Sir William Herschel: His Life and Works Part 6

There is something almost grandiose and majestic in his statement of the ultimate destiny of the Galaxy:

"To him the fates were known Of orbs dim hovering on the skirts of s.p.a.ce."

"--Since the stars of the Milky Way are permanently exposed to the action of a power whereby they are irresistibly drawn into groups, we may be certain that from mere cl.u.s.tering stars they will be gradually compressed, through successive stages of acc.u.mulation, till they come up to what may be called the ripening period of the globular form, and total insulation; from which it is evident that the Milky Way must be finally broken up and cease to be a stratum of scattered stars.

"The state into which the incessant action of the cl.u.s.tering power has brought it at present, is a kind of chronometer that may be used to measure the time of its past and future existence; and although we do not know the rate of going of this mysterious chronometer, it is nevertheless certain that since the breaking up of the Milky Way affords a proof that it cannot last forever, it equally bears witness that its past duration cannot be admitted to be infinite."

(1814.)

HERSCHEL'S relations with his cotemporaries were usually of the most pleasant character, though seldom intimate. This peace was broken but by one unpleasant occurrence. In the _Philosophical Transactions_ for 1792, SCHROETER had communicated a series of observations made with one of HERSCHEL'S own telescopes on the atmospheres of _Venus_, the Moon, etc.

It was not only an account of phenomena which had been seen; it was accompanied by measures, and the computations based on these led to heights and dimensions for mountains on _Venus_ which were, to say the least, extravagant. The adjective will not seem too strong when we say that the very existence of the mountains themselves is to-day more than doubtful.

The appearances seen by SCHROETER were described by him in perfectly good faith, and similar ones have been since recorded. His reasoning upon them was defective, and the measures which he made were practically valueless. This paper, printed in the _Transactions_ of the Royal Society, to which SCHROETER had not before contributed, appears to have irritated HERSCHEL.

No doubt there were not wanting members of his own society who hinted that on the Continent, too, there were to be found great observers, and that here, at least, HERSCHEL had been antic.i.p.ated even in his own field. I have always thought that the memoir of HERSCHEL which appeared in the next volume of the _Transactions_ (1793), _Observations on the Planet Venus_, was a rejoinder intended far more for the detractors at home than for the astronomer abroad. The review is conceived in a severe spirit. The first idea seems to be to crush an opposition which he feels. The truth is established, but its establishment is hardly the _first_ object.

It seems as if HERSCHEL had almost allowed himself to be forced into a position of arrogance, which his whole life shows was entirely foreign to his nature. All through the review he does not once mention SCHROETER'S name. He says:

"A series of observations on _Venus_, begun by me in April, 1777, has been continued down to the present time. . . . The result of my observations would have been communicated long ago if I had not flattered myself with the hope of some better success concerning the diurnal motion of _Venus_, which has still eluded my constant attention as far as concerns its period and direction. . . . Even at this present time I should hesitate to give the following extracts if it did not seem inc.u.mbent on me to examine by what accident I came to overlook mountains in this planet of such enormous height as to exceed four, five, or even six times the perpendicular height of Chimboraco, the highest of our mountains. . . . The same paper contains other particulars concerning _Venus_ and _Saturn_. All of which being things of which I have never taken any notice, it will not be amiss to show, by what follows, that neither want of attention, nor a deficiency of instruments, would occasion my not perceiving these mountains of more than twenty-three miles in height, this jagged border of _Venus_, and these flat, spherical forms on _Saturn_."

The reply of SCHROETER (1795) is temperate and just. It does him honor, and he generously gives full justice to his critic.

It would hardly be worth while to mention this slight incident if it were not that during these years there certainly existed a feeling that HERSCHEL undervalued the labors of his cotemporaries.

This impression was fostered no doubt by his general habit of not quoting previous authorities in the fields which he was working.

A careful reading of his papers will, I think, show that his definite indebtedness to his _cotemporaries_ was vanishingly small. The work of MICh.e.l.l and WILSON he alludes to again and again, and always with appreciation. Certainly he seems to show a vein of annoyance that the papers of CHRISTIAN MAYER, _De novis in coelo sidereo phaenomenis_ (1779), and _Beobachtungen von Fixsterntrabanten_ (1778), should have been quoted to prove that the method proposed by HERSCHEL in 1782 for ascertaining the parallax of the fixed stars by means of observations of those which were double, was not entirely original with himself.

There is direct proof that it was so,[22] and if this was not forthcoming it would be unnecessary, as he has amply shown in his Catalogue of Double Stars. One is reminded of his remarks on the use of the high magnifying powers by the impatience of his comments.

His proposal to call the newly discovered minor planets _asteroids_ (1802) was received as a sign that he wished to discriminate between the discoveries of PIAZZI and OLBERS and his own discovery of URa.n.u.s.[23]

He takes pains to quietly put this on one side in one of his papers, showing that he was cognizant of the existence of such a feeling.

I am tempted to resurrect from a deserved obscurity a notice of HERSCHEL'S _Observations on the Two Lately Discovered Celestial Bodies_ (_Philosophical Transactions_, 1802), printed in the first volume of the _Edinburgh Review_, simply to show the kind of envy to which even he, the glory of England, was subject.

The reviewer sets forth the princ.i.p.al results of HERSCHEL'S observations, and, after quoting his definition of the new term asteroid, goes on to say:

"If a new name must be found, why not call them by some appellation which shall, in some degree, be descriptive of, or at least consistent with, their properties? Why not, for instance, call them _Concentric Comets_, or _Planetary Comets_, or _Cometary Planets_?

or, if a single term must be found, why may we not coin such a phrase as _Planetoid_ or _Cometoid_?"

Then follows a general arraignment of HERSCHEL'S methods of expression and thought, as distinguished from his powers of mere observation. This distinction, it may be said, exists only in the reviewer's mind; there was no such distinction in fact. If ever a series of observations was directed by profound and reasonable thought, it was HERSCHEL'S own.

"Dr. HERSCHEL'S pa.s.sion for coining words and idioms has often struck us as a weakness wholly unworthy of him. The invention of a name is but a poor achievement for him who has discovered whole worlds. Why, for instance, do we hear him talking of the _s.p.a.ce-penetrating power_ of his instrument--a compound epithet and metaphor which he ought to have left to the poets, who, in some future age, shall acquire glory by celebrating his name. The other papers of Dr. HERSCHEL, in the late volumes of the _Transactions_, do not deserve such particular attention. His catalogue of 500 new nebulae, though extremely valuable to the practical astronomer, leads to no general conclusions of importance, and abounds with the defects which are peculiar to the Doctor's writings--a great prolixity and tediousness of narration--loose and often unphilosophical reflections, which give no very favorable idea of his scientific powers, however great his merit may be as an observer--above all, that idle fondness for inventing names without any manner of occasion, to which we have already alluded, and a use of novel and affected idioms.

"To the speculations of the Doctor on the nature of the Sun, we have many similar objections; but they are all eclipsed by the grand absurdity which he has there committed, in his hasty and erroneous theory concerning the influence of the solar spots on the price of grain. Since the publication of Gulliver's voyage to Laputa, nothing so ridiculous has ever been offered to the world. We heartily wish the Doctor had suppressed it; or, if determined to publish it, that he had detailed it in language less confident and flippant."

One is almost ashamed to give s.p.a.ce and currency to a forgotten attack, but it yields a kind of perspective; and it is instructive and perhaps useful to view HERSCHEL'S labors from all sides, even from wrong and envious ones.

The study of the original papers, together with a knowledge of the circ.u.mstances in which they were written, will abundantly show that HERSCHEL'S ideas sprung from a profound meditation of the nature of things in themselves. What the origin of trains of thought prosecuted for years may have been we cannot say, nor could he himself have expressed it. A new path in science was to be found out, and he found it. It was not in his closet, surrounded by authorities, but under the open sky, that he meditated the construction of the heavens. As he says, "My situation permitted me not to consult large libraries; nor, indeed, was it very material; for as I intended to view the heavens myself, Nature, that great volume, appeared to me to contain the best catalogue."

His remarkable memoirs on the invisible and other rays of the solar spectrum were received with doubt, and with open denial by many of the scientific bodies of Europe. The reviews and notices of his work in this direction were often quite beyond the bounds of a proper scientific criticism; but HERSCHEL maintained a dignified silence. The discoveries were true, the proofs were open to all, and no response was needed from him. He may have been sorely tempted to reply, but I am apt to believe that the rumors that reached him from abroad and at home did not then affect him as they might have done earlier. He was at his grand climacteric, he had pa.s.sed his sixty-third year, his temper was less hasty than it had been in his youth, and his nerves had not yet received the severe strain from whose effects he suffered during the last years of his life.

We have some glimpses of his personal life in the reminiscences of him in the _Diary and Letters_ of Madame D'ARBLAY, who knew him well:

"1786.--In the evening Mr. HERSCHEL came to tea. I had once seen that very extraordinary man at Mrs. DE LUC'S, but was happy to see him again, for he has not more fame to awaken curiosity than sense and modesty to gratify it. He is perfectly una.s.suming, yet openly happy, and happy in the success of those studies which would render a mind less excellently formed presumptuous and arrogant.

"The king has not a happier subject than this man, who owes it wholly to His Majesty that he is not wretched; for such was his eagerness to quit all other pursuits to follow astronomy solely, that he was in danger of ruin, when his talents and great and uncommon genius attracted the king's patronage. He has now not only his pension, which gives him the felicity of devoting all his time to his darling study, but he is indulged in license from the king to make a telescope according to his new ideas and discoveries, that is to have no cost spared in its construction, and is wholly to be paid for by His Majesty.

"This seems to have made him happier even than the pension, as it enables him to put in execution all his wonderful projects, from which his expectations of future discoveries are so sanguine as to make his present existence a state of almost perfect enjoyment.

Mr. LOCKE himself would be quite charmed with him.

"He seems a man without a wish that has its object in the terrestrial globe. At night Mr. HERSCHEL, by the king's command, came to exhibit to His Majesty and the royal family the new comet lately discovered by his sister, Miss HERSCHEL; and while I was playing at piquet with Mrs. SCHWELLENBURG, the Princess AUGUSTA came into the room and asked her if she chose to go into the garden and look at it. She declined the offer, and the princess then made it to me. I was glad to accept it for all sorts of reasons. We found him at his telescope. The comet was very small, and had nothing grand or striking in its appearance; but it is the first lady's comet, and I was very desirous to see it. Mr. HERSCHEL then showed me some of his new discovered universes, with all the good humor with which he would have taken the same trouble for a brother or a sister astronomer; there is no possibility of admiring his genius more than his gentleness."

"_1786, December 30th_.--This morning my dear father carried me to Dr. HERSCHEL. That great and very extraordinary man received us almost with open arms. He is very fond of my father, who is one of the council of the Royal Society this year, as well as himself. . . .

At this time of day there was nothing to see but his instruments; those, however, are curiosities sufficient. . . . I wished very much to have seen his sister, . . . but she had been up all night, and was then in bed."

"_1787, September_.--Dr. HERSCHEL is a delightful man; so una.s.suming with his great knowledge, so willing to dispense it to the ignorant, and so cheerful and easy in his general manners, that, were he no genius, it would be impossible not to remark him as a pleasing and sensible man."

"_1788, October 3d_.--We returned to Windsor at noon, and Mrs. DE LUC sent me a most pressing invitation to tea and to hear a little music. Two young ladies were to perform at her house in a little concert. Dr. HERSCHEL was there, and accompanied them very sweetly on the violin; his new-married wife was with him, and his sister.

His wife seems good-natured; she was rich, too! and astronomers are as able as other men to discern that gold can glitter as well as stars."

DR. BURNEY TO MADAME D'ARBLAY.

"CHELSEA COLLEGE,

_September 28, 1798_.

"I drove through Slough in order to ask at Dr. HERSCHEL'S door when my visit would be least inconvenient to him--that night or next morning. The good soul was at dinner, but came to the door himself, to press me to alight immediately and partake of his family repast; and this he did so heartily that I could not resist.

"I expected (not knowing that HERSCHEL was married) only to have found Miss HERSCHEL; but there was a very old lady, the mother, I believe, of Mrs. HERSCHEL, who was at the head of the table herself, and a Scots lady (a Miss WILSON, daughter of Dr. WILSON, of Glasgow, an eminent astronomer), Miss HERSCHEL, and a little boy. They rejoiced at the accident which had brought me there, and hoped I would send my carriage away and take a bed with them. They were sorry they had no stables for my horses.

"We soon grew acquainted--I mean the ladies and I--and before dinner was over we seemed old friends just met after a long absence. Mrs.

HERSCHEL is sensible, good-humored, unpretending, and well bred; Miss HERSCHEL all shyness and virgin modesty; the Scots lady sensible and harmless; and the little boy entertaining, promising, and comical. HERSCHEL, you know, and everybody knows, is one of the most pleasing and well-bred natural characters of the present age, as well as the greatest astronomer.

"Your health was drunk after dinner (put that into your pocket), and after much social conversation and a few hearty laughs, the ladies proposed to take a walk, in order, I believe, to leave HERSCHEL and me together. We walked and talked round his great telescopes till it grew damp and dusk, then retreated into his study to philosophize.

"He made a discovery to me, which, had I known it sooner, would have overset me, and prevented my reading any part of my work.[24] He said that he had almost always had an aversion to poetry, which he regarded as the arrangement of fine words, without any useful meaning or adherence to truth; but that when truth and science were united to these fine words, he liked poetry very well."