves' "Life of Sir William Rowan Hamilton," you'll find a series of letters where Aunt Sydney updates his mother in Dublin about the boy’s progress. There’s probably no record of an infant prodigy as remarkable as what these letters describe. When he was three years old, his aunt told his mother that William is "a hopeful blade," though it seems she was mainly referring to his physical energy; the evidence she provides of his abilities relates to how he can make older boys run away from him. In the second letter, a month later, we learn that William was brought in to read the Bible, aiming to embarrass boys double his age who couldn't read nearly as well. Uncle James seems to have put a lot of effort into William's schooling, but his aunt mentioned that "how he picks up everything is astonishing, as he never stops playing and jumping around." When he was four years and three months old, he went out to dinner at the vicar’s and entertained the guests by reading equally well whether the book was upside down or held in different ways. His aunt assures his mother that "Willie is a very sensible little guy, but he also has a lot of mischief in him." When he was four years and five months old, he came to visit his mother in town, and she wrote to her sister describing the boy;—

"His reciting is astonishing, and his clear and accurate knowledge of geography is beyond belief; he even draws the countries with a pencil on paper, and will cut them out, though not perfectly accurate, yet so well that a anybody knowing the countries could not mistake them; but, you will think this nothing when I tell you that he reads Latin, Greek, and Hebrew."

"His ability to recite is amazing, and his clear and precise knowledge of geography is unbelievable; he even draws the countries with a pencil on paper and cuts them out. While they might not be perfectly accurate, they're done well enough that anyone familiar with the countries wouldn't misidentify them. But you'll think this is nothing when I tell you he reads Latin, Greek, and Hebrew."

Aunt Sydney recorded that the moment Willie got back to Trim he was desirous of at once resuming his former pursuits. He would not eat his breakfast till his uncle had heard him his Hebrew, and he comments on the importance of proper pronunciation. At five he was taken to see a friend, to whom he repeated long passages from Dryden. A gentleman present, who was not unnaturally sceptical about Willie's attainments, desired to test him in Greek, and took down a copy of Homer which happened to have the contracted type, and to his amazement Willie went on with the greatest ease. At six years and nine months he was translating Homer and Virgil; a year later his uncle tells us that William finds so little difficulty in learning French and Italian, that he wishes to read Homer in French. He is enraptured with the Iliad, and carries it about with him, repeating from it whatever particularly pleases him. At eight years and one month the boy was one of a party who visited the Scalp in the Dublin mountains, and he was so delighted with the scenery that he forthwith delivered an oration in Latin. At nine years and six months he is not satisfied until he learns Sanscrit; three months later his thirst for the Oriental languages is unabated, and at ten years and four months he is studying Arabic and Persian. When nearly twelve he prepared a manuscript ready for publication. It was a "Syriac Grammar," in Syriac letters and characters compiled from that of Buxtorf, by William Hamilton, Esq., of Dublin and Trim. When he was fourteen, the Persian ambassador, Mirza Abul Hassan Khan, paid a visit to Dublin, and, as a practical exercise in his Oriental languages, the young scholar addressed to his Excellency a letter in Persian; a translation of which production is given by Mr. Graves. When William was fourteen he had the misfortune to lose his father; and he had lost his mother two years previously. The boy and his three sisters were kindly provided for by different members of the family on both sides.

Aunt Sydney recorded that as soon as Willie got back to Trim, he was eager to dive back into his old activities. He wouldn't eat his breakfast until his uncle had heard him read Hebrew, and he mentioned the importance of correct pronunciation. At five, he was taken to see a friend, where he recited lengthy passages from Dryden. A gentleman present, who was understandably skeptical about Willie's abilities, decided to test him in Greek and picked up a copy of Homer that happened to be in small print. To his surprise, Willie continued with incredible ease. At six years and nine months, he was translating Homer and Virgil; a year later, his uncle shared that William found learning French and Italian so easy that he wanted to read Homer in French. He was thrilled with the Iliad and carried it everywhere, reciting anything that particularly impressed him. At eight years and one month, the boy was part of a group that visited the Scalp in the Dublin mountains, and he was so taken with the scenery that he immediately delivered a speech in Latin. By nine years and six months, he wouldn't be satisfied until he learned Sanskrit; three months later, his interest in Oriental languages was still strong, and at ten years and four months, he was studying Arabic and Persian. When he was nearly twelve, he prepared a manuscript for publication. It was a "Syriac Grammar," written in Syriac letters and characters that he compiled from Buxtorf's work, by William Hamilton, Esq., of Dublin and Trim. At fourteen, the Persian ambassador, Mirza Abul Hassan Khan, visited Dublin, and as a practical exercise in his Oriental languages, the young scholar wrote a letter in Persian to his Excellency, a translation of which was provided by Mr. Graves. When William was fourteen, he unfortunately lost his father; he had lost his mother two years earlier. The boy and his three sisters were well cared for by various family members on both sides.

It was when William was about fifteen that his attention began to be turned towards scientific subjects. These were at first regarded rather as a relaxation from the linguistic studies with which he had been so largely occupied. On November 22nd, 1820, he notes in his journal that he had begun Newton's "Principia": he commenced also the study of astronomy by observing eclipses, occultations, and similar phenomena. When he was sixteen we learn that he had read conic sections, and that he was engaged in the study of pendulums. After an attack of illness, he was moved for change to Dublin, and in May, 1822, we find him reading the differential calculus and Laplace's "Mecanique Celeste." He criticises an important part of Laplace's work relative to the demonstration of the parallelogram of forces. In this same year appeared the first gushes of those poems which afterwards flowed in torrents.

It was when William was around fifteen that he started to focus on scientific subjects. At first, these were seen more as a break from the language studies he had been primarily engaged with. On November 22nd, 1820, he writes in his journal that he had begun reading Newton's "Principia"; he also started studying astronomy by observing eclipses, occultations, and similar events. By the time he turned sixteen, we learn that he had read conic sections and was studying pendulums. After a bout of illness, he was taken to Dublin for a change of scenery, and in May, 1822, we find him reading differential calculus and Laplace's "Mecanique Celeste." He critiques a significant part of Laplace's work concerning the demonstration of the parallelogram of forces. In the same year, the first bursts of those poems, which later poured out in abundance, began to appear.

His somewhat discursive studies had, however, now to give place to a more definite course of reading in preparation for entrance to the University of Dublin. The tutor under whom he entered, Charles Boyton, was himself a distinguished man, but he frankly told the young William that he could be of little use to him as a tutor, for his pupil was quite as fit to be his tutor. Eliza Hamilton, by whom this is recorded, adds, "But there is one thing which Boyton would promise to be to him, and that was a FRIEND; and that one proof he would give of this should be that, if ever he saw William beginning to be UPSET by the sensation he would excite, and the notice he would attract, he would tell him of it." At the beginning of his college career he distanced all his competitors in every intellectual pursuit. At his first term examination in the University he was first in Classics and first in Mathematics, while he received the Chancellor's prize for a poem on the Ionian Islands, and another for his poem on Eustace de St. Pierre.

His somewhat wandering studies had, however, now to make way for a more focused reading plan in preparation for entering the University of Dublin. The tutor he worked with, Charles Boyton, was a distinguished individual, but he honestly told the young William that he could be of little help as a tutor, as his pupil was just as capable of being his tutor. Eliza Hamilton, who recorded this, adds, "But there is one thing Boyton promised to be for him, and that was a FRIEND; and one proof he would give of this was that, if he ever saw William starting to feel DISTRESSED by the attention he would attract, he would let him know." At the start of his college career, he outpaced all his competitors in every intellectual pursuit. In his first term exam at the University, he ranked first in Classics and first in Mathematics, while he also won the Chancellor's prize for a poem about the Ionian Islands, and another for his poem on Eustace de St. Pierre.

There is abundant testimony that Hamilton had "a heart for friendship formed." Among the warmest of the friends whom he made in these early days was the gifted Maria Edgeworth, who writes to her sister about "young Mr. Hamilton, an admirable Crichton of eighteen, a real prodigy of talents, who Dr. Brinkley says may be a second Newton, quiet, gentle, and simple." His sister Eliza, to whom he was affectionately attached, writes to him in 1824:—

There is plenty of evidence that Hamilton had "a heart for friendship." Among the closest friends he made in those early days was the talented Maria Edgeworth, who wrote to her sister about "young Mr. Hamilton, an amazing Crichton of eighteen, a true prodigy of talents, who Dr. Brinkley says might be a second Newton, quiet, gentle, and humble." His sister Eliza, to whom he was very close, wrote to him in 1824:—

"I had been drawing pictures of you in my mind in your study at Cumberland Street with 'Xenophon,' &c., on the table, and you, with your most awfully sublime face of thought, now sitting down, and now walking about, at times rubbing your hands with an air of satisfaction, and at times bursting forth into some very heroical strain of poetry in an unknown language, and in your own internal solemn ventriloquist-like voice, when you address yourself to the silence and solitude of your own room, and indeed, at times, even when your mysterious poetical addresses are not quite unheard."

"I had been imagining you in your study at Cumberland Street, with 'Xenophon,' etc., on the table, and you, with your incredibly profound expression of thought, sometimes sitting down and sometimes pacing around, at times rubbing your hands with a look of satisfaction, and at times bursting into some very heroic lines of poetry in an unknown language, using your own serious, ventriloquist-like voice, when you speak to the silence and solitude of your own room, and indeed, sometimes even when your mysterious poetic remarks are not quite unheard."

This letter is quoted because it refers to a circumstance which all who ever met with Hamilton, even in his latest years, will remember. He was endowed with two distinct voices, one a high treble, the other a deep bass, and he alternately employed these voices not only in ordinary conversation, but when he was delivering an address on the profundities of Quaternions to the Royal Irish Academy, or on similar occasions. His friends had long grown so familiar with this peculiarity that they were sometimes rather surprised to find how ludicrous it appeared to strangers.

This letter is included because it talks about a situation that everyone who met Hamilton, even in his later years, will remember. He had two distinct voices: one was a high treble and the other a deep bass. He would switch between these voices not just in regular conversation, but also when he was giving a talk about the complexities of Quaternions to the Royal Irish Academy or during similar events. His friends had gotten so used to this quirk that they were sometimes taken aback by how ridiculous it seemed to outsiders.

Hamilton was fortunate in finding, while still at a very early age, a career open before him which was worthy of his talents. He had not ceased to be an undergraduate before he was called to fill an illustrious chair in his university. The circumstances are briefly as follows.

Hamilton was lucky to discover a promising career ahead of him at a young age that matched his talents. He had barely finished his undergraduate studies when he was asked to take a prestigious position at his university. The circumstances are briefly as follows.

We have already mentioned that, in 1826, Brinkley was appointed Bishop of Cloyne, and the professorship of astronomy thereupon became vacant. Such was Hamilton's conspicuous eminence that, notwithstanding he was still an undergraduate, and had only just completed his twenty-first year, he was immediately thought of as a suitable successor to the chair. Indeed, so remarkable were his talents in almost every direction that had the vacancy been in the professorship of classics or of mathematics, of English literature or of metaphysics, of modern or of Oriental languages, it seems difficult to suppose that he would not have occurred to every one as a possible successor. The chief ground, however, on which the friends of Hamilton urged his appointment was the earnest of original power which he had already shown in a research on the theory of Systems of Rays. This profound work created a new branch of optics, and led a few years later to a superb discovery, by which the fame of its author became world-wide.

We already mentioned that in 1826, Brinkley was appointed Bishop of Cloyne, which left the position of professor of astronomy open. Hamilton's significant talent was so evident that, despite still being an undergraduate and just having turned twenty-one, he was immediately considered a suitable candidate for the position. In fact, his remarkable abilities in nearly every field make it hard to believe that if the vacancy had been in classics, mathematics, English literature, metaphysics, modern languages, or Oriental languages, he wouldn't have been thought of as a potential successor. The main reason Hamilton's friends pushed for his appointment was the promise of original talent he demonstrated in a study on the theory of Systems of Rays. This groundbreaking work established a new area of optics and led to an amazing discovery a few years later, earning its author international recognition.

At first Hamilton thought it would be presumption for him to apply for so exalted a position; he accordingly retired to the country, and resumed his studies for his degree. Other eminent candidates came forward, among them some from Cambridge, and a few of the Fellows from Trinity College, Dublin, also sent in their claims. It was not until Hamilton received an urgent letter from his tutor Boyton, in which he was assured of the favourable disposition of the Board towards his candidature, that he consented to come forward, and on June 16th, 1827, he was unanimously chosen to succeed the Bishop of Cloyne as Professor of Astronomy in the University. The appointment met with almost universal approval. It should, however, be noted that Brinkley, whom Hamilton succeeded, did not concur in the general sentiment. No one could have formed a higher opinion than he had done of Hamilton's transcendent powers; indeed, it was on that very ground that he seemed to view the appointment with disapprobation. He considered that it would have been wiser for Hamilton to have obtained a Fellowship, in which capacity he would have been able to exercise a greater freedom in his choice of intellectual pursuits. The bishop seems to have thought, and not without reason, that Hamilton's genius would rather recoil from much of the routine work of an astronomical establishment. Now that Hamilton's whole life is before us, it is easy to see that the bishop was entirely wrong. It is quite true that Hamilton never became a skilled astronomical observer; but the seclusion of the observatory was eminently favourable to those gigantic labours to which his life was devoted, and which have shed so much lustre, not only on Hamilton himself, but also on his University and his country.

At first, Hamilton thought it would be arrogant to apply for such a high position; so he left for the countryside and went back to studying for his degree. Other notable candidates came forward, including some from Cambridge, and a few Fellows from Trinity College, Dublin, also submitted their applications. It wasn’t until Hamilton got an urgent letter from his tutor Boyton, assuring him that the Board was favorable towards his application, that he agreed to step forward. On June 16th, 1827, he was unanimously chosen to succeed the Bishop of Cloyne as Professor of Astronomy at the University. The appointment was nearly universally welcomed. However, it should be noted that Brinkley, whom Hamilton replaced, didn’t share this general approval. No one had a higher opinion of Hamilton’s exceptional abilities than he did; in fact, it was for this reason that he seemed to disapprove of the appointment. He believed it would have been wiser for Hamilton to obtain a Fellowship, allowing him to have more freedom in choosing his intellectual pursuits. The bishop seemed to think, and not without reason, that Hamilton's genius would struggle with much of the routine work associated with an astronomical institution. Now that we can see Hamilton’s entire life, it’s clear that the bishop was completely mistaken. While it’s true that Hamilton never became a skilled astronomical observer, the solitude of the observatory was particularly beneficial for the monumental work to which he dedicated his life, bringing great acclaim not just to Hamilton himself, but also to his University and his country.

In his early years at Dunsink, Hamilton did make some attempts at a practical use of the telescopes, but he possessed no natural aptitude for such work, while exposure which it involved seems to have acted injuriously on his health. He, therefore, gradually allowed his attention to be devoted to those mathematical researches in which he had already given such promise of distinction. Although it was in pure mathematics that he ultimately won his greatest fame, yet he always maintained and maintained with justice, that he had ample claims to the title of an astronomer. In his later years he set forth this position himself in a rather striking manner. De Morgan had written commending to Hamilton's notice Grant's "History of Physical Astronomy." After becoming acquainted with the book, Hamilton writes to his friend as follows:—

In his early years at Dunsink, Hamilton made some attempts to practically use the telescopes, but he didn't have a natural talent for that kind of work, and the exposure it required seemed to negatively impact his health. As a result, he gradually shifted his focus to the mathematical research in which he had already shown great promise. Although he ultimately gained the most fame in pure mathematics, he always argued—and justifiably so—that he had strong credentials to be called an astronomer. In his later years, he emphasized this point in a rather striking way. De Morgan had recommended Grant's "History of Physical Astronomy" to Hamilton. After reading the book, Hamilton wrote to his friend as follows:—

"The book is very valuable, and very creditable to its composer. But your humble servant may be pardoned if he finds himself somewhat amused at the title, 'History of Physical Astronomy from the Earliest Ages to the Middle of the Nineteenth Century,' when he fails to observe any notice of the discoveries of Sir W. R. Hamilton in the theory of the 'Dynamics of the Heavens.'"

"The book is quite valuable and does great credit to its author. But I hope you’ll forgive me if I find the title, 'History of Physical Astronomy from the Earliest Ages to the Middle of the Nineteenth Century,' a bit amusing, especially since I don’t see any mention of Sir W. R. Hamilton's discoveries in the theory of the 'Dynamics of the Heavens.'"

The intimacy between the two correspondents will account for the tone of this letter; and, indeed, Hamilton supplies in the lines which follow ample grounds for his complaint. He tells how Jacobi spoke of him in Manchester in 1842 as "le Lagrange de votre pays," and how Donkin had said that, "The Analytical Theory of Dynamics as it exists at present is due mainly to the labours of La Grange Poisson, Sir W. R. Hamilton, and Jacobi, whose researches on this subject present a series of discoveries hardly paralleled for their elegance and importance in any other branch of mathematics." In the same letter Hamilton also alludes to the success which had attended the applications of his methods in other hands than his own to the elucidation of the difficult subject of Planetary Perturbations. Even had his contributions to science amounted to no more than these discoveries, his tenure of the chair would have been an illustrious one. It happens, however, that in the gigantic mass of his intellectual work these researches, though intrinsically of such importance, assume what might almost be described as a relative insignificance.

The closeness between the two correspondents sets the tone of this letter; and in fact, Hamilton provides plenty of reasons for his complaint in the lines that follow. He mentions how Jacobi referred to him in Manchester in 1842 as "the Lagrange of your country," and how Donkin remarked that, "The Analytical Theory of Dynamics as it stands today is mainly thanks to the efforts of La Grange, Poisson, Sir W. R. Hamilton, and Jacobi, whose research on this topic showcases a series of discoveries that are hardly matched for their elegance and significance in any other area of mathematics." In the same letter, Hamilton also references the success that others have had using his methods to clarify the complex subject of Planetary Perturbations. Even if his contributions to science consisted only of these discoveries, his position in the chair would still have been a notable one. However, within the vast amount of his intellectual work, these studies, while fundamentally important, take on what could almost be seen as a relatively minor role.

The most famous achievement of Hamilton's earlier years at the observatory was the discovery of conical refraction. This was one of those rare events in the history of science, in which a sagacious calculation has predicted a result of an almost startling character, subsequently confirmed by observation. At once this conferred on the young professor a world-wide renown. Indeed, though he was still only twenty-seven, he had already lived through an amount of intellectual activity which would have been remarkable for a man of threescore and ten.

The most famous achievement of Hamilton's early years at the observatory was the discovery of conical refraction. This was one of those rare moments in science history where a clever calculation predicted an almost astonishing result, which was later confirmed by observation. This instantly made the young professor famous worldwide. In fact, even though he was only twenty-seven, he had already experienced a level of intellectual activity that would be impressive for someone twice his age.

Simultaneously with his growth in fame came the growth of his several friendships. There were, in the first place, his scientific friendships with Herschel, Robinson, and many others with whom he had copious correspondence. In the excellent biography to which I have referred, Hamilton's correspondence with Coleridge may be read, as can also the letters to his lady correspondents, among them being Maria Edgeworth, Lady Dunraven, and Lady Campbell. Many of these sheets relate to literary matters, but they are largely intermingled With genial pleasantry, and serve at all events to show the affection and esteem with which he was regarded by all who had the privilege of knowing him. There are also the letters to the sisters whom he adored, letters brimming over with such exalted sentiment, that most ordinary sisters would be tempted to receive them with a smile in the excessively improbable event of their still more ordinary brothers attempting to pen such effusions. There are also indications of letters to and from other young ladies who from time to time were the objects of Hamilton's tender admiration. We use the plural advisedly, for, as Mr. Graves has set forth, Hamilton's love affairs pursued a rather troubled course. The attention which he lavished on one or two fair ones was not reciprocated, and even the intense charms of mathematical discovery could not assuage the pangs which the disappointed lover experienced. At last he reached the haven of matrimony in 1833, when he was married to Miss Bayly. Of his married life Hamilton said, many years later to De Morgan, that it was as happy as he expected, and happier than he deserved. He had two sons, William and Archibald, and one daughter, Helen, who became the wife of Archdeacon O'Regan.

At the same time his fame grew, so did his friendships. First, there were his scientific friendships with Herschel, Robinson, and many others with whom he had extensive correspondence. In the excellent biography I mentioned, you can read Hamilton's letters to Coleridge, as well as his letters to female correspondents like Maria Edgeworth, Lady Dunraven, and Lady Campbell. Many of these letters discuss literary topics but are filled with friendly banter, showing the affection and respect he received from everyone who had the privilege of knowing him. There are also letters to the sisters he adored, filled with such high emotions that most ordinary sisters would likely receive them with a smile if their even more ordinary brothers tried to write such heartfelt messages. Additionally, there are signs of correspondence with other young women who occasionally caught Hamilton's romantic interest. We mention the plural carefully, as Mr. Graves pointed out, Hamilton's love life was quite complicated. The attention he lavished on one or two attractive women was not returned, and even the deep satisfaction he found in mathematical discovery couldn't ease the heartbreak he felt. Finally, in 1833, he found the peace of marriage when he wed Miss Bayly. Years later, he told De Morgan that his married life was as happy as he expected, and even happier than he deserved. He had two sons, William and Archibald, and one daughter, Helen, who married Archdeacon O'Regan.

SIR W. ROWAN HAMILTON.
SIR W. ROWAN HAMILTON.
Sir W. Rowan Hamilton.

The most remarkable of Hamilton's friendships in his early years was unquestionably that with Wordsworth. It commenced with Hamilton's visit to Keswick; and on the first evening, when the poet met the young mathematician, an incident occurred which showed the mutual interest that was aroused. Hamilton thus describes it in a letter to his sister Eliza:—

The most notable friendship Hamilton formed in his early years was definitely with Wordsworth. It began when Hamilton visited Keswick; and on the first evening, when the poet met the young mathematician, something happened that demonstrated the shared interest that was sparked. Hamilton described it in a letter to his sister Eliza:—

"He (Wordsworth) walked back with our party as far as their lodge, and then, on our bidding Mrs. Harrison good-night, I offered to walk back with him while my party proceeded to the hotel. This offer he accepted, and our conversation had become so interesting that when we had arrived at his home, a distance of about a mile, he proposed to walk back with me on my way to Ambleside, a proposal which you may be sure I did not reject; so far from it that when he came to turn once more towards his home I also turned once more along with him. It was very late when I reached the hotel after all this walking."

"He walked back with our group to their lodge, and after saying goodnight to Mrs. Harrison, I offered to walk back with him while my friends went on to the hotel. He accepted my offer, and our conversation was so engaging that by the time we reached his home, about a mile away, he suggested walking back with me toward Ambleside. I definitely didn’t turn down that suggestion; in fact, I was so eager that when he turned to head home again, I turned with him one more time. It was really late by the time I finally got back to the hotel after all that walking."

Hamilton also submitted to Wordsworth an original poem, entitled "It Haunts me Yet." The reply of Wordsworth is worth repeating:—

Hamilton also sent Wordsworth an original poem titled "It Haunts Me Yet." Wordsworth's response is worth sharing:—

"With a safe conscience I can assure you that, in my judgment, your verses are animated with the poetic spirit, as they are evidently the product of strong feeling. The sixth and seventh stanzas affected me much, even to the dimming of my eyes and faltering of my voice while I was reading them aloud. Having said this, I have said enough. Now for the per contra. You will not, I am sure, be hurt when I tell you that the workmanship (what else could be expected from so young a writer?) is not what it ought to be. . .

"With a clear conscience, I can confidently say that, in my opinion, your verses are filled with poetic spirit, as they clearly come from deep feelings. The sixth and seventh stanzas really moved me, making my eyes well up and my voice tremble while I read them aloud. Having said that, I've said enough. Now, for the other side. I'm sure you won't be offended when I mention that the craftsmanship (what else could be expected from such a young writer?) isn't quite where it should be..."

"My household desire to be remembered to you in no formal way. Seldom have I parted—never, I was going to say—with one whom after so short an acquaintance I lost sight of with more regret. I trust we shall meet again."

"My family wants to send their regards to you informally. I've rarely parted—never, I must say—from someone I would miss more after such a brief acquaintance. I hope we will meet again."

The further affectionate intercourse between Hamilton and Wordsworth is fully set forth, and to Hamilton's latest years a recollection of his "Rydal hours" was carefully treasured and frequently referred to. Wordsworth visited Hamilton at the observatory, where a beautiful shady path in the garden is to the present day spoken of as "Wordsworth's Walk."

The ongoing friendship between Hamilton and Wordsworth is clearly described, and even in Hamilton's later years, he cherished the memories of his "Rydal hours" and often talked about them. Wordsworth visited Hamilton at the observatory, where a lovely shaded path in the garden is still known today as "Wordsworth's Walk."

It was the practice of Hamilton to produce a sonnet on almost every occasion which admitted of poetical treatment, and it was his delight to communicate his verses to his friends all round. When Whewell was producing his "Bridgewater Treatises," he writes to Hamilton in 1833:—

It was Hamilton's habit to write a sonnet for nearly every occasion that called for poetry, and he loved to share his verses with friends far and wide. When Whewell was working on his "Bridgewater Treatises," he wrote to Hamilton in 1833:—

"Your sonnet which you showed me expressed much better than I could express it the feeling with which I tried to write this book, and I once intended to ask your permission to prefix the sonnet to my book, but my friends persuaded me that I ought to tell my story in my own prose, however much better your verse might be."

"Your sonnet that you shared with me captured the feeling I tried to convey in this book far better than I ever could. I had planned to ask for your permission to include the sonnet at the beginning of my book, but my friends convinced me that I should share my story in my own words, no matter how much better your poetry might be."

The first epoch-marking contribution to Theoretical Dynamics after the time of Newton was undoubtedly made by Lagrange, in his discovery of the general equations of Motion. The next great step in the same direction was that taken by Hamilton in his discovery of a still more comprehensive method. Of this contribution Hamilton writes to Whewell, March 31st, 1834:—

The first major contribution to Theoretical Dynamics after Newton was definitely made by Lagrange with his discovery of the general equations of Motion. The next significant advancement in this area came from Hamilton when he found an even more comprehensive method. In a letter to Whewell dated March 31st, 1834, Hamilton discusses this contribution:—

"As to my late paper, a day or two ago sent off to London, it is merely mathematical and deductive. I ventured, indeed, to call it the 'Mecanique Analytique' of Lagrange, 'a scientific poem'; and spoke of Dynamics, or the Science of Force, as treating of 'Power acting by Law in Space and Time.' In other respects it is as unpoetical and unmetaphysical as my gravest friends could desire."

"As for my recent paper, which I sent off to London a day or two ago, it's purely mathematical and deductive. I even dared to refer to it as the 'Mecanique Analytique' of Lagrange, calling it 'a scientific poem'; and I described Dynamics, or the Science of Force, as dealing with 'Power acting by Law in Space and Time.' In other ways, it's as unpoetic and non-metaphysical as my most serious friends could wish."

It may well be doubted whether there is a more beautiful chapter in the whole of mathematical philosophy than that which contains Hamilton's dynamical theory. It is disfigured by no tedious complexity of symbols; it condescends not to any particular problems; it is an all embracing theory, which gives an intellectual grasp of the most appropriate method for discovering the result of the application of force to matter. It is the very generality of this doctrine which has somewhat impeded the applications of which it is susceptible. The exigencies of examinations are partly responsible for the fact that the method has not become more familiar to students of the higher mathematics. An eminent professor has complained that Hamilton's essay on dynamics was of such an extremely abstract character, that he found himself unable to extract from it problems suitable for his examination papers.

It can be questioned whether there is a more beautiful chapter in all of mathematical philosophy than the one featuring Hamilton's dynamical theory. It isn't bogged down by tedious complexities of symbols; it doesn't limit itself to specific problems; it's a comprehensive theory that offers a clear understanding of the best approach for uncovering the effects of force on matter. Ironically, the very broadness of this doctrine has somewhat limited its practical applications. The demands of exams are partly why this method hasn’t become more familiar to students of advanced mathematics. An esteemed professor has noted that Hamilton's essay on dynamics is so abstract that he struggles to pull problems suitable for his exam papers from it.

The following extract is from a letter of Professor Sylvester to Hamilton, dated 20th of September, 1841. It will show how his works were appreciated by so consummate a mathematician as the writer:—

The following extract is from a letter from Professor Sylvester to Hamilton, dated September 20, 1841. It demonstrates how much his works were valued by such an accomplished mathematician as the writer:—

"Believe me, sir, it is not the least of my regrets in quitting this empire to feel that I forego the casual occasion of meeting those masters of my art, yourself chief amongst the number, whose acquaintance, whose conversation, or even notice, have in themselves the power to inspire, and almost to impart fresh vigour to the understanding, and the courage and faith without which the efforts of invention are in vain. The golden moments I enjoyed under your hospitable roof at Dunsink, or moments such as they were, may probably never again fall to my lot.

"Honestly, sir, one of my biggest regrets about leaving this empire is missing the chance to meet those masters of my art, especially you, whose knowledge, conversation, or even just attention can inspire and revive the spirit, as well as the courage and faith needed for truly inventive efforts. The precious times I spent under your welcoming roof at Dunsink, no matter how brief, may never come my way again."

"At a vast distance, and in an humble eminence, I still promise myself the calm satisfaction of observing your blazing course in the elevated regions of discovery. Such national honour as you are able to confer on your country is, perhaps, the only species of that luxury for the rich (I mean what is termed one's glory) which is not bought at the expense of the comforts of the million."

"From a great distance, and from a small height, I still look forward to the peaceful satisfaction of watching your bright journey in the lofty areas of discovery. The national honor you can bring to your country is, perhaps, the only kind of luxury for the wealthy (I mean what’s called glory) that doesn’t come at the cost of the comforts of the many."

The study of metaphysics was always a favourite recreation when Hamilton sought for a change from the pursuit of mathematics. In the year 1834 we find him a diligent student of Kant; and, to show the views of the author of Quaternions and of Algebra as the Science of Pure Time on the "Critique of the Pure Reason," we quote the following letter, dated 18th of July, 1834, from Hamilton to Viscount Adare:—

The study of metaphysics was always a favorite pastime for Hamilton when he wanted a break from studying mathematics. In 1834, he was a dedicated student of Kant; to illustrate the perspectives of the author of Quaternions and Algebra as the Science of Pure Time on the "Critique of Pure Reason," we quote the following letter, dated July 18, 1834, from Hamilton to Viscount Adare:—

"I have read a large part of the 'Critique of the Pure Reason,' and find it wonderfully clear, and generally quite convincing. Notwithstanding some previous preparation from Berkeley, and from my own thoughts, I seem to have learned much from Kant's own statement of his views of 'Space and Time.' Yet, on the whole, a large part of my pleasure consists in recognising through Kant's works, opinions, or rather views, which have been long familiar to myself, although far more clearly and systematically expressed and combined by him. . . . Kant is, I think, much more indebted than he owns, or, perhaps knows, to Berkeley, whom he calls by a sneer, 'GUTEM Berkeley'. . . as it were, 'good soul, well meaning man,' who was able for all that to shake to its centre the world of human thought, and to effect a revolution among the early consequences of which was the growth of Kant himself."

"I’ve read a lot of 'Critique of Pure Reason,' and I find it really clear and generally quite convincing. Even though I had some background from Berkeley and my own thoughts, I feel like I’ve learned a lot from Kant's own explanation of his ideas on 'Space and Time.' Overall, a big part of my enjoyment comes from recognizing through Kant's work opinions, or rather views, that I’ve been familiar with for a long time, but he expresses and organizes them much more clearly and systematically. . . I think Kant owes a lot more to Berkeley than he admits or maybe even realizes, whom he dismissively calls 'GOOD Berkeley' . . . as if to say, 'good soul, well-meaning man,' who nonetheless managed to shake the foundations of human thought and kickstart a revolution, the early consequences of which included the development of Kant himself."

At several meetings of the British Association Hamilton was a very conspicuous figure. Especially was this the case in 1835, when the Association met in Dublin, and when Hamilton, though then but thirty years old, had attained such celebrity that even among a very brilliant gathering his name was perhaps the most renowned. A banquet was given at Trinity College in honour of the meeting. The distinguished visitors assembled in the Library of the University. The Earl of Mulgrave, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, made this the opportunity of conferring on Hamilton the honour of knighthood, gracefully adding, as he did so: "I but set the royal, and therefore the national mark, on a distinction already acquired by your genius and labours."

At several meetings of the British Association, Hamilton was a prominent figure. This was especially true in 1835, when the Association gathered in Dublin, and Hamilton, though only thirty years old at the time, had gained such fame that even in a very impressive crowd, his name was perhaps the most well-known. A banquet was held at Trinity College to honor the meeting. The distinguished guests gathered in the University Library. The Earl of Mulgrave, who was then the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, took this opportunity to award Hamilton the honor of knighthood, adding graciously, as he did so: "I am simply placing the royal, and hence national, mark on a distinction already achieved through your talent and hard work."

The banquet followed, writes Mr. Graves. "It was no little addition to the honour Hamilton had already received that, when Professor Whewell returned thanks for the toast of the University of Cambridge, he thought it appropriate to add the words, 'There was one point which strongly pressed upon him at that moment: it was now one hundred and thirty years since a great man in another Trinity College knelt down before his sovereign, and rose up Sir Isaac Newton.' The compliment was welcomed by immense applause."

The banquet happened next, according to Mr. Graves. "It was a significant boost to the honor Hamilton had already received when Professor Whewell expressed gratitude for the toast to the University of Cambridge. He thought it fitting to add, 'There was one point that strongly struck him at that moment: it has now been one hundred and thirty years since a great man in another Trinity College knelt before his sovereign and was raised up as Sir Isaac Newton.' The compliment received massive applause."

A more substantial recognition of the labours of Hamilton took place subsequently. He thus describes it in a letter to Mr. Graves of 14th of November, 1843:—

A more significant acknowledgment of Hamilton's efforts occurred later. He describes it in a letter to Mr. Graves dated November 14, 1843:—

"The Queen has been pleased—and you will not doubt that it was entirely unsolicited, and even unexpected, on my part—'to express her entire approbation of the grant of a pension of two hundred pounds per annum from the Civil List' to me for scientific services. The letters from Sir Robert Peel and from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in which this grant has been communicated or referred to have been really more gratifying to my feelings than the addition to my income, however useful, and almost necessary, that may have been."

"The Queen has kindly—and you can be sure it was entirely unrequested and even surprising for me—'to express her full approval of the grant of a pension of two hundred pounds a year from the Civil List' to me for my scientific contributions. The letters from Sir Robert Peel and the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland informing me of this grant have honestly meant more to me than the extra income, important and almost essential as it might be."

The circumstances we have mentioned might lead to the supposition that Hamilton was then at the zenith of his fame but this was not so. It might more truly be said, that his achievements up to this point were rather the preliminary exercises which fitted him for the gigantic task of his life. The name of Hamilton is now chiefly associated with his memorable invention of the calculus of Quaternions. It was to the creation of this branch of mathematics that the maturer powers of his life were devoted; in fact he gives us himself an illustration of how completely habituated he became to the new modes of thought which Quaternions originated. In one of his later years he happened to take up a copy of his famous paper on Dynamics, a paper which at the time created such a sensation among mathematicians, and which is at this moment regarded as one of the classics of dynamical literature. He read, he tells us, his paper with considerable interest, and expressed his feelings of gratification that he found himself still able to follow its reasoning without undue effort. But it seemed to him all the time as a work belonging to an age of analysis now entirely superseded.

The circumstances we've mentioned might lead to the idea that Hamilton was at the peak of his fame, but that wasn’t the case. It might be more accurate to say that his achievements up to that point were more like preparatory exercises that prepared him for the monumental task of his life. Hamilton's name is now mainly associated with his groundbreaking invention of the calculus of Quaternions. He dedicated the later, more developed years of his life to the creation of this branch of mathematics; in fact, he illustrates how completely adapted he became to the new ways of thinking that Quaternions introduced. In one of his later years, he happened to pick up a copy of his famous paper on Dynamics, which had created quite a stir among mathematicians at the time and is now considered one of the classics of dynamics literature. He read his paper with a lot of interest and expressed his satisfaction that he could still follow its reasoning without too much effort. However, he felt throughout that it was a work from a bygone era of analysis that had now been completely replaced.

In order to realise the magnitude of the revolution which Hamilton has wrought in the application of symbols to mathematical investigation, it is necessary to think of what Hamilton did beside the mighty advance made by Descartes. To describe the character of the quaternion calculus would be unsuited to the pages of this work, but we may quote an interesting letter, written by Hamilton from his death-bed, twenty-two years later, to his son Archibald, in which he has recorded the circumstances of the discovery:—

In order to understand the impact of the revolution that Hamilton created in using symbols for mathematical exploration, it's important to consider what Hamilton achieved alongside the significant progress made by Descartes. Describing the nature of quaternion calculus would not fit within this work, but we can share an interesting letter Hamilton wrote from his deathbed, twenty-two years later, to his son Archibald, in which he details the circumstances of the discovery:—

"Indeed, I happen to be able to put the finger of memory upon the year and month—October, 1843—when having recently returned from visits to Cork and Parsonstown, connected with a meeting of the British Association, the desire to discover the laws of multiplication referred to, regained with me a certain strength and earnestness which had for years been dormant, but was then on the point of being gratified, and was occasionally talked of with you. Every morning in the early part of the above-cited month, on my coming down to breakfast, your (then) little brother William Edwin, and yourself, used to ask me, 'Well papa, can you multiply triplets?' Whereto I was always obliged to reply, with a sad shake of the head: 'No, I can only ADD and subtract them,'

"Actually, I can pinpoint the exact year and month—October 1843—when I returned from visits to Cork and Parsonstown related to a meeting of the British Association. The urge to uncover the laws of multiplication mentioned earlier came back to me with a certain intensity and seriousness that had been dormant for years but was about to be fulfilled and was sometimes discussed with you. Every morning at the beginning of that month, when I came down for breakfast, your (then) little brother William Edwin and you would ask me, 'Well, Dad, can you multiply triplets?' To which I always had to respond with a sad shake of my head: 'No, I can only ADD and subtract them.'"

"But on the 16th day of the same month—which happened to be Monday, and a Council day of the Royal Irish Academy—I was walking in to attend and preside, and your mother was walking with me along the Royal Canal, to which she had perhaps driven; and although she talked with me now and then, yet an UNDERCURRENT of thought was going on in my mind which gave at last a RESULT, whereof it is not too much to say that I felt AT ONCE the importance. An ELECTRIC circuit seemed to CLOSE; and a spark flashed forth the herald (as I FORESAW IMMEDIATELY) of many long years to come of definitely directed thought and work by MYSELF, if spared, and, at all events, on the part of OTHERS if I should even be allowed to live long enough distinctly to communicate the discovery. Nor could I resist the impulse—unphilosophical as it may have been—to cut with a knife on a stone of Brougham Bridge as we passed it, the fundamental formula which contains the SOLUTION of the PROBLEM, but, of course, the inscription has long since mouldered away. A more durable notice remains, however, on the Council Books of the Academy for that day (October 16, 1843), which records the fact that I then asked for and obtained leave to read a Paper on 'Quaternions,' at the First General Meeting of the Session; which reading took place accordingly, on Monday, the 13th of November following."

"But on the 16th day of the same month—which happened to be a Monday and a Council day of the Royal Irish Academy—I was walking in to attend and preside, and your mother was walking with me along the Royal Canal, where she might have driven to meet me; and although she talked with me from time to time, there was an UNDERCURRENT of thought in my mind that ultimately led to a RESULT, which it’s fair to say I immediately recognized as important. An ELECTRIC circuit seemed to CLOSE; and a spark ignited the herald (as I IMMEDIATELY FORESAW) of many years to come filled with focused thought and work by MYSELF, if I was spared, and, in any case, from OTHERS if I lived long enough to clearly share the discovery. I couldn’t help but feel the urge—unphilosophical as it may have been—to carve with a knife on a stone of Brougham Bridge as we passed it, the fundamental formula that contains the SOLUTION to the PROBLEM, but, of course, that inscription has long since faded. However, a more lasting record exists in the Council Books of the Academy for that day (October 16, 1843), which notes that I requested and received permission to read a Paper on 'Quaternions' at the First General Meeting of the Session; that reading occurred, as planned, on Monday, the 13th of November that same year."

Writing to Professor Tait, Hamilton gives further particulars of the same event. And again in a letter to the Rev. J. W. Stubbs:—

Writing to Professor Tait, Hamilton gives more details about the same event. And once again in a letter to Rev. J. W. Stubbs:—

"To-morrow will be the fifteenth birthday of the Quaternions. They started into life full-grown on the 16th October, 1843, as I was walking with Lady Hamilton to Dublin, and came up to Brougham Bridge—which my boys have since called Quaternion Bridge. I pulled out a pocketbook which still exists, and made entry, on which at the very moment I felt that it might be worth my while to expend the labour of at least ten or fifteen years to come. But then it is fair to say that this was because I felt a problem to have been at that moment solved, an intellectual want relieved which had haunted me for at least fifteen years before.

"Tomorrow will mark the fifteenth birthday of the Quaternions. They came to life fully formed on October 16, 1843, while I was walking with Lady Hamilton to Dublin and reached Brougham Bridge, which my boys have since named Quaternion Bridge. I took out a pocket notebook, which still exists, and made a note in it, realizing at that moment that it would be worth my effort to spend at least ten or fifteen years on it in the future. But it's worth mentioning that this was because I believed I had just solved a problem, an intellectual need that had been haunting me for at least the last fifteen years."

"But did the thought of establishing such a system, in which geometrically opposite facts—namely, two lines (or areas) which are opposite IN SPACE give ALWAYS a positive product—ever come into anybody's head till I was led to it in October, 1843, by trying to extend my old theory of algebraic couples, and of algebra as the science of pure time? As to my regarding geometrical addition of lines as equivalent to composition of motions (and as performed by the same rules), that is indeed essential in my theory but not peculiar to it; on the contrary, I am only one of many who have been led to this view of addition."

"But did anyone ever think about creating a system where geometrically opposite facts—specifically, two lines (or areas) that are opposite IN SPACE always give a positive product—before I came up with it in October 1843 while trying to expand my old theory of algebraic pairs and algebra as the study of pure time? My idea of treating the geometric addition of lines as the same as combining motions (and following the same rules) is indeed crucial to my theory, but it’s not unique to it; in fact, I'm just one of many who have arrived at this perspective on addition."

Pilgrims in future ages will doubtless visit the spot commemorated by the invention of Quaternions. Perhaps as they look at that by no means graceful structure Quaternion Bridge, they will regret that the hand of some Old Mortality had not been occasionally employed in cutting the memorable inscription afresh. It is now irrecoverably lost.

Pilgrims in the future will surely visit the site marked by the invention of Quaternions. As they gaze at the rather ungraceful Quaternion Bridge, they might wish that the hand of some Old Mortality had been used to update the memorable inscription from time to time. It is now permanently lost.

It was ten years after the discovery that the great volume appeared under the title of "Lectures on Quaternions," Dublin, 1853. The reception of this work by the scientific world was such as might have been expected from the extraordinary reputation of its author, and the novelty and importance of the new calculus. His valued friend, Sir John Herschel, writes to him in that style of which he was a master:—

It was ten years after the discovery that the significant book titled "Lectures on Quaternions" was published in Dublin in 1853. The scientific community received this work as one might expect given the remarkable reputation of its author and the novelty and significance of the new calculus. His dear friend, Sir John Herschel, writes to him in a style that he truly excelled at:—

"Now, most heartily let me congratulate you on getting out your book—on having found utterance, ore rotundo, for all that labouring and seething mass of thought which has been from time to time sending out sparks, and gleams, and smokes, and shaking the soil about you; but now breaks into a good honest eruption, with a lava stream and a shower of fertilizing ashes.

"Now, I wholeheartedly congratulate you on publishing your book—on having found the right words, loud and clear, for all that hard work and intense thinking that has been sparking, shining, and bubbling up, shaking the ground around you; but now it erupts in a genuine way, with a flow of ideas and a shower of enriching insights."

"Metaphor and simile apart, there is work for a twelve-month to any man to read such a book, and for half a lifetime to digest it, and I am glad to see it brought to a conclusion."

"Aside from the metaphors and similes, it takes anyone a whole year to read a book like this, and another half a lifetime to

We may also record Hamilton's own opinion expressed to Humphrey Lloyd:—

We can also note Hamilton's opinion shared with Humphrey Lloyd:—

"In general, although in one sense I hope that I am actually growing modest about the quaternions, from my seeing so many peeps and vistas into future expansions of their principles, I still must assert that this discovery appears to me to be as important for the middle of the nineteenth century as the discovery of fluxions was for the close of the seventeenth."

"In general, while I hope I'm becoming more humble about quaternions since I'm seeing so many glimpses into future developments of their principles, I still have to say that this discovery seems just as significant for the mid-nineteenth century as the discovery of calculus was for the late seventeenth."

Bartholomew Lloyd died in 1837. He had been the Provost of Trinity College, and the President of the Royal Irish Academy. Three candidates were put forward by their respective friends for the vacant Presidency. One was Humphrey Lloyd, the son of the late Provost, and the two others were Hamilton and Archbishop Whately. Lloyd from the first urged strongly the claims of Hamilton, and deprecated the putting forward of his own name. Hamilton in like manner desired to withdraw in favour of Lloyd. The wish was strongly felt by many of the Fellows of the College that Lloyd should be elected, in consequence of his having a more intimate association with collegiate life than Hamilton; while his scientific eminence was world-wide. The election ultimately gave Hamilton a considerable majority over Lloyd, behind whom the Archbishop followed at a considerable distance. All concluded happily, for both Lloyd and the Archbishop expressed, and no doubt felt, the pre-eminent claims of Hamilton, and both of them cordially accepted the office of a Vice-President, to which, according to the constitution of the Academy, it is the privilege of the incoming President to nominate.

Bartholomew Lloyd passed away in 1837. He had served as the Provost of Trinity College and as the President of the Royal Irish Academy. Three candidates were suggested by their supporters for the vacant presidency: Humphrey Lloyd, the late Provost's son, and two others, Hamilton and Archbishop Whately. From the start, Lloyd strongly advocated for Hamilton's candidacy and preferred not to put his own name forward. Similarly, Hamilton wished to step back in favor of Lloyd. Many Fellows of the College strongly felt that Lloyd should be elected due to his closer ties to college life compared to Hamilton, and his scientific reputation was recognized worldwide. Ultimately, the election favored Hamilton, who won by a significant margin over Lloyd, with the Archbishop trailing far behind. In the end, there was a positive conclusion, as both Lloyd and the Archbishop recognized, and likely believed in, Hamilton's superior qualifications and both gladly accepted the role of Vice-President, which, according to the Academy's constitution, is the incoming President's privilege to assign.

In another chapter I have mentioned as a memorable episode in astronomical history, that Sir J. Herschel went for a prolonged sojourn to the Cape of Good Hope, for the purpose of submitting the southern skies to the same scrutiny with the great telescope that his father had given to the northern skies. The occasion of Herschel's return after the brilliant success of his enterprise, was celebrated by a banquet. On June 15th, 1838, Hamilton was assigned the high honour of proposing the health of Herschel. This banquet is otherwise memorable in Hamilton's career as being one of the two occasions in which he was in the company of his intimate friend De Morgan.

In another chapter, I've noted a significant moment in astronomical history: Sir J. Herschel traveled to the Cape of Good Hope for an extended stay to explore the southern skies with the same great telescope his father used for the northern skies. When Herschel returned after achieving remarkable success, a banquet was held in his honor. On June 15th, 1838, Hamilton had the prestigious task of proposing a toast to Herschel. This banquet is also notable in Hamilton's life as one of the two times he was with his close friend De Morgan.

In the year 1838 a scheme was adopted by the Royal Irish Academy for the award of medals to the authors of papers which appeared to possess exceptionally high merit. At the institution of the medal two papers were named in competition for the prize. One was Hamilton's "Memoir on Algebra, as the Science of Pure Time." The other was Macullagh's paper on the "Laws of Crystalline Reflection and Refraction." Hamilton expresses his gratification that, mainly in consequence of his own exertions, he succeeded in having the medal awarded to Macullagh rather than to himself. Indeed, it would almost appear as if Hamilton had procured a letter from Sir J. Herschel, which indicated the importance of Macullagh's memoir in such a way as to decide the issue. It then became Hamilton's duty to award the medal from the chair, and to deliver an address in which he expressed his own sense of the excellence of Macullagh's scientific work. It is the more necessary to allude to these points, because in the whole of his scientific career it would seem that Macullagh was the only man with whom Hamilton had ever even an approach to a dispute about priority. The incident referred to took place in connection with the discovery of conical refraction, the fame of which Macullagh made a preposterous attempt to wrest from Hamilton. This is evidently alluded to in Hamilton's letter to the Marquis of Northampton, dated June 28th, 1838, in which we read:—

In 1838, the Royal Irish Academy established a program to award medals to authors of papers that demonstrated exceptional merit. When the medal was introduced, two papers were chosen for the prize. One was Hamilton's "Memoir on Algebra, as the Science of Pure Time," and the other was Macullagh's paper on the "Laws of Crystalline Reflection and Refraction." Hamilton shared his pleasure that, largely due to his own efforts, the medal was awarded to Macullagh instead of himself. In fact, it seemed as though Hamilton had obtained a letter from Sir J. Herschel, highlighting the significance of Macullagh's memoir in a way that influenced the decision. It then became Hamilton's responsibility to present the medal from the chair and to give a speech expressing his appreciation for Macullagh's outstanding scientific contributions. It's important to mention these details because throughout his entire scientific career, it appears that Macullagh was the only person with whom Hamilton had even a hint of a dispute over priority. This incident relates to the discovery of conical refraction, a topic on which Macullagh absurdly tried to claim credit from Hamilton. This is clearly referenced in Hamilton's letter to the Marquis of Northampton, dated June 28th, 1838, where we read:—

"And though some former circumstances prevented me from applying to the person thus distinguished the sacred name of FRIEND, I had the pleasure of doing justice...to his high intellectual merits... I believe he was not only gratified but touched, and may, perhaps, regard me in future with feelings more like those which I long to entertain towards him."

"And even though some past situations kept me from referring to the person with the honored title of FRIEND, I was glad to give recognition...to his great intellectual abilities... I think he was not only pleased but also moved, and maybe, in the future, he will see me with feelings more similar to the ones I hope to have for him."

Hamilton was in the habit, from time to time, of commencing the keeping of a journal, but it does not appear to have been systematically conducted. Whatever difficulties the biographer may have experienced from its imperfections and irregularities, seem to be amply compensated for by the practice which Hamilton had of preserving copies of his letters, and even of comparatively insignificant memoranda. In fact, the minuteness with which apparently trivial matters were often noted down appears almost whimsical. He frequently made a memorandum of the name of the person who carried a letter to the post, and of the hour in which it was despatched. On the other hand, the letters which he received were also carefully preserved in a mighty mass of manuscripts, with which his study was encumbered, and with which many other parts of the house were not unfrequently invaded. If a letter was laid aside for a few hours, it would become lost to view amid the seething mass of papers, though occasionally, to use his own expression, it might be seen "eddying" to the surface in some later disturbance.

Hamilton sometimes started keeping a journal, but it doesn’t seem like he did it consistently. Any challenges the biographer faced due to its flaws and inconsistencies seem to be more than balanced out by Hamilton's practice of saving copies of his letters and even relatively unimportant notes. In fact, the detailed way he noted seemingly trivial matters often feels a bit quirky. He often made a note of who took a letter to the post and the exact time it was sent. On the flip side, he also carefully kept the letters he received in a huge collection of manuscripts that cluttered his study and sometimes spilled into other parts of the house. If a letter was set aside for a few hours, it would get lost in the chaotic pile of papers, though occasionally, to use his own words, it might be seen “eddying” to the surface during some later rummaging.

The great volume of "Lectures on Quaternions" had been issued, and the author had received the honours which the completion of such a task would rightfully bring him. The publication of an immortal work does not, however, necessarily provide the means for paying the printer's bill. The printing of so robust a volume was necessarily costly; and even if all the copies could be sold, which at the time did not seem very likely, they would hardly have met the inevitable expenses. The provision of the necessary funds was, therefore, a matter for consideration. The Board of Trinity College had already contributed 200 pounds to the printing, but yet another hundred was required. Even the discoverer of Quaternions found this a source of much anxiety. However, the board, urged by the representation of Humphrey Lloyd, now one of its members, and, as we have already seen, one of Hamilton's staunchest friends, relieved him of all liability. We may here note that, notwithstanding the pension which Hamilton enjoyed in addition to the salary of his chair, he seems always to have been in some what straitened circumstances, or, to use his own words in one of his letters to De Morgan, "Though not an embarrassed man, I am anything rather than a rich one." It appears that, notwithstanding the world-wide fame of Hamilton's discoveries, the only profit in a pecuniary sense that he ever obtained from any of his works was by the sale of what he called his Icosian Game. Some enterprising publisher, on the urgent representations of one of Hamilton's friends in London, bought the copyright of the Icosian Game for 25 pounds. Even this little speculation proved unfortunate for the purchaser, as the public could not be induced to take the necessary interest in the matter.

The extensive volume of "Lectures on Quaternions" had been published, and the author had received the recognition that completing such a task deserved. However, publishing an important work doesn’t automatically pay the printer's bill. Producing such a substantial volume was inevitably expensive; and even if all the copies sold, which seemed unlikely at the time, they wouldn't have covered the necessary costs. Securing the needed funds was, therefore, a point of concern. The Board of Trinity College had already contributed 200 pounds toward the printing, but another hundred was still needed. Even the inventor of Quaternions found this quite stressful. However, the board, prompted by the advocacy of Humphrey Lloyd, who was now one of its members and one of Hamilton's closest supporters, relieved him of all financial responsibility. It is worth noting that, despite the pension Hamilton received in addition to his salary, he always seemed to be in somewhat tight financial situations. To quote his own words in a letter to De Morgan, "Though not an embarrassed man, I am anything rather than a rich one." It appears that, despite the worldwide recognition of Hamilton's discoveries, the only financial benefit he ever gained from his works was from selling what he called his Icosian Game. An enterprising publisher, persuaded by one of Hamilton's friends in London, purchased the copyright of the Icosian Game for 25 pounds. Even this small investment turned out to be unfortunate for the buyer, as the public showed little interest in it.

After the completion of his great book, Hamilton appeared for awhile to permit himself a greater indulgence than usual in literary relaxations. He had copious correspondence with his intimate friend, Aubrey de Vere, and there were multitudes of letters from those troops of friends whom it was Hamilton's privilege to possess. He had been greatly affected by the death of his beloved sister Eliza, a poetess of much taste and feeling. She left to him her many papers to preserve or to destroy, but he said it was only after the expiration of four years of mourning that he took courage to open her pet box of letters.

After finishing his great book, Hamilton seemed to allow himself some extra time for literary relaxation. He had extensive correspondence with his close friend, Aubrey de Vere, and received countless letters from the many friends Hamilton was fortunate to have. He was deeply impacted by the death of his beloved sister Eliza, a talented poet with great taste and sentiment. She left him her many papers to either keep or discard, but he said it wasn't until four years of mourning had passed that he found the courage to open her special box of letters.

The religious side of Hamilton's character is frequently illustrated in these letters; especially is this brought out in the correspondence with De Vere, who had seceded to the Church of Rome. Hamilton writes, August 4, 1855:—

The religious aspect of Hamilton's personality is often highlighted in these letters; this is particularly evident in the correspondence with De Vere, who had converted to the Catholic Church. Hamilton writes, August 4, 1855:—

"If, then, it be painfully evident to both, that under such circumstances there CANNOT (whatever we may both DESIRE) be NOW in the nature of things, or of minds, the same degree of INTIMACY between us as of old; since we could no longer TALK with the same degree of unreserve on every subject which happened to present itself, but MUST, from the simplest instincts of courtesy, be each on his guard not to say what might be offensive, or, at least, painful to the other; yet WE were ONCE so intimate, and retain still, and, as I trust, shall always retain, so much of regard and esteem and appreciation for each other, made tender by so many associations of my early youth and your boyhood, which can never be forgotten by either of us, that (as times go) TWO OR THREE VERY RESPECTABLE FRIENDSHIPS might easily be carved out from the fragments of our former and ever-to-be-remembered INTIMACY. It would be no exaggeration to quote the words: 'Heu! quanto minus est cum reliquis versari, quam tui meminisse!'"

"If it’s painfully obvious to both of us that under these circumstances, there CAN’T (no matter how much we both WANT to) be the same level of CLOSENESS between us as there once was; since we can no longer CHAT with the same openness about whatever comes up, but HAVE to, out of basic manners, be careful not to say anything that might offend or, at the very least, hurt the other; still, we WERE once very close, and we still hold, and I hope will always hold, a lot of respect, regard, and appreciation for each other, deepened by so many memories from my early youth and your childhood that neither of us can ever forget. So (in today’s world), TWO OR THREE QUITE MEANINGFUL FRIENDSHIPS could easily arise from the pieces of our past, cherishable CLOSENESS. It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say: 'Heu! quanto minus est cum reliquis versari, quam tui meminisse!'"

In 1858 a correspondence on the subject of Quaternions commenced between Professor Tait and Sir William Hamilton. It was particularly gratifying to the discoverer that so competent a mathematician as Professor Tait should have made himself acquainted with the new calculus. It is, of course, well known that Professor Tait subsequently brought out a most valuable elementary treatise on Quaternions, to which those who are anxious to become acquainted with the subject will often turn in preference to the tremendous work of Hamilton.

In 1858, a discussion about Quaternions began between Professor Tait and Sir William Hamilton. The discoverer was especially pleased that such a skilled mathematician as Professor Tait took the time to learn the new calculus. It's well known that Professor Tait later published a highly valuable introductory book on Quaternions, which many eager learners often prefer over Hamilton’s extensive work.

In the year 1861 gratifying information came to hand of the progress which the study of Quaternions was making abroad. Especially did the subject attract the attention of that accomplished mathematician, Moebius, who had already in his "Barycentrische Calculus" been led to conceptions which bore more affinity to Quaternions than could be found in the writings of any other mathematician. Such notices of his work were always pleasing to Hamilton, and they served, perhaps, as incentives to that still closer and more engrossing labour by which he became more and more absorbed. During the last few years of his life he was observed to be even more of a recluse than he had hitherto been. His powers of long and continuous study seemed to grow with advancing years, and his intervals of relaxation, such as they were, became more brief and more infrequent.

In 1861, exciting news came about the progress being made in the study of Quaternions overseas. The topic particularly caught the attention of the skilled mathematician, Moebius, who had already explored ideas in his "Barycentrische Calculus" that were more similar to Quaternions than anything found in other mathematicians' writings. Such recognition of his work always pleased Hamilton and may have driven him to dive even deeper into his own intense research, which he became increasingly absorbed in. In the final years of his life, he was seen as even more of a recluse than before. His ability to focus and study for long periods seemed to increase with age, while his moments of relaxation, as few as they were, became shorter and less common.

It was not unusual for him to work for twelve hours at a stretch. The dawn would frequently surprise him as he looked up to snuff his candles after a night of fascinating labour at original research. Regularity in habits was impossible to a student who had prolonged fits of what he called his mathematical trances. Hours for rest and hours for meals could only be snatched in the occasional the lucid intervals between one attack of Quaternions and the next. When hungry, he would go to see whether anything could be found on the sideboard; when thirsty, he would visit the locker, and the one blemish in the man's personal character is that these latter visits were sometimes paid too often.

It wasn't uncommon for him to work for twelve hours straight. Dawn would often catch him off guard as he looked up to blow out his candles after a night of engaging research. Sticking to a routine was impossible for a student who experienced long bouts of what he referred to as his mathematical trances. He could only grab a few hours of rest and meals during the brief clear moments between one episode of Quaternions and the next. When he got hungry, he would check to see if anything was available on the sideboard; when he was thirsty, he would hit the locker, and the only flaw in his character was that he sometimes visited the latter a bit too frequently.

As an example of one of Hamilton's rare diversions from the all- absorbing pursuit of Quaternions, we find that he was seized with curiosity to calculate back to the date of the Hegira, which he found on the 15th July, 622. He speaks of the satisfaction with which he ascertained subsequently that Herschel had assigned precisely the same date. Metaphysics remained also, as it had ever been, a favourite subject of Hamilton's readings and meditations and of correspondence with his friends. He wrote a very long letter to Dr. Ingleby on the subject of his "Introduction to Metaphysics." In it Hamilton alludes, as he has done also in other places, to a peculiarity of his own vision. It was habitual to him, by some defect in the correlation of his eyes, to see always a distinct image with each; in fact, he speaks of the remarkable effect which the use of a good stereoscope had on his sensations of vision. It was then, for the first time, that he realised how the two images which he had always seen hitherto would, under normal circumstances, be blended into one. He cites this fact as bearing on the phenomena of binocular vision, and he draws from it the inference that the necessity of binocular vision for the correct appreciation of distance is unfounded. "I am quite sure," he says, "that I SEE DISTANCE with EACH EYE SEPARATELY."

As an example of one of Hamilton's rare breaks from his intense focus on Quaternions, we see that he became curious about calculating back to the date of the Hegira, which he found to be July 15, 622. He expressed satisfaction in later discovering that Herschel had assigned the same date. Metaphysics continued to be, as it always had been, a favorite topic for Hamilton's readings, reflections, and conversations with friends. He wrote a lengthy letter to Dr. Ingleby discussing his "Introduction to Metaphysics." In this letter, Hamilton refers to a peculiarity of his own vision. Due to some issue with the coordination of his eyes, he habitually saw a distinct image with each one. In fact, he mentions the remarkable impact that using a good stereoscope had on his visual experiences. It was then, for the first time, that he realized how the two images he had always perceived would typically merge into one under normal circumstances. He cites this fact in relation to the phenomena of binocular vision and concludes that the necessity for binocular vision to accurately perceive distance is not valid. "I am quite sure," he says, "that I SEE DISTANCE with EACH EYE SEPARATELY."

The commencement of 1865, the last year of his life saw Hamilton as diligent as ever, and corresponding with Salmon and Cayley. On April 26th he writes to a friend to say, that his health has not been good for years past, and that so much work has injured his constitution; and he adds, that it is not conducive to good spirits to find that he is accumulating another heavy bill with the printer for the publication of the "Elements." This was, indeed, up to the day of his death, a cause for serious anxiety. It may, however, be mentioned that the whole cost, which amounted to nearly 500 pounds, was, like that of the previous volume, ultimately borne by the College. Contrary to anticipation, the enterprise, even in a pecuniary sense, cannot have been a very unprofitable one. The whole edition has long been out of print, and as much as 5 pounds has since been paid for a single copy.

At the start of 1865, the last year of his life, Hamilton was as hardworking as ever, keeping in touch with Salmon and Cayley. On April 26th, he wrote to a friend to say that his health hadn’t been good for the past few years and that all the work had taken a toll on his body. He also mentioned that it didn’t help his mood to see he was racking up another hefty bill with the printer for the publication of the "Elements." This was indeed a source of serious worry for him right up until his death. However, it’s worth noting that the total cost, which came to nearly 500 pounds, was covered by the College, just like with the previous volume. Contrary to expectations, the project turned out to be reasonably profitable in financial terms. The entire edition has long been out of print, and as much as 5 pounds has been paid for a single copy since then.

It was on the 9th of May, 1865, that Hamilton was in Dublin for the last time. A few days later he had a violent attack of gout, and on the 4th of June he became alarmingly ill, and on the next day had an attack of epileptic convulsions. However, he slightly rallied, so that before the end of the month he was again at work at the "Elements." A gratifying incident brightened some of the last days of his life. The National Academy of Science in America had then been just formed. A list of foreign Associates had to be chosen from the whole world, and a discussion took place as to what name should be placed first on the list. Hamilton was informed by private communication that this great distinction was awarded to him by a majority of two-thirds.

It was on May 9, 1865, that Hamilton was in Dublin for the last time. A few days later, he had a severe gout attack, and on June 4, he became seriously ill, suffering from epileptic convulsions the next day. However, he made a slight recovery, so by the end of the month, he was back to work on the "Elements." A heartening moment brightened some of the last days of his life. The National Academy of Sciences in America had just been established. A list of foreign associates needed to be created from around the world, and there was a discussion about who should be listed first. Hamilton was privately notified that this significant honor was granted to him by a two-thirds majority.

In August he was still at work on the table of contents of the "Elements," and one of his very latest efforts was his letter to Mr. Gould, in America, communicating his acknowledgements of the honour which had been just conferred upon him by the National Academy. On the 2nd of September Mr. Graves went to the observatory, in response to a summons, and the great mathematician at once admitted to his friend that he felt the end was approaching. He mentioned that he had found in the 145th Psalm a wonderfully suitable expression of his thoughts and feelings, and he wished to testify his faith and thankfulness as a Christian by partaking of the Lord's Supper. He died at half-past two on the afternoon of the 2nd of September, 1865, aged sixty years and one month. He was buried in Mount Jerome Cemetery on the 7th of September.

In August, he was still working on the table of contents for the "Elements," and one of his latest efforts was his letter to Mr. Gould in America, expressing his gratitude for the honor recently given to him by the National Academy. On September 2nd, Mr. Graves went to the observatory after receiving a call, and the great mathematician immediately confided in his friend that he sensed the end was near. He mentioned that he had found a beautifully fitting phrase in the 145th Psalm that captured his thoughts and feelings, and he wanted to express his faith and gratitude as a Christian by taking part in the Lord's Supper. He passed away at 2:30 PM on September 2, 1865, at the age of sixty years and one month. He was buried in Mount Jerome Cemetery on September 7th.

Many were the letters and other more public manifestations of the feelings awakened by Hamilton's death. Sir John Herschel wrote to the widow:—

Many were the letters and other public shows of emotion triggered by Hamilton's death. Sir John Herschel wrote to the widow:—

"Permit me only to add that among the many scientific friends whom time has deprived me of, there has been none whom I more deeply lament, not only for his splendid talents, but for the excellence of his disposition and the perfect simplicity of his manners—so great, and yet devoid of pretensions."

"Let me just add that among the many scientific friends I've lost over time, there hasn't been anyone I regret more than him, not just because of his remarkable talents, but also due to his wonderful character and the genuine simplicity of his manner—so great, and yet totally unpretentious."

De Morgan, his old mathematical crony, as Hamilton affectionately styled him, also wrote to Lady Hamilton:—

De Morgan, his longtime math buddy, as Hamilton fondly referred to him, also wrote to Lady Hamilton:—

"I have called him one of my dearest friends, and most truly; for I know not how much longer than twenty-five years we have been in intimate correspondence, of most friendly agreement or disagreement, of most cordial interest in each other. And yet we did not know each other's faces. I met him about 1830 at Babbage's breakfast table, and there for the only time in our lives we conversed. I saw him, a long way off, at the dinner given to Herschel (about 1838) on his return from the Cape and there we were not near enough, nor on that crowded day could we get near enough, to exchange a word. And this is all I ever saw, and, so it has pleased God, all I shall see in this world of a man whose friendly communications were among my greatest social enjoyments, and greatest intellectual treats."

"I have called him one of my closest friends, and that's so true; I don't know how long we've been in close correspondence, probably longer than twenty-five years, filled with friendly agreement and disagreement, and a genuine interest in each other. And still, we didn't know what each other looked like. I met him around 1830 at Babbage's breakfast table, and that was the only time in our lives we talked. I saw him from a distance at a dinner for Herschel (around 1838) when he returned from the Cape, but we were too far apart that busy day to exchange any words. That's all I've ever seen of him, and as it has pleased God, it’s all I will see in this world of a man whose friendly messages were among my greatest social pleasures and intellectual delights."

There is a very interesting memoir of Hamilton written by De Morgan, in the "Gentleman's Magazine" for 1866, in which he produces an excellent sketch of his friend, illustrated by personal reminiscences and anecdotes. He alludes, among other things, to the picturesque confusion of the papers in his study. There was some sort of order in the mass, discernible however, by Hamilton alone, and any invasion of the domestics, with a view to tidying up, would throw the mathematician as we are informed, into "a good honest thundering passion."

There’s a fascinating memoir about Hamilton written by De Morgan in the "Gentleman's Magazine" from 1866, where he creates an excellent portrait of his friend, filled with personal memories and stories. He mentions, among other things, the chaotic pile of papers in Hamilton's study. There was a kind of order in the mess, but only Hamilton could see it, and if any household staff tried to organize it, as we’ve been told, it would send the mathematician into "a good honest thundering rage."

Hardly any two men, who were both powerful mathematicians, could have been more dissimilar in every other respect than were Hamilton and De Morgan. The highly poetical temperament of Hamilton was remarkably contrasted with the practical realism of De Morgan. Hamilton sends sonnets to his friend, who replies by giving the poet advice about making his will. The metaphysical subtleties, with which Hamilton often filled his sheets, did not seem to have the same attraction for De Morgan that he found in battles about the quantification of the Predicate. De Morgan was exquisitely witty, and though his jokes were always appreciated by his correspondent, yet Hamilton seldom ventured on anything of the same kind in reply; indeed his rare attempts at humour only produced results of the most ponderous description. But never were two scientific correspondents more perfectly in sympathy with each other. Hamilton's work on Quaternions, his labours in Dynamics, his literary tastes, his metaphysics, and his poetry, were all heartily welcomed by his friend, whose letters in reply invariably evince the kindliest interest in all Hamilton's concerns. In a similar way De Morgan's letters to Hamilton always met with a heartfelt response.

Hardly any two powerful mathematicians could have been more different in every other way than Hamilton and De Morgan. Hamilton's highly poetic nature stood in sharp contrast to De Morgan's practical realism. Hamilton would send sonnets to his friend, who would respond by giving the poet advice on writing his will. The metaphysical complexities that often filled Hamilton's pages didn’t seem to interest De Morgan as much as his debates over the quantification of the Predicate. De Morgan had a sharp wit, and while his jokes were always appreciated by Hamilton, the poet rarely attempted to respond in kind; indeed, his few tries at humor often fell flat. Yet, never were two scientific correspondents more perfectly in tune with each other. Hamilton's work on Quaternions, his efforts in Dynamics, his literary interests, his metaphysics, and his poetry were all warmly embraced by De Morgan, whose replies consistently showed a genuine interest in all of Hamilton's endeavors. Similarly, De Morgan's letters to Hamilton always received a heartfelt response.

Alike for the memory of Hamilton, for the credit of his University, and for the benefit of science, let us hope that a collected edition of his works will ere long appear—a collection which shall show those early achievements in splendid optical theory, those achievements of his more mature powers which made him the Lagrange of his country, and finally those creations of the Quaternion Calculus by which new capabilities have been bestowed on the human intellect.

For the sake of Hamilton's memory, the reputation of his university, and the advancement of science, let's hope that a complete edition of his works will soon be published—a collection that highlights his early accomplishments in impressive optical theory, the achievements from his more developed skills that made him the Lagrange of his country, and finally, the innovations in Quaternion Calculus that have given new abilities to human thought.

LE VERRIER.

The name of Le Verrier is one that goes down to fame on account of very different discoveries from those which have given renown to several of the other astronomers whom we have mentioned. We are sometimes apt to identify the idea of an astronomer with that of a man who looks through a telescope at the stars; but the word astronomer has really much wider significance. No man who ever lived has been more entitled to be designated an astronomer than Le Verrier, and yet it is certain that he never made a telescopic discovery of any kind. Indeed, so far as his scientific achievements have been concerned, he might never have looked through a telescope at all.

The name Le Verrier is celebrated for very different discoveries than those that have made several other astronomers famous. We often think of an astronomer as someone who uses a telescope to observe the stars, but the term “astronomer” actually has a much broader meaning. No one deserves the title of astronomer more than Le Verrier, and yet he never made any discoveries using a telescope. In fact, when it comes to his scientific contributions, it’s as if he never looked through a telescope at all.

For the full interpretation of the movements of the heavenly bodies, mathematical knowledge of the most advanced character is demanded. The mathematician at the outset calls upon the astronomer who uses the instruments in the observatory, to ascertain for him at various times the exact positions occupied by the sun, the moon, and the planets. These observations, obtained with the greatest care, and purified as far as possible from the errors by which they may be affected form, as it were, the raw material on which the mathematician exercises his skill. It is for him to elicit from the observed places the true laws which govern the movements of the heavenly bodies. Here is indeed a task in which the highest powers of the human intellect may be worthily employed.

To fully understand the movements of celestial bodies, you need advanced mathematical knowledge. The mathematician first collaborates with the astronomer, who uses tools in the observatory to determine the precise positions of the sun, moon, and planets at different times. These observations, collected meticulously and cleaned up as much as possible from any errors, serve as the raw data from which the mathematician applies their skills. It's up to the mathematician to extract the true laws that govern the movements of celestial bodies. This is truly a task where the highest capabilities of the human intellect can be effectively utilized.

Among those who have laboured with the greatest success in the interpretation of the observations made with instruments of precision, Le Verrier holds a highly honoured place. To him it has been given to provide a superb illustration of the success with which the mind of man can penetrate the deep things of Nature.

Among those who have worked with exceptional success in interpreting observations made with precise instruments, Le Verrier holds a prestigious position. He has provided a remarkable example of how effectively the human mind can understand the profound aspects of Nature.

The illustrious Frenchman, Urban Jean Joseph Le Verrier, was born on the 11th March, 1811, at St. Lo, in the department of Manche. He received his education in that famous school for education in the higher branches of science, the Ecole Polytechnique, and acquired there considerable fame as a mathematician. On leaving the school Le Verrier at first purposed to devote himself to the public service, in the department of civil engineering; and it is worthy of note that his earliest scientific work was not in those mathematical researches in which he was ultimately to become so famous. His duties in the engineering department involved practical chemical research in the laboratory. In this he seems to have become very expert, and probably fame as a chemist would have been thus attained, had not destiny led him into another direction. As it was, he did engage in some original chemical research. His first contributions to science were the fruits of his laboratory work; one of his papers was on the combination of phosphorus and hydrogen, and another on the combination of phosphorus and oxygen.

The renowned Frenchman, Urban Jean Joseph Le Verrier, was born on March 11, 1811, in St. Lo, in the Manche department. He was educated at the prestigious Ecole Polytechnique, known for its focus on advanced scientific studies, and gained considerable recognition as a mathematician there. After graduating, Le Verrier initially planned to work in public service within the civil engineering department. It's interesting to note that his early scientific work wasn't in the mathematical fields for which he later became famous. His role in the engineering department involved hands-on chemical research in the lab. He seems to have become quite skilled at it, and he might have achieved fame as a chemist if fate hadn't guided him elsewhere. Nevertheless, he did pursue some original chemical research. His first contributions to science were based on his lab work; one of his papers discussed the combination of phosphorus and hydrogen, while another focused on the combination of phosphorus and oxygen.

His mathematical labours at the Ecole Polytechnique had, however, revealed to Le Verrier that he was endowed with the powers requisite for dealing with the subtlest instruments of mathematical analysis. When he was twenty-eight years old, his first great astronomical investigation was brought forth. It will be necessary to enter into some explanation as to the nature of this, inasmuch as it was the commencement of the life-work which he was to pursue.

His work in mathematics at the Ecole Polytechnique showed Le Verrier that he had the skills needed to handle the most complex tools of mathematical analysis. When he was twenty-eight, he produced his first major astronomical study. It's important to explain what this was, as it marked the beginning of the career he would dedicate himself to.

If but a single planet revolved around the sun, then the orbit of that planet would be an ellipse, and the shape and size, as well as the position of the ellipse, would never alter. One revolution after another would be traced out, exactly in the same manner, in compliance with the force continuously exerted by the sun. Suppose, however, that a second planet be introduced into the system. The sun will exert its attraction on this second planet also, and it will likewise describe an orbit round the central globe. We can, however, no longer assert that the orbit in which either of the planets moves remains exactly an ellipse. We may, indeed, assume that the mass of the sun is enormously greater than that of either of the planets. In this case the attraction of the sun is a force of such preponderating magnitude, that the actual path of each planet remains nearly the same as if the other planet were absent. But it is impossible for the orbit of each planet not to be affected in some degree by the attraction of the other planet. The general law of nature asserts that every body in space attracts every other body. So long as there is only a single planet, it is the single attraction between the sun and that planet which is the sole controlling principle of the movement, and in consequence of it the ellipse is described. But when a second planet is introduced, each of the two bodies is not only subject to the attraction of the sun, but each one of the planets attracts the other. It is true that this mutual attraction is but small, but, nevertheless, it produces some effect. It "disturbs," as the astronomer says, the elliptic orbit which would otherwise have been pursued. Hence it follows that in the actual planetary system where there are several planets disturbing each other, it is not true to say that the orbits are absolutely elliptic.

If just one planet orbited the sun, that planet's path would be an ellipse, and the shape, size, and position of that ellipse would never change. Each revolution would follow the same pattern, following the constant force from the sun. But if we add a second planet to the system, the sun's attraction would also act on this second planet, causing it to orbit around the sun as well. We can no longer say that the path of either planet remains a perfect ellipse. We might assume that the sun's mass is much larger than either planet's. In this case, the sun's gravitational pull is so dominant that each planet's path remains almost the same as if the other planet didn’t exist. However, the orbit of each planet is inevitably influenced to some extent by the other’s gravitational pull. The general law of nature states that every object in space attracts every other object. When there’s only one planet, the sole attraction between that planet and the sun governs its movement, leading to the elliptical path. But with a second planet, both are influenced by the sun's attraction and also by each other's gravitational pull. While this mutual attraction is relatively minor, it still has an effect. It "disturbs," as astronomers say, the elliptical orbit that would otherwise occur. Therefore, in our actual planetary system where multiple planets influence one another, it's inaccurate to claim that their orbits are perfectly elliptical.

At the same time in any single revolution a planet may for most practical purposes be said to be actually moving in an ellipse. As, however, time goes on, the ellipse gradually varies. It alters its shape, it alters its plane, and it alters its position in that plane. If, therefore, we want to study the movements of the planets, when great intervals of time are concerned, it is necessary to have the means of learning the nature of the movement of the orbit in consequence of the disturbances it has experienced.

At the same time, during any single revolution, a planet can be considered to be moving in an ellipse for most practical purposes. However, as time passes, the ellipse slowly changes. Its shape shifts, its plane changes, and its position within that plane adjusts. Therefore, if we want to study the movement of the planets over long periods, we need to have ways to understand how the orbit's movement has been affected by various disturbances.

We may illustrate the matter by supposing the planet to be running like a railway engine on a track which has been laid in a long elliptic path. We may suppose that while the planet is coursing along, the shape of the track is gradually altering. But this alteration may be so slow, that it does not appreciably affect the movement of the engine in a single revolution. We can also suppose that the plane in which the rails have been laid has a slow oscillation in level, and that the whole orbit is with more or less uniformity moved slowly about in the plane.

We can explain this by imagining the planet moving like a train on a track that follows a long, elliptical path. While the planet travels along this track, the shape of the track changes gradually. However, this change is so slow that it doesn’t significantly impact the train’s movement during a single lap. We can also imagine that the plane of the track has a slow up-and-down motion, and the entire orbit is moving slowly and uniformly within that plane.

In short periods of time the changes in the shapes and positions of the planetary orbits, in consequence of their mutual attractions, are of no great consequence. When, however, we bring thousands of years into consideration, then the displacements of the planetary orbits attain considerable dimensions, and have, in fact, produced a profound effect on the system.

In short periods, the changes in the shapes and positions of planetary orbits due to their mutual attractions don't have much impact. However, when we consider thousands of years, the shifts in planetary orbits become significant and have actually had a profound effect on the system.

It is of the utmost interest to investigate the extent to which one planet can affect another in virtue of their mutual attractions. Such investigations demand the exercise of the highest mathematical gifts. But not alone is intellectual ability necessary for success in such inquiries. It must be united with a patient capacity for calculations of an arduous type, protracted, as they frequently have to be, through many years of labour. Le Verrier soon found in these profound inquiries adequate scope for the exercise of his peculiar gifts. His first important astronomical publication contained an investigation of the changes which the orbits of several of the planets, including the earth, have undergone in times past, and which they will undergo in times to come.

It’s really interesting to explore how one planet can influence another because of their mutual attractions. These explorations require top-notch math skills. But it's not just about having the intellectual capability; you also need to be patient to handle difficult calculations, which often take years of hard work. Le Verrier quickly found a perfect opportunity to use his unique talents in these deep studies. His first major astronomical publication examined the changes that the orbits of several planets, including Earth, have gone through in the past and will go through in the future.

As an illustration of these researches, we may take the case of the planet in which we are, of course, especially interested, namely, the earth, and we can investigate the changes which, in the lapse of time, the earth's orbit has undergone, in consequence of the disturbance to which it has been subjected by the other planets. In a century, or even in a thousand years, there is but little recognisable difference in the shape of the track pursued by the earth. Vast periods of time are required for the development of the large consequences of planetary perturbation. Le Verrier has, however, given us the particulars of what the earth's journey through space has been at intervals of 20,000 years back from the present date. His furthest calculation throws our glance back to the state of the earth's track 100,000 years ago, while, with a bound forward, he shows us what the earth's orbit is to be in the future, at successive intervals of 20,000 years, till a date is reached which is 100,000 years in advance of A.D. 1800.

As an example of this research, let's consider the planet we are particularly interested in: Earth. We can explore the changes that Earth's orbit has experienced over time due to disturbances from other planets. In a century or even a thousand years, there's little noticeable difference in the shape of Earth's path. It takes vast amounts of time for the significant effects of planetary perturbation to develop. However, Le Verrier has provided us with details about Earth's journey through space going back 20,000 years from today. His farthest calculation takes us back to the state of Earth's orbit 100,000 years ago, while, looking ahead, he illustrates what Earth's orbit will be like in the future at intervals of 20,000 years, reaching a point 100,000 years beyond A.D. 1800.

The talent which these researches displayed brought Le Verrier into notice. At that time the Paris Observatory was presided over by Arago, a SAVANT who occupies a distinguished position in French scientific annals. Arago at once perceived that Le Verrier was just the man who possessed the qualifications suitable for undertaking a problem of great importance and difficulty that had begun to force itself on the attention of astronomers. What this great problem was, and how astonishing was the solution it received, must now be considered.

The talent shown in these researches brought Le Verrier into the spotlight. At that time, the Paris Observatory was led by Arago, a scholar who holds a prominent place in French scientific history. Arago quickly realized that Le Verrier was the right person to tackle a significant and challenging problem that had started to attract the attention of astronomers. Now, we must look at what this major problem was and how remarkable the solution turned out to be.

Ever since Herschel brought himself into fame by his superb discovery of the great planet Uranus, the movements of this new addition to the solar system were scrutinized with care and attention. The position of Uranus was thus accurately determined from time to time. At length, when sufficient observations of this remote planet had been brought together, the route which the newly-discovered body pursued through the heavens was ascertained by those calculations with which astronomers are familiar. It happens, however, that Uranus possesses a superficial resemblance to a star. Indeed the resemblance is so often deceptive that long ere its detection as a planet by Herschel, it had been observed time after time by skilful astronomers, who little thought that the star-like point at which they looked was anything but a star. From these early observations it was possible to determine the track of Uranus, and it was found that the great planet takes a period of no less than eighty-four years to accomplish a circuit. Calculations were made of the shape of the orbit in which it revolved before its discovery by Herschel, and these were compared with the orbit which observations showed the same body to pursue in those later years when its planetary character was known. It could not, of course, be expected that the orbit should remain unaltered; the fact that the great planets Jupiter and Saturn revolve in the vicinity of Uranus must necessarily imply that the orbit of the latter undergoes considerable changes. When, however, due allowance has been made for whatever influence the attraction of Jupiter and Saturn, and we may add of the earth and all the other Planets, could possibly produce, the movements of Uranus were still inexplicable. It was perfectly obvious that there must be some other influence at work besides that which could be attributed to the planets already known.

Ever since Herschel became famous for his amazing discovery of the planet Uranus, people have examined its movements closely. The position of Uranus was accurately determined from time to time. Eventually, after enough observations of this distant planet were collected, astronomers figured out the path it took through space using calculations they are familiar with. However, Uranus looks a lot like a star. In fact, the resemblance is so misleading that long before Herschel identified it as a planet, skilled astronomers had observed it repeatedly, not realizing that the star-like point they were watching was anything but a star. From these early observations, it was possible to trace Uranus's path, and it turned out that this massive planet takes a whopping eighty-four years to complete one orbit. Calculations were made to determine the shape of its orbit before Herschel's discovery, and these were compared with the orbit observations revealed in the later years when it was recognized as a planet. Naturally, it wasn't expected that the orbit would stay the same; the fact that the large planets Jupiter and Saturn orbit near Uranus suggests that Uranus's orbit experiences significant changes. Even after accounting for any influence from the gravitational pull of Jupiter and Saturn, as well as Earth and the other planets, the movements of Uranus remained unexplained. It was clear that some other force must be influencing it beyond what could be attributed to the known planets.

Astronomers could only recognise one solution of such a difficulty. It was impossible to doubt that there must be some other planet in addition to the bodies at that time known, and that the perturbations of Uranus hitherto unaccounted for, were due to the disturbances caused by the action of this unknown planet. Arago urged Le Verrier to undertake the great problem of searching for this body, whose theoretical existence seemed demonstrated. But the conditions of the search were such that it must needs be conducted on principles wholly different from any search which had ever before been undertaken for a celestial object. For this was not a case in which mere survey with a telescope might be expected to lead to the discovery.

Astronomers could only recognize one solution to this problem. It was impossible to deny that there had to be another planet besides the ones known at that time, and that the unexplained disturbances of Uranus were due to the influence of this unknown planet. Arago encouraged Le Verrier to take on the significant task of searching for this body, whose theoretical existence seemed proven. However, the conditions of the search meant it had to be conducted based on entirely different principles than any previous search for a celestial object. This wasn't a situation where simply scanning the sky with a telescope would likely lead to a discovery.

Certain facts might be immediately presumed with reference to the unknown object. There could be no doubt that the unknown disturber of Uranus must be a large body with a mass far exceeding that of the earth. It was certain, however, that it must be so distant that it could only appear from our point of view as a very small object. Uranus itself lay beyond the range, or almost beyond the range, of unassisted vision. It could be shown that the planet by which the disturbance was produced revolved in an orbit which must lie outside that of Uranus. It seemed thus certain that the planet could not be a body visible to the unaided eye. Indeed, had it been at all conspicuous its planetary character would doubtless have been detected ages ago. The unknown body must therefore be a planet which would have to be sought for by telescopic aid.

Certain facts can be quickly assumed regarding the unknown object. There’s no doubt that the mysterious disruptor of Uranus has to be a large body, significantly bigger than Earth. However, it’s clear that it must be so far away that it only appears as a very small object from our perspective. Uranus itself is nearly, if not completely, beyond the capability of unaided vision. It's evident that the planet causing the disturbance orbits outside of Uranus. Therefore, it seems certain that the planet cannot be something visible to the naked eye. In fact, if it had been noticeable at all, its planetary nature would have surely been identified a long time ago. Thus, the unknown body must be a planet that will need to be searched for using a telescope.

There is, of course, a profound physical difference between a planet and a star, for the star is a luminous sun, and the planet is merely a dark body, rendered visible by the sunlight which falls upon it. Notwithstanding that a star is a sun thousands of times larger than the planet and millions of times more remote, yet it is a singular fact that telescopic planets possess an illusory resemblance to the stars among which their course happens to lie. So far as actual appearance goes, there is indeed only one criterion by which a planet of this kind can be discriminated from a star. If the planet be large enough the telescope will show that it possesses a disc, and has a visible and measurable circular outline. This feature a star does not exhibit. The stars are indeed so remote that no matter how large they may be intrinsically, they only exhibit radiant points of light, which the utmost powers of the telescope fail to magnify into objects with an appreciable diameter. The older and well-known planets, such as Jupiter and Mars, possess discs, which, though not visible to the unaided eye, were clearly enough discernible with the slightest telescopic power. But a very remote planet like Uranus, though it possessed a disc large enough to be quickly appreciated by the consummate observing skill of Herschel, was nevertheless so stellar in its appearance, that it had been observed no fewer than seventeen times by experienced astronomers prior to Herschel. In each case the planetary nature of the object had been overlooked, and it had been taken for granted that it was a star. It presented no difference which was sufficient to arrest attention.

There’s definitely a significant physical difference between a planet and a star. A star is a bright sun, while a planet is just a dark body that is visible because sunlight shines on it. Even though a star is thousands of times larger than a planet and millions of times farther away, telescopic planets can look surprisingly similar to the stars around them. The only way to really tell a planet like this apart from a star is by its appearance. If a planet is large enough, a telescope will reveal that it has a disc and a clear, measurable circular outline. This is something a star doesn’t show. Stars are so far away that, no matter how big they are, they only look like points of light, and no amount of magnification can make them appear as anything with a noticeable diameter. The older planets, like Jupiter and Mars, have discs that aren’t visible to the naked eye, but can easily be seen with even a small telescope. However, a distant planet like Uranus, which did have a disc large enough to be noticed by the skilled observations of Herschel, still looked so much like a star that experienced astronomers had spotted it seventeen times before Herschel did. In every instance, the planetary nature of the object was missed, and it was assumed to be a star. It didn’t show any distinguishing features that would grab attention.

As the unknown body by which Uranus was disturbed was certainly much more remote than Uranus, it seemed to be certain that though it might show a disc perceptible to very close inspection, yet that the disc must be so minute as not to be detected except with extreme care. In other words, it seemed probable that the body which was to be sought for could not readily be discriminated from a small star, to which class of object it bore a superficial resemblance, though, as a matter of fact, there was the profoundest difference between the two bodies.

As the unknown object that disturbed Uranus was definitely much farther away than Uranus itself, it seemed clear that while it might appear as a small disc under close examination, that disc would be so tiny that it could only be noticed with great effort. In other words, it was likely that the object being searched for would be hard to distinguish from a small star, to which it superficially resembled, even though there was a significant difference between the two objects.

There are on the heavens many hundreds of thousands of stars, and the problem of identifying the planet, if indeed it should lie among these stars, seemed a very complex matter. Of course it is the abundant presence of the stars which causes the difficulty. If the stars could have been got rid of, a sweep over the heavens would at once disclose all the planets which are bright enough to be visible with the telescopic power employed. It is the fortuitous resemblance of the planet to the stars which enables it to escape detection. To discriminate the planet among stars everywhere in the sky would be almost impossible. If, however, some method could be devised for localizing that precise region in which the planet's existence might be presumed, then the search could be undertaken with some prospect of success.

There are hundreds of thousands of stars in the sky, and figuring out which one might be a planet, if any are, seems really complicated. The sheer number of stars is what makes it hard. If we could just remove the stars, we could easily see all the planets that are bright enough to be spotted with the telescope we’re using. It’s the random similarity of a planet to the stars that lets it go undetected. Trying to tell apart the planet from the stars scattered all over the sky would be nearly impossible. However, if we could come up with a way to pinpoint the exact area where a planet might be, then we could start searching with a better chance of success.

To a certain extent the problem of localizing the region on the sky in which the planet might be expected admitted of an immediate limitation. It is known that all the planets, or perhaps I ought rather to say, all the great planets, confine their movements to a certain zone around the heavens. This zone extends some way on either side of that line called the ecliptic in which the earth pursues its journey around the sun. It was therefore to be inferred that the new planet need not be sought for outside this zone. It is obvious that this consideration at once reduces the area to be scrutinized to a small fraction of the entire heavens. But even within the zone thus defined there are many thousands of stars. It would seem a hopeless task to detect the new planet unless some further limitation to its position could be assigned.

To some extent, the challenge of pinpointing the area of the sky where the planet might be found had an immediate limit. It’s known that all planets, or maybe I should say all the larger planets, keep their movements within a specific zone in the sky. This zone stretches a bit on either side of a line called the ecliptic, which is the path Earth takes as it orbits the sun. Therefore, it was logical to conclude that the new planet wouldn't need to be searched for outside this zone. Clearly, this consideration immediately shrinks the area to be examined to a small part of the entire sky. However, even within this defined zone, there are many thousands of stars. It seems like a daunting task to find the new planet unless we can narrow down its position even further.

It was accordingly suggested to Le Verrier that he should endeavour to discover in what particular part of the strip of the celestial sphere which we have indicated the search for the unknown planet should be instituted. The materials available to the mathematician for the solution of this problem were to be derived solely from the discrepancies between the calculated places in which Uranus should be found, taking into account the known causes of disturbance, and the actual places in which observation had shown the planet to exist. Here was indeed an unprecedented problem, and one of extraordinary difficulty. Le Verrier, however, faced it, and, to the astonishment of the world, succeeded in carrying it through to a brilliant solution. We cannot here attempt to enter into any account of the mathematical investigations that were necessary. All that we can do is to give a general indication of the method which had to be adopted.

It was suggested to Le Verrier that he should try to find out exactly where in the area of the night sky we mentioned the search for the unknown planet should begin. The only information available to him as a mathematician for solving this problem came from the differences between the predicted positions where Uranus should be, considering the known factors causing disturbances, and the actual positions shown by observations of the planet. This was indeed an unprecedented problem and extremely challenging. However, Le Verrier took it on and, to the world's astonishment, managed to come up with a brilliant solution. We can't go into detail about the mathematical work that was involved, but we can provide a general idea of the method that had to be used.

Let us suppose that a planet is revolving outside Uranus, at a distance which is suggested by the several distances at which the other planets are dispersed around the sun. Let us assume that this outer planet has started on its course, in a prescribed path, and that it has a certain mass. It will, of course, disturb the motion of Uranus, and in consequence of that disturbance Uranus will follow a path the nature of which can be determined by calculation. It will, however, generally be found that the path so ascertained does not tally with the actual path which observations have indicated for Uranus. This demonstrates that the assumed circumstances of the unknown planet must be in some respects erroneous, and the astronomer commences afresh with an amended orbit. At last after many trials, Le Verrier ascertained that, by assuming a certain size, shape, and position for the unknown Planet's orbit, and a certain value for the mass of the hypothetical body, it would be possible to account for the observed disturbances of Uranus. Gradually it became clear to the perception of this consummate mathematician, not only that the difficulties in the movements of Uranus could be thus explained, but that no other explanation need be sought for. It accordingly appeared that a planet possessing the mass which he had assigned, and moving in the orbit which his calculations had indicated, must indeed exist, though no eye had ever beheld any such body. Here was, indeed, an astonishing result. The mathematician sitting at his desk, by studying the observations which had been supplied to him of one planet, is able to discover the existence of another planet, and even to assign the very position which it must occupy, ere ever the telescope is invoked for its discovery.

Let’s say there’s a planet orbiting outside Uranus, at a distance similar to where the other planets are found around the sun. We’ll assume this outer planet is on its path and has a certain mass. Naturally, it will affect Uranus's motion, and because of that disturbance, Uranus will follow a path that can be calculated. However, it usually turns out that the calculated path doesn’t match the actual path observed for Uranus. This shows that the conditions we assumed for the unknown planet must be somewhat incorrect, and the astronomer has to start again with a revised orbit. After numerous attempts, Le Verrier determined that by assuming a specific size, shape, and position for the unknown planet's orbit, along with a particular mass for the hypothetical body, he could explain the observed disturbances in Uranus's movement. Gradually, this brilliant mathematician realized not only that the issues in Uranus's movements could be explained this way, but that no other explanation was necessary. It became clear that a planet with the mass he had assigned and moving in the orbit his calculations indicated must exist, even though no one had ever seen such a body. This was, indeed, an incredible finding. The mathematician, from his desk, by analyzing observations of one planet, was able to deduce the existence of another planet and even pinpoint its exact location before a telescope was ever used to confirm it.

Thus it was that the calculations of Le Verrier narrowed greatly the area to be scrutinised in the telescopic search which was presently to be instituted. It was already known, as we have just pointed out, that the planet must lie somewhere on the ecliptic. The French mathematician had now further indicated the spot on the ecliptic at which, according to his calculations, the planet must actually be found. And now for an episode in this history which will be celebrated so long as science shall endure. It is nothing less than the telescopic confirmation of the existence of this new planet, which had previously been indicated only by mathematical calculation. Le Verrier had not himself the instruments necessary for studying the heavens, nor did he possess the skill of the practical astronomer. He, therefore, wrote to Dr. Galle, of the Observatory at Berlin, requesting him to undertake a telescopic search for the new planet in the vicinity which the mathematical calculation had indicated for the whereabouts of the planet at that particular time. Le Verrier added that he thought the planet ought to admit of being recognised by the possession of a disc sufficiently definite to mark the distinction between it and the surrounding stars.

So it was that Le Verrier's calculations significantly narrowed the area to be examined in the upcoming telescopic search. It was already known, as we just mentioned, that the planet had to be somewhere on the ecliptic. The French mathematician had now pinpointed the exact location on the ecliptic where, according to his calculations, the planet should be found. And now we come to a moment in this history that will be celebrated for as long as science exists. It is nothing less than the telescopic confirmation of the existence of this new planet, which had previously been indicated solely by mathematical calculation. Le Verrier did not have the instruments needed to study the heavens, nor did he have the skills of a practical astronomer. So, he wrote to Dr. Galle at the Observatory in Berlin, asking him to conduct a telescopic search for the new planet in the area that the calculations suggested it would be located at that time. Le Verrier added that he believed the planet should be noticeable enough to have a disc clear enough to distinguish it from the surrounding stars.

It was the 23rd September, 1846, when the request from Le Verrier reached the Berlin Observatory, and the night was clear, so that the memorable search was made on the same evening. The investigation was facilitated by the circumstance that a diligent observer had recently compiled elaborate star maps for certain tracts of the heavens lying in a sufficiently wide zone on both sides of the equator. These maps were as yet only partially complete, but it happened that Hora. XXI., which included the very spot which Le Verrier's results referred to, had been just issued. Dr. Galle had thus before his eyes a chart of all the stars which were visible in that part of the heavens at the time when the map was made. The advantage of such an assistance to the search could hardly be over-estimated. It at once gave the astronomer another method of recognising the planet besides that afforded by its possible possession of a disc. For as the planet was a moving body, it would not have been in the same place relatively to the stars at the time when the map was constructed, as it occupied some years later when the search was being made. If the body should be situated in the spot which Le Verrier's calculations indicated in the autumn of 1846, then it might be regarded as certain that it would not be found in that same place on a map drawn some years previously.

It was September 23, 1846, when the request from Le Verrier reached the Berlin Observatory, and the night was clear, allowing for the memorable search to take place that evening. The investigation was aided by the fact that a dedicated observer had recently put together detailed star maps for certain areas of the sky, covering a broad zone on both sides of the equator. These maps were still only partially complete, but it happened that Volume XXI, which included the exact area that Le Verrier's results referred to, had just been published. Dr. Galle thus had a chart of all the stars visible in that part of the sky at the time the map was created. The value of such help in the search could hardly be overstated. It provided the astronomer with another way to identify the planet, in addition to its potential visibility as a disc. Since the planet was a moving object, it wouldn't have been in the same position relative to the stars at the time the map was made as it would have been a few years later when the search was conducted. If the body was located in the area indicated by Le Verrier's calculations in the autumn of 1846, it was almost certain that it wouldn't be in the same place on a map drawn several years earlier.

The search to be undertaken consisted in a comparison made point by point between the bodies shown on the map, and those stars in the sky which Dr. Galle's telescope revealed. In the course of this comparison it presently appeared that a star-like object of the eighth magnitude, which was quite a conspicuous body in the telescope, was not represented in the map. This at once attracted the earnest attention of the astronomer, and raised his hopes that here was indeed the planet. Nor were these hopes destined to be disappointed. It could not be supposed that a star of the eighth magnitude would have been overlooked in the preparation of a chart whereon stars of many lower degrees of brightness were set down. One other supposition was of course conceivable. It might have been that this suspicious object belonged to the class of variables, for there are many such stars whose brightness fluctuates, and if it had happened that the map was constructed at a time when the star in question had but feeble brilliance, it might have escaped notice. It is also well known that sometimes new stars suddenly develop, so that the possibility that what Dr. Galle saw should have been a variable star or should have been a totally new star had to be provided against.

The search that was to be conducted involved a detailed comparison between the celestial bodies shown on the map and the stars revealed by Dr. Galle's telescope. During this comparison, it quickly became clear that a star-like object of the eighth magnitude, which was quite noticeable in the telescope, was not included on the map. This immediately drew the astronomer's attention and raised his hopes that he might have found the planet. Fortunately, these hopes were not in vain. It seemed unlikely that an eighth-magnitude star would have been missed in the creation of a chart that included many stars of much lower brightness. Of course, there was one other possibility to consider. It could be that this questionable object was a type of variable star, as there are many stars whose brightness changes. If the map was made when this particular star was dim, it might have gone unnoticed. It's also well known that new stars can suddenly appear, so the chance that what Dr. Galle saw was either a variable star or a completely new star had to be taken into account.

Fortunately a test was immediately available to decide whether the new object was indeed the long sought for planet, or whether it was a star of one of the two classes to which I have just referred. A star remains fixed, but a planet is in motion. No doubt when a planet lies at the distance at which this new planet was believed to be situated, its apparent motion would be so slow that it would not be easy to detect any change in the course of a single night's observation. Dr. Galle, however, addressed himself with much skill to the examination of the place of the new body. Even in the course of the night he thought he detected slight movements, and he awaited with much anxiety the renewal of his observations on the subsequent evenings. His suspicions as to the movement of the body were then amply confirmed, and the planetary nature of the new object was thus unmistakably detected.

Fortunately, there was an immediate test available to determine whether the new object was really the long-sought planet or just a star from one of the two classes I mentioned earlier. A star stays fixed, while a planet moves. When a planet is at the distance where this new one was thought to be, its apparent motion would be so slow that noticing any change in just one night's observation would be difficult. Dr. Galle, however, skillfully examined the position of the new body. Even during the night, he thought he noticed slight movements, and he anxiously awaited the chance to observe it again on the following nights. His suspicions about the movement of the body were soon confirmed, and the planetary nature of the new object was clearly established.

Great indeed was the admiration of the scientific world at this superb triumph. Here was a mighty planet whose very existence was revealed by the indications afforded by refined mathematical calculation. At once the name of Le Verrier, already known to those conversant with the more profound branches of astronomy, became everywhere celebrated. It soon, however, appeared, that the fame belonging to this great achievement had to be shared between Le Verrier and another astronomer, J. C. Adams, of Cambridge. In our chapter on this great English mathematician we shall describe the manner in which he was independently led to the same discovery.

The scientific community was incredibly impressed by this amazing achievement. Here was a powerful planet whose very existence was uncovered through advanced mathematical calculations. Instantly, the name of Le Verrier, already recognized among those familiar with the deeper aspects of astronomy, became widely known. However, it soon became clear that the credit for this significant discovery had to be shared between Le Verrier and another astronomer, J. C. Adams from Cambridge. In our chapter on this remarkable English mathematician, we will explain how he independently arrived at the same discovery.

Directly the planetary nature of the newly-discovered body had been established, the great observatories naturally included this additional member of the solar system in their working lists, so that day after day its place was carefully determined. When sufficient time had elapsed the shape and position of the orbit of the body became known. Of course, it need hardly be said that observations applied to the planet itself must necessarily provide a far more accurate method of determining the path which it follows, than would be possible to Le Verrier, when all he had to base his calculations upon was the influence of the planet reflected, so to speak, from Uranus. It may be noted that the true elements of the planet, when revealed by direct observation, showed that there was a considerable discrepancy between the track of the planet which Le Verrier had announced, and that which the planet was actually found to pursue.

Once the planetary nature of the newly discovered body was confirmed, the major observatories quickly added this new member of the solar system to their working lists, ensuring that its position was accurately measured day after day. After enough time had passed, the shape and position of the body's orbit became known. Obviously, it goes without saying that observations made directly on the planet itself provided a much more accurate way to determine its path than what Le Verrier had, which was based solely on the influence of the planet as reflected, so to speak, from Uranus. It's worth noting that the actual characteristics of the planet, revealed through direct observation, showed a significant difference between the orbit that Le Verrier had predicted and the one that was actually observed.

The name of the newly-discovered body had next to be considered. As the older members of the system were already known by the same names as great heathen divinities, it was obvious that some similar source should be invoked for a suggestion as to a name for the most recent planet. The fact that this body was so remote in the depths of space, not unnaturally suggested the name "Neptune." Such is accordingly the accepted designation of that mighty globe which revolves in the track that at present seems to trace out the frontiers of our system.

The name of the newly discovered planet next needed to be considered. Since the older planets were already named after significant pagan gods, it was clear that a similar source should be used for a name suggestion for the latest planet. The fact that this planet was so far away in the depths of space naturally led to the name "Neptune." This is, therefore, the accepted name for that immense planet, which orbits in the path that currently appears to define the boundaries of our solar system.

Le Verrier attained so much fame by this discovery, that when, in 1854, Arago's place had to be filled at the head of the great Paris Observatory, it was universally felt that the discoverer of Neptune was the suitable man to assume the office which corresponds in France to that of the Astronomer Royal in England. It was true that the work of the astronomical mathematician had hitherto been of an abstract character. His discoveries had been made at his desk and not in the observatory, and he had no practical acquaintance with the use of astronomical instruments. However, he threw himself into the technical duties of the observatory with vigour and determination. He endeavoured to inspire the officers of the establishment with enthusiasm for that systematic work which is so necessary for the accomplishment of useful astronomical research. It must, however, be admitted that Le Verrier was not gifted with those natural qualities which would make him adapted for the successful administration of such an establishment. Unfortunately disputes arose between the Director and his staff. At last the difficulties of the situation became so great that the only possible solution was to supersede Le Verrier, and he was accordingly obliged to retire. He was succeeded in his high office by another eminent mathematician, M. Delaunay, only less distinguished than Le Verrier himself.

Le Verrier became so famous from this discovery that when, in 1854, they needed to fill Arago's position at the helm of the great Paris Observatory, everyone believed the discoverer of Neptune was the right person for the role that is equivalent to the Astronomer Royal in England. Although, up until that point, his work as an astronomical mathematician had been quite theoretical. His discoveries were made from his desk rather than in the observatory, and he had no practical experience with astronomical instruments. Nonetheless, he tackled the technical responsibilities of the observatory with energy and determination. He tried to motivate the staff with enthusiasm for the systematic work that is essential for effective astronomical research. However, it must be acknowledged that Le Verrier didn't possess the natural qualities needed for the successful management of such an institution. Unfortunately, conflicts arose between the Director and his team. Eventually, the situation became so challenging that the only viable solution was to replace Le Verrier, and he was forced to step down. He was succeeded in his prestigious role by another prominent mathematician, M. Delaunay, who was nearly as distinguished as Le Verrier himself.

Relieved of his official duties, Le Verrier returned to the mathematics he loved. In his non-official capacity he continued to work with the greatest ardour at his researches on the movements of the planets. After the death of M. Delaunay, who was accidentally drowned in 1873, Le Verrier was restored to the directorship of the observatory, and he continued to hold the office until his death.

Relieved of his official duties, Le Verrier went back to the mathematics he loved. In his unofficial role, he kept working passionately on his research into the movements of the planets. After M. Delaunay, who accidentally drowned in 1873, passed away, Le Verrier was reinstated as the director of the observatory, and he held that position until he died.

The nature of the researches to which the life of Le Verrier was subsequently devoted are not such as admit of description in a general sketch like this, where the language, and still less the symbols, of mathematics could not be suitably introduced. It may, however, be said in general that he was particularly engaged with the study of the effects produced on the movements of the planets by their mutual attractions. The importance of this work to astronomy consists, to a considerable extent, in the fact that by such calculations we are enabled to prepare tables by which the places of the different heavenly bodies can be predicted for our almanacs. To this task Le Verrier devoted himself, and the amount of work he has accomplished would perhaps have been deemed impossible had it not been actually done.

The nature of the research that Le Verrier focused on later in his life isn't something that can be easily described in a general overview like this, since the language and especially the symbols of mathematics wouldn’t fit properly. However, it's safe to say that he was especially involved in studying how the movements of planets are affected by their gravitational pull on each other. This work is incredibly important to astronomy because it allows us to create tables that predict the positions of various celestial bodies for our almanacs. Le Verrier dedicated himself to this task, and the amount of work he accomplished would likely have been considered impossible if it hadn’t actually been completed.

The superb success which had attended Le Verrier's efforts to explain the cause of the perturbations of Uranus, naturally led this wonderful computer to look for a similar explanation of certain other irregularities in planetary movements. To a large extent he succeeded in showing how the movements of each of the great planets could be satisfactorily accounted for by the influence of the attractions of the other bodies of the same class. One circumstance in connection with these investigations is sufficiently noteworthy to require a few words here. Just as at the opening of his career, Le Verrier had discovered that Uranus, the outermost planet of the then known system, exhibited the influence of an unknown external body, so now it appeared to him that Mercury, the innermost body of our system, was also subjected to some disturbances, which could not be satisfactorily accounted for as consequences of any known agents of attraction. The ellipse in which Mercury revolved was animated by a slow movement, which caused it to revolve in its plane. It appeared to Le Verrier that this displacement was incapable of explanation by the action of any of the known bodies of our system. He was, therefore, induced to try whether he could not determine from the disturbances of Mercury the existence of some other planet, at present unknown, which revolved inside the orbit of the known planet. Theory seemed to indicate that the observed alteration in the track of the planet could be thus accounted for. He naturally desired to obtain telescopic confirmation which might verify the existence of such a body in the same way as Dr. Galle verified the existence of Neptune. If there were, indeed, an intramercurial planet, then it must occasionally cross between the earth and the sun, and might now and then be expected to be witnessed in the actual act of transit. So confident did Le Verrier feel in the existence of such a body that an observation of a dark object in transit, by Lescarbault on 26th March, 1859, was believed by the mathematician to be the object which his theory indicated. Le Verrier also thought it likely that another transit of the same object would be seen in March, 1877. Nothing of the kind was, however, witnessed, notwithstanding that an assiduous watch was kept, and the explanation of the change in Mercury's orbit must, therefore, be regarded as still to be sought for.

The great success that Le Verrier had in explaining the cause of Uranus's irregularities naturally led this brilliant mathematician to search for a similar explanation for other oddities in planetary movements. To a large extent, he managed to show how the movements of each of the major planets could be explained by the gravitational pull of the other planets of the same type. One detail regarding these investigations is quite noteworthy and deserves mention here. Just like at the beginning of his career when Le Verrier discovered that Uranus, the outermost planet in the then-known solar system, was affected by an unknown external body, he now believed that Mercury, the innermost planet, was also experiencing some disturbances that couldn't be easily explained by any known sources of gravitational attraction. The orbit of Mercury had a slow movement that caused it to shift in its plane. Le Verrier thought this displacement couldn't be explained by the influence of any known bodies in our solar system. Thus, he was prompted to see if he could deduce from the disturbances of Mercury the existence of some other planet, currently unknown, that orbits within the path of the known planet. Theory suggested that this observed change in Mercury's path could be explained this way. He naturally wanted telescopic confirmation to validate the existence of such a planet, similar to how Dr. Galle confirmed Neptune's existence. If there was indeed a planet inside Mercury's orbit, it should occasionally pass between the Earth and the Sun and could occasionally be seen during its transit. Le Verrier was so convinced of the existence of such a body that he believed an observation of a dark object in transit, made by Lescarbault on March 26, 1859, was the one his theory predicted. Le Verrier also thought another transit of the same object would be visible in March 1877. However, nothing of the sort was observed, despite careful monitoring, and the explanation for the change in Mercury's orbit remains to be found.

Le Verrier naturally received every honour that could be bestowed upon a man of science. The latter part of his life was passed during the most troubled period of modern French history. He was a supporter of the Imperial Dynasty, and during the Commune he experienced much anxiety; indeed, at one time grave fears were entertained for his personal safety.

Le Verrier naturally received every honor that could be given to a scientist. He spent the latter part of his life during the most tumultuous period of modern French history. He was a supporter of the Imperial Dynasty and faced a lot of anxiety during the Commune; at one point, there were serious fears for his personal safety.

Early in 1877 his health, which had been gradually failing for some years, began to give way. He appeared to rally somewhat in the summer, but in September he sank rapidly, and died on Sunday, the 23rd of that month.

Early in 1877, his health, which had been steadily declining for several years, started to deteriorate. He seemed to improve a bit in the summer, but by September he declined quickly and passed away on Sunday, the 23rd of that month.

His remains were borne to the cemetery on Mont Parnasse in a public funeral. Among his pallbearers were leading men of science, from other countries as well as France, and the memorial discourses pronounced at the grave expressed their admiration of his talents and of the greatness of the services he had rendered to science.

His body was taken to the cemetery on Mont Parnasse for a public funeral. Among his pallbearers were prominent scientists from both France and other countries, and the speeches given at the graveside expressed their admiration for his talents and the significant contributions he made to science.

ADAMS.

The illustrious mathematician who, among Englishmen, at all events, was second only to Newton by his discoveries in theoretical astronomy, was born on June the 5th, 1819, at the farmhouse of Lidcot, seven miles from Launceston, in Cornwall. His early education was imparted under the guidance of the Rev. John Couch Grylls, a first cousin of his mother. He appears to have received an education of the ordinary school type in classics and mathematics, but his leisure hours were largely devoted to studying what astronomical books he could find in the library of the Mechanics' Institute at Devonport. He was twenty years old when he entered St. John's College, Cambridge. His career in the University was one of almost unparalleled distinction, and it is recorded that his answering at the Wranglership examination, where he came out at the head of the list in 1843, was so high that he received more than double the marks awarded to the Second Wrangler.

The famous mathematician who, among Englishmen, was second only to Newton in his contributions to theoretical astronomy, was born on June 5th, 1819, at Lidcot farmhouse, seven miles from Launceston in Cornwall. He was educated under the guidance of Rev. John Couch Grylls, who was his mother's first cousin. He seems to have received a typical school education in classics and mathematics, but in his free time, he dedicated himself to studying any astronomical books he could find in the Mechanics' Institute library in Devonport. He was twenty when he entered St. John's College, Cambridge. His time at the University was marked by extraordinary achievement, and it's noted that during the Wranglership examination in 1843, where he ranked first, his score was so high that he received more than double the marks awarded to the Second Wrangler.

Among the papers found after his death was the following memorandum, dated July the 3rd, 1841: "Formed a design at the beginning of this week of investigating, as soon as possible after taking my degree, the irregularities in the motion of Uranus, which are as yet unaccounted for, in order to find whether they may be attributed to the action of an undiscovered planet beyond it; and, if possible, thence to determine the elements of its orbit approximately, which would lead probably to its discovery."

Among the papers found after his death was the following memorandum, dated July 3rd, 1841: "I came up with a plan at the start of this week to investigate, as soon as I can after graduating, the unexplained movements of Uranus, which have not yet been accounted for. I want to find out if they might be due to the influence of an undiscovered planet beyond it; and, if possible, use that information to roughly determine its orbital elements, which might eventually lead to its discovery."

After he had taken his degree, and had thus obtained a little relaxation from the lines within which his studies had previously been necessarily confined, Adams devoted himself to the study of the perturbations of Uranus, in accordance with the resolve which we have just seen that he formed while he was still an undergraduate. As a first attempt he made the supposition that there might be a planet exterior to Uranus, at a distance which was double that of Uranus from the sun. Having completed his calculation as to the effect which such a hypothetical planet might exercise upon the movement of Uranus, he came to the conclusion that it would be quite possible to account completely for the unexplained difficulties by the action of an exterior planet, if only that planet were of adequate size and had its orbit properly placed. It was necessary, however, to follow up the problem more precisely, and accordingly an application was made through Professor Challis, the Director of the Cambridge Observatory, to the Astronomer Royal, with the object of obtaining from the observations made at Greenwich Observatory more accurate values for the disturbances suffered by Uranus. Basing his work on the more precise materials thus available, Adams undertook his calculations anew, and at last, with his completed results, he called at Greenwich Observatory on October the 21st, 1845. He there left for the Astronomer Royal a paper which contained the results at which he had arrived for the mass and the mean distance of the hypothetical planet as well as the other elements necessary for calculating its exact position.

After he graduated and got a little break from the confines of his studies, Adams focused on studying the disturbances of Uranus, in line with the decision he made while still in college. For his first attempt, he speculated that there might be a planet beyond Uranus, at a distance twice that of Uranus from the sun. After calculating how this hypothetical planet could affect Uranus's movement, he concluded that a sufficiently sized external planet could fully explain the unresolved issues if its orbit was positioned correctly. However, it was necessary to explore the problem in greater detail, so a request was made through Professor Challis, the Director of the Cambridge Observatory, to the Astronomer Royal for more accurate observations of the disturbances affecting Uranus from the Greenwich Observatory. Using the more precise data available, Adams recalculated and finally, with his completed results, he visited Greenwich Observatory on October 21, 1845. There, he left a paper for the Astronomer Royal detailing his findings on the mass and average distance of the hypothetical planet, along with other information required to determine its exact position.

JOHN COUCH ADAMS.
JOHN COUCH ADAMS.
John Couch Adams.

As we have seen in the preceding chapter, Le Verrier had been also investigating the same problem. The place which Le Verrier assigned to the hypothetical disturbing planet for the beginning of the year 1847, was within a degree of that to which Adams's computations pointed, and which he had communicated to the Astronomer Royal seven months before Le Verrier's work appeared. On July the 29th, 1846, Professor Challis commenced to search for the unknown object with the Northumberland telescope belonging to the Cambridge Observatory. He confined his attention to a limited region in the heavens, extending around that point to which Mr. Adams' calculations pointed. The relative places of all the stars, or rather star-like objects within this area, were to be carefully measured. When the same observations were repeated a week or two later, then the distances of the several pairs of stars from each other would be found unaltered, but any planet which happened to lie among the objects measured would disclose its existence by the alterations in distance due to its motion in the interval. This method of search, though no doubt it must ultimately have proved successful, was necessarily a very tedious one, but to Professor Challis, unfortunately, no other method was available. Thus it happened that, though Challis commenced his search at Cambridge two months earlier than Galle at Berlin, yet, as we have already explained, the possession of accurate star-maps by Dr. Galle enabled him to discover the planet on the very first night that he looked for it.

As we saw in the previous chapter, Le Verrier was also looking into the same issue. The location that Le Verrier predicted for the hypothetical planet at the start of 1847 was within a degree of where Adams's calculations indicated, which he had shared with the Astronomer Royal seven months before Le Verrier's findings were published. On July 29, 1846, Professor Challis began searching for the unknown object using the Northumberland telescope from the Cambridge Observatory. He focused on a specific area of the sky around the point indicated by Mr. Adams' calculations. The positions of all the stars, or rather star-like objects, in this region were to be carefully measured. When the same observations were repeated a week or two later, the distances between the various star pairs would remain unchanged, but any planet located among the measured objects would reveal its presence through changes in distance due to its movement during that time. This search method, although it would eventually have proven successful, was quite tedious, and unfortunately for Professor Challis, he had no other method available. So, even though Challis started his search in Cambridge two months earlier than Galle in Berlin, as we have already noted, Galle’s access to accurate star maps allowed him to discover the planet on the very first night he searched for it.

The rival claims of Adams and Le Verrier to the discovery of Neptune, or rather, we should say, the claims put forward by their respective champions, for neither of the illustrious investigators themselves condescended to enter into the personal aspect of the question, need not be further discussed here. The main points of the controversy have been long since settled, and we cannot do better than quote the words of Sir John Herschel when he addressed the Royal Astronomical Society in 1848:—

The competing claims of Adams and Le Verrier regarding the discovery of Neptune— or more accurately, the claims made by their respective supporters, since neither of the esteemed researchers chose to delve into the personal side of the issue— don’t need to be revisited here. The key points of the debate have been resolved long ago, and it’s best to quote Sir John Herschel's remarks when he spoke to the Royal Astronomical Society in 1848:—

"As genius and destiny have joined the names of Le Verrier and Adams, I shall by no means put them asunder; nor will they ever be pronounced apart so long as language shall celebrate the triumphs of science in her sublimest walks. On the great discovery of Neptune, which may be said to have surpassed, by intelligible and legitimate means, the wildest pretensions of clairvoyance, it Would now be quite superfluous for me to dilate. That glorious event and the steps which led to it, and the various lights in which it has been placed, are already familiar to every one having the least tincture of science. I will only add that as there is not, nor henceforth ever can be, the slightest rivalry on the subject between these two illustrious men—as they have met as brothers, and as such will, I trust, ever regard each other—we have made, we could make, no distinction between then, on this occasion. May they both long adorn and augment our science, and add to their own fame already so high and pure, by fresh achievements."

"As genius and destiny have united the names of Le Verrier and Adams, I will not separate them; they will always be mentioned together as long as language honors the achievements of science in its highest realms. Regarding the great discovery of Neptune, which can be said to have exceeded the wildest claims of clairvoyance through clear and valid methods, it would be unnecessary for me to elaborate further. That remarkable event, the steps leading to it, and the various perspectives it has been interpreted through are already well-known to anyone with even a basic understanding of science. I will just add that there is, and will never be, any rivalry between these two distinguished men—they have come together as brothers, and I hope they will always view each other that way. On this occasion, we have made, and could make, no distinction between them. May they both continue to enhance and enrich our science and add to their already great and untarnished reputation with new accomplishments."

Adams was elected a Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, in 1843; but as he did not take holy orders, his Fellowship, in accordance with the rules then existing came to an end in 1852. In the following year he was, however, elected to a Fellowship at Pembroke College, which he retained until the end of his life. In 1858 he was appointed Professor of Mathematics in the University of St. Andrews, but his residence in the north was only a brief one, for in the same year he was recalled to Cambridge as Lowndean Professor of Astronomy and Geometry, in succession to Peacock. In 1861 Challis retired from the Directorship of the Cambridge Observatory, and Adams was appointed to succeed him.

Adams was elected a Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, in 1843; however, since he didn’t take holy orders, his Fellowship ended in 1852 according to the rules at the time. The following year, he was elected to a Fellowship at Pembroke College, which he held until his death. In 1858, he was appointed Professor of Mathematics at the University of St. Andrews, but his stay in the north was short-lived, as he was recalled to Cambridge that same year to serve as the Lowndean Professor of Astronomy and Geometry, succeeding Peacock. In 1861, Challis retired from the Directorship of the Cambridge Observatory, and Adams was appointed to take his place.

The discovery of Neptune was a brilliant inauguration of the astronomical career of Adams. He worked at, and wrote upon, the theory of the motions of Biela's comet; he made important corrections to the theory of Saturn; he investigated the mass of Uranus, a subject in which he was naturally interested from its importance in the theory of Neptune; he also improved the methods of computing the orbits of double stars. But all these must be regarded as his minor labours, for next to the discovery of Neptune the fame of Adams mainly rests on his researches upon certain movements of the moon, and upon the November meteors.

The discovery of Neptune marked an impressive start to Adams' career in astronomy. He worked on and wrote about the theory of Biela's comet's movements; he made significant corrections to the theory of Saturn; he explored the mass of Uranus, an area he was particularly interested in because of its relevance to Neptune's theory; he also improved the methods for calculating the orbits of double stars. However, all of these are considered his lesser contributions, as after the discovery of Neptune, Adams' reputation is mainly based on his studies of specific moon movements and the November meteors.

The periodic time of the moon is the interval required for one circuit of its orbit. This interval is known with accuracy at the present day, and by means of the ancient eclipses the period of the moon's revolution two thousand years ago can be also ascertained. It had been discovered by Halley that the period which the moon requires to accomplish each of its revolutions around the earth has been steadily, though no doubt slowly, diminishing. The change thus produced is not appreciable when only small intervals of time are considered, but it becomes appreciable when we have to deal with intervals of thousands of years. The actual effect which is produced by the lunar acceleration, for so this phenomenon is called, may be thus estimated. If we suppose that the moon had, throughout the ages, revolved around the earth in precisely the same periodic time which it has at present, and if from this assumption we calculate back to find where the moon must have been about two thousand years ago, we obtain a position which the ancient eclipses show to be different from that in which the moon was actually situated. The interval between the position in which the moon would have been found two thousand years ago if there had been no acceleration, and the position in which the moon was actually placed, amounts to about a degree, that is to say, to an arc on the heavens which is twice the moon's apparent diameter.

The periodic time of the moon is the time it takes to complete one orbit around the Earth. This time is accurately known today, and by examining ancient eclipses, we can also determine the moon's revolution period from two thousand years ago. Halley discovered that the time the moon takes for each of its revolutions around the Earth has been gradually decreasing, although this change is very slow. While this change is not noticeable over short periods, it becomes significant over thousands of years. The actual effect of this lunar acceleration, as this phenomenon is called, can be estimated. If we assume that the moon has always revolved around the Earth in the same periodic time it has now, and if we calculate where the moon would have been about two thousand years ago based on this assumption, we find a position that ancient eclipses show is different from where the moon actually was. The difference between where the moon would have been without acceleration and its actual position about two thousand years ago is roughly one degree—this is an arc in the sky that is twice the moon’s apparent diameter.

If no other bodies save the earth and the moon were present in the universe, it seems certain that the motion of the moon would never have exhibited this acceleration. In such a simple case as that which I have supposed the orbit of the moon would have remained for ever absolutely unchanged. It is, however, well known that the presence of the sun exerts a disturbing influence upon the movements of the moon. In each revolution our satellite is continually drawn aside by the action of the sun from the place which it would otherwise have occupied. These irregularities are known as the perturbations of the lunar orbit, they have long been studied, and the majority of them have been satisfactorily accounted for. It seems, however, to those who first investigated the question that the phenomenon of the lunar acceleration could not be explained as a consequence of solar perturbation, and, as no other agent competent to produce such effects was recognised by astronomers, the lunar acceleration presented an unsolved enigma.

If there were no other bodies in the universe besides the Earth and the Moon, it seems clear that the Moon's motion wouldn't show this acceleration. In such a straightforward scenario, the Moon's orbit would remain completely unchanged forever. However, it's well known that the Sun has a disruptive effect on the Moon's movements. With each revolution, our satellite is constantly pulled off course by the Sun's influence from where it would otherwise be. These irregularities are referred to as the perturbations of the lunar orbit, and they've been studied for a long time, with most of them adequately explained. However, those who initially looked into this issue believed that the phenomenon of lunar acceleration couldn't be attributed to solar perturbation, and since no other factor capable of causing such effects was recognized by astronomers, lunar acceleration remained an unresolved mystery.

At the end of the last century the illustrious French mathematician Laplace undertook a new investigation of the famous problem, and was rewarded with a success which for a long time appeared to be quite complete. Let us suppose that the moon lies directly between the earth and the sun, then both earth and moon are pulled towards the sun by the solar attraction; as, however, the moon is the nearer of the two bodies to the attracting centre it is pulled the more energetically, and consequently there is an increase in the distance between the earth and the moon. Similarly when the moon happens to lie on the other side of the earth, so that the earth is interposed directly between the moon and the sun, the solar attraction exerted upon the earth is more powerful than the same influence upon the moon. Consequently in this case, also, the distance of the moon from the earth is increased by the solar disturbance. These instances will illustrate the general truth, that, as one of the consequences of the disturbing influence exerted by the sun upon the earth-moon system, there is an increase in the dimensions of the average orbit which the moon describes around the earth. As the time required by the moon to accomplish a journey round the earth depends upon its distance from the earth, it follows that among the influences of the sun upon the moon there must be an enlargement of the periodic time, from what it would have been had there been no solar disturbing action.

At the end of the last century, the renowned French mathematician Laplace started a new study of the famous problem and achieved what seemed to be a complete success for a long time. Let's imagine that the moon is positioned directly between the earth and the sun; in this case, both the earth and the moon experience the sun's gravitational pull. However, since the moon is closer to the sun, it is pulled more strongly, resulting in an increase in the distance between the earth and the moon. Similarly, when the moon is on the opposite side of the earth, with the earth directly between the moon and the sun, the gravitational pull on the earth is stronger than on the moon. Thus, in this scenario as well, the distance from the moon to the earth increases due to the sun's influence. These examples illustrate the general principle that one of the effects of the sun's disturbing influence on the earth-moon system is an increase in the average size of the orbit that the moon follows around the earth. Since the time it takes for the moon to complete an orbit around the earth depends on its distance from the earth, it follows that the sun's influence on the moon must result in a longer orbital period than it would be without that solar disturbance.

This was known long before the time of Laplace, but it did not directly convey any explanation of the lunar acceleration. It no doubt amounted to the assertion that the moon's periodic time was slightly augmented by the disturbance, but it did not give any grounds for suspecting that there was a continuous change in progress. It was, however, apparent that the periodic time was connected with the solar disturbance, so that, if there were any alteration in the amount of the sun's disturbing effect, there must be a corresponding alteration in the moon's periodic time. Laplace, therefore, perceived that, if he could discover any continuous change in the ability of the sun for disturbing the moon, he would then have accounted for a continuous change in the moon's periodic time, and that thus an explanation of the long-vexed question of the lunar acceleration might be forthcoming.

This was known long before Laplace's time, but it didn’t directly explain the moon's acceleration. It certainly suggested that the moon's orbital period was slightly increased by the disturbance, but it didn’t provide any reason to suspect that a continuous change was happening. However, it was clear that the orbital period was linked to the solar disturbance, so if there was any change in the sun's disturbing influence, there should be a corresponding change in the moon's orbital period. Laplace realized that if he could find any continuous change in how the sun disturbed the moon, he could then explain a continuous change in the moon's orbital period, and this might finally provide an answer to the long-standing question of lunar acceleration.

The capability of the sun for disturbing the earth-moon system is obviously connected with the distance of the earth from the sun. If the earth moved in an orbit which underwent no change whatever, then the efficiency of the sun as a disturbing agent would not undergo any change of the kind which was sought for. But if there were any alteration in the shape or size of the earth's orbit, then that might involve such changes in the distance between the earth and the sun as would possibly afford the desired agent for producing the observed lunar effect. It is known that the earth revolves in an orbit which, though nearly circular, is strictly an ellipse. If the earth were the only planet revolving around the sun then that ellipse would remain unaltered from age to age. The earth is, however, only one of a large number of planets which circulate around the great luminary, and are guided and controlled by his supreme attracting power. These planets mutually attract each other, and in consequence of their mutual attractions the orbits of the planets are disturbed from the simple elliptic form which they would otherwise possess. The movement of the earth, for instance, is not, strictly speaking, performed in an elliptical orbit. We may, however, regard it as revolving in an ellipse provided we admit that the ellipse is itself in slow motion.

The sun's ability to influence the earth-moon system is clearly linked to how far the earth is from the sun. If the earth followed an unchanging orbit, the sun wouldn't change its role as a disturbing force. However, if there were any changes in the earth's orbit's shape or size, this could lead to differences in the distance between the earth and the sun, potentially creating the conditions needed to explain the observed lunar effects. It's known that the earth travels in an orbit that, while nearly circular, is technically an ellipse. If the earth were the only planet orbiting the sun, that ellipse would remain constant over time. But the earth is just one of many planets that revolve around the sun, all of which are influenced by its strong gravitational pull. These planets attract each other, and as a result, their orbits are disturbed from the simple elliptical shape they would otherwise have. The earth’s movement, for example, is not strictly an elliptical orbit. However, we can consider it to be moving in an ellipse if we accept that the ellipse itself is in slow motion.

It is a remarkable characteristic of the disturbing effects of the planets that the ellipse in which the earth is at any moment moving always retains the same length; that is to say, its longest diameter is invariable. In all other respects the ellipse is continually changing. It alters its position, it changes its plane, and, most important of all, it changes its eccentricity. Thus, from age to age the shape of the track which the earth describes may at one time be growing more nearly a circle, or at another time may be departing more widely from a circle. These alterations are very small in amount, and they take place with extreme slowness, but they are in incessant progress, and their amount admits of being accurately calculated. At the present time, and for thousands of years past, as well as for thousands of years to come, the eccentricity of the earth's orbit is diminishing, and consequently the orbit described by the earth each year is becoming more nearly circular. We must, however, remember that under all circumstances the length of the longest axis of the ellipse is unaltered, and consequently the size of the track which the earth describes around the sun is gradually increasing. In other words, it may be said that during the present ages the average distance between the earth and the sun is waxing greater in consequence of the perturbations which the earth experiences from the attraction of the other planets. We have, however, already seen that the efficiency of the solar attraction for disturbing the moon's movement depends on the distance between the earth and the sun. As therefore the average distance between the earth and the sun is increasing, at all events during the thousands of years over which our observations extend, it follows that the ability of the sun for disturbing the moon must be gradually diminishing.

It’s a striking aspect of the unsettling effects of the planets that the ellipse in which the Earth is currently moving always keeps the same length; in other words, its longest diameter never changes. However, the ellipse is constantly shifting in other ways. It changes position, alters its plane, and most crucially, its eccentricity varies. So, over the ages, the shape of the path the Earth traces can at times become more circular, or at other times drift further away from a circle. These changes are very slight and happen extremely slowly, but they are always occurring, and their extent can be precisely calculated. Currently, and for thousands of years in the past, as well as for thousands of years in the future, the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit is decreasing, which means the path the Earth follows each year is becoming closer to a circle. However, we must keep in mind that the length of the longest axis of the ellipse remains unchanged, and therefore the size of the path that the Earth travels around the Sun is gradually increasing. In other words, we can say that in these present times, the average distance between the Earth and the Sun is getting greater due to the disturbances the Earth experiences from the gravitational pull of other planets. However, we have already noted that the effectiveness of the Sun’s gravitational force in affecting the Moon’s movement relies on the distance between the Earth and the Sun. Therefore, as the average distance between the Earth and the Sun increases, at least over the thousands of years our observations cover, it follows that the Sun’s ability to disturb the Moon must be slowly decreasing.

CAMBRIDGE OBSERVATORY.
CAMBRIDGE OBSERVATORY.
Cambridge Observatory.

It has been pointed out that, in consequence of the solar disturbance, the orbit of the moon must be some what enlarged. As it now appears that the solar disturbance is on the whole declining, it follows that the orbit of the moon, which has to be adjusted relatively to the average value of the solar disturbance, must also be gradually declining. In other words, the moon must be approaching nearer to the earth in consequence of the alterations in the eccentricity of the earth's orbit produced by the attraction of the other planets. It is true that the change in the moon's position thus arising is an extremely small one, and the consequent effect in accelerating the moon's motion is but very slight. It is in fact almost imperceptible, except when great periods of time are involved. Laplace undertook a calculation on this subject. He knew what the efficiency of the planets in altering the dimensions of the earth's orbit amounted to; from this he was able to determine the changes that would be propagated into the motion of the moon. Thus he ascertained, or at all events thought he had ascertained, that the acceleration of the moon's motion, as it had been inferred from the observations of the ancient eclipses which have been handed down to us, could be completely accounted for as a consequence of planetary perturbation. This was regarded as a great scientific triumph. Our belief in the universality of the law of gravitation would, in fact, have been seriously challenged unless some explanation of the lunar acceleration had been forthcoming. For about fifty years no one questioned the truth of Laplace's investigation. When a mathematician of his eminence had rendered an explanation of the remarkable facts of observation which seemed so complete, it is not surprising that there should have been but little temptation to doubt it. On undertaking a new calculation of the same question, Professor Adams found that Laplace had not pursued this approximation sufficiently far, and that consequently there was a considerable error in the result of his analysis. Adams, it must be observed, did not impugn the value of the lunar acceleration which Halley had deduced from the observations, but what he did show was, that the calculation by which Laplace thought he had provided an explanation of this acceleration was erroneous. Adams, in fact, proved that the planetary influence which Laplace had detected only possessed about half the efficiency which the great French mathematician had attributed to it. There were not wanting illustrious mathematicians who came forward to defend the calculations of Laplace. They computed the question anew and arrived at results practically coincident with those he had given. On the other hand certain distinguished mathematicians at home and abroad verified the results of Adams. The issue was merely a mathematical one. It had only one correct solution. Gradually it appeared that those who opposed Adams presented a number of different solutions, all of them discordant with his, and, usually, discordant with each other. Adams showed distinctly where each of these investigators had fallen into error, and at last it became universally admitted that the Cambridge Professor had corrected Laplace in a very fundamental point of astronomical theory.

It has been noted that, as a result of the solar disturbance, the moon's orbit must be somewhat larger. Now that it appears the solar disturbance is generally decreasing, it follows that the moon's orbit, which needs to be adjusted relative to the average value of the solar disturbance, must also be gradually decreasing. In other words, the moon is getting closer to the earth due to changes in the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit caused by the gravitational pull of the other planets. It's true that the change in the moon's position is extremely small, and the resulting effect on the moon's motion is only slight. In fact, it is almost undetectable, except over long periods of time. Laplace made calculations on this topic. He understood the extent to which the planets affected the dimensions of the Earth's orbit; from this, he was able to determine the changes that would affect the motion of the moon. He concluded, or at least believed he had concluded, that the acceleration of the moon's motion, inferred from observations of ancient eclipses passed down to us, could be fully explained by planetary disturbances. This was seen as a significant scientific achievement. Our faith in the universality of the law of gravitation would have been seriously challenged without an explanation for the lunar acceleration. For about fifty years, no one questioned the validity of Laplace's investigation. Given that a mathematician of his caliber provided such a comprehensive explanation of the notable observational facts, it’s not surprising there was little inclination to doubt it. When Professor Adams conducted a new calculation on the same question, he discovered that Laplace had not taken this approximation far enough, resulting in a significant error in his analysis. It's important to note that Adams did not challenge the value of the lunar acceleration that Halley had derived from observations. Instead, he demonstrated that the calculation by which Laplace believed he explained this acceleration was incorrect. Adams actually proved that the planetary influence Laplace had identified had only about half the effectiveness he had attributed to it. Several notable mathematicians defended Laplace's calculations. They re-computed the question and arrived at results that closely matched those he had provided. Meanwhile, certain distinguished mathematicians, both domestically and internationally, validated Adams's results. The issue was purely mathematical, with only one correct solution. Gradually, it became clear that those who opposed Adams offered several different solutions, all inconsistent with his, and often inconsistent with each other. Adams clearly showed where each of these researchers went wrong, and it eventually became widely accepted that the Cambridge Professor had made a crucial correction to Laplace's astronomical theory.

Though it was desirable to have learned the truth, yet the breach between observation and calculation which Laplace was believed to have closed thus became reopened. Laplace's investigation, had it been correct, would have exactly explained the observed facts. It was, however, now shown that his solution was not correct, and that the lunar acceleration, when strictly calculated as a consequence of solar perturbations, only produced about half the effect which was wanted to explain the ancient eclipses completely. It now seems certain that there is no means of accounting for the lunar acceleration as a direct consequence of the laws of gravitation, if we suppose, as we have been in the habit of supposing, that the members of the solar system concerned may be regarded as rigid particles. It has, however, been suggested that another explanation of a very interesting kind may be forthcoming, and this we must endeavour to set forth.

Though it was desirable to know the truth, the gap between observation and calculation that Laplace was thought to have closed reopened. Laplace's investigation, if it had been right, would have accurately explained the observed facts. However, it has now been shown that his solution was incorrect, and that the lunar acceleration, when calculated as a result of solar disturbances, produced only about half the effect needed to fully explain the ancient eclipses. It now seems certain that there is no way to account for the lunar acceleration as a direct result of the laws of gravitation, if we assume, as we usually do, that the bodies in the solar system can be treated as rigid particles. However, it has been suggested that another, very interesting explanation may be on the horizon, and this is something we should strive to present.

It will be remembered that we have to explain why the period of revolution of the moon is now shorter than it used to be. If we imagine the length of the period to be expressed in terms of days and fractions of a day, that is to say, in terms of the rotations of the earth around its axis, then the difficulty encountered is, that the moon now requires for each of its revolutions around the earth rather a smaller number of rotations of the earth around its axis than used formerly to be the case. Of course this may be explained by the fact that the moon is now moving more swiftly than of yore, but it is obvious that an explanation of quite a different kind might be conceivable. The moon may be moving just at the same pace as ever, but the length of the day may be increasing. If the length of the day is increasing, then, of course, a smaller number of days will be required for the moon to perform each revolution even though the moon's period was itself really unchanged. It would, therefore, seem as if the phenomenon known as the lunar acceleration is the result of the two causes. The first of these is that discovered by Laplace, though its value was over-estimated by him, in which the perturbations of the earth by the planets indirectly affect the motion of the moon. The remaining part of the acceleration of our satellite is apparent rather than real, it is not that the moon is moving more quickly, but that our time-piece, the earth, is revolving more slowly, and is thus actually losing time. It is interesting to note that we can detect a physical explanation for the apparent checking of the earth's motion which is thus manifested. The tides which ebb and flow on the earth exert a brake-like action on the revolving globe, and there can be no doubt that they are gradually reducing its speed, and thus lengthening the day. It has accordingly been suggested that it is this action of the tides which produces the supplementary effect necessary to complete the physical explanation of the lunar acceleration, though it would perhaps be a little premature to assert that this has been fully demonstrated.

It should be noted that we need to explain why the moon's revolution period is now shorter than it used to be. If we think of this period in terms of days and fractions of a day, meaning in relation to the Earth's rotations on its axis, we encounter the issue that the moon now takes fewer Earth rotations to complete each revolution than it did in the past. This may be explained by the fact that the moon is moving faster than before, but it's also possible that there's another explanation. The moon might be moving at the same speed as always, but the length of the day could be increasing. If the day is getting longer, then fewer days would be needed for the moon to complete each revolution, even if the moon's period itself remained unchanged. Therefore, it seems that what we call lunar acceleration can result from two causes. The first one, discovered by Laplace—though he overestimated its effect—is that the planets' gravitational pull on the Earth indirectly influences the moon's motion. The rest of the acceleration of our satellite is more apparent than real; it’s not that the moon is moving faster, but that the Earth, our timekeeper, is turning more slowly and is thus actually losing time. It’s interesting to note that there’s a physical explanation for the apparent slowing of the Earth’s rotation. The tides that rise and fall on Earth create a braking effect on the spinning planet, and there’s no doubt they are gradually reducing its speed, effectively lengthening the day. It has been suggested that this tidal action helps account for the additional effect needed to explain lunar acceleration, although it may be a bit premature to claim that this has been fully proven.

The third of Professor Adams' most notable achievements was connected with the great shower of November meteors which astonished the world in 1866. This splendid display concentrated the attention of astronomers on the theory of the movements of the little objects by which the display was produced. For the definite discovery of the track in which these bodies revolve, we are indebted to the labours of Professor Adams, who, by a brilliant piece of mathematical work, completed the edifice whose foundations had been laid by Professor Newton, of Yale, and other astronomers.

The third major achievement of Professor Adams was related to the spectacular meteor shower in November 1866 that amazed the world. This impressive event drew the focus of astronomers to the theory behind the movements of the small celestial objects responsible for the display. We owe the precise discovery of the paths along which these bodies travel to the efforts of Professor Adams, who, through a brilliant piece of mathematical work, finished the structure that Professor Newton of Yale and other astronomers had started.

Meteors revolve around the sun in a vast swarm, every individual member of which pursues an orbit in accordance with the well-known laws of Kepler. In order to understand the movements of these objects, to account satisfactorily for their periodic recurrence, and to predict the times of their appearance, it became necessary to learn the size and the shape of the track which the swarm followed, as well as the position which it occupied. Certain features of the track could no doubt be readily assigned. The fact that the shower recurs on one particular day of the year, viz., November 13th, defines one point through which the orbit must pass. The position on the heavens of the radiant point from which the meteors appear to diverge, gives another element in the track. The sun must of course be situated at the focus, so that only one further piece of information, namely, the periodic time, will be necessary to complete our knowledge of the movements of the system. Professor H. Newton, of Yale, had shown that the choice of possible orbits for the meteoric swarm is limited to five. There is, first, the great ellipse in which we now know the meteors revolve once every thirty three and one quarter years. There is next an orbit of a nearly circular kind in which the periodic time would be a little more than a year. There is a similar track in which the periodic time would be a few days short of a year, while two other smaller orbits would also be conceivable. Professor Newton had pointed out a test by which it would be possible to select the true orbit, which we know must be one or other of these five. The mathematical difficulties which attended the application of this test were no doubt great, but they did not baffle Professor Adams.

Meteors orbit around the sun in a vast swarm, with each one following a path according to the well-known laws of Kepler. To understand how these objects move, explain their regular appearances, and predict when they will show up, it was essential to determine the size and shape of the path the swarm takes, as well as its position. Some characteristics of the path could certainly be identified. The fact that the meteor shower happens on the same day each year, specifically November 13th, defines one point that the orbit must intersect. The position in the sky of the radiant point from which the meteors seem to come provides another factor in the path. The sun must be located at one focus of the orbit, so only one more piece of information, the periodic time, is needed to fully understand the movements of the system. Professor H. Newton from Yale showed that there are five possible orbits for the meteoric swarm. First is the large ellipse where we now know the meteors complete a revolution every thirty-three and a quarter years. Next is an orbit that is almost circular, with a periodic time of just over a year. There’s another similar path with a periodic time of a few days short of a year, while two other smaller orbits could also be possible. Professor Newton suggested a test that could help identify the actual orbit, which must be one of these five. The mathematical challenges in applying this test were certainly significant, but they did not deter Professor Adams.

There is a continuous advance in the date of this meteoric shower. The meteors now cross our track at the point occupied by the earth on November 13th, but this point is gradually altering. The only influence known to us which could account for the continuous change in the plane of the meteor's orbit arises from the attraction of the various planets. The problem to be solved may therefore be attacked in this manner. A specified amount of change in the plane of the orbit of the meteors is known to arise, and the changes which ought to result from the attraction of the planets can be computed for each of the five possible orbits, in one of which it is certain that the meteors must revolve. Professor Adams undertook the work. Its difficulty principally arises from the high eccentricity of the largest of the orbits, which renders the more ordinary methods of calculation inapplicable. After some months of arduous labour the work was completed, and in April, 1867, Adams announced his solution of the problem. He showed that if the meteors revolved in the largest of the five orbits, with the periodic time of thirty three and one quarter years, the perturbations of Jupiter would account for a change to the extent of twenty minutes of arc in the point in which the orbit crosses the earth's track. The attraction of Saturn would augment this by seven minutes, and Uranus would add one minute more, while the influence of the Earth and of the other planets would be inappreciable. The accumulated effect is thus twenty-eight minutes, which is practically coincident with the observed value as determined by Professor Newton from an examination of all the showers of which there is any historical record. Having thus showed that the great orbit was a possible path for the meteors, Adams next proved that no one of the other four orbits would be disturbed in the same manner. Indeed, it appeared that not half the observed amount of change could arise in any orbit except in that one with the long period. Thus was brought to completion the interesting research which demonstrated the true relation of the meteor swarm to the solar system.

There’s a continuous shift in the timing of this meteor shower. The meteors now intersect our path at the point where Earth is on November 13th, but this point is gradually changing. The only known factor that could explain the ongoing alteration in the plane of the meteor's orbit is the gravitational pull from the various planets. Therefore, we can approach the problem this way: a specific amount of change in the meteor's orbital plane is recognized, and the changes expected from the gravitational influence of the planets can be calculated for each of the five possible orbits, one of which must contain the meteors. Professor Adams took on the task. The challenge mainly stems from the high eccentricity of the largest orbit, which makes conventional calculation methods ineffective. After several months of hard work, the task was finished, and in April 1867, Adams presented his solution to the issue. He demonstrated that if the meteors revolved in the largest of the five orbits, with a periodic time of thirty-three and a quarter years, Jupiter's perturbations would explain a change of twenty minutes of arc where the orbit intersects Earth's path. Saturn's gravitational pull would increase this by seven minutes, and Uranus would add another minute, while the influence of Earth and the other planets would be negligible. The total effect is therefore twenty-eight minutes, which is almost exactly in line with the value observed by Professor Newton from a study of all the historical meteor showers. Having established that this large orbit was a possible path for the meteors, Adams next demonstrated that none of the other four orbits would be affected in the same way. Indeed, it appeared that not even half the observed amount of change could happen in any orbit aside from the one with the long period. Thus, this significant research was completed, confirming the real connection between the meteor swarm and the solar system.

Besides those memorable scientific labours with which his attention was so largely engaged, Professor Adams found time for much other study. He occasionally allowed himself to undertake as a relaxation some pieces of numerical calculation, so tremendously long that we can only look on them with astonishment. He has calculated certain important mathematical constants accurately to more than two hundred places of decimals. He was a diligent reader of works on history, geology, and botany, and his arduous labours were often beguiled by novels, of which, like many other great men, he was very fond. He had also the taste of a collector, and he brought together about eight hundred volumes of early printed works, many of considerable rarity and value. As to his personal character, I may quote the words of Dr. Glaisher when he says, "Strangers who first met him were invariably struck by his simple and unaffected manner. He was a delightful companion, always cheerful and genial, showing in society but few traces of his really shy and retiring disposition. His nature was sympathetic and generous, and in few men have the moral and intellectual qualities been more perfectly balanced."

Besides his notable scientific work that occupied most of his time, Professor Adams managed to engage in a variety of other studies. He sometimes took breaks by tackling incredibly long numerical calculations that leave us in awe. He has accurately calculated certain important mathematical constants to more than two hundred decimal places. He was an avid reader of history, geology, and botany, and often relaxed by diving into novels, which he enjoyed like many other great minds. He also had a collector's eye, amassing around eight hundred volumes of early printed works, many of which are rare and valuable. Regarding his personal character, I can quote Dr. Glaisher, who said, "Strangers who first met him were always impressed by his straightforward and genuine manner. He was a wonderful companion, always cheerful and friendly, showing only a few signs of his naturally shy and reserved nature. He was sympathetic and generous, and few people have had such a perfect balance of moral and intellectual qualities."

In 1863 he married the daughter of Haliday Bruce, Esq., of Dublin and up to the close of his life he lived at the Cambridge Observatory, pursuing his mathematical work and enjoying the society of his friends.

In 1863, he married the daughter of Haliday Bruce, Esq., from Dublin, and he lived at the Cambridge Observatory until the end of his life, continuing his mathematical work and enjoying the company of his friends.

He died, after a long illness, on 21st January, 1892, and was interred in St. Giles's Cemetery, on the Huntingdon Road, Cambridge.

He passed away after a lengthy illness on January 21, 1892, and was buried in St. Giles's Cemetery on Huntingdon Road, Cambridge.


Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!