REESE LIBRARY 
 
 I^HVJERSITJ OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Received^. L^W^^U AS - y: 
 
 Accessions .VV>. ^"V r vT3>!r Shelf A r o.. 
 

THE HEAVENLY BODIES 
 
MORRISON AND G1BB, EDINBURGH, 
 PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE. 
 
THE HEAVENLY BODIES 
 
 THEIR 
 
 NATURE AND HABITABILITY 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM MILLEE, S.S.C. 
 
 EDINBURGH 
 Author of ' Wintering in the Riviera ' 
 
 LONDON 
 
 HODDEE AND STOUGHTON 
 
 27 PATEENOSTEE EOW 
 
 1883 
 
 [All Rights Reserved] 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 "l^TEAKLY five-and-thirty years ago an idea, entered 
 *V in a note - book, occurred to me regarding 
 'plurality of worlds,' which at that time I imagined 
 went far to unsettle the prevailing belief, and to decide 
 a question subsequently much agitated. The little 
 paper in which it was embodied, lying so long dormant, 
 has been the germ of the present work. From a jotting 
 on it I see I had in 1860 observed that another had, in 
 a published book, struck out a similar idea, and it has 
 since been repeated by other writers. It was then, if 
 not previously, I presume, I became desirous to take 
 up and examine the whole subject in all its bearings ; 
 but the incessant claims of an anxious profession 
 altogether precluded the attempt, and it is only of 
 recent date I have had it in my power to effect my 
 purpose, and to bestow upon the subject the amount 
 of study which I found to be requisite. 
 
 I may not, however, conceal from myself that many 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 will, with justice, consider, that for one who cannot 
 appear with the knowledge and authority of an 
 astronomer, either practical or theoretical, it is a piece 
 of bold presumption to endeavour to handle the matters 
 to which this volume relates. In extenuation, I can 
 only say that the occupations of my profession are 
 favourable to the consideration of anything which 
 demands close inquiry, and to the formation of soundly 
 reasoned conclusions ; while I have, in the course of 
 an experience now extending over many years, had 
 (sometimes in the conduct of what have been causes 
 cttebres in their day) opportunities of studying, and 
 generally of writing on, questions arising out of matters 
 of extremely diversified nature. Nor have I dared to 
 enter upon the scientific topics embraced in this book 
 without investigating with, at least, the patient care I 
 have always, when the rush and hurry of business 
 would permit, sought to bring to bear on questions 
 upon the solution of which material interests have 
 depended. Still, in gathering, and dealing with, the 
 evidence, which only others have been competent to 
 furnish, I have necessarily experienced many difficulties, 
 and would often have been glad to have had a chance 
 of putting the witnesses under interrogation. I can 
 only trust to have made unfamiliar subjects clear to the 
 general apprehension, and that any opinions expressed 
 will be found sufficiently supported. At same time, 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 considering that these pages embrace so much of what 
 to most people is new, it may not be unreasonable to* 
 expect, unless there have been failure to use the proper 
 means for securing attention, that, if they do not allure 
 to brighter worlds, they may at least help to lead the 
 reader into fields of research which afford some of the 
 purest and noblest subjects of meditation. 
 
 To discuss such a subject as the ' plurality of worlds ' 
 may be viewed differently by different minds. An 
 American astronomer of the present day (Professor 
 ISTewcomb) thus writes regarding it : ' The question 
 whether other planets are, as a general rule, peopled, is 
 one of the highest interest to us, not only as involving 
 our place in creation, but as showing us what is really 
 greatest in the Universe. Many thinking people regard 
 the discovery of evidence of life in other worlds as 
 the great ultimate object of telescopic research.' But 
 without claiming for the subject such an undue 
 importance, or availing myself of the time-honoured 
 custom conceded to authors of ' magnifying mine office,' 
 it can admit of no doubt that there is a certain amount 
 of interest in the inquiry, and that it has awakened 
 from time to time much attention ; a fact which will 
 be manifest from the historical resum6 with which 
 I have thought it well to commence. Perhaps the 
 interest excited among the French may have exceeded 
 
viii PREFACE. 
 
 that manifested by the more ^thoroughly practical people 
 of this country. It will be seen how enthusiastically 
 Fontenelle's work was received nigh two centuries ago, 
 while to all appearance there has been among our 
 philosophical neighbours no' flagging of zealous regard 
 for the subject, if one may judge from the fact of 
 the very large number of editions through which 
 Flammarion's Mondes HaliUs and Mondes Imaginaires 
 have in a few years passed. And yet this French 
 astronomer in contending for plurality seems to have 
 contented himself as much as possible with the slender 
 arguments previously advanced. The question, how- 
 ever, is one which, if it is to be settled on a solid basis, 
 should be examined more searchingly, and my endeavour 
 has been to consider it more fully and methodically. 
 How far I have succeeded remains to be seen. 
 
 In pondering the 'plurality of worlds/ it speedily 
 became apparent that a very wide range of subjects was 
 involved, and that the idea which had occurred to me 
 so many years before, although important, was in reality 
 but a small point, going but a limited way towards the 
 solution of this much vexed question. I must not, 
 however, anticipate the conclusions to which examina- 
 tion has led. 
 
 The investigation occasioned divergence into other 
 
PREFACE. ix 
 
 kindred matters which are not embraced in this volume, 
 unless the chapters on the Sun are to be so regarded. 
 But these chapters are truly german^to the leading 
 inquiry, which would hardly be complete without them. 
 For it seemed advisable at the outset of examination to 
 enter upon a careful analysis of what had been dis- 
 covered regarding the nature and constitution of that 
 important body, as well with a view to ascertain the 
 possibility of its own habitability, as considering it in 
 the light of a representative member of the starry 
 system, from the grave bearing the ascertainment of 
 the state of the fact must have upon conclusions to 
 be drawn regarding the remaining stars. And of very 
 recent years so much has been learnt with regard to 
 our luminary, especially by means of that wonderful 
 instrument the spectroscope, under the intelligent in- 
 genuity with which it has been employed, that the 
 knowledge now attained almost wholly upsets, or at 
 least supersedes, what was formerly believed, and 
 certainly furnishes us with a more exact acquaintance 
 with a star so comparatively near. The material so 
 acquired enabled me to deliver in Edinburgh two 
 lectures on the Sun ; and, while they embraced rather 
 more than was strictly necessa^ to their due place in 
 discussing the plurality of worlds, it has appeared to 
 me that the facts stated are in themselves of much 
 interest, and are more likely to be generally read when 
 
x PREFACE. 
 
 presented in this shape than if the reader had been 
 referred to them as scattered over more scientific and 
 formal works in which they might be found ; but in 
 the view of looking at the Sun as representing and 
 illustrating the stars generally, it was well to cany 
 with us a fuller notion of the leading circumstances 
 connected with it, and therefore that they should be 
 reproduced here, with such little additions and adapta- 
 tions as seemed suitable, keeping always in view that 
 the study of the Sun thus made was to lead up to 
 the consideration of its condition as a residence for 
 life. 
 
 I have indeed regarded it as a fortunate circumstance 
 that at the time of the preparation of these Lectures I 
 had seen no work affording, in a systematic manner, and 
 up to date, the information which recent discoveries 
 had brought to light; so that, although the investigation 
 was thus rendered troublesome, it served to make it 
 more thorough. Mr. Proctor's Sun, Ruler, etc., of the 
 Planetary System, somehow I had not previously seen, 
 and it was dated so far back as 1870, since which time 
 a good deal has been revealed. Professor Young subse- 
 quently (1882) published in the International Scientific 
 Series his interesting work, entitled The Sun, which, it 
 may be well to keep in view, does not in all points 
 accord with the opinions of Mr. Lockyer, by whose 
 researches I had been largely guided. 
 
PREFACE. xl 
 
 In dealing with life upon the Earth, I have been led 
 into a more extensive consideration of ' Evolution ' than 
 I had originally intended, or was perhaps required by 
 its relative importance. But some of its advocates have 
 sought to demonstrate their propositions and to over- 
 whelm their antagonists by the force of dogmatic and 
 rather arrogant assertion ; so that it is well quietly to 
 see, so far as needful for present purposes, whether 
 their hypothesis can really be supported or no. 
 
 But upon this and other points I must leave the 
 further discussion to more competent hands. 
 
 W. M. 
 
 GEORGE SQUARE, 
 EDINBURGH, March 1883. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PREFACE, .. . . . . . . . r 
 
 PART I. 
 
 THE SUN A REPRESENTATIVE STAR. 
 
 Introductory Observations, ..... 1 
 
 1. The Sun's Magnitude, Distance, Motions, Light, and Heat, . 5 
 
 2. The Constitution of the Sun, its Spots and Prominences, . 41 
 
 PART II. 
 
 ARE THE HEAVENLY BODIES HABITABLE ? OR, ' THE PLURALITY OF 
 
 WORLDS' CONSIDERED. 
 
 Introductory Observations, . . . . .89 
 
 1. Historical Resume Views of Philosophers, . . .93 
 
 2. General Arguments for Plurality considered Postulates, . 133 
 
 3. The Sun, Stars, and supposed Stellar Systems, . . .145 
 
 (1) The Sun, . . . . . . - 145 
 
 (2) The Fixed Stars, 151 
 
 (3) The supposed Stellar Planetary Systems, . 157 
 
 4. Life upon the Earth, . . . . .171 
 
 5. The Moon, . , . . . . .218 
 
 6. The Minor Planets, . . . . . .238 
 
 (1) Mercury, . . . . . . .238 
 
 (2) Venus, . . . . . . .244 
 
 (3) Mars, ....... 249 
 
 13 
 
xiv CONTENTS. 
 
 PACK 
 
 7. Smaller Bodies of the System, ..... 273 
 
 (1) The Asteroids and Meteorites, .... 273 
 
 (2) The Comets, . . . . .282 
 
 8. The Major Planets, ...... 300 
 
 (1) Jupiter, . . . 300 
 
 (2) Saturn, ....... 321 
 
 (3) Uranus, . . . . . . .332 
 
 (4) Neptune, . ..... 338 
 
 CONCLUSION, . . . 341 
 
PAET I. 
 
 THE SUN A REPRESENTATIVE STAR. 
 
01 THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 THE SUN 
 
 A REPRESENTATIVE STAR. 
 
 FT1HE solar system forms a minute part of the great 
 -- galaxy called the Milky Way, a galaxy covering 
 so vast a portion of space that it has been said hy a French 
 writer that light, on the calculation, slightly erroneous, 
 of its travelling at the rate of 1 86,000 miles a second, 
 or upwards of 16,000 millioas of miles a day, takes 
 15,000 years to pass- from its one extremity to its 
 other. The galaxy was estimated by Sir William Her- 
 schel to enclose in its- main portion not less than 18 
 millions, and probably altogether will not number less 
 than 20 millions of stars. And yet the Milky Way is 
 only one of many, it may be thousands of, similar galaxies, 
 which, separated from each other by tremendous gulfs, 
 occupy the boundless universe, and are so remote 
 that even their distant sheen is invisible to the naked 
 
 A 
 
2 THE SUN. 
 
 eye, and only in part can be brought to sight by means 
 of the most powerful telescopes. 1 
 
 Some idea of the enormous number of stars thus filling 
 the heavens may be got by a single computation. For were 
 the 2 millions of stars of the Milky Way to be passed 
 in review before us at the distance of the Sun (nearer 
 would be undesirable, and even at so great a distance 
 many would, from the potency of their rays of heat and 
 light, be unendurable by us), and were they, large and 
 small, to move on incessantly in close procession at the 
 rate of onty one per minute across the Sun's disc (equal 
 to a possible average motion of nearly 60 millions of 
 miles in the hour, or a million times quicker than the 
 fastest railway train), it would take them about 37 
 years to march past. 
 
 Our Sun is also a star, as these stars are also all suns, 
 and it is not a little strange to think we have a star 
 
 1 Professor Newcomb is disposed only to allow from 30 to 50 millions 
 of stars altogether. Arago, in place of reckoning, like Flammarion, 
 15,000 years for the Milky flight of light, puts it down at only 3000 ; 
 while Dr. Dick, founding on Sir William Herschel's calculations, is 
 content with 1640, and Lardner suggests 20,000. But astronomers dis- 
 agree even more than doctors do, and in their estimates vary to an 
 extent far exceeding the notorious divergences of competing builders. 
 When one compares a dozen auth6rities on any point, it is hard to tell 
 which to believe. Fortunately the difference of a few millions more or 
 less does not materially affect either person or pocket, and equally 
 fortunate is it that astronomical calculations are long, and life is short ; 
 so that astronomers are, occasionally, it is a pleasing relief to find, 
 courteously inclined to borrow. 
 
THE SUN A STAR. 3 
 
 brought so comparatively near that it appears to us as a 
 huge globe, and can now be made the subject of close 
 ocular inspection. For, excepting the Moon, it is some- 
 times or when Mars, Venus, and Mercury are not each 
 approaching conjunction with the Earth the nearest 
 heavenly body. 
 
 The Sun therefore offers itself, and very steadily too, 
 for our examination ; and by aid of the means which 
 inventive genius has, especially of late years, devised, 
 examination has been rendered very complete. We 
 have now possessed ourselves of a knowledge of its 
 nature and characteristics, and of many facts previously 
 unknown or obscure, so that the study of the bright 
 luminary of day becomes profoundly interesting, and it 
 is the more so, seeing that in giving a short account of 
 the Sun, as it is now proposed to do, it will bring us 
 by reason of their similarity into immediate acquaint- 
 ance with the whole universe of stars. 
 
 In treating of the Sun it is convenient to deal with 
 it in the two divisions which were originally the sub- 
 ject of separate discourse. The second division, in 
 portraying its constitution, more thoroughly answers 
 to inquiry as to the nature of the stars, the constitution 
 of which is presumably similar. But the facts con- 
 tained in the first division will materially contribute to 
 
4 THE SUN. 
 
 the formation of a notion- regarding other particulars 
 which should go to complete our conjectural acquaintance 
 with them. For in magnitude, motions, light, and heat 
 there must be, with both individual and generic differ- 
 ences, undoubted general similarity ; while the matter 
 of distance is, in its vastness, a point equally applicable 
 to their relations. The enormous immensity of the scale 
 upon which everything connected with our luminary has 
 been designed, is overwhelming to our feeble powers 
 of conception. It will be the endeavour of these pages 
 to make some effort towards realizing, although it can 
 only be in a faint measure, what is so impossible for 
 even the most vivid imagination fully or adequately to 
 apprehend or to describe. 
 
I. 
 
 THE SUN'S MAGNITUDE, DISTANCE, MOTIONS, LIGHT, AND 
 
 HEAT. 1 
 
 BY all the early pagans the Sun was regarded as a 
 god, and was worshipped in different countries under 
 different names, such as Baal, so repeatedly mentioned 
 in sacred writ. Aristotle believed it to be animated. 
 Some curious ideas were propounded by the Greeks. 
 Thus Anaxagoras held the Sun to be a mass of ignited 
 stone larger than the Peloponnesus, which, roughly speak- 
 ing, may be said to be about 70 miles square, or some- 
 where about equal to the half of Scotland south of the 
 Firth of Forth ; and this minute fraction of the reality 
 was doubtless regarded by the Greeks as indicating a 
 heavenly body of immense size. Another, Anaximenes, 
 maintained that, instead of being, as it appeared to be, a 
 globe, it was flat or thin like a leaf ; while Anaximander 
 imagined it to be a chariot of fire, the fire escaping through 
 a circular aperture or hole in the chariot. Zeno supposed 
 the Sun to consist of a fire larger than the earth ; while 
 still another, Epicurus, represented the Sun as a ter- 
 restrial mass, pierced through like purnice-stone, and 
 in a state of incandescence ; also that the Sun was 
 kindled in the morning, and was in the evening ex- 
 tinguished in the waters of the ocean, into which it 
 
 1 Originally delivered at Edinburgh on 21st January 1882 as a lecture, 
 which, however, has been here considerably altered. 
 
6 THE SUN. 
 
 seemed to the Greeks, from their geographical position, 
 to fall. 
 
 Of a different kind, but perhaps to be put alongside 
 of those dreams of unenlightened philosophers, was the 
 opinion of an Englishman, the Eev. Tobias Swindon, 
 who, so recently as 1727, published a book in which 
 he set forth reasons for holding the Sun to be the local 
 place of helL 1 But a more common, though, as we 
 shall speedily be convinced, a less justifiable idea, has, 
 I suspect, been to consider it the abode of the blessed. 
 
 The invention of the telescope in the beginning of 
 the 17th century put an end to such absurd notions as 
 those to which the Greeks gave birth, and brought to 
 man a more accurate knowledge of the heavenly bodies 
 than he had previously possessed, but still led to great 
 diversity and error of opinion regarding the nature of the 
 Sun ; and it is a circumstance not unworthy of remark, 
 that Sir Isaac Newton, with the limited means of research 
 which, in his time, were within command, but with the 
 giant intellect he possessed, arrived at conclusions which, 
 although only partially correct, have been considered to 
 approximate those which astronomers of the present 
 day, with vastly extended means of investigation, have 
 at last come to hold. Before, however, entering upon a 
 consideration of the constitution of the Sun, it is well to 
 make ourselves somewhat acquainted with its size, its 
 distance, its motions, its light, and its heat. 
 
 1 This curious and rare old book was translated into French, Recherclies 
 sur la nature de VEnfer et du lieu oil il est situe. Traduit de 1'Anglois 
 par Jean Bron. Swindon, considering hell to be a place of real fire, 
 held that, from its nature, size, position, etc., it is adapted to receive the 
 fallen angels and the wicked. Only the French edition is to be found 
 in the Advocates' Library. 
 
ITS MAGNITUDE. 
 
 THE MAGNITUDE OF THE SUN. 
 
 A good many years ago visitors to London seldom 
 missed going to Leicester Square to see the great globe 
 which was there erected as a model of the Earth. I 
 suppose it was probably from 40 to 50 feet in diameter, or 
 as large as a good-sized house. Upon it were delineated 
 the features of the World its oceans, mountains, rivers, 
 and lands ; and I confess that, small as this model com- 
 paratively was, it gave me, on walking round it, a better 
 notion of the great planet on which we dwell than I 
 had ever previously experienced. Now a model of the 
 Sun on the same scale would need to be hewn out of a 
 mountain a mile high and a mile thick, for it would 
 require to be a mile in diameter. Placed beside the 
 Leicester Square globe, we should obtain an idea of the 
 comparative size of our great luminary. 
 
 Perhaps it may be well still further to gain an idea 
 of the Sun's bulk by first trying to realize the size of 
 this Earth. If we could soar on seraph's wings to a 
 height of some hundreds of miles above the Earth, the 
 grandeur of its proportions would vaguely fill our sight ; 
 but the altitudes within our reach by balloon or moun- 
 tain ascent would give little notion ; and we must seek 
 it in a better way, and it may be had thus. 1 The circum- 
 ference of the Earth is, we know, about 24,000 miles. 
 Could we construct a continuous railway round it, and 
 despatch over it an express train at ordinary express 
 
 1 The greatest altitude ever attained in a balloon was on occasion of 
 an ascent from Paris on 15th April 1875, when the aeronauts reached a 
 height of 8 miles ; but from the extreme rarity of the atmosphere at that 
 great elevation two of them died, so that for scientific purposes it was 
 recommended that thenceforth no ascent higher than 4 miles should be 
 made. But these very lofty ascents by no means afford correspond- 
 ingly good or satisfactory views. Mount Etna is 10,900 feet, or rather 
 
8 THE SUN. 
 
 speed, it would take, at 1000 miles a day, 24 days to 
 make the circuit. That is, constantly travelling night 
 and day by express train, we should be able to dash 
 round the World in somewhat less than a month. This 
 will give some conception of the magnitude of the World 
 upon which we live. Its diameter is 7916, in round 
 numbers 8000 miles; so that, if we could bore it and 
 construct a tunnel through to the other side, and lay it 
 with rails, we should emerge again to daylight at the 
 antipodes, say, in New Zealand, by express, in about 
 8 days. The Earth, therefore, is in size by no means 
 contemptible, and to us pigmy inhabitants it is very 
 huge. 
 
 But the Sun is a body hitherto reckoned to be about 
 355,000 times the mass or weight of the Earth; while, 
 seeing its substance is only about one -fourth of the 
 Earth's density, its real size or volume is correspond- 
 ingly greater, and is, as hitherto reckoned, 1,348,000 
 times the volume of the Earth. Now we can scarcely 
 realize a body one thousand times greater than the 
 Earth, but here we have one which is no less than 
 nearly a million and a half times greater ; although its 
 distance is so vast that it appears to us as a com- 
 paratively small globe, no larger than the Moon, and it 
 only looms large to us when we see it, as it rises or sets, 
 resting on the top of a distant hill. The diameter of 
 the Sun, however, in place of being, like the Earth, 8000 
 miles, is 882,646 (Young, 866,400 ] ) miles, and its cir- 
 
 more than 2 miles high, and an extensive prospect must be had from 
 its summit ; but it only commands about l/4000th part of the Earth's 
 surface, which covers 200,000,000 square miles; so that to see the whole 
 world we should require to have it studded at equal distances with 4000 
 mountains of similar height, and to ascend them all. 
 
 1 Professor Young bases this and other relative calculations on the 
 
ITS MAGNITUDE. 9 
 
 cumference is nearly 2,650,000 miles, or 111^- times 
 that of our World. An express train, therefore, going 
 1000 miles a day, would take 7 years and 3 months to 
 travel round the Sun. 
 
 Another method to adopt, is to think of the Sun as 
 equal to 70,000,000 times that of the Moon. Con- 
 ceive, if we can, what would be its apparent size were it 
 brought as near to us as the Moon. Imagine a majestic 
 body moving before us in the firmament in bulk 
 70,000,000 times, and in diameter 220 times, larger 
 than the Moon. 
 
 These facts may give us some idea, but it may be 
 realized in another way. Assuming the volume of the 
 Sun at the above-mentioned 1,348,000 times that of 
 the Earth, it would require so many globes each of the 
 size of the Earth to make up a body equal to the Sun. 
 Now suppose we were in imagination to take these 
 1,348,000 globes and put them in a line from the 
 Sun out into space, they would extend to upwards of 
 10,600,000,000 miles. Now, as the Sun lies 93,000,000 
 miles from us, were these globes laid side by side in a 
 straight line they would extend to about 114 times the 
 distance we are from the Sun, or to nearly four times 
 the distance from the Sun of the far-away planet Neptune, 
 which, hugely greater than the Earth, is invisible to the 
 unassisted eye, a distance so great that an express 
 train starting from the Sun would take upwards of 
 29,000 years to reach the last of the line of globes. 
 
 more recent estimates of the solar parallax. I have retained the previous 
 estimates, and made my calculations on their basis, the actual size and 
 distance of the Sun not being yet authoritatively ascertained. The 
 difference is about 1/5 4th between the two sets of calculations, but this 
 amount does not materially affect my illustrations. 
 
io THE SUN. 
 
 It is only in some such way we can approximately 
 realize the enormous mass of matter, or the vastness of 
 the gigantic "body of the Sun, which is more than 600, 
 or, as Dr. Young states it, 750, times greater than that 
 of all the planets, satellites, and comets of the solar 
 system put together. 
 
 Indeed, so small is the Earth in comparison with the 
 Sun, that Professor Tait says : l 
 
 ' The Earth, as seen from the Sun, appears very much 
 less than the planet Jupiter, or even Mars, as seen by 
 us, that is, that it would present no visible disc to the 
 naked eye, and that to an observer at such a distance as 
 that of the Sun it would require a telescope of some 
 little magnifying power to show it as a disc at all.' 
 
 On the other hand, we should run away with a very 
 false notion if we supposed that the Sun is the largest 
 body in space. On the contrary, it is believed on good 
 ground to be a comparatively small star in the great 
 universe ; at all events, it is not among the largest, and 
 the greater number of the stars, in all probability, are 
 quite as large. Indeed, many of the fixed stars may 
 be enormously larger. Mr. Proctor estimates Alpha 
 Centauri, the nearest star, must be in diameter more 
 than half as large again as the Sun, and its volume 
 about five times his bulk. 2 Dr. Dick, 8 taking an 
 observation of Sir William Herschel for his basis, calcu- 
 lates that the star Vega (a Lyrae), the third in distance 
 from us (a brilliant star of the first magnitude in the 
 constellation of the Harp), is about 38 times the diameter 
 
 1 Tait's Recent Advances in Physical Science, p. 155. 
 
 2 Manchester Lectures, 1872, p. 7. 
 
 3 Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 64. 
 
STAR MAGNITUDE. n 
 
 of the Sun, and that its solid contents are 54,872 times 
 those of the Sun a magnitude, he truly enough says, 
 'altogether overpowering to the human imagination.' 
 Mr. Grant, 1 however, bringing out an even larger sum, 
 attributes the result to an erroneous determination of 
 the apparent diameter of the star. Yet it is probable 
 that Vega is greatly larger than the Sun, though how 
 much larger may be matter of opinion. But Sirius, 
 which is farther removed than Vega, undoubtedly 
 seems, by consensus of opinion, to be vastly larger than 
 the Sun, although in this, as in so many other things, 
 astronomers differ widely in their estimates. For Sir 
 John Herschel estimates the volume of Sirius to be 
 8000 times that of the Sun; while Mr. Proctor, on 
 what he conceives a better calculation of the distance 
 of Sirius, though apparently by no means stating with 
 any assurance, gives the bulk at only 4860 times 
 large enough certainly, but perhaps by no means 
 approaching the size of some of the brilliant but vastly 
 farther distant stars. Suppose, however, that either 
 Vega or Sirius be only one thousand times larger than 
 the Sun, their magnitude is beyond our conception ; 
 while, in all likelihood, there are stars much larger, 
 perhaps, even than 54,000 times that of our Sun; 
 stars so large as to exercise control over far-distant 
 systems and worlds ; magnitudes which cannot be even 
 faintly apprehended by our finite powers. Such a star 
 may be Alcyone, which is said, but not universally 
 admitted, to be the central orb of a great star system 
 of which the Sun and his planets form a part. 2 
 
 1 History of Physical Astronomy, p. 546. 
 
 2 Newcomb, p. 208, states that for the most part the stars with a 
 decided parallax are not of conspicuous magnitude, which indicates that 
 those of conspicuous magnitude must be vastly larger. 
 
12 THE SUN. 
 
 Having acquired an idea, however faint, of its size, 
 we may pass to consider the prodigious 
 
 DISTANCE OF THE SUN. 
 
 Here it is necessary to start with a knowledge of 
 what the distance actually is in figures. It is a problem 
 very far from being easy of solution. 
 
 ' In the time of Copernicus it was supposed that the 
 Sun's distance could not exceed 5 millions of miles, and 
 indeed there are many who thought that estimate very 
 extravagant. From a review of the observations of 
 Tycho Brahe, Kepler, however, concluded the error was 
 actually in the opposite direction, and that the estimate 
 must be raised to at least 13 millions. In 1670, Cessini 
 showed that these numbers were altogether inconsistent 
 with the facts, and gave as his conclusion 85 millions.' l 
 
 Eighty-five millions was also erroneous, because short 
 of the true distance. Fifty years ago children were 
 taught at school that the distance was 95 millions. 
 Now any schoolboy will probably affirm it to be 91 
 millions ; 2 but it turns out that every schoolboy is 
 wrong, and that the real distance is different, and rather 
 greater. 
 
 And this leads to the consideration of how the 
 distance is determined. There are various methods (as 
 to which see Professor Forbes On the Transit of Venus, 
 chap. ii. ; also The Sun, by Dr. Young, p. 25). But the 
 
 1 Conflict between Science and Religion, p. 173. Huygens estimated 
 the distance to be 25,086 semi-diameters of the Earth, or 99 millions 
 of miles. Newcomb, p. 173. See also Halley's mention of the various 
 early computations. Ferguson's Astronomy, p. 449. 
 
 2 In Guillemin's Heavens the distance is stated to be 91,430,000 miles, 
 ed. 1876, p. 14. 
 
ITS DISTANCE. 13 
 
 one which obtains most favour is that which arises out 
 of the observation of the transits of the planet Venus, 
 or its passing across the face of the Sun. These transits 
 occur in pairs eight years apart, and with 122 years 
 between the pairs. The last transit took place on 8th 
 December 1874, and the next will be in December 
 1882; 1 and the next succeeding one will not be till 
 7th June 2004, that is, 122 years afterwards. Nor is 
 a transit visible in all parts of the world. It is only 
 seen at least in its completeness over a strip or belt 
 of the world varying in position on each different 
 occasion. It was first predicted by Kepler for the year 
 1631, but was not seen because that particular transit 
 was not visible in Europe. A young English curate 
 named Horrox, devoted to astronomical pursuits, there- 
 after calculated a transit for Sunday, 24th November 
 1639, the precise hour having been unknown, and 
 there was even an uncertainty as to the day. After an 
 anxious, protracted vigil, interrupted on the Sunday 
 by the requirements of clerical duty, so that the young 
 enthusiast had alternately to rush off to service, doubt- 
 less hastily and abstractedly performed, and to rush 
 back excitedly to observe and watch, and nearly baffled 
 by the occurrence of clouds, which, however, fortunately 
 withdrew in sufficient time, he was gratified, for the 
 first time in the world's history, by observing the 
 transit. His observations, though of a very rude kind, 
 were important both in relation to Venus herself and as 
 to the Sun's di&tance, although it does not appear that 
 he himself observed with this view, and it is to Dr. 
 
 1 This lecture was delivered previous to this the last transit, which, 
 although the weather in Britain generally was unfavourable, has been 
 seen elsewhere to great advantage, and excellent results from the 
 observation are fully anticipated. 
 
14 " ; THE SUN. 
 
 Halley we are indebted for the suggestion of making 
 the transits a means of measuring the distance of the 
 Sun. His dissertation on the subject, together with 
 Ferguson's observations thereon, and various other rela- 
 tive papers, including account of Horrock's observation, 
 will be found in Ferguson's Astronomy, pp. 434-501. 
 Halley's suggestion was the more interesting that it 
 bore reference to an event which would not happen for 
 70 years thereafter, and therefore long after he should 
 be in his grave. The next transit took place in 1761, 
 and the following one in 1769. On both these occasions 
 several European States sent out expeditions to those 
 parts of the world where observations could be made 
 to most advantage. One of these expeditions was, 
 under command of the famous Captain Cook, to the 
 islands of the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 Great discussion followed on the observations then 
 effected, showing much want of accordance in results 
 the computations of distance varying from 88 to 109 
 millions of miles, or no less than 2 1 millions of miles 
 difference between the highest and the lowest. The cele- 
 brated mathematician Encke therefore devoted attention 
 to the subject, and revised the calculations in 1822-24, 
 announcing his result to be 95,274,000 miles; and this 
 was held to be the true distance for a long time. Others 
 subsequently computed the distance differently ; but 
 Leverrier at last made it 91,759,000, and Airy and 
 Stone 91,400,000. 91 or 91^ millions was therefore 
 popularly assumed to be in round numbers the correct 
 quantity. But astronomers were far from being satisfied, 
 and waited impatiently for the next transit of Venus to 
 enable them to make their calculation more exact. 
 They had to wait a long time, for Venus, with feminine 
 inflexibility, would not go out of her way one second to 
 
TRANSIT OF VENUS. 15 
 
 please the most impatient astronomer, charm he ever so 
 wisely. The next transit did not happen till 1874. 
 
 By this time the means of observation had attained 
 to vastly greater perfection than at the time of the 
 previous transits, and all the civilised Powers, recognising 
 the importance of ensuring absolute accuracy in observ- 
 ing the transit then to take place, provided expeditions 
 to the different parts of the world where the transit 
 would be seen. Books were published on the subject, 
 including one by Mr. Proctor and a smaller one by 
 Professor George Forbes. That by Mr. Proctor (who 
 had previously published a series of papers on the sub- 
 ject in his book called The Universe and the Coming 
 Transits) entered pretty fully into the history of the 
 previous observations, and into a detail of the places 
 and mode of observation, and is a model of beautiful 
 illustration. That by Professor Forbes (more of a hand- 
 book), after explaining the object of the observation 
 and the different means to be used for attaining results, 
 so as to be checks on each other, gave an account of 
 the various expeditions then to be undertaken by the 
 different countries. 
 
 The British Government, besides making use of 
 existing observations, selected special stations at Alex- 
 andria in Egypt, Kerguelen's Island (in the Southern 
 Indian Ocean), the Sandwich Islands, Kodriquez, and 
 New Zealand two being situated in Kerguelen's Island, 
 three in the Sandwich Islands, and two in Egypt, where 
 there was also a private one at Thebes, by Colonel 
 Campbell of Blythswpod. The sum of 15,000 was 
 originally voted by Parliament in aid ; but how much 
 more was subequently voted I do not know. Over and 
 above, Lord Lindsay undertook a station at the Mauritius, 
 provided with appliances for utilizing all the different 
 
1 6 THE SUN. 
 
 modes of observation, including about 5 chronometers ; 
 and Professor Forbes says it was perhaps the most 
 completely equipped expedition which had ever been 
 undertaken by a private individual in the interests of 
 astronomy. 
 
 But without detailing the various other expeditions, I 
 may simply say that the Germans sent out or stationed 5 
 or 6, the Eussians 46, the French 8, the Americans 8, the 
 Italians 3, the Dwtch 1. In aH, the transit was to be 
 viewed from about 75 stations; and the expense of the 
 whole was estimated to amount to between 150,000 and 
 200,000. The preparations were great for an obser- 
 vation which would scarcely last four hours, being the 
 time Venus took to cross the Sun. But the observa- 
 tions then made were only the beginning of the inquiry. 
 They afforded materials merely ; for after they had been 
 duly noted, they fell to be compared, and results de- 
 duced ; and the number of calculations requiring to be 
 made was so vast that it literally took years to over- 
 take them. I have seen the number of calculations 
 estimated, which was something astonishing, but un- 
 fortunately did mot note it down at the time. It would 
 have shown that the faets of astronomy are only 
 obtained, not merely by means of much observation, 
 both careful and minute, but by an after process of 
 immense extent of calculation, and by the exercise of 
 great skill, knowledge, and ingenuity, involving patient 
 and laborious working, while they are very costly. 
 Apart from their utility, they are of great interest to 
 those who umdierstasid about them* 
 
 The result of all was to- ascertain that previous cal- 
 culations were in error. The Sun was considerably 
 more distant from us than the last calculations had 
 given. The British observers completed their calcula- 
 
DETERMINATION OF DISTANCE. 17 
 
 tions, except what fell to be deduced from the photo- 
 graphic records, in the year 1876, and estimated the 
 Sun's mean distance to be 93,300,000 miles, or nearly 
 2 millions more than the immediately previous estimate, 
 and more than was anticipated ; but I believe there has 
 been as yet no final result arrived at by a collection 
 and comparison of the observations and calculations of 
 all countries. 
 
 Another method of determination has been recently 
 adopted by observation of Mars when in opposition ; 
 and for this end Mr. Gill, Her Majesty's Astronomer, 
 Cape of Good Hope, proceeded to the Island of Ascension 
 in 187 7. He has now published, in a reprint from the 
 Memoirs of the Eoyal Astronomical Society, an account 
 of his observations, with this 
 
 ' Definitive result of the present investigation : mean 
 horizonal equatorial parallax of the Sun = 8''78, with 
 the probable error 0*012, which result combined with 
 the most modern determination of the value of the 
 equatorial radius of the Earth, viz. Listings = 396279 
 miles, gives for the mean distance of the Earth from 
 the Sun 93,080,000 miles.' 1 
 
 Dr. Young, referring to these labours, but before the 
 issue of the final publication from which I have quoted, 
 
 says : 
 
 ' So far as can be judged from the work thus far 
 published, this determination must be conceded the 
 precedence over all others in respect to its probable 
 freedom from constant and systematic errors, and from 
 theoretical difficulties. 4 2 
 
 Dr. Young, still 3 writing in the same predicament, 
 
 1 Memoirs, p. 163. 2 Young's Sun, p. 30. 3 Ibid. p. 43. 
 
1 8 THE SUN. 
 
 ' collecting all the evidence at present attainable,' arrives 
 at a distance of 92,885,000 miles, with a probable 
 error of 225,000 miles. Newcomb 1 estimates it to be 
 between 92,200,000 and 92,700,000 miles. 
 
 The distance of the Earth from the Sun is not always 
 the same, because its orbit is eliptical, not circular, and 
 it also varies from year to year through a very long 
 cycle or period of time, so that the difference between 
 the two extremes is no less than 11,300,000 miles, 2 
 and the difference of heat at the two extremes is as 
 
 19 to 26. 
 
 ' So slow, however,' says Ansted, ' is the change in 
 eccentricity, that although it is now diminishing, and has 
 been so for a long time, it will continue to do so for 
 nearly 24,000 years without being reduced to a minimum. 
 The actual distance of the Sun from the Earth changes 
 every day ; and owing to certain changes that take 
 place in its movements, also occupying a long cycle 
 (extending, however, over 25,686 3 years only), it happens 
 that occasionally (as at present) the Earth is nearer to 
 the Sun in the northern hemisphere during winter than 
 during summer ' by about 3 millions of miles. ' Nearly 
 10,000 years ago the Earth was nearest the Sun in 
 summer, and farthest in winter, and the eccentricity 
 was greater than it is now. This difference was cer- 
 tainly sufficient to produce a far more excessive climate, 
 that is, a climate much hotter in summer and cooler in 
 winter. As much as 210,000 years ago the difference 
 was nearly a maximum in every way. Then perhaps was 
 one of the glacial periods of geologists, for then the 
 winter was nearly a month longer than the summer, as 
 well as much colder than it is now.' 4 
 
 1 Astronomy, p. 200. 2 Ansted's Physical Geography, p. 5. 
 
 8 Sir J. Herschel has it 25,868 years, Outlines, 316. Col. Drayson, 
 31,000 years, Glacial Epoch, p. 217. 
 4 Ansted, p. 6. 
 
REALIZING DISTANCE. 19 
 
 But assuming the mean or average distance of the 
 Sun at the present time to be 93,000,000, let us 
 endeavour to realize what this means. And in the first 
 place we must start by seeing how long it takes to 
 count up a million. Supposing, then, we could count 
 200 per minute, and did so for 10 hours a day, it would 
 require above 8 days to count a million. To count up 
 93 millions would therefore occupy, at the same rate, 
 no less than 2 years 3 months. From this we acquire 
 some idea of what an enormous figure 93 millions comes 
 to be. 
 
 We must, however, try and realize this 93 millions 
 in miles. 
 
 Now the velocity at which light travels has been 
 variously computed at different times, and is still sub- 
 ject of investigation. A considerable sum (1000) was 
 recently appropriated by the United States of America 
 for the construction of apparatus to compute it. But 
 the latest calculation is, I think, that by Dr. Huggins, 
 who estimates that the rate at which light travels is 
 185,000 miles per second ; and yet the distance is so 
 great that light takes 8 minutes, or rather more, to reach 
 us from the Sun, travelling at this inconceivable rate of 
 speed. Yet, truly, this helps us but a very short way 
 to realize or comprehend the immense distance ; because 
 we have no idea, and can form none, of a speed of 
 185,000 miles per second. Bearing in mind, however, 
 that there are 480 seconds in 8 minutes, this enormous 
 distance of 185,000 miles must be travelled 480 times 
 over (it is really 500 times) before the light reaches the 
 Earth. 
 
 Again, the Moon is distant from the Earth about 
 240,000 miles, and the Sun is removed from us about 
 
20 THE SUN. 
 
 390 times the distance of; the Moon. Neither, however, 
 can this calculation enable us to comprehend the vast 
 distance the immense gulf which separates us from 
 our great luminary. 
 
 As little can we comprehend the distance by being 
 told that a cannon-ball discharged from a cannon would, 
 it has been said, take 350 years to reach the Sun. 
 
 But suppose we adopt our former method of estimating 
 that is, according to time taken in railway travelling. 
 Now, were, a railway laid from the Earth to the Sun by 
 which we could travel to it at the rate of 1000 miles 
 per day, it would occupy no less than 255 years to per- 
 form the journey ; so that had Charles i. on the day of 
 his accession to the throne of Great Britain commenced 
 a journey upon this imaginary railway, he could now 
 only have just arrived at the other terminus, the Sun. 
 Or if some adventurous hero were to begin it now, he 
 could not reach the Sim till the year 2135 ; and he 
 could not get back here, provided the Sun would let 
 him, till the year 2390. 
 
 Travelling by special express train for 255 years 
 would, however, be costly. Might we not try to walk 
 the distance ? Suppose, then, some remarkably good 
 pedestrian, endowed with a body incapable of fatigue or 
 decay, were to start on the journey and accomplish 30 
 miles a day, it would take him no less than 8415 years ; 
 and suppose he did enjoy the somewhat needful Sunday 
 rest, he would not accomplish the journey in under 
 9617 years that is, nearly 10,000 years, the odd 383 
 years being neither here nor there in an expedition of 
 such duration. 
 
 Of course I am supposing a road laid down all the 
 way as straight as a Eoman road, or as many of the 
 
A WALK TO IT. 
 
 roads are in France to this day ; and, like them, planted 
 with an everlasting row of green shady trees on each 
 side the highway, and supplied at least at the end of 
 every day's journey with a comfortable hotel furnished 
 with an abundance of the good things of this life, and 
 conducted by a very obliging and accommodating land- 
 lord, willing to take drafts on the Sun in payment of his 
 bill, and with here and there a tailor and shoemaker's 
 shop to replace what was worn out by the way. The 
 journey would indeed be a remarkably striking one, 
 perhaps striking in a double sense, for the road would 
 be rendered as lively as a city under bombardment, and 
 a good deal more appalling, by the constant passage of 
 huge flying bodies, and by coming in sight of terrific 
 globes dashing nearer and nearer with furious and ever- 
 increasing speed : of the Moon, of Venus, of Mercury 
 whizzing with annihilating rush across the sky, Venus 
 and Mercury glowing with a scorching reflection of light 
 and heat from the Sun ; and cornets flashing past with 
 far-extending tail ; and then as the brave traveller, who, 
 we shall suppose, is protected from all evil consequences, 
 came near the Sun itself, what an awful form it would 
 assume, glowing as with millions of tremendous furnaces, 
 and darting out its huge red flickering flames with a 
 frightful rapidity, as if to lick up and suck everything 
 in ! He would, though scared and stupefied, be power- 
 less to escape, and only be drawn on by an irresistible 
 but horrible fascination, till unconsciously he touched 
 the fiery willow leaves, the burning waves of the Sun, 
 and should be at once ejected as an audacious, prying, 
 interloping trespasser, and sent back on his weary course 
 to Earth again, a wiser and a sadder man. 
 
 The thought of this dreadful walk of 10,000 years 
 will give some idea of the prodigious distance away at 
 
22 THE SUN. 
 
 which our immense luminary day after day rises in the 
 east and turns his giant face upon us, benevolently 
 beaming with light and heat and vivifying power. 
 Were the Earth itself to lose that centrifugal force 
 which keeps it from obeying the attraction of the Sun, 
 and were thus, under the influence of the law of gravity, 
 to be drawn to the parent orb, it would take little more 
 than 60 days to perform its journey to the great parent 
 orb ; but long ere these two eventful months were over 
 we should all have perished upon the face of the Earth ; 
 while the Earth, proceeding on with its freight of dead, 
 would plunge into the Sun and be instantaneously 
 swallowed up and lost, like a fragment of coal tossed 
 into a huge smelting-furnace. 
 
 Yet, far as it is removed from the Earth, the Sun 
 itself, with its surrounding planetary system, is still 
 more inconceivably removed from even the nearest fixed 
 star. The ascertainment, however, of the distances of 
 even the nearest fixed stars is scarcely less difficult than 
 the estimate of their magnitudes. 1 It has been, at least 
 
 1 For the modes of measuring the distance of the stars, see Sir J. 
 Herschel's Outlines, 799 et seq. The Astronomer Royal thus informs 
 us as to the method taken by Bessel to ascertain the distance of 61 
 Cygni, by observations commenced in August 1837 at Konigsberg : 
 ' I mentioned another way in which the distances of the stars may be 
 ascertained, a method which is free from all those defects of which I 
 have spoken. This method is by the observation of two stars, of which 
 one is believed to be very much nearer to the Sun than the other. For 
 then Ave may assume that the distant star will have no sensible change 
 of place from parallax, depending on the position of the Earth in its orbit. 
 And then in observing the stars from the various parts of the Earth's 
 orbit, we can compare the apparent place of that star which we believe 
 to be the nearer with the place of the other. Practically this is of 
 importance. The refraction, precession, mutation, and aberration are 
 sensibly the same ; and there is no uncertainty whatever from the com- 
 putation of the various quantities which cast so much uncertainty on 
 
DISTANCE FROM FIXED STARS. 23 
 
 approximately, made in the case of a few, the nearest of 
 all being, as already mentioned, the star a Centauri. This 
 star is calculated to be upwards of 200,000 times more 
 distant than the Sun is from the Earth, its light taking 
 3 years 8 months to reach us. In miles the distance 
 is 19,653,690,000,000 (tens of thousands of millions, 
 more or less). But we can only faintly realize a figure so 
 vast when it is added that an express train, travelling 
 1000 miles a day, would take upwards of 50 millions 
 of years to reach this, our nearest starry neighbour. Yet 
 the succeeding star is more than twice as far away. 
 
 The following table of distances has been furnished by 
 Flammarion, corresponding with that of Guillemin : * 
 
 Number of Eadii of Time Light 
 
 Terrestrial Orbit. travels to us. 
 
 a of the Centaur, . . 211,330 3 years 8 months. 
 
 of the Swan, . . . 550,920 9 years. 
 
 Vega, of Lyra, . . 1,330,700 21 
 
 Sirius, a of the Great Dog, . 1,375,000 22 ,, 
 
 a of the Great Bear, . . 1,550,800 25 ,, 
 
 Arcturus, of Bootes, . 1,622,800 26 
 
 Pole Star, .... 3,078,600 50 
 
 The Goat, a of Auriga, . 4,484,000 72 ,, 
 
 the results derived from other observations. This is the method pursued 
 by Bessel-in determining the distance of the star 61 Cygni. He measured 
 the angular distance of this star from two small stars near it by means 
 of an instrument called the heliometer, well known on the Continent, 
 but of which there was at that time no specimen in England. "With 
 this he determined the parallax of the star 61 Cygni to be one-third of a 
 second ; that amounts to the same as saying that the distance is 600,000 
 times greater than the distance of the Earth from the Sun. It is 
 deserving of attention that 61 Cygni is a double star ; but we know 
 from long observation that the two stars partake of the same motions, 
 and probably are a connected system like the Earth and Moon, and 
 therefore we speak of them and of their distance as if they were only one 
 star.' Six Lectures on Astronomy at Ipswich, by George Biddell Airy, 
 Astronomer Royal, 4th ed. p. 170. 
 
 1 Flammarion's Wonders of Heavens, p. 107 ; Guillemin's Heavens, 
 p. 292. 
 
24 THE SUN. 
 
 These may not correspond with the figures of other 
 astronomers, and indeed "their calculations differ con- 
 siderably, as may be seen by comparing with Xewcomb j 1 
 but they suffice to give an idea of the enormous spaces 
 by which one star is removed from another. There are 
 stars in the Milky Way which are some thousand times 
 as far removed as a Centauri ; and Herschel believed 
 his telescope revealed the light of stars which took 2 
 millions of years to reach us ; so that, if he was right, 
 these stars are 600,000 times as distant as the nearest 
 star. One is overwhelmed with the thought. 
 
 But we require to take along with the distances the 
 conception of 
 
 THE SUN'S MOTIONS. 
 
 The Sun does not in reality revolve on its axis so 
 fast as the Earth, but its bulk is so greatly larger that 
 the actual motion at the surface or circumference is 
 nearly four times faster. Were the Earth to move at 
 its surface as rapidly as the Sun moves at its surface, 
 we should see the Sun, Moon, and stars perceptibly 
 sailing through the heavens. 
 
 But besides its diurnal motion on its axis, the Sun is 
 also moving through space, carrying along with it the 
 Earth and all the other planets, and it does so with the 
 prodigious velocity of well-nigh half a million of miles 
 a day, or about 150,000,000 miles in a year. And 
 
 1 Newcomb's Astronomy, p. 536. Mr. Proctor observes on the above 
 list, that recent measurement reduces the distance of 61 Cygni and of 
 Sirius ; but that ' with the single exception, perhaps, of a Centauri, the 
 stars are at distances beyond our present means of measurement.' 
 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 292, editorial note. 
 
ITS MOTIONS. 25 
 
 yet, at a speed which we cannot apprehend, it would 
 occupy the Sun from 120,000 to 130,000 years to 
 reach the nearest fixed star, were that star in its course, 
 and would wait its arrival. The Sun is believed to be 
 moving in a tremendous orbit of its own round some 
 great central Sun, which, as already mentioned, has 
 been rightly or wrongly supposed to be Alcyone in 
 the Pleiades, dragging us all with it in its course. 
 Yet, although moving at this inconceivable rate of 
 150,000,000 miles in a year, it is calculated to take 
 18,200,000 years to make the circuit, so that since 
 the days of Adam it has only performed the 3000th 
 part of its progress round that distant centre ; and how 
 often it has made the circuit no one can tell, or perhaps 
 in this life ever will. Doubtless it has been many 
 times. While all the other stars are in motion, too, 
 revolving in great orbits of their own, never jarring or 
 jostling each other, and, perhaps, all in turn are 
 revolving round a great chief centre ; yet in some 
 cases these orbits, if they are orbits, must be so im- 
 mense that the course of the stars appears to be in a 
 straight line, and some are moving 
 
 'At such a rate that the gravitation of all the known 
 stars cannot stop them until they shall have passed 
 through and beyond the visible universe. The most 
 remarkable of these, so far as we know, is Groombridge, 
 1830, it having the largest apparent motion of any star.' l 
 
 The motion of this star is so rapid that ' it would pass 
 from the Earth to the Sun in about 5 days, so that its 
 velocity probably exceeds 200 miles per second/ Some 
 stars are receding from us, and others are approaching 
 us (see a list in Newcomb, p. 458), but the star which 
 is approaching us most directly is a Cygni, . which is 
 1 Newcomb's Astronomy, p. 485. 
 
26 THE SUN. 
 
 coming at the rate of about 40 miles per second, and 
 in a period of between iOO,000 and 300,000 years 
 ' will pass by our system at something like a hundredth 
 of its present distance, and will for several thousand 
 years be many times nearer and brighter than any star 
 is now.' l 
 
 These facts give rise to a curious thought. For, keep- 
 ing in mind that every individual star is at a different 
 distance from us, some vastly farther off than others, 
 so that their light arrives at Earth in different 
 periods of time, while each star is in rapid motion, 
 and is moving in a separate course, the conclusion is 
 forced upon us, that when we look upon the face of the 
 sky we see not really a true picture of what at the exact 
 moment surrounds us ; for the light of one star having 
 taken 1000 years to come to us, the star itself is now 
 in a different place from where it was when its light 
 left it ; and the light of another having taken 5000 
 years, is still farther removed from where it was when 
 the light left it, and thus what we actually see differs 
 from what it would be did the light reach us instan- 
 taneously, and we then saw the stars just where they 
 respectively are in the heavens. 
 
 Little as we usually think regarding the magnitude 
 and distance of the Sun, I fear we as little apprehend, 
 though we can more easily realize, its power and its 
 importance to us. 
 
 ' The Sun's rays/ says Sir John Herschel, ' are the 
 ultimate source of almost every motion which takes place 
 on the surface of the Earth. By its heat are produced all 
 winds, and those disturbances in the electric equilibrium 
 
 1 Newcomb's Astronomy, p. 459. 
 
ITS UTILITY. 27 
 
 of the atmosphere which give rise to the phenomena of 
 lightning, and probably also to those of terrestrial 
 magnetism and the aurora. By their vivifying action 
 vegetables are enabled to draw support from inor- 
 ganic matter, and become in their turn the support of 
 animals and of man, and the sources of those great 
 deposits of dynamical efficiency which are laid up for 
 human use in our coal strata. By them the waters of 
 the sea are made to circulate in vapour through the air 
 and irrigate the land, producing springs and rivers. By 
 them are produced all disturbances of the chemical 
 equilibrium of the elements of nature which, by a series 
 of compositions and decompositions, give rise to new 
 products, and originate a transfer of materials.' x 
 
 These, however, are only some of the uses of the Sun 
 to us ; but the fact is that all life upon the Earth is, 
 under God, dependent upon the light and heat which 
 we derive from it, so carefully adjusted and adapted 
 that were they either considerably increased or con- 
 siderably diminished, we should be either scorched or 
 chilled out of existence, and the means of supporting 
 life would likewise perish. 
 
 Let us, then, consider for a little the light and heat 
 derived from the Sun. 
 
 THE SUN S LIGHT. 
 
 And, first, with regard to that benign and glorious 
 light with which the parent Sun gilds the Earth, 
 cheering us from day to day, a blessing so freely 
 bestowed that we think not of it except when it is cut 
 off from us ; and a mysterious thing it is, too, for it 
 travels, as we have seen, at the enormous speed of 
 185,000 miles per second, and yet it is only a series of 
 1 Herschel's Outlines of Astronomy, 8th ed. p. 259, 399. 
 
28 THE SUN. 
 
 vibrations or wayes ' dancing to and fro at the rate of 
 about 450 billions of times in a single second/ a 
 rapidity of action which is truly as incomprehensible as 
 are the figures by which it is expressed. 
 
 The ascertainment of the intensity of the sunlight 
 has long been a subject of experimental investigation, 
 and among popular books will be found treated in 
 Guillemin's Sun, chap, i., and Young's Sun, chap, viii., 
 to which I would refer. 
 
 The comparison has been made chiefly with the light 
 of candles. In 1725, Bouguer, a French astronomer 
 and philosopher, made certain experiments, and taking 
 his calculations as a basis, Guillemin estimates the 
 light of the Sun at the zenith, that is, when directly 
 overhead, with a clear sky, to be equal to 75,200 
 times that of a candle placed at the distance of 3^ feet 
 from the object illuminated. Dr. Wollaston, an English 
 philosopher, made it to be rather less, or equal to about 
 68,000 times at similar distance. With such a basis 
 of calculation the number of candles placed on a plane 
 surface facing the Earth at the Sun's distance, so as to 
 give a light equal to that of the Sun, has been com- 
 puted, but is altogether beyond apprehension. 1 
 
 M. Becquerel, another French natural philosopher, 
 made experiments on the lime light, on the light arising 
 from the burning of magnesium wire, and the electric 
 light ; and upon the footing of the estimate made of 
 the power of candle light by Bouguer and Wollastoii, 
 Guillemin deduced that the Sun's light is equal to 75 
 times that of the electric light at 3^ feet distance. 
 With more powerful batteries other experimenters are 
 said to have produced electric light than which the 
 
 1 See Young's Sun, p. 240. 
 
ITS LIGHT ESTIMATED. 29 
 
 light of the Sun was only 2^ times greater, which, if 
 correct, was a near approach to daylight. It must, 
 however, be borne in mind that the sunlight is most 
 intense at noon, when the Sun is in the zenith. At 
 sunrise it was found at Paris, on the 20th June (the 
 height of summer), the light was 1300 times less than 
 when the Sun was in the zenith, and that as the Sun 
 rose higher and higher in the heavens the light pro- 
 portionally got stronger and stronger. 
 
 The light of the Sun has also been compared with 
 that of the Moon and of the stars. 
 
 Bouguer concluded the light of the Sun to be 
 300,000 times that of the Moon ; Wollaston, as much 
 as 801,072 times ; Professor Bond of Cambridge, 
 470,000 times; Zollner, 619,000 times as much light 
 as the full Moon, -a result which Newcomb thinks is 
 probably quite near the truth. 
 
 Huygens, the celebrated Dutch philosopher of the 
 17th century, estimated the light of the Sun to be 
 equal to 765 millions of times that of Sirius, the most 
 brilliant star in the sky ; though in our hazy climate w r e 
 do not see it glowing with the intensity with which it 
 may be seen in the clearer southern atmosphere of the 
 Riviera. But Wollaston's calculation, made at a long 
 after period, and, doubtless, with much better means, 
 was much greater, for he estimated the light of the Sun 
 to be 20,000 millions of times that of Sirius; 1 and yet 
 if Sirius were unfortunately brought as near to us as is 
 the Sun, its" light would be equal to 94 Suns similar 
 to our own a blaze of light by which we should 
 immediately be blinded. The distance of Sirius from 
 
 1 Great reliance on these computations, however, in the nature of the 
 case, cannot be placed. Sir John Herschel and Mr. Bond estimated the 
 light of Sirius at less. 
 
30 THE SUN. 
 
 us is, however, so enormously great, seven times that 
 of the nearest star, that, assuming Wollaston's calcula- 
 tion to be correct, it would require the sky to be set 
 and it would be a gorgeous illumination with 20,000 
 millions of visible stars, each with all the brilliance of 
 Sirius, to light us up as fully as we are lighted by the 
 Sun. 
 
 These facts show that there are stars which yield a 
 much greater light than the San. Sirius is a particu- 
 larly bright star. Sir John Herschel has estimated the 
 intensity of its light to be equal to the light of nearly 
 200 stars of the 6th magnitude. But it is com- 
 paratively near, and some of the brilliant stars which 
 are much farther removed may shine with a far more 
 exceeding splendour. 
 
 THE SUN'S HEAT. 
 
 From the light of the Sun it is an easy transition to 
 pass to consider its heat, for all light produces or 
 carries with it heat. Dr. Lardner, in his treatise on 
 heat, 1 does indeed say that moonlight is an exception ; 
 because in whatever degree moonlight can be con- 
 centrated by the most powerful burning glasses, it ' has 
 never yet been found to affect the most sensible 
 thermometer.' But his book is dated 1833, and, 
 doubtless, expressed the result of experiments made 
 during upwards of 130 years previously. Subse- 
 quent inquiries upset the view. For Professor Piazzi 
 Smith 2 (who experimented on the top of the Peak of 
 Teneriffe), Professor Forbes, and Melloni, an Italian, all 
 have detected, though in minute degree, some amount 
 1 Lardner's Heat, p. 351. 2 See Proctor's Moon, pp. 272-282. 
 
ITS HEAT. 31 
 
 of heat in the Moon's rays ; while Lord Eosse, using a 
 powerful reflecting telescope, was able to say that the 
 light reflected from the Moon can be felt, and he esti- 
 mated that this heat is the l/900,000th part of that 
 radiated from the Sun. 1 The light emanating from all 
 the stars, or from space, has been calculated by M. 
 Guillemin 2 (and the statement is surprising) to afford 
 the Earth as much heat as is equal to about 5/6th of 
 the heat we derive from the Sun. This estimate is 
 founded upon investigations by M. Pouillet, another 
 Frenchman (for it is chiefly to French philosophers 
 we are indebted for investigations on this subject), 
 who found the temperature of interplanetary space to 
 be about 140 C. below freezing point a statement 
 which it seems difficult to reconcile with Guillemin's 
 calculation. The heat received from individual stars 
 has likewise been estimated, and necessarily is minute ; 
 that from Arcturus was found to be ' equal to the 
 radiation of a Leslie cube of boiling water at a distance 
 of 383 yards.' 3 
 
 But we do not by a long way receive from the 
 Sun all the heat it emanates. Professor Tait tells us 
 ' that the quantity of heat which the whole Earth gets 
 from the Sun is of the order of something less 
 than the 2000 millionth part of that which the Sun 
 gives out.' 4 
 
 Guillemin states the same thing : ' the heat intercepted 
 by the Earth is only 2050,000000 P ar ^ of the entire solar 
 radiation.' 5 Further, Sir John Herschel informs us that 
 the heat received by the Earth in a given area -is as 
 
 1 Proctor's Orbs around us, p. 73. 2 Guillemin's Sun, p. 37. 
 
 3 Guillemin's Forces of Nature, p. 496. 4 Tait's Advances, p. 155. ' 
 5 Guillemin's Forces of Nature, p. 495. 
 
32 THE SUN. 
 
 to the heat on an equal given area in the Sun only 
 about the 92,000th part, 1 or as he has elsewhere said, 
 I presume meaning much the same thing, ' the 
 temperature, that is to say, the degree or intensity 
 of the heat, at the actual surface of the Sun ' is 
 'more than 90,000 times greater than the intensity 
 of sunshine here on our globe at noon and under the 
 equator.' 2 
 
 Putting these facts or calculations together, the 
 amazing amount of heat which exists in, and is con- 
 stantly proceeding from the Sun, must be something 
 inconceivable ; and from early times philosophers have 
 set to work to estimate its intensity and measure its 
 power. Eecently M. Pouillet has invented an instru- 
 ment (and others have done the same) to measure 
 the solar heat as received by the Earth, called the 
 Pyrheliometer. 
 
 In one of the most recent works on astronomy, 
 though in parts somewhat sketchy, that by M. Kam- 
 bosson, Laureate of the Institute of France, 3 there are 
 given some of the different opinions which have been 
 held on the subject of the Sun's temperature, from 
 which it appears that so great is the disagreement of 
 philosophers, that the heat of the Sun has been variously 
 estimated at from 1461 up to 10,000,000, the 
 highest calculation being 6000 times that of the lowest, 
 from which it is very evident that no great reliance 
 can be placed upon any such estimates, although the 
 progress of science tends to greater certainty. How- 
 
 1 Outlines, 396. 
 
 2 Quoted in Williams' Fuel of Sun, p. 73, without reference. 
 
 3 Rambosson's Astronomy, p, 93. 
 
COMPUTATIONS OF HEAT. 33 
 
 ever, even the lowest of these computations states an 
 amount of heat far beyond our experience. 1 Endeavour 
 has indeed been made to realize the amount of heat by 
 comparing it with temperatures which can be reached 
 on Earth. Thus it has been estimated by one man 
 that the heat emitted from the Sun (which is greatly 
 less than that contained in it) is 1000 hotter than 
 what is necessary to melt iron ; and Sir William 
 Thomson has said it is from 15 to 45 times greater 
 than that developed in the furnace of a locomotive, 
 while he considers the Sun's radiation to be equivalent 
 to about 7000 horse-power per square foot of his sur- 
 face. 2 While such figures- may be mentioned, all we 
 can understand is, that the heat is- something incon- 
 ceivably tremendous. 
 
 The more common methods- of computation or com- 
 parison, however, are by estimating by its power on ice, 
 by the amount of coal it would be necessary to bum 
 to make its equivalent, by its capacity for boiling, and 
 the like. 
 
 Computations as with ice seem to be a favourite 
 method. Eor example, Sir John Herschel* considers 
 the heat, if it could be concentrated, sufficient to melt 
 a cylinder of ice 45 miles in diameter continuously 
 darted into the Sun with the velocity of light without 
 diminishing the intensity of the Sun's heat. 4 Dr. 
 
 1 * Secchi originally contended for a temperature of aUxMit 18,000,000 
 Fahr. (though he afterwards- lowered his estimate to about 250,000). 
 Ericson puts the figure at 4,000,000 or 5, 000 y 000. Zollner, Spoerer, 
 and Lane name temperatures ranging from 50,000' to 100,000 Fahr. ; 
 while Pouillet, Vicaire, and Deville have put it as low as between 
 3000 and 10,000 Fahr. The intensest artificial heat may perhaps 
 reach 4000 Fahr.' Young's Sun, p. 265. 
 
 2 Tait's Advances, p. 158. 3 Outlines, p. 259. 4 Young's Sun, p. 255. 
 
 C 
 
34 THE SUN. 
 
 Young says it would in a second of time melt a column 
 of ice 2^ miles in diameter spanning the inconceivable 
 abyss between the Earth and the Sun, and in seven 
 seconds it would dissipate the whole in vapour. Pouillet 1 
 describes the heat as sufficient to melt .in one minute a 
 layer of ice 11.80 metres (nearly 40 feet) thickness, or 
 in one day 16,992 metres, or 4 leagues, that is, were 
 the Sun suddenly girt with ice of adequate depth, the 
 power of its heat would in one day melt through a belt 
 of ice 1 3 miles thick. 
 
 Professor Tyndall 2 estimates this heat as equal to 
 boiling 2900 thousand millions of cubic kilometres, or 
 as it is elsewhere stated, 700,000,000 cubic miles of 
 water at the temperature of ice. Tyndall 3 also says : 
 ' Expressed in another way, the heat emitted by the 
 Sun is equal to that which would be produced by the 
 combustion of a seam of coal 27 kilometres (16.65 
 miles) thick.' Sir John Herschel puts it, that to 
 maintain the heat calculated by Sir William Thomson, 
 it would require 13,500 Ibs. for every square yard of 
 the Sun that is, 6 tons of coal to be burnt each hour 
 on each square yard of the Sun. 
 
 But I only mention these estimates, which really it 
 is impossible for us to realize, in order to furnish some 
 idea, vague and general it must be, of the vast heat 
 existing in and emanating from the Sun even after 
 allowing the largest deduction for over-estimates. It is 
 an amount (whichever calculation we choose) with which 
 we have nothing on Earth fortunately to compare ; for 
 ' if the Sun were to come as near us as the Moon, the 
 solid Earth would melt like wax.' 4 The experiments 
 
 1 Williams' Fuel of Sun, p. 74. 2 Guillemin's Sun, p. 35. 
 
 3 Guillemin's Forces of Nature, p. 495. 4 Young's Sun, p. 268. 
 
HEAT HO W PRODUCED. 35 
 
 and observations made by some of the French philo- 
 sophers l led them to conclude that the solar heat does 
 not exceed 3000 centigrade, and probably is from 
 2500 to 2800, in other words 12 or 14 times the 
 heat necessary to make water boil. These are lower 
 estimates than others, and seem to be unreliable. 
 Eosetti finds, says Dr. Young 
 
 ' 18,000 Fahr. as the effective temperature of the Sun, 
 a result which, all things considered, seems to the writer 
 more reasonable and better founded than any of the 
 earlier estimates. Eosetti considers that this is also 
 pretty nearly the actual temperature of the upper layers 
 of the photosphere." 2 
 
 Bat really, after all, no more can be said on this sub- 
 ject than that philosophers widely disagree as to the 
 extent or degree of heat, but all agree that it is some- 
 thing far exceeding anything we have experience of here, 
 or which we can possibly realize. 
 
 I do not enter upon the power of the Sun's heat 
 further than to mention that when the Sun's rays are 
 collected and concentrated by means of a burning glass, 
 the heat exceeds that of a powerful furnace, and is 
 sufficient to melt gold and convert it into vapour. 3 It 
 is also a curious fact to be stated in the same connec- 
 tion, that the heat may be transmitted through a burn- 
 ing glass of ice, so as, without melting the ice itself, to 
 set on fire what is placed in the focus. 
 
 How this awful heat is produced or maintained is 
 a question which has not yet been solved. Sir John 
 Herschel says : 
 
 1 Eambosson, p. 95. 2 Young's Sun, p. 267. 
 
 3 Lardner's Heat, p. 350. 
 
36 THE SUN. 
 
 ' The great mystery is to conceive how so enormous a 
 conflagration (if such it ;"be) can be kept up. Every dis- 
 covery in chemical science here leaves us completely at 
 a loss, or rather seerns to remove further the prospect of 
 probable explanation.' l 
 
 ' It is quite certain,' says Dr. Young, ' that it is not 
 a case of mere combustion.' ' If the Sun were made 
 of solid coal burning in pure oxygen, it could only last 
 about six thousand years. 2 
 
 Various theories have been propounded, and one of 
 them, by M. Matthieu Williams in Fuel of the Sun, who, 
 discarding a supposition that it is maintained by a bom- 
 bardment of aerolites, suggests the ingenious explanation 
 that the Sun, travelling through space with the velocity 
 of about 400 to 500 thousand miles a day, is fed by 
 the air through which it passes, which he calculates 
 would be equal to fresh fuel at the rate of 165 millions 
 of millions of tons per second. In other words, that 
 the Sun is an immense fire fed by fuel. But if I 
 might hazard an observation, I think this view is 
 untenable, because 1st, It would imply the Sun is 
 fed only upon the side or part or half which is 
 in advance, the other half or back part would be 
 unfed, or at least meagrely fed while in rear. And 
 as the Sun takes nearly a month to perform its re- 
 volution on its axis, each part of its surface would in 
 succession be unfed for nearly half a month. 2d, Its 
 condition would necessarily be dependent upon the 
 quality of the atmosphere or space through which it 
 passed, in some places densely laden with matter, 
 in others lightly, so that it would burn unsteadily. 
 3d, The probability is that the matter of the system 
 moves with the Sun or system, so that its material 
 1 Outlines, 400. ? Young, p. 270. 
 
HE A T DIMINISHING. 3 7 
 
 would soon be burnt out. 4th, That no appearances 
 in the shape of a trail of smoke or otherwise justify 
 the conclusion. There may be better scientific reason, 
 and indeed any form of maintenance by combustion seems 
 now to be given up, and the view generally entertained 
 appears rather to be that first suggested by Helmholtz, 
 that the great heat is engendered by the tremendous 
 pressure and contraction which the force of gravity should 
 produce ; and this also is the view taken by Dr. Young, 
 the latest authority, who, however, allows that a fraction 
 of the heat may result from, the falling in of meteors. 
 
 It is not doubted that the heat of the Sun is 
 diminishing; 1 but it is comforting to think that, ac- 
 cording to Father Secchi of Eome, the diminution 
 1 is almost imperceptible, not exceeding one degree in 
 4000 years.' The rate, however, is a point upon 
 which it is not possible to form any correct opinion. 
 Professor Tait says : ' The Sun cannot possibly cool more 
 than a single degree centigrade in seven years. It may 
 be on the highest estimate we can take one degree in 
 7000 years; the data are very uncertain; but we may 
 say that these are the limits between which it must 
 lie.' 2 But taking the highest estimate of 7000, and 
 the temperature of the Sun to be now 18,000 (and 
 it may be vastly more), the conclusion would be that 
 in 126,000,000 years the sun will cool down to zero. 
 Dr. Young, saying that Newcomb allows it only 
 10,000,000 years to continue to afford sufficient heat 
 to support life, will not himself allow the possibility of 
 60 millions of years. 3 Indeed, he would assign a total 
 existence for the solar system from its birth to its death 
 
 1 See Professor Nichol's Phenomena, p. 191. 
 
 2 Recent Advances, p. 159. 3 Young's Sun, p. 276. 
 
38 THE SUN. 
 
 of only 30 millions of years, 1 a fraction merely of the 
 periods which others have assigned. 
 
 The Sun's heat, however, might he maintained for a 
 short season longer than it would otherwise be by the 
 falling into it of the planets a supposition not impossible. 
 For from time to time (though so rarely that, as according 
 to Humboldt, only twenty have been recorded as seen in 
 2000 years) there have been instances of stars observed 
 suddenly to blaze out as if on fire, one of the most 
 remarkable of which was that of a star in the constella- 
 tion Corona borealis, which, on 12th May 1866, burst 
 out for a period of twelve days from the appearance of 
 a star of the 9th magnitude to that of the 2d, and then 
 returned to its former magnitude ; 2 and there have not 
 been found wanting those who have expressed the 
 opinion that such a blazing out might be occasioned by 
 the violent precipitation of some great mass, perhaps of 
 a planet upon the star. Indeed, it is now considered, 
 although the period it may take may be very long pro- 
 tracted, that the existence of aluminiferous 3 ether in 
 the realms of space, united to other causes, must offer 
 such a resistance to the planets 4 as will in course of 
 time cause them to fall into the Sun ; just as the aerolites 
 or falling stars, flying through space, are arrested by the 
 Earth at the rate of seven and a half millions per day. 5 
 
 1 Young's Sun, p. 277. 
 
 2 Schellen's Spectrum Analysis, p. 523. See also mention of the star 
 in Cassiopeia, and the star n Argus in Professor Nichol's Solar System, 
 p. 189. 
 
 3 Helmholtz, Popular Scientific Lectures, 2d series, p. 165. 
 
 * The resistance experienced in the case of Encke's comet has, however, 
 it is right to say, been attributed by some to its passing through the 
 zodiacal nebulosity. 
 
 8 Helmholtz, p. 169. 
 
THE SUN'S DEATH. 39 
 
 Professor Tait 1 calculates that if the Earth were to 
 fall into the Sun, the heat thus generated would be equal 
 to the heat given out by the Sun in about 91 years. 
 Sir William Thomson 2 makes it 95 years, and calculates 
 the additional duration which the collapse of the other 
 planets would ensure. Jupiter falling in would, from 
 its immensely greater bulk, add 32,254 years, while 
 all the planets together would only effect a prolongation 
 of the Sun's beams for 45,604 years. But after all, 
 the Sun must in time be reduced to a black body 
 like that of the companion of Sirius, which is almost 
 indiscernable from the faintness of its light, 3 and ulti- 
 mately to that of the satellites or companion of the star 
 Procyon, which, from its darkness, has not yet been 
 seen. 
 
 Mr. Ivalley Miller, contemplating speculations of this 
 nature, observes : 4 ' When the last of the planets is 
 swallowed up, the Sun's energies will rapidly die out, 
 and a deep and deathly gloom gather around nature's 
 grave. Looking into the ages of a future eternity, we 
 can see nothing but a cold and burnt-out mass remain- 
 ing of that glorious orb which went forth in the morning 
 of time, joyful as a bridegroom from his chamber, and 
 rejoicing as a strong man to run a race.' 
 
 1 Recent Advances, p. 158. 2 Young, p. 272. 
 
 3 Helmholtz, p. 190. 
 
 4 R. Kalley Miller's Romance of Astronomy, p. 108. 
 
UNIVERSITY] 
 
 II. 
 
 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE SUN, ITS SPOTS AND 
 PROMINENCES. 1 
 
 PKINCIPAL LEITCH of Queen's College, Canada, in a popu- 
 lar work called God's Glory in the Heavens, published in 
 1863 (eighteen years ago), expressing an idea which 
 at that time and for ninety years previously had pre- 
 vailed among astronomers, thus describes our subject: 2 
 
 ' The Sun may then be conceived as composed of a 
 dark central body, encompassed by successive envelopes 
 or shells suspended at different heights in the atmosphere, 
 the uppermost being the one which forms the luminous 
 disc of the Sun. A Chinese ivory ball, composed of carved 
 concentric shells, represents very well the structure of the 
 Sun and the nature of the spots/ 
 
 Upon this dark central body the supposed inhabitants 
 of the Sun were imagined to dwell Imprisoned within 
 this tremendous oven, enveloped by a vast surrounding 
 canopy of cloud and fire which would for ever exclude 
 the view of all outside the Sun, its poor denizens, we 
 might fairly conceive, if not undergoing the daily 
 torment of continuous suffocation, would, without some 
 
 1 This lecture was delivered before the Literary Institute of Edin- 
 burgh on 7th December 1881, and was repeated, at request, before the 
 Greenock Philosophical Society on 24th February 1882. A few altera- 
 tions and additions have been made since. 
 
 a 2d edition, p. 123. 
 
 41 
 
42 THE SUN. 
 
 marvellous means of refrigeration, be unceasingly suffer- 
 ing the horrid pangs of recasting or stewing alive. 
 
 We are, however, saved the pain of realizing and 
 sympathizing with so frightful a condition by the know- 
 ledge to which we have now attained. During these 
 eighteen years astronomers, with the enormously increased 
 means of investigation at their disposal, and especially 
 by the use of the spectroscope, have been vigorously 
 prosecuting their inquiries with gigantic strides have 
 succeeded in unveiling many mysteries, and have intelli- 
 gently and patiently achieved that apparently difficult 
 task of throwing light upon the Sun. Nay, we are not 
 content with having our eyes filled with the Sun, but 
 we must have our ears too. For within the last few 
 months attempt, it seems, has been made by Professor 
 Graham Bell, under the guidance of M. Janssen, a 
 famous French astronomer, by employment of the photo- 
 phone, and that with sufficient encouragement, it is said, 
 to justify hope of ultimate success, to explore the noises 
 supposed to accompany the vast movements of matter 
 taking place in the solar surface. 
 
 Perhaps, in Great Britain at least, Mr. Norman 
 Lockyer is the astronomer who has, by his unwearied 
 labours, most largely contributed to acquaintance with 
 our great luminary. Among the foreign astronomers, 
 we are indebted to the late Father Secchi of Eome, M. 
 Janssen, and others, some of whose names I shall have 
 occasion to mention. 
 
 Philosophers, owing to the limited means of observa- 
 tion formerly had, have, till recent years, widely differed 
 regarding the constitution of the Sun. Some maintained, 
 
FORMATION INTERIOR. 43 
 
 like Professor Leitch, that its interior is, or contains, a 
 more or less solid body, cool and habitable ; others 
 that the Sun is entirely gaseous. The former opinion 
 is now abandoned, and the latter proposition, that it 
 is gaseous, is what is now generally held as the result 
 of more accurate scientific investigation to be its true 
 explanation or description. 
 
 This, then, is now considered to be the general forma- 
 tion of the Sun 
 
 (1.) The interior or portion which lies below or 
 within what is called the photosphere or surface, and is 
 entirely invisible to us. 
 
 (2.) The photosphere, or luminous face of the Sun. 
 
 (3.) Above this the chromosphere, or denser portion of 
 the Sun's atmosphere, and 
 
 (4.) Above the chromosphere, extending to a great 
 height, the Corona, or thinner or more attenuated 
 atmosphere. 
 
 Let us consider these different divisions in their 
 order. 
 
 1. The Interior of the Sun. 
 
 Though invisible, there is every reason to believe it 
 to be composed of gaseous vapours in a state of incan- 
 descence, burning with inconceivable heat ; and this 
 conclusion is supported by the well-ascertained fact that 
 the density of the Sun is so much less than that of the 
 Earth as to be only one and a half times that of water. 
 
 'So that,' says Sir John Herschel, 1 'it must consist in 
 reality of far lighter materials, especially when we 
 consider the force under which its central parts must be 
 
 1 Outlines, 8th ed. 449, p. 297. 
 
44 THE SUN. 
 
 condensed. This consideration renders it highly probable 
 that intense heat prevails-- in its interior, by which its' 
 elasticity is reinforced and rendered capable of resisting 
 this almost inconceivable pressure without collapsing 
 into smaller dimensions.' 
 
 M. Faye, a French astronomer 
 
 'Eegards the interior of the Sun as consisting of the 
 original nebula from which our whole system has been 
 slowly condensed, in a state of dissociation that is, at 
 such an intense heat that chemical combinations are 
 impossible.' 1 
 
 Father Secchi, late Director of the Observatory at 
 Eome, who has largely contributed to our knowledge of 
 the Sun by his observations on this, to him, a favourite 
 subject, says: 
 
 'When the sun at the epoch of its formation had 
 reached a volume about equivalent to that which it now 
 possesses, its temperature would have been at least 500 
 millions degrees; and, moreover, we know by experi- 
 ments that even now its surface temperature amounts to 
 several millions degrees ; that of the interior is probably 
 higher still. We must conclude from these facts that the 
 Sun cannot be composed of a solid mass ; nor, enormous 
 as may be the pressure existent in this mass, it cannot 
 possibly, so to speak, be in a liquid state. Whence we 
 are necessarily led to the supposition that it is gaseous 
 notwithstanding its extreme condensation.' 2 
 
 M. Delauney, another French astronomer, holds that 
 
 ' The Sun is a gaseous mass with a very elevated 
 temperature, which prevents the elementary substances 
 that enter into its composition from consolidating.' 3 
 
 1 Lockyer's Solar Physics, p. 67. 2 Rambosson's Astronomy, p. 89. 
 
 3 The views of some of the distinguished students of the Sun, includ- 
 ing specially Secchi, Faye, Young, and Langley, will be found in 
 Newcomb's Astronomy, p. 265 et seq. 
 
INTERIOR PHOTOSPHERE. 45 
 
 M. Rambosson, Laureate of the Institute of France, 
 says : 
 
 1 For my own part, after comparing the various solu- 
 tions that have been proposed, I must pronounce for the 
 gaseous nature of the sun.' l 
 
 Professor Young, holding it probable that the Sun's 
 core is gaseous, observes : 
 
 'Nothing could be remoter from the truth than to 
 imagine that a mass of gas under such conditions of 
 temperature and pressure ' (as he had described) ' would 
 resemble our air in its obvious characteristics. It would 
 be denser than water ; and since, as Maxwell and others 
 have shown, the viscosity of a gas increases fast with 
 rising temperature, it is probable that it would resist 
 motion something like a mass of pitch or putty.' 2 
 
 Such is the concurrence of opinion ; and the fact 
 appears to be pretty universally admitted or proved, 
 that the heat in its intensity is in the centre, Mr. 
 Lockyer observing that there is proof that the deeper 
 we go the hotter we get, and the coolness, comparative 
 of course, is to be found in the exterior or crust. It is 
 to this comparative coolness this which to us would 
 be an inappreciable diminution of inconceivably fervent 
 heat the Sun owes 
 
 2. The Photosphere, its shining cover. 
 M. Faye, Mr. Lockyer observes 
 
 'Looks upon the photosphere as the surface at which 
 the heat is so acted upon by the cold of space as to allow 
 chemical combinations and solid and liquid particles to 
 exist.' 3 
 
 1 P. 90. - 2 Sun, p. 286. 3 Solar Physics, p. 67. 
 
46 THE SUN. 
 
 It is from this photosphere, or shining skin of the 
 Sun, we derive our light and our heat, and its appear- 
 ance when examined by the telescope is very remarkable. 
 Observation of it had been made, as stated by Arago, 1 
 from time to time. It had been remarked by the 
 Bavarian Jesuit Scheiner, a contemporary of Galileo, 
 that the entire surface of the solar body was constantly 
 covered with light and dark streaks of slender dimen- 
 sions. A century and a half later (1774) Francis 
 Wollaston, an English astronomer, said, 'The Sun is 
 frequently dotted, perhaps always is,' and Sir William 
 Herschel in 1795 wrote, ' The Sun appears to be 
 irregular, like the skin of an orange.' About twenty 
 years ago Mr. Nasmyth, an English astronomer, examin- 
 ing with more care, observed upon the Sun what, from 
 their shape and elongated form, he designated, ' Willow 
 leaves,' a name by which this peculiar mottling has 
 generally been since known. It has been likened, 
 however, by other observers to slashed blades of straw, 
 and to grains of rice. Although only visible under a 
 powerful telescope, these so-called willow leaves are 
 necessarily of great size, having been estimated to be 
 not less than 1000 miles long by from 200 to 300 
 miles broad. They have been said by some, though it 
 is doubted or disputed by others, to interlace each other 
 like the cross hatching in a drawing or engraving. The 
 leaves themselves are luminous. The spaces between 
 them, being by contrast dark or less luminous, have 
 been called pores or openings. The leaves have thus 
 been described by Sir John Herschel : 
 
 ' According to his (Mr. Nasmyth's) observations made 
 with a very fine telescope of his own making, the bright 
 surface of the Sun consists of separate insulated in- 
 
 1 Arago's Popular Astronomy, p. 440. 
 
THE WILLOW LEAVES. 47 
 
 dividual objects or things all nearly, or exactly, of one 
 certain definite size and shape, which is more like that of 
 a willow leaf, as he describes them, than anything else. 
 These leaves or scales are not arranged in any order (as 
 those on a butterfly's wing are), but lie crossing one 
 another in all directions (like what are called spills in 
 the game of spillikens), except at the borders of a spot 
 where they point, for the most part, inwards towards the 
 middle of the spot, presenting much the sort of appear- 
 ance that the small leaves of some water-plants or 
 sea-weeds do at the edge of a deep hole of clear water. 
 The exceedingly definite shape of these objects, their 
 exact similarity one to another, and the way in which 
 they lie across and athwart each other (except where they 
 form a sort of bridge across a spot, in which case they 
 seem to affect a common direction, that, namely, of the 
 bridge itself), all these characters seem quite repugnant 
 to the notion of their being of a vaporous, a cloudy, or a 
 fluid nature. Nothing remains but to consider them as 
 separate and independent sheets, flakes, or scales having 
 some sort of solidity. And these flakes, be they what 
 they may, and whatever may be said about the dashing 
 of meteoric stones into the Sun's atmosphere, etc., are 
 evidently the immediate sources of the solar light and 
 Jieat/Bud. Sir John makes this singular addition : 'We 
 cannot refuse to regard them as organisms of some 
 peculiar and amazing kind, and though it would be too 
 daring to speak of such organization as partaking of the 
 nature of life, yet we do know that vital action is com- 
 petent to develope both heat, light, and electricity.' 1 
 
 The views relative to the supposed willow leaves 
 have, however, now undergone a change. Mr. Lockyer, 
 in his recent work on star-gazing (published 187S), 2 
 concludes, as the result of the work of many careful 
 
 1 Good Words, 1863, p. 282. 
 
 2 Lockyer's Star-gazing, p. 472. See also Skertchly's Physical System 
 of -the Universe, p. 222 ; Williams' Fuel of the Sun, p. 99. 
 
48 THE SUN. 
 
 observers since Mr. Nasmyth's discovery, that the appear- 
 ance of mottling is due to dome-like masses ; and these 
 dome-like masses are not improbably produced by the 
 upward and downward currents, to which I shall after- 
 wards refer. 
 
 Indeed, it has been a great subject of controversy 
 whether this surface or photosphere is solid, liquid, or 
 gaseous. The result of the most recent investigations 
 seems to be the establishment of the position that it is 
 gaseous. Nor do I think this is at all inconsistent with 
 the idea of a certain cloudy and even firm consistency 
 or crystallization, as it were, into shapes more or less 
 resembling the form of willow leaves. Our own clouds, 
 which are not subjected to the same enormous pressure, 
 often assume forms having an apparent solidity or com- 
 pactness dependent for their shapes upon the currents 
 existing in the atmosphere in which they are suspended. 
 But the surface of the Sun is subject to the pressure of 
 an atmosphere which, we shall presently see, is several 
 hundred thousand miles high, and this pressure, com- 
 bined with the contraction occasioned to a metallic 
 gas by exposure to a certain amount of (comparatively 
 speaking) cooler influence, may cause the luminous 
 matter to assume given forms, such as that of the 
 willow leaf. 
 
 There are, however, breaks in the willow-leaf system ; 
 for by means of the telescope it is seen that there are 
 here and there upon it, but constantly varying in num- 
 ber, extent, and place, what have been termed ' spots/ 
 I shall deal with them more specially afterwards. Mean- 
 time, I may just say generally that these are huge 
 cavities or holes or irregular wells in the photosphere. 
 
FACUL^E. 49 
 
 On the other hand, there are raised portions which 
 may be considered to be mountains of light, and are called 
 faculw. These mountains or ridges always exist round 
 the edges or borders of a spot, but are found all over 
 the Sun, while the spots are not. They form the most 
 intensely brilliant parts, and may be 
 ' Of all magnitudes,' says Mr. Lockyer, from hardly 
 visible, softly gleaming, narrow tracts 1000 miles long, to 
 continuous, complicated, and heapy ridges 40,000 miles 
 and more in length, and 1000 to 4000 miles broad.'' 1 
 
 The height of these ridges no one, so far as I have 
 noticed, seems to have estimated, unless it be Dr. Dick, 2 
 who speaks of them as several hundred miles above the 
 level ; but they would require to be of greater height to 
 be even seen as ridges. They have been attributed to 
 uprushes from the interior of the Sun ; and if so, may 
 be somewhat akin to the uprush of molten lava from, a 
 volcano, although probably not possessed of the same 
 degree of viscous solidity. They have been observed to 
 undergo a melting or disappearing action, and under the 
 influences existing on the Sun's surface in time may 
 form portions of the. willow leaf system, thus becoming 
 feeders of it. This curious operation is described by 
 Mr. Lockyer, 3 who, in observing ' a tongue of facula ' 
 stretching half-way into a spot, at first extremely 
 brilliant, but afterwards losing this brilliancy, says : 
 
 ' At the same time it seemed to me to be " giving out," 
 as it were, at its end, and a portion of the umbra between 
 it and the penumbra appeared to be veiled with a stratus 
 cloud evolved out of it.4 After a time, large, very dim 
 
 1 P. 18. 2 Dick's Celestial Scenery, ed. 1860, p. 215. 
 
 3 Lockyer's Solar Physics, p. 26. 
 
 4 I have seen at Zermatt an appearance analogous to this, in the issue 
 from the Matterhorn, under the influence of a strong Sun melting the 
 snow, of a continuous streak of white cloud. 
 
 D 
 
50 THE SUN. 
 
 " willow leaves " seemed to.be forming (condensing) on the 
 following portion of the Cloudy mass. So that at first 
 you got a very brilliant mass of what appeared to be 
 facula gradually melting away into umbra, and then the 
 umbra condensing into willow leaves/ 
 
 3. The Chromosphere. 
 
 Surrounding the photosphere like an envelope, the 
 spectroscope has revealed the existence of what was con- 
 sidered by Arago and other astronomers to be clouds, and 
 which some thought shone by reflected light. Mr. Lock- 
 yer, who was the first, or an early observer of certain 
 lines produced by it on the spectroscope, says l wherever 
 he looked he found these newly discovered lines 
 
 ' Showing that for some 5000 miles in height all round 
 the Sun there was an envelope, of which the prominences 
 were but the higher waves. This envelope I named the 
 chromosphere, as it is the region in which all the variously 
 coloured effects are seen in total eclipses, and because I 
 considered it of importance to distinguish between its 
 discontinuous spectrum and the continuous one of the 
 photosphere.' 
 
 Apparently this envelope ' as a rule bounds the con- 
 vection currents of the Sun,' 2 and does not exactly or at 
 all places rest on the photosphere or surface of the Sun, 3 
 but lies, like our clouds, a little above it, leaving hollows 
 between, which are, Mr. Lockyer says, doubtless filled 
 with dense vapours. Father Secchi fancies, apparently, 
 that the space of separation extends to as much as 
 40,000 miles. 4 But this view does not seem to be 
 concurred in by other astronomers, and is opposed by 
 Mr. Lockyer. The chromosphere itself, though largely 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 218. 8 Ibid. p. 417. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 409. * Schellen, Spectrum Analysis, p. 414. 
 
THE CORONA. 51 
 
 consisting of hydrogen gas, is pervaded by the vapours 
 of various metals. 1 It is not of uniform thickness, and 
 its thickness seems to depend on the prominences or 
 eruptions from below, to which I shall afterwards advert. 
 
 4. The Corona. 
 
 Above the chromosphere is a luminous atmosphere, 
 only visible during total eclipses, called the Corona. It 
 is thus described by Mr. Lockyer : 
 
 ' A total eclipse of the Sun is at once one of the grandest 
 and most awe-inspiring sights it is possible for man to 
 witness. All nature conspires to make it strange and 
 unearthly. Soon the stars burst out, and surrounding the 
 dark Moon on all sides is seen a glorious halo, generally 
 of a silver white light ; this is called the Corona. It is 
 slightly radiated in structure, and extends sometimes 
 beyond the Moon to a distance equal to her diameter. 
 Besides this, rays of light, called aigrettes, diverge from 
 the Moon's edge, and appear to be shining through the 
 light of the corona. In some eclipses parts of the corona 
 have reached to a much greater distance from the Moon's 
 edge than in others. It is supposed that the corona is 
 the Sun's atmosphere, which is not seen when the Sun 
 itself is visible, owing to the overpowering light of the 
 latter.' 8 
 
 But the speculation regarding the corona has been 
 great. Up to the year 1842 it was firmly believed 
 to be an appendage of the Moon, 3 and indicated the 
 height of its supposed atmosphere, an opinion which 
 was, Mr. Lockyer mentions, not banished from men's 
 minds till I860. 4 Thereafter the idea prevailed, and 
 apparently was at one time entertained by Mr. Lockyer 
 himself, that it owed its origin to the Earth's atmosphere. 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 480. 2 Ibid. p. 74. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 106. 4 Ibid. pp. 254, 265, 271. 
 
52 THE SUN. 
 
 The subject strongly interested astronomers, and became 
 a special question for determination by observation in 
 succeeding eclipses, in which all the aids to considera- 
 tion were had recourse to, particularly during the eclipses 
 of 1869, 1870, and 1871, specially mentioned in Mr. 
 Lockyer's Solar Physics, published in 1874, and also in 
 subsequent eclipses. The methods taken embraced 
 drawings of the appearances as seen by the naked eye, 
 spectroscopic and polariscopic observations, and photo- 
 graphy. The observations by these different methods 
 differed, but the representations obtained by means of 
 photography during the eclipse of 1871 l seemed to 
 establish beyond any doubt ' the solar nature of most, 
 if not all, of the corona recorded on the plates.' 
 
 The eclipse of 1875 established this conclusively. 2 
 Dr. Janssen, well known for his previous observations, 
 watched it carefully, and ascertained that the corona was 
 in reality an atmosphere of the Sun radiating by itself. 
 
 A curious appearance, perhaps due to an ocular 
 deception, but observed by different persons on differ- 
 ent occasions, has been not merely that of a flickering 
 or wavering, but even of a rotatory motion the corona 
 seeming to move in every conceivable way and direction. 
 One man in 1788 said 'it seemed to be endued with a 
 rapid rotatory motion, which caused it to resemble a 
 firework turning round its centre.' Another in 1860 
 similarly described it as 'a thing that was going round 
 and round like a firework.' 3 It is, however, very clear 
 that the corona assumes different shapes and appearances 
 and magnitudes at different times, and especially in 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 376. 2 Year Book of Facts in Science and Art?* 
 
 1876, p. 248. 
 3 Lockyer, pp. 294, 377. 
 
CORONA COLOUR. 53 
 
 being at times broken here and there by rifts. One 
 cannot wonder, therefore, that some people have 
 suggested ' that the corona was nothing but a per- 
 manent solar aurora.' 1 
 
 It has, however, now been authoritatively established 
 that this corona is in. reality an attenuated atmosphere 
 of the Sun ; 2 but opinions have greatly differed as to 
 the height above to which it extends, the most extrava- 
 gant opinion ascribing to it c two or three millions of 
 miles in height.' Opinions have also differed and 
 fluctuated from time to time in regard to the com- 
 position and pressure of the atmosphere. 
 
 The colour or appearance of the corona has been 
 variously described. Dr. Lardner, referring to the 
 observations of Mr. Hind and Mr. Dawes, says : 
 
 ' Its colour seemed to be that of tarnished silver, 
 brightest next the Moon's limb, and gradually fading to 
 a distance equal to one-third of her diameter, where it 
 became confounded with the general tint of the heavens.' 3 
 
 Guillemin describes it as ' sometimes of a pearly 
 or silvery white, sometimes yellowish, and even red.' 
 Father Fauro, writing to Father Secchi, says : 
 
 ' The colour was beyond the power of any artist to 
 paint. All observers agree that it resembled mother-of- 
 pearl, or pure unpolished silver, but far more beautiful, 
 and more intensely brilliant.' 4 
 
 The opinion entertained not many years ago was 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 305. 
 
 2 Mr. Proctor, who gives much interesting information regarding the 
 corona, seems to attribute it to an enormous mass of meteors accumu- 
 lated round the Sun, I presume in a dissolved state (Sun, p. 364 et seq.). 
 
 3 Lardner's Handbook of Astronomy, 522. 
 
 4 Schellen, Spectrum Analysis, 325. 
 
54 THE SUN. 
 
 that the chromosphere is low and of simple composition, 
 subject to a small pressure, and that the envelope of 
 the Sun's atmosphere consists solely of hydrogen. All 
 this is now changed, and there has been a discovery of 
 two new substances in the solar atmosphere. One of 
 these was at one time thought to be vapour of iron, but 
 this opinion was abandoned, and the view was retained 
 that it is the vapour or gas of a substance unknown on 
 the Earth a gas which seems to pervade the Sun's 
 atmosphere from the lowest depths to the greatest 
 elevation. It is denoted by the line in the spectrum, 
 No. 1474. The other substance discovered is the gas 
 of an also unknown constituent, and designated as the 
 line D 3 . It exists only at the lower altitudes. Both 
 these gases, however, have recently been thought by 
 Mr. Proctor to be a form of hydrogen, though differing 
 from the ordinary forms of that gas as known to us. 1 
 But this is only a supposition which remains to be, if 
 possible, proved. Hydrogen proper was formerly sup- 
 posed to be the lightest of all gases or substances, but 
 the unknown gas, 1474, is discovered existing still 
 lighter, for it rises high above the utmost limit of 
 hydrogen in the solar atmosphere, and forms the outer 
 envelope, extending to at least 20', or about 500,000 
 miles high, and probably, could it be detected, and 
 without doubt occasionally, a good deal higher ; but 
 at a height of 20', 2 ten thousand times higher than the 
 atmosphere of the Earth, which has commonly been 
 believed to extend only to a height of 50 miles, 
 although a much greater elevation has been assigned 
 to it by some. The line of extreme limit of hydrogen 
 (proper) in the Sun's atmosphere is thought to be 12', 
 or about 300,000 miles high, but at this height it 
 1 Year Book, 1879, p. 78, 2 1' is = 25,000 miles upon the Sun. 
 
ITS A TMOSPHERIC STRA TA. 5 5 
 
 exists as a layer of cool gas ; below this again is a 
 layer of incandescent hydrogen gas (that is gas at a 
 white heat), mixed with vapours of various metals and 
 of other substances. The hydrogen rests on a layer of 
 the unknown element (D 3 ), and it again on the chromo- 
 sphere, which extends 5000 miles above the Sun, and 
 is of a composite character ; while the chromosphere, in 
 its under surface more or less pervaded by hollows, 1 
 rests separated probably by some space on the photo- 
 sphere, arid the photosphere reposes (if such a term can 
 be applied to a scene of constant fiery activity) on the 
 gaseous matter below, thus floating like a crust on the 
 atmosphere of the Sun, by which on both sides it is 
 enveloped. Mr. Lockyer describes this succession of 
 elements on the Sun in these words : 
 
 ' Travelling down from x', which gives us the 1474 line, 
 and exists at the extremest, the most utterly distant parts 
 of the corona, right down through the solar atmosphere to 
 the bottom of the deepest spot, we shall pass very much 
 through the different substances in this order. Beginning 
 with the 1474 element, we pass through the sub-incan- 
 descent hydrogen ; deeper still we get to the incandescent 
 hydrogen ; then we go through the D 3 element ; then we 
 get into regions where the lines are generally mixed 
 rather more together, but from which magnesium and 
 sodium are generally ejected more frequently and higher 
 than any other material ; then we get into the more 
 doubtful zone of barium and nickel sometimes sodium 
 being thrown up, sometimes barium, sometimes nickel; 
 and then we come lower down into what may be called, 
 so far as we shall ever be able to investigate the Sun, 
 the very bowels of our central orb, where we are certain 
 to get iron, and we may get many other materials.' 2 
 
 Although the corona extends to high above the Sun, 
 
 1 Schellen, p. 415. 2 Lockyer, p. 415. 
 
5 6 THE SUN. 
 
 it must by no means be thought that it resembles in 
 its upper portions the Atmosphere of our Earth in 
 density. The corona, it is said, must be hundreds of 
 times lighter than hydrogen. The great comet of 1843 
 passed at the rate of 350 miles per second through 
 at least 300,000 miles of it without visible damage or 
 retardation. Whereas shooting stars are instantly and 
 completely vaporized by encountering our atmosphere 
 at a height of 50 or 100 miles. 1 
 
 The existence and non-existence of substances in the 
 Sun, which are known to us on Earth, have been dis- 
 covered by means of the spectroscope, and different 
 observers, have made different lists or tables ; but 
 all are agreed that hydrogen, sodium, iron, calcium, 
 magnesium, and nickel are there. As to other sub- 
 stances, opinions differ ; but there is, at all events, a 
 general accord that gold, silver, mercury, tin, and lead, 
 all metals having a great specific gravity, with some 
 other substances existing in the Earth, are wanting. 
 What have been so discovered all exist, in consequence 
 of the frightful heat, in a state of vapour. The absence 
 of the heavy metals may, I think, be explained on the 
 supposition, according to the Nebular hypothesis, that 
 they may rind their place in the outer planets. 
 
 Eecently oxygen has been discovered by Professor 
 Henry Draper. 2 The existence of nitrogen is not yet 
 with certainty ascertained. 3 Professor Newcomb regards 
 the discovery of oxygen as 'the most important advance 
 in spectrum analysis since Lockyer and Janssen dis- 
 covered the spectrum of the solar protuberances.' 4 
 
 1 Newcorab, p. 259. 
 
 2 See Guillemin's Forces of Nature, Appendix, p. 673. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 676. 4 Ibid. p. 520. 
 
THE SPOTS. 57 
 
 With this enormous atmosphere, laden, too, with so 
 many metallic vapours, joined to the immense attrac- 
 tion or force of gravity exerted by the huge body of the 
 Sun, the pressure on the photosphere must be excessive, 
 and to that enormous pressure may be due, as experi- 
 ment would seem to prove, the brilliancy of the Sun's 
 light ; * while below the photosphere the pressure must 
 maintain, if it do not produce, the inconceivable heat 
 which fills the vast gaseous cavity forming the interior 
 of the Sun. 
 
 We are now perhaps in a position to approach the 
 consideration of the spots and prominences on the Sun, 
 both of which, like everything else connected with the 
 investigation of our great luminary, have, by reason of 
 diversity of opinion, been the subjects of much discus- 
 sion. 
 
 THE SOLAR SPOTS. 
 
 The spots on the Sun are not usually visible to the 
 naked or unassisted eye. It is to Galileo, the wonder- 
 ful Italian, the discovery of them is commonly, and 
 apparently with truth, attributed. M. Arago, 2 no doubt, 
 disputes this position, and dates observation back to the 
 time of Virgil, citing cases of observations from the 
 year 321 downwards to 1607 of spots which, on some 
 occasions, were supposed to have been the planets 
 Mercury or Venus crossing the Sun's disc. Such obser- 
 vations without telescopic aid, however, can hardly be 
 regarded as having been of much value, and the first 
 real observation was truly made by Galileo who, in 1610, 
 soon after he had invented his telescope, and even with the 
 very small power he had at first succeeded in producing, 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 329. 2 Book xiv. c. viii. p. 420. 
 
58 THE SUN. 
 
 observed, and informed others of, the spots on the Sun's 
 disc, and from their motion inferred, as one named John 
 Fabricius is said by Arago 1 to have first done, the 
 revolution of the Sun upon its axis. The honour of 
 the telescopic discovery was indeed contested by the 
 Jesuit Father Scheiner, professor of mathematics at 
 Ingolstadt; but he did not in reality observe them for 
 a year later. Galileo, in a work published by him in 
 March 1613, called History and Explanation of the 
 Solar Spots, 2 settled the controversy between him and 
 Scheiner and his other opponents ; while he at the same 
 time first published his views in favour of the Coper- 
 nican system a publication which soon brought him 
 into trouble with the ecclesiastical powers of Italy. 
 
 Galileo's opinion with regard to the spots was that 
 they are matter in or near the Sun of the nature of 
 cloud, and are not permanent ; that they are black or 
 dark to appearance in the centre, but are in reality as 
 bright as the Moon. Scheiner, on the other hand, held 
 them to be similar to planetary moons or comets, and 
 that some might be ' as far from the Sun as the Moon, 
 Venus, or Mercury (on the Ptolemaic system).' 3 They 
 are not, he thought, on the Sun, but, although thin, were 
 as dense as the Moon. 
 
 Towards the close of the century, Fontenelle, in his 
 once popular but superficial work on the Plurality of 
 Worlds, states, and seems to countenance, the absurd 
 notion that the Sun is of melted gold, which appears to 
 boil over continually, and by force of its motion casts 
 up the spots as scum or dross to its surface, where it is 
 consumed. 4 
 
 1 Popular Astronomy, p. 424. 2 Gebler's Galileo, p. 44. 
 
 3 Lockyer, p. 8. * Fontenelle, p. 104. 
 
NATURE OF SPOTS. 59 
 
 Dr. Wilson of Glasgow, in 1774, showed that the 
 spots are cavities, 1 or what he terms ' excavations,' in a 
 luminous envelope surrounding the Sun, which, accord- 
 ing to his view, was a dark globe. Surrounding the 
 dark spot there always is a lighter portion, which has 
 been called the penumbra, and Wilson inferred that the 
 penumbroe were the sloping sides of the well at the 
 bottom of which is the black spot. 2 The justice of which 
 deduction, Skertchly says, 3 concurred in by Guillemin, 4 
 'all subsequent research has confirmed.' In 1769, 
 Wilson also calculated, according to mathematical prin- 
 ciples, that the depth of one spot was equal to the Earth's 
 radius, or 4000 miles ; 5 but generally he assigned a depth 
 of from 2000 to 4000 miles. 6 Matthieu Williams, 
 however, considers ' one or two hundred thousand 
 miles' 7 as not an unreasonable estimate of the depth of 
 some of the largest Sun spots. But this is likely to be 
 as extravagant an estimate as the other is inadequate. 
 
 A very common opinion, held up till recent times, as 
 we have seen, and one conceived by Dr. Wilson, and 
 shared in by Sir William Herschel, and more recently 
 by the late Professor Nichol of Glasgow, 8 and others, 
 was that the Sun is a solid body, and the spots are 
 cavities or displacements in the shining envelope, through 
 which we see this solid body or nucleus, the cavities 
 being occasioned by the working of some sort of elastic 
 vapour which is generated within the dark globe. The 
 French philosopher, La Lande, suggested that the spots 
 
 1 See Nichol's Phenomena of Solar System, p. 178 et seq. ; also his 
 Solar System, p. 170. 
 
 2 Arago, p. 436. 3 Skertchly, p. 207. 
 4 Guillemin's Sun, p. 222. 5 Arago, p. 438. 
 
 6 Dick's Celestial Scenery, p. 213. 7 Williams' Fuel of Sun, p. 90. 
 8 Nichol's Phenomena, pp. 186-190. 
 
60 THE SUN. 
 
 might be ' eminences in the nature of mountains actually 
 laid bare.' * The idea that a spot was disclosure of the 
 assumed solid body of the Sun, was rather countenanced 
 by the observations of Mr. Dawes in 1851, who supposed 
 he had found the blacker portions of spots merely to be 
 an inferior or lower 
 
 ' Stratum of very feebly luminous or illuminated matter, 
 which he has called the cloudy stratum, which again in 
 its turn is frequently seen to be pierced with a smaller 
 and usually much more rounded aperture, which would 
 seem at length to afford a view of the real solar surface 
 of most intense blackness.' 2 
 
 All these and other opinions were formed during the 
 time when the Sun could only be examined by means 
 of the telescope, which, even using the finest instru- 
 ment ' under the most favourable atmospheric conditions,' 
 only enables us to observe the various phenomena as we 
 should do with the naked eye at a distance of 180,000 
 miles. But the invention of the spectroscope, among 
 its other wonders, has at last, after patient investigation 
 and consideration, and not without the broaching of 
 discordant theories, settled, according to Lockyer, that 
 the spots are occasioned by a downrush from the 
 upper and cooler solar atmosphere of the metallic 
 vapours 3 with which it is loaded through the photosphere 
 to the hotter regions below. A spot, accordingly, is just, 
 in the words of Mr. Lockyer 
 
 ' A place in which principally the vapours of sodium, 
 barium, iron, and magnesium occupy a lower level than 
 they do ordinarily in the atmosphere.' It is ' the seat of 
 a downrush ' or downsinking ' (sometimes having the ap- 
 
 i Sir J. Herschel's Outlines, 389. 2 Ibid. 389 a. 
 
 3 Lockyer, pp. 70, 72. 
 
SIZE OF SPOTS. 6 1 
 
 pearance of being formed in a whirlpool J ), and the greater 
 darkness of a spot is due to 'the general absorption of the 
 atmosphere, thicker here than elsewhere, as the spot is a 
 cavity.' 2 
 
 This result of investigation has accounted also for 
 the fact of the gradations of darkness observed in spots, 
 the darker portions being those which are deepest, and 
 probably most densely laden with metallic fumes. 
 
 Such is the simple explanation of solar spots. But 
 there are various circumstances connected with them. 
 
 1. In the first place, a spot is often of tremendous size. 
 Guillemin says : 
 
 . ' In 1779, William Herschel saw a spot which was not 
 less than 50,000 miles in diameter. Those shown in fig. 30, 
 from a drawing by Captain Davis, show what enormous 
 dimensions some spots sometimes attain, the largest of 
 them, which has, however, a double nucleus, was not 
 less than 187,000 miles in its greatest length ; its super- 
 fices, including the penumbra, was about 25,000,000,000 
 square miles. If these spots are, as we shall see farther 
 on, great rents in the luminous envelope of the Sun, 
 of what an immense capacity these enormous gulfs, 
 those gigantic abysses, must be ; our entire globe would 
 appear in their depths no larger than a fragment of rock 
 rolled into the crater of a volcano. With such dimen- 
 sions as these, its spots must sometimes be visible to the 
 naked eye.' 3 
 
 Arago mentions spots seen equal to ten times the 
 diameter of the Earth. 4 Dr. Young says that the 
 largest spot yet recorded was observed in 1858. It 
 
 1 See drawing of one observed by Professor Secchi, Guillemin's Sun, 
 p. 221. 
 
 2 Lockyer, pp. 226, 227. 3 Guillemin's Sun, p. 178. 
 4 Arago, p. 409. 
 
62 THE SUN. 
 
 had a breadth of 143,00$ miles, and covered about one 
 thirty-sixth of the whole surface of the Sun. 1 Mr. 
 Proctor also mentions the sizes of various spots, stating 
 the largest to have been 143,500 miles. 2 
 
 Williams, referring to the great spot observed in 
 1839, above mentioned by Guillemin, says: 'Worlds 
 of the size of ours might be poured by hundreds into 
 such a cavity, like peas in a basin.' 3 
 
 2. The spots which advance from east to west some- 
 times 'preserve nearly the same form for many days 
 together', 4 but as a rule they are always changing their 
 aspect, are formed and closed with tremendous velocity ; 
 and ' it not unfrequently happens,' says Schellen, in his 
 work on spectrum analysis, ' that the appearance of a 
 group of spots is so entirely changed from one day to 
 another that it can no longer be recognised in the new 
 form it has assumed.' 5 When near to each other, says 
 Arago, ' the nuclei appear to have a certain tendency to 
 unite together. They usually enlarge till the moment 
 when their union is effected/ 6 I have little doubt that 
 this tendency is the result of gravitation between two 
 or more comparatively solid bodies of vapour, which the 
 nuclei must be. Sir John Herschel says : 
 
 ' When watched from day to day, or even from hour 
 to hour, they appear to enlarge or contract, to change 
 their forms, and at length to disappear altogether, or to 
 break out anew in parts of the surface where none were 
 before. In such cases of disappearance the central dark 
 spot always contracts into a point, and vanishes before 
 
 1 Young's Sun, p. 126. 2 Proctor's Sun, p. 233. 
 
 3 Williams, p. 112. 4 Schellen, p. 276. 
 
 6 Schellen, p. 275. 6 Arago, p. 435. 
 
FORMS OF SPOTS. 63 
 
 the border.' ' Spots have been observed whose lineal 
 diameter has been upwards of 45,000 miles, and even, if 
 some records are to be trusted, of very much greater 
 extent. That such a spot should close up in six weeks' 
 time (for they seldom last much longer), its borders must 
 approach at the rate of more than 1000 miles a day.' l 
 
 The appearances of a spot breaking up into smaller 
 fractions are described by Francis Wollaston, in 1774, 
 as ' similar to those which happened when, after having 
 hurled a mass of ice upon the surface of a frozen pond, 
 the different fragments into which it divides slide off in 
 all sorts of directions/ 2 a description which Guillemin 
 says must not be taken too literally. 3 Dr. Long saw a 
 spot not much less in diameter than our Earth break 
 into two the parts separating ' from one another with 
 prodigious velocity.' The rate of separation or union, 
 however, has been calculated. Guillemin says : 
 ' According to the recent observations of M. Chacornac, 
 small spots are precipitated into larger ones with a 
 velocity which sometimes attains to 599^ yards per 
 second,' 4 an exactitude of measurement even to half a 
 yard not a little surprising, although it in reality means 
 a rapidity of 20 miles per minute, equal to 28,800 
 miles in a day, or thirty times the speed of a flying 
 railway train. The same author mentions two cases of 
 spots which M. Langier estimated receded from each 
 other with a velocity of 121 yards per second, equal to 
 about 5800 miles per day. 
 
 3. A third circumstance is, that the spots are only to 
 be found in two zones or belts near to the equator of the 
 Sun. They are never observed at the poles of the Sun, 
 
 1 Outlines, 386. 2 Arago, p. 434. 
 
 3 Guilleinin's Sun, p. 191. * Ibid. p. 191. 
 
64 THE SUN. 
 
 which, I may incidentally mention, are not thought to 
 be much colder than the region of the Sun's equator. 
 The equator itself is generally clear of spots, as may 
 be noticed by examining Carrington's Plates of Obser- 
 vations. 
 
 4. But a much more singular circumstance is, that 
 the spots are found to travel round the Sun, or 
 accompany it in its rotation on its axis, at different 
 rates of speed, dependent on their proximity to or 
 distance from the Sun's equator. 1 The nearer they are 
 to the equator they travel the more rapidly. This 
 observed fact has explained the difference of observa- 
 tions as to the period of the Sun's rotation, which, 
 having been computed by watching the period of 
 revolution of the spots, has varied greatly. 2 It would 
 also evidence a great want of coherence in the photo- 
 sphere of the Sun, and probably, though Mr. Lockyer 
 thinks not, in its whole body, supposing the Sun to be 
 entirely gaseous, and no solid nucleus within. 3 The 
 fact was discovered by Mr. Carrington, who spent seven 
 years and a half in watching with painstaking minute- 
 ness 4 the appearances of the Sun ; and the result of his 
 labours on this point was, according to Mr. Lockyer, 
 that he found the rotation of the Sun at the equator is 
 
 1 Professor Newcomb, however, holds a different opinion. He says 
 ' that the equatorial regions of the Sun perform their revolution in a 
 shorter time than those parts nearer the poles, cannot be regarded as a 
 scientific theory' (Newcomb, p. 251). 
 
 2 Lockyer, p. 66. 3 Ibid. p. 39. 
 
 * Mr. Carrington's labours are exhibited in a large quarto volume, 
 published in 1863, Observations of the Spots of the Sun, November 9, 
 1853, to March 24, 1861, made at Redhill. The plates, 166 in number, 
 embrace diagrams showing 99 rotations. Sometimes these diagrams 
 are clear altogether of spots. 
 
OF 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 PLANET INFLUENCE 
 
 in 30 '8 6 days, or nearly 31 days; 1 while at 
 or S. latitude (the highest points at which spots have 
 been observed) the rotation takes place in 28*36 days, 
 or in about 28 days, 8 hours. 
 
 5. Another peculiarity of the spots arises out of the 
 influence exerted on the Sun by the relative position, 
 the approach or retirement, of the planets, and by their 
 conjunctions, and especially by the movements of the 
 planets Mercury, Venus, and Jupiter. 
 
 ' In order to obtain grounds for this conclusion,' says 
 Mr. Lockyer, 2 ' the Kew observers have laboriously 
 measured the area of all the Sun spots observed by 
 Carrington from 1854 to 1860, and they find as the 
 result of their inquiries that a spot has a tendency to 
 break out at that portion of the Sun which is nearest 
 to the planet Venus. As the Sun rotates, carrying 
 the newly -born spot farther away from this planet, 
 the spot grows larger, attaining its maximum at the 
 point farthest from Venus, and decreasing again on its 
 approaching this planet. We here speak of Venus, as it 
 appears to be the most influential of all the planets in 
 this respect. Jupiter appears also to have much influence, 
 and more recently it has been shown that Mercury has 
 an influence of the same nature, although more difficult 
 to discuss on account of his rapid motion. Should, 
 therefore, any two of these planets, or, still better, should 
 all three be acting together at the same place upon the 
 Sun, we may expect a very large amount of spots, which 
 will attain their maximum at that portion of the Sun 
 most remote from these planets.' 3 
 
 1 I am at a loss to reconcile this with Mr. Carrington's Observations, 
 which throughout seem to take the rotation to be about 26 days. Dr. 
 Young (Sun, p. 133) puts the period of rotation down at only 25 days. 
 
 2 Lockyer, p. 81. 
 
 3 Dr. Young considers it more probable that the periodicity of spots 
 is in the Sun itself dependent upon no external causes, but upon the 
 
 E 
 
66 THE SUN. 
 
 It follows as a corollary that the more planets come 
 in conjunction the greater will be the number of spots 
 or disturbance of the Sun. Mr. Williams states the 
 mean gravitation of Jupiter upon the Sim to be 13 
 times that of the Earth ; of Venus, about 2^ times ; and 
 of Saturn, a little above equal ; while that of the other 
 planets, Uranus and Neptune, is considerably less than 
 that of the Earth. 1 
 
 6. After the statement of these facts you will, no 
 doubt, be prepared for another that the number of 
 spots during successive years seems to run a course, 
 or what is termed a cycle, increasing gradually to a 
 maximum, or largest number, and diminishing again to 
 a minimum, or the smallest number, and so on. Looking 
 to the regularity of the planetary motions (to which 
 the fact must, I think, be mainly ascribed), we should 
 naturally expect this result; and to the consideration 
 of this question the attention of astronomers has been, 
 and is still being directed. Mr. Lockyer mentions that 
 Herr Schwabe of Dessau 'has now for about 40 years 
 been engaged, without intermission, in registering the 
 number of spots which appear on the Sun's surface,' 2 
 and the result of his labours has been to declare for a 
 period or cycle of 10 years. In other words, that the 
 same series of spots are formed and present themselves 
 after a lapse of 10 years. 3 This conclusion, it is only 
 right to say, has been disputed on the ground that it 
 does not, as alleged, tally with recorded observations ; 
 
 constitution of the photosphere, and the rate at which the Sun is losing 
 heat (Young's Sun, p. 152). 
 
 1 "Williams' Fuel of Sun, p. 57. 2 Lockyer, p. 79. 
 
 3 A table of the number of days in each year without spots from 
 1823 to 1869 is given in Proctor's Sun, p. 199. 
 
SPOT CYCLES PROMINENCES. 67 
 
 and it cannot be positively affirmed that we are yet in 
 a position to lay down authoritatively a law on the 
 subject, or rather to fix the precise period of time, 
 although it is commonly reckoned to be 10 or 11 
 years. As all the planets, and even the distant ones 
 (which are the larger bodies), exert an influence more 
 or less, and as their relative positions and conjunctions 
 are intricately varying, it is probable, I think, that 
 there may be a general law giving a 10 or 11 years' 
 period due to the positions of Mercury, Venus, the 
 Earth, and Jupiter; or, perhaps, according with Jupiter's 
 period of revolution (which occupies 11 years 314 days), 
 subject to displacement by the disturbances occasioned 
 by the changing positions of the other planets, whose 
 influence, however, individually is greatly smaller, 
 though conjointly, as has been the case during the last 
 3 years, it becomes important. Indeed, it is considered 
 that the 11 years' period is part of a larger cycle of 
 33 years, while some have stated another period of 
 maximum spot development of about 56 years, cor- 
 responding to the epoch at which Jupiter and Saturn 
 come into conjunction. 1 The fact, however, is a very 
 weighty one, and, as I shall immediately show, we 
 dwellers upon the Earth are deeply interested in it. 
 In the meantime I must take up an equally interesting 
 topic. 
 
 THE SOLAR PROMINENCES. 
 
 These are only visible during a total eclipse, and 
 they are of irregular form and of lake red colour. They 
 were at first supposed to belong to the atmosphere of 
 the Moon ; but that they are appearances in the solar 
 atmosphere is now regarded as beyond question. 
 
 1 Williams, pp. 55, 56. 
 
68 THE SUN. 
 
 The first recorded observation of these red flames was 
 made at Berne in 1*706. They were again noticed in 
 1715 and on subsequent occasions ; but they were 
 particularly watched during the eclipse of 1842. 1 
 M. Baily, one of the observers, thus describes them : 
 
 1 They had the appearance of mountains of a prodigious 
 elevation ; their colour was red, tinged witli lilac or 
 purple ; perhaps the colour of the peach blossom would 
 more nearly represent it. They somewhat resembled the 
 snowy tops of the Alpine mountains when coloured by 
 the rising or setting Sun.' 
 
 Another writer compared the appearance to ' a box 
 of ebony garnished with rubies ; ' and another observed 
 them ' change from white to red and from red to violet, 
 and then back again through the reverse order.' The rapid 
 changes they underwent was a feature of the observa- 
 tion of this eclipse. In 1851, they were again watched, 
 and for the first time photographed, although photo- 
 graphy does not appear capable of furnishing views of 
 the Sun as distinct and clear as can be got by the eye 
 itself. 2 One of the prominences then observed was so 
 brilliant as to be visible to the naked eye. But it 
 would occupy too much space to describe the appear- 
 ances during this and subsequent eclipses. By that of 
 1860, when photography was better applied, it was 
 established that there was a continuous envelope (the 
 chromosphere) surrounding the Sun, and that the pro- 
 minences were merely local heapings up of the envelope, 
 and were accordingly attached to the Sun, a fact pre- 
 viously conjectured, if not proved, by Mr. Grant in his 
 history of physical astronomy. 3 These observations led 
 to the discovery that it was possible to photograph 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 108. 2 See Lockyer's Star-gazing, pp. 476, 477. 
 
 3 Grant's Physical Astronomy, pp. 395-401. 
 
OBSER VA TION OF PROMINENCES. 69 
 
 the prominences while they were invisible to the eye, 
 and even while the Sun is not under eclipse. 
 
 Mr. Lockyer in 1866 ingeniously suggested the 
 possibility of observing the prominences when there 
 is no eclipse of the Sun, and after working with a 
 spectroscopic instrument of insufficient power, was, on 
 16th October 1868, put in possession by means of a 
 Government grant of a better one. 1 Four days after 
 he was enabled, he tells us, to examine the prominences 
 while ' the Sun was shining in all the glory that an 
 English autumn permits,' and with the result of dis- 
 covering the existence of that for which he was looking, 
 * bright lines ' in the spectroscopic image. An eclipse 
 had happened in August of the same year, and had 
 been watched in India by M. Janssen, the French 
 astronomer. He also observed the bright lines, and 
 being struck with the brilliancy of the red flames he 
 was led to consider ' it might be possible to see them ' 
 (the spectroscopic image) ' without an eclipse.' 2 He 
 tried it next day, and was rewarded by the sight, and 
 for seventeen days afterwards with similar success. 
 Although he had the good fortune to be in point of 
 time earlier than Mr. Lockyer, who had first suggested 
 the possibility of the examination, yet his communica- 
 tion to Paris was not received till Mr. Lockyer had 
 published his independent discovery. 3 The scientific 
 importances of these concurring observations was this, 
 that they settled, at least in great measure, the problem 
 of what do these flames or prominences consist. 4 
 
 It had been previously thought that the prominences 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 127. 2 Ibid. p. 127. 
 
 3 Mr. Proctor seems mistakingly inclined to give M. Janssen the 
 greater credit (Sun, p. 280). 
 
 4 Lockyer, p. 77, 78. 
 
70 THE SUN. 
 
 were not due to burning- vapour, and that they might 
 be particles of solid matter at a red glowing heat sus- 
 pended in the atmosphere. The question being whether 
 ' the particles in the photosphere itself might not be 
 likened to a white hot poker, and those in the atmosphere 
 to merely a red hot one/ The bright lines now discovered 
 upset this idea, and showed that the prominences were 
 truly burning gas. But I shall best convey a descrip- 
 tion of the observation in Mr. Lockyer's own words. 
 
 ' Three beautifully coloured lines of light were visible. 
 Two of them, corresponding to C and F in the solar 
 spectrum, showed that the famous red flames were com- 
 posed in part at least of incandescent hydrogen gas ; 
 that hydrogen gas was present in the atmosphere of the 
 Sun in volumes beside which the size of the Earth is as 
 nothing, welling up in what may be almost considered 
 tongues of flame to a height of 70,000 and 80,000 miles, 
 now running out into strange shapes and branches, now 
 parting from the lower surface, and floating cloudlike in 
 the higher regions. Besides these two lines which settled 
 the question as to hydrogen, another line was observed 
 near D which, strangely enough, had no dark line in the 
 solar spectrum corresponding with it. I soon found that 
 by sweeping the slit of the spectroscope along the Sun's 
 edge and over the prominences it was quite easy to 
 determine their outline, the length of the bright line 
 visible giving the height of that part of the prominence 
 on the slit at the time.' 1 
 
 M. Janssen's observations were nearly similar, and 
 he declares as a result of his investigations that the 
 prominences ' are the seats of movements of which no 
 terrestrial phenomena can give any idea, masses of 
 matter many hundred times larger than the Earth 
 changing both place and form in the space of a few 
 minutes.' 2 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 125. 2 Ibid. p. 128. 
 
HEIGHT OF PROMINENCES. 71 
 
 The rapidity of the changes and the height to which 
 the prominences have reached, or been blown or driven, 
 has been matter of repeated observation. For example, 
 a prominence 40,000 miles high was subjected to such 
 forces as in 10 minutes to leave scarcely a vestige of 
 it the changes being apparently greatest in the higher 
 and rarer atmosphere. 
 
 Professor Respighi, an Italian astronomer, who has 
 devoted himself with enormous labour to the observation 
 of the solar prominences, states that he never found a 
 prominence sensibly higher than 6' that is, 150,000 
 miles ; and he has furnished a table of the comparative 
 heights, from which it appears that out of 1363 pro- 
 minences, 1154 did not rise higher than from 25,000 
 to 50,000 miles, and only 5 exceeded 125,000 miles. 1 
 
 Dr. Young says he has 
 
 ' Seen in all perhaps three or four which exceeded 
 150,000 miles ; and Secchi has recorded one of 300,000 
 miles. On 7th October 1880, the writer observed one 
 which attained the hitherto unprecedented height of over 
 13' of arc, or 350,000 miles.' 2 
 
 Most astronomers divide the prominences into two 
 classes eruptive and nebulous ; but Kespighi, from 
 the extent of his observations, is inclined to subdivide 
 much further. They are evidently due to a welling up 
 of hydrogen and other vapours or gases from the hotter 
 regions below, and have been ascribed by some to elec- 
 tricity, by others to heat, and by others to explosions. 3 
 Whatever be their cause, they are thus the counterparts 
 of the spots which are due, as already stated, to the 
 down/rush of metallic vapours from the cooler heights 
 above. Indeed, so closely connected is this action 
 (which may, I presume, be somewhat likened to that 
 
 1 Lockyer, p. 395. 2 Sun, 202. 3 Lockyer, p. 402. 
 
72 THE SUN. 
 
 which goes on an the oqean between the poles of the 
 Earth and the equator) tnat 
 
 'As a rule, when we get the bright line indication of 
 an uprush we get an absorption line ' (indicating down- 
 rush) ' by the side of it, often moved towards the red, 
 which shows that we have relative^ cooler hydrogen 
 descending from above the disturbed part, but at times 
 the index line in many cases disappears altogether, that 
 is, we have no longer relatively cooler hydrogen, the 
 whole of the superincumbent hydrogen has been heated 
 to the same temperature as that of the newly ejected 
 material, which is as hot, or at times hotter than the 
 photosphere.' 1 
 
 The prominences rise with immense rapidity, an 
 ordinary rate being 40 miles per second ; but often 
 vastly more rapid. Conceive this if we can. Williams 
 says : 
 
 ' It must be an enormous volley millions of cubic 
 miles of a furiously explosive mixture consisting chiefly 
 of the elements of water.' ' It must be a continuous 
 explosion of such mighty force and magnitude that 
 beggars the imagination in its efforts to picture its action 
 and results. We know the deafening report which ac- 
 companies the explosion of a soap bubble when filled 
 with these gases accurately mixed in the proportions to 
 form water. What would be the crash if the cupola of 
 St. Paul's were filled in like manner and exploded ! ' 
 c What if a hundred worlds all charged with the material 
 of this horrid ruin were fired successively in one long 
 bellowing train, combining their propulsive efforts like 
 the contiguous grains of powder in a gun ! ' 2 
 
 But not only do the prominences rise with such in- 
 conceivable fury and velocity, but they change their form 
 1 Lockyer, p. 324. 2 Fuel of Sun, p. 111. 
 
PROMINENCES RAPID CHANGES. 73 
 
 in the most marvellous manner. One of the most ex- 
 traordinary effects witnessed by man was one which 
 happened on 7th September 1871, and has been 
 described by Professor Young. 1 
 
 ' Just at noon the writer had been examining with the 
 telespectroscope an enormous proturberance or hydrogen 
 cloud on the eastern limb of the Sun/ ' a long, low, quiet- 
 looking cloud not very dense or brilliant, nor in any way 
 remarkable except for its size/ ' floating above the 
 chromosphere with its lower surface at a height of some 
 15,000 miles, but was connected to it, as is usually the 
 case, by three or four vertical columns brighter and more 
 active than the rest.' ' It was about 100,000 miles long 
 by 54,000 high/ On viewing it again, in less than half 
 an hour, he ' found the whole thing had been literally blown 
 to shreds by some inconceivable uprush from beneath, 
 and the air was filled with flying debris/ 
 
 When he first looked, some of them had already 
 reached a height of nearly 100,000 miles, and while he 
 watched them they rose with a motion almost perceptible 
 to the eye, until in 1 minutes the uppermost were more 
 than 200,000 miles above the solar surface. 
 
 As the filaments rose they gradually faded away 
 like a dissolving cloud, and at 1.15 only a few filmy 
 wisps, with some brighter streamers low down near 
 the chromosphere, remained to mark the place. 
 
 What a wonderfully fascinating spectacle the Sun 
 would present to us on some planet, were there one, 
 near enough to enable us, without being burnt up, to 
 witness such explosions, and perhaps to hear their 
 terrific sound ! How inexpressibly beautiful, but how 
 awful would such appearances be ! How overwhelmingly 
 grand, but fear inspiring, would we feel those prodigiously 
 
 1 Lockycr, p. 398. 
 
74 THE SUN. 
 
 colossal manifestations of the innate forces of nature 
 exerted in play without: an effort and unconscious of 
 their tremendous power, a power controllable only by 
 the Creator from whom it was received 1 How trivial 
 beside them would seem the most magnificent pyro- 
 technical displays of the creature man ! 
 
 Professor Young, who says the velocity often exceeds 
 100 miles a second, and sometimes, though rarely, 
 reaches 200 miles, calculated the uprush he described 
 as just mentioned to be at the rate of 166 miles per 
 second. But let us think for a moment what this 
 terrific rush of 166 miles per second means. It is 
 close upon 600,000 miles per hour. "We have all seen 
 and started back from an express train whizzing past 
 us at the rate of 40 miles per hour, and know what that 
 means. Yet supposing it 60 miles per hour, nearly 
 the highest speed, the rapidity of the solar uprush of 
 furious flame was ten thousand times greater. We 
 cannot take it in, strain our imagination as we may. 
 The downrush which creates a spot is probably not so 
 rapid, but it must bear some proportion to the uprush. 
 We have seen that the spots form and close at the 
 rate of 1000 miles a day; but the Sun is swept by 
 cyclones with which we have nothing on earth to com- 
 pare. 1 For the solar wind is calculated to speed at the 
 rate of 120 miles per second, while the greatest hurri- 
 cane on earth has only blown at the rate of 100 to 120 
 miles per hour. 2 
 
 And it is not the mere speed of rush upwards or 
 downwards or along the surface of the Sun which is 
 to be regarded ; nor is it a rush confined to spots or 
 
 1 Lockyer, pp. 236, 401. 
 
 2 Buchan's Meteorology, 410 ; Hartwig's^enaZ World, p. 111. 
 
MOVEMENTS IN SUN. 75 
 
 to faculce, for probably every willow leaf is hissing with 
 the light and heat which wells up through it to the 
 surface, and every interstice, every pore or space between 
 the leaves is whistling with the downrush of hot metallic 
 vapour seeking to regain its home in the regions below. 
 Eeniember, too, what a frightful element it is which is 
 being tossed up and down, back and fore the element of 
 fire of heat and light beyond our faintest conception. 
 What a tempestuous burning ocean must be for ever 
 boiling and seething and tossing, blown and hurled with 
 irresistible fury into waves perhaps higher than our 
 loftiest mountains, sublimely grand amidst an uproar 
 which would appal the shuddering heart of the stoutest 
 demon of the fiery lake. 
 
 M. Flainmarion in a popular work, alluding to the 
 solar spots, says : 
 
 ' We may be led to the belief that these are insignifi- 
 cant movements carried on on the Sun's surface, and of 
 small extent. It is not so. They are daily and very 
 important phenomena. Some of them have been known 
 to measure 80,000 miles, that is to say, they are ten 
 times larger than the Earth. Our globe falling into 
 most of them would be lost as in a well. Besides being 
 of this size, they are also the seat of various actions and 
 prodigious phenomena, They are not formed suddenly 
 as a whole, but increase to the limit they attain, and 
 afterwards diminish. Some only last a few weeks, others 
 months. Now the movements with which they are 
 animated, either for their increase or diminution, or in 
 their internal action, are sometimes of unheard of 
 rapidity. Lately astronomers have followed a dazzling 
 meteor passing through a group of spots with a velocity 
 of 2000 French leagues per minute. In other parts they 
 have watched circular whirlwinds dragging into their 
 commotion large spots like the Earth, and swallowing 
 
76 THE SUN. 
 
 them up in abysses with; fearful velocity. Sometimes 
 are seen the crests of stormy waves extending over parts 
 of the penumbra, and rising on the white surface of the 
 Sun as a still whiter or brighter substance, doubtless 
 projected in their ebullition by interior forces. There 
 have, besides, been seen immense bridges of fiery sub- 
 stances cast suddenly over a black spot crossing it from 
 one end to the other, like an arch of luminous strise, 
 which sometimes is dissipated, and falls down into the 
 abysses of lower whirlpools. This body, which each day 
 pours out over our heads such a pure and calm light, is 
 the seat of powerful actions and prodigious movements 
 of which our tempests, hurricanes, and water-spouts give 
 us but a slight idea ; for these gigantic disturbances are 
 not performed, as here, in an atmosphere of a few leagues' 
 thickness and over a few leagues' area, but in proportions 
 as vast as its atmosphere, which rises thousands of 
 leagues above its surface, and as its volume, which 
 exceeds 1,450,000 times that of our globe.' l 
 
 Now do not suppose that these disturbances in the 
 Sun are immaterial to us dwellers upon Earth. For 
 every movement in the Sun is fraught with influence 
 upon the Earth. The greater the action the greater 
 the heat evolved. The goodness or the badness of our 
 seasons is dependent upon the extent of the Sun's con- 
 vulsion. Mr. Proctor, in one of his many books (Other 
 Worlds than ours, published in 1870), after stating 
 certain of the effects of what he terms the magnetic 
 action in the Sun upon the Earth, and referring par- 
 ticularly to a magnetic storm in the Sun observed on 
 1st September 1859, which sharply disturbed the self- 
 registering magnetic instruments of the Kew Observa- 
 tory, interrupted telegraphic communication, and in 
 some cases set the telegraphic offices on fire, while 
 ' auroras appeared both in the northern and southern 
 
 1 Flammarion, Marvels of the Heavens, p. 145. 
 
DISTURBANCE INFLUENCE. 77 
 
 hemispheres during the night which followed, and the 
 whole frame of the Earth seemed to thrill responsively 
 to the disturbance/ says : 
 
 ' No disturbance can affect the solar photosphere 
 without affecting our Earth to a greater or less degree. 
 But if our Earth, then also the other planets, Mercury 
 and Venus, so much nearer the Sun than we are, surely 
 respond even more swiftly and more distinctly to the 
 solar magnetic influences. But beyond our Earth, and 
 beyond the orbit of moonless Mars, 1 the magnetic 
 impulses speed with the velocity of light ; the vast globe 
 of Jupiter is thrilled from pole to pole as the magnetic 
 wave rolls in upon it ; then Saturn feels the shock, and 
 then the vast distances, beyond which lie Uranus and 
 Neptune, are swept by the ever lessening yet ever 
 widening disturbance wave.' 2 
 
 The influence 3 thus poetically but truly ascribed by 
 Mr. Proctor to the Sun was an opinion broached so 
 early as 1614 by Baptiste Baliarios, an Italian mathe- 
 matician, and was revived by Sir William Herschel, 
 but for want of meteorological observations he and 
 others were obliged to take the prices of wheat as the 
 basis (a very rough one) of comparison and deduction, 
 and it was not surprising that very opposite conclusions 
 were formed by eminent philosophers. While Herschel 
 himself did not escape ridicule for his speculations, a 
 writer in the Edinburgh Review thus delivering him- 
 self :- 
 
 ' 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 
 
 1 Mars is now discovered to have two Moons, but of small size. 
 
 2 Proctor, p. 34. 
 
 3 See subject discussed in Herschel's Popular Lectures on Scientific 
 Subjects, p. 79 (1876), and Skertchly's Universe, p. 212. 
 
78 THE SUN. 
 
 committed in his -hasty and erroneous theory concerning 
 the influence of the solar spots on the price of grain. 
 Since the publication of Gullivers Voyage to Laputa 
 nothing so ridiculous has ever been offered to the 
 world.' 
 
 It is only right, however, to say that Mr. Carrington 
 does not seem to attach importance to calculations 
 based on price of grain, because ' social and political 
 causes affect prices to an extent sufficient to destroy 
 their value for the purpose for which he (Herschel) 
 selected them.' J 
 
 But the subject has of late years been more fully 
 investigated, and the results form a new chapter in 
 meteorology not to be found even in recent books on 
 this branch of science. 
 
 ' Mr. Meldrum, a distinguished meteorologist, who 
 lives in the torrid zone,' says Mr. Lockyer, 2 ' tells us that 
 the whole question of cyclones is a question of solar 
 activity, and that if we write down in one column the 
 number of cyclones in any given year, and in another 
 column the number of Sun spots in any given year, that 
 there will be a strict relation between them many Sun 
 spots, many hurricances ; few Sun spots, few hurricanes. 
 Only this morning I have received a letter from Dr. 
 Stewart, who tells me that Mr. Meldrum has since found 
 that what is true of the storms which devastate the 
 Indian Ocean is true of the storms which devastate the 
 West Indies ; and on referring to the storms of the 
 Indian Ocean, Mr. Meldrum points out that at those 
 years where we have been quietly mapping the Sun spot 
 maxima the harbours were filled with wrecks, vessels 
 coming in disabled from every part of the great Indian 
 Ocean. Now that is surely something worth considering, 
 because if we can manage to get at these things, to 
 associate them in some way with solar activity so that 
 
 1 Observations, p. 248. 2 Lockj^er, p. 423. 
 
STORM CORRESPONDENCE. 79 
 
 there can be no mistake about it, the power of prediction 
 that power which would be the most useful one in 
 meteorology, if we could only get at it would be within 
 our grasp.' * 
 
 Observation has likewise been directed to the cor- 
 respondence of particular solar paroxysms with particular 
 storms upon Earth, 2 and it has been stated that the one 
 follows the other after the lapse of above two liours of 
 time. The rainfall has similarly been found, according 
 to tabulated statements, to be obedient to the same 
 influences. 3 But there is a difference of opinion as to 
 whether the terrestrial phenomena are most violent 
 when the spots are at their maxima or at their minima. 
 Professor Balfour Stewart holds that there is greatest 
 solar activity when the spots are greatest (which, so far 
 as I can pretend to judge, really appears to coincide 
 with observation), and that this activity is greatest 
 when the planets are in conjunction, or when they are 
 nearest the Sun, is most likely. Indeed, a Dr. Knapp 
 of Chicago has published, in 1879, a pamphlet (reprinted 
 in Edinburgh) called Coming Disasters on the Earth, 
 1881 to 1885, resulting from the Perihelia of the 
 Planets* For (taking Dr. Knapp's dates) Jupiter 
 attained its perihelion in October 1880 ; Mars, in May 
 1881. Neptune was due in end of 1881; Uranus 
 will reach its perihelion in spring of 1882 ; and Saturn 
 in autumn of 1885. Besides, in 1881 and 1882 
 Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune have been, and are, and 
 will be almost in conjunction, so that their combined 
 
 . lr rhe severe weather experienced in December 1882 followed the 
 appearance of a great solar spot, which possibly may have caused the 
 storm of snow and cold. 
 
 2 Lockyer, pp. 639, 640. 3 Ibid. p. 426. 
 
 4 Edinburgh : Robert Somerville, 1881. 
 
8o 
 
 THE SUN. 
 
 influence on the Sun is great. 1 Such an event ' as four 
 of the largest planets being in perihelia within so brief 
 a space of time as five years ' is a combination which is 
 said not to have happened for 2000 years, and serious 
 results storms, floods, earthquakes, and extremes of 
 heat and cold, producing famines and plagues might, 
 the pamphlet said, be expected ; and in proof Dr. 
 Knapp details a correspondence between such perihelia 
 in former years and famines, pestilences, and other 
 disasters on Earth, although he does not seem to trace 
 them up to observed disturbances in the Sun. The 
 severe and changeable weather we have, unfortunately, 
 experienced during the last two or three years, em- 
 bracing days of ' the greatest cold that ever was known 
 in the British Isles,' 2 certainly seems to support the 
 
 1 The above diagram has been adapted from that of Dr. Knapp, taking 
 his dates of the perihelia, and drawing lines to show the positions at 
 November 1881. Assuming the dates to be correct, it will be seen how 
 closely the perihelia approximate. 
 
 2 Mr. Buchan's statement at Edinburgh Botanical Society, November 
 1881. 
 
THE PLANETARY CONJUNCTION. 81 
 
 conclusion of its direct connection with solar perturba- 
 tion arising out of the position of the planets. Indeed, 
 what could be more convincing than the storms which 
 have visited us during the last few months (the latest 
 only last night), when Neptune has been attaining his 
 perihelion. We can well imagine that this distant 
 planet, conscious of his wanderings from his great 
 parent, and agitated by his near approach, nearer than 
 he has been for 165 years, the period of his revolution, 
 and distracted by the tugs of his big brothers, 
 Jupiter and Saturn, stoiters and staggers in his course, 
 and, doubtless, is drawn many millions of miles nearer 
 to us than he would wish, or than would otherwise be. 
 "While all the three, Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune, are 
 having a long pull, a strong pull, and a pull altogether 
 upon their susceptible father, the Sun, who, fancying the 
 time has come in which to gather his erring offspring 
 to himself in a devouring embrace, is, with intenser 
 light flashing from his eyes, opening his soft but 
 treacherous heart to receive the guilty truants, and, 
 excited by the animating thought into a tumult of 
 boisterous emotion, sends a tremor of terror thrilling to 
 us and to all the trembling worlds of his system. It is 
 confirmatory of this view to know that the Sun has 
 been lately filled with spots. Some days ago Mr. 
 William Southern, F.K.A.S., writing from Leamington 
 to the Daily Post on 23rd November 1881, says: 
 
 ' It will doubtless interest many of your readers 
 possessing telescopes of even small aperture to know 
 that just now the Sun is full of interest on account of 
 the remarkable number of spots visible. On Monday 
 last I counted twenty. A group very much resembling 
 the configuration of the constellation Ursa Major Great 
 Bear occupied a position a little north of the solar 
 
 F 
 
82 THE SUN. 
 
 equator, and about midway between the eastern and 
 western limbs.' 
 
 Mr. Southern refers in his letter to the eleven years' 
 cycle, but makes no allusion to the more important fact 
 of the planetary conjunction and perihelia. The whole 
 subject, however, of the connection between solar spots 
 and terrestrial weather has been for some time matter 
 of investigation and discussion, although apparently 
 little attention seems to have been directed to the 
 planetary influences now affecting us. I can only refer 
 to it thus generally in the expectation that ere long 
 some one qualified to deal with the matter will give us 
 full enlightenment. Meantime I may just observe that, 
 looking "to the position of the major planets, our farmers 
 and our sailors may for some time to come possibly 
 even for a few years to come continue to experience 
 unfavourable and perhaps stormy weather. But when 
 this severe and trying period shall have passed, it is 
 satisfactory to think that probably it may not again 
 occur in the world's history till the next similar con- 
 junction, perhaps after another long 2000 years shall 
 have run their eventful course. 1 
 
 It is not a little curious to find that the ancient 
 Chaldeans ' had an astro-meteorological period consisting 
 of twelve solar years in which they conceived the 
 phenomena of weather to recur.' 2 To a somewhat 
 similar opinion the moderns are now inclining, but 
 doubtless on better scientific grounds. As already 
 stated, the cycle of Sun spots has been supposed to 
 be a period of ten or eleven years, and may possibly be, 
 
 1 This lecture was delivered on 7th. December 1881, and severe 
 storms and floods afterwards happened. 
 
 2 See G. C. Lewis' Astronomy of Ancients, p. 311. 
 
THE CHALDEAN CYCLE. 83 
 
 in accordance with Jupiter's revolution, more nearly the 
 Chaldean period of twelve years. It is therefore most 
 important for us to obtain a true knowledge of the law 
 of succession of these solar disturbances, because we 
 should then obtain a clue to so far unveiling the 
 mysteries of nature and obtaining a foreknowledge of 
 those terrestrial changes which may enable us to foresee, 
 to some extent, like Joseph, divinely inspired, a seven 
 years' plenty or a seven years' famine. Imagination 
 has indeed been already sufficiently lively in attributing 
 to solar activity such consequences as the American 
 Secession War and our periodic commercial crises. But 
 more reliable and practical deductions are being made. 
 For, as we all know, our mariners have greatly benefited 
 by the forecasts of storms which our American brethren 
 so kindly and so frequently telegraph to Europe. When 
 our knowledge shall have become more complete and 
 exact, meteorology may have attained a higher place, 
 and will confer greater benefits upon man. 
 
 Looking to all that has been now stated regarding 
 the Sun, yet without entering at present on the question, 
 it would require some confidence to affirm that the Sun 
 is the abode of life. 
 
 But let us suppose it possible, and let us imagine, 
 with a free indulgence in poetical licence, some being 
 akin to man carried to the Sun's surface. 
 
 One of the first effects he would experience would be 
 to find every shred of clothing burnt off his body long 
 ere he entered the Sun's atmosphere. Well, that would 
 not signify much. There would be little fear of any 
 cold shiver supervening. Matters far more alarming 
 would at once confound him. Every drop of blood 
 
84 THE SUX. 
 
 would be instantaneously 'evaporated. Dried, parched, 
 scorched to a living cinder, he would most resemble a 
 bit of unburnable asbestos, with, however, we must 
 suppose, in order that he might comprehend his position, 
 all his senses intact, and, among others, those of feeling, 
 hearing, and also sight, which the glare of the Sun, 
 even encountered 90 millions of miles off, takes away. 
 Suppose this remarkable, imperishable, glowing, red 
 being, this desiccated, burning, curled up cinder, suffer- 
 ing torture inconceivable, steps upon the photosphere 
 of the Sun, and with a yell of agony if a yell could 
 be uttered, and, if uttered, could be heard sits down 
 upon a hot willow leaf larger than Great Britain. In 
 torment beyond conception he looks around. There is 
 not a living being of any sort with whom to fraternize 
 in woe. A terrible solitude of devouring anguish 
 environs the place. He looks up through a blaze of 
 light. A comet on lightning wings is rushing and 
 flashing past. Meteors in millions are gleaming and 
 bursting and falling in fiery showers fast and close 
 and furious. There is not a particle of blue sky on 
 which to rest his parched and blinded eyes. He looks 
 around, and there is not a green tree, or even a green 
 blade of grass, to refresh his frenzied gaze. There is 
 not a drop of cold water to allay the feverish rage of 
 his unquenchable thirst. There is not a cool cave or 
 grotto into which to retreat from the dazzling glare, or 
 from the overpowering conflagration into which every 
 element of the Sun is thrown. There are mountains 
 indeed, and mountains of gigantic height, but they are 
 masses of incandescent metal, rather are they phantom 
 mountains of thick fervent vapour, heated to a degree 
 with which we have nothing on Earth to compare. 
 There are rivers indeed, or what seem to be so, but they 
 
VISITED. 85 
 
 are to appearance torrents of liquid metallic fire, not 
 little, sputtering, crackling streams, but pouring heavily 
 ocean wide in steaming, heaving, burning, tossing, angry, 
 fearful waves, rolling over precipitous heights to awful 
 hollows, and thundering with the roar of ten thousand 
 hurling avalanches. With the horrid din of which, and^ 
 of the loud tumultuous hissing of violent currents of 
 wrathful gases tearing from their beds, bursting, blazing, 
 and twisting as they mingle to fight in fierce raging 
 conflict, and darting in colossal tongues of red flame 
 100,000 miles up with almost the swiftness of light, 
 the bewildered ear is rent. And now a frightful, fiery, 
 tempestuous tornado sweeps across his leaf with appal- 
 ling vehemence. He is turned over and over, vainly 
 clutching and clinging to ghostly shapes, and rolls, 
 bruised and crushed, he knows not where. Everything 
 around him he fancies grating and cracking, tearing and 
 separating, and he feels his leaf is blown like a feather, 
 and, with the speed of an express, is flung forward 10,000 
 miles, and tossed now up, now down, amid a crowd of 
 others shaking and crushing for room, till at last he 
 finds it suspended over a vast yawning, horrible gulf. 
 In consternation, clinging to some burning barrier, he 
 looks down the dreadful aperture, and sees a seething 
 mass of impetuous scorching clouds, boiling and swirling 
 and pouring to the bottom, and down, down, far down 
 into the depths below, he fancies he descries a glowing 
 metallic looking mass, which he imagines to be the great 
 body of the Sun. Eecoiling in fright, his leaf trembles 
 under him, and, terror-struck, he looks up and finds he 
 is again in motion ; for a hurricane overwhelms the 
 closing chasm, and he is being driven and sent spinning 
 forward and forward, or rather backward and backward, 
 to where he was, and all round about other gigantic 
 
86 THE SUN. 
 
 glowing leaves like his own are impelled and wheeled 
 as by some prodigious whirlwind ; and amidst the noise 
 of a Titanic conflict, clashing and crashing, they rush 
 in wildest frenzy to embrace. Stunned by the awful 
 shock, our living cinder is suddenly shot high into 
 the air, and escapes from his terrific ordeal uncon- 
 scious. 
 
 Such, could it be witnessed and experienced, might 
 be the scene upon the Sun. Fortunately, we have 
 nothing like it upon Earth. But to all this distant 
 turmoil which is death to all life upon the Sun itself 
 we owe the condition of our little planet, and its 
 beautiful adaptation to receive organic life, and among 
 and above all the being Man, to whom has been 
 accorded not merely organic life, but the gift of intelli- 
 gence and reason, and that which dignifies him beyond 
 every other of the creatures upon Earth, a soul destined 
 to live on and for ever on, when Sun and Moon and 
 land and sea shall be no more. 
 
PART II. 
 ARE THE HEAVENLY BODIES HABITABLE? 
 
 OB, 
 
 'THE PLURALITY OF WORLDS' CONSIDERED. 
 
AKE THE HEAVENLY BODIES HABITABLE? 
 
 OR, 
 
 ' THE PLURALITY OF WORLDS ' CONSIDERED. 
 
 WHEN, on a clear night, we walk out into the 
 open field, and, lifting our eyes to the azure 
 vault, behold a thousand flickering stars scintillating 
 above us, and know that, excepting a very few which 
 are planets of our system, these are all vastly larger 
 than the great globe on which we dwell ; and when we 
 reflect that for every shining orb which thus indicates 
 its existence the telescope reveals to us millions more 
 invisible to the unassisted eye ; and that beyond the 
 reach of all present, and perhaps of all future, telescopic 
 power, the Universe is filled with other and like orbs, 
 stretching in clusters and vast galaxies in every direc- 
 tion around, to the limitless verge of infinity ; and 
 when we conjoin with this grand thought the con- 
 sciousness that all about on this Earth we see life 
 prevailing in every conceivable shape, the tendency 
 is not unnatural mentally to conjure up the concep- 
 
 89 
 
90 'PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 tion of numerous and diversified animal and vegetable 
 forms in each of these myriad stars, and, in dreamy 
 reverie, to think that upon each sparkling ball there 
 are beings, active and intelligent, peopling and enliven- 
 ing its every zone. Nay, while the distances, the 
 magnitudes, the velocities, the periods of the heavenly 
 bodies, or some of them, are ascertained by scientific 
 means, with mathematical nicety, to a mile, to a ton, 
 to a fraction of a second of time, but with results so 
 vast that, knowing it all, our imagination refuses to 
 realize figures so precise but so immense, yet where 
 by no application of the exact sciences, by no disposition 
 of x and y, can there be demonstration of life, or even 
 of a single unit of being, in any one of those lustrous 
 spheres, that same imagination, no longer inert, seizes 
 the bit, becomes imgovernable, and wildly rushes off 
 with us, and not only endues each globe with life, but 
 pictures to our glowing vision populations of men, of 
 like forms and like passions with ourselves, engaged in 
 all the pursuits of earth, and passing through all the 
 phases of existence, from infancy to age, from ignorance 
 to erudition; exhibiting here the old, old tale of true 
 and tender and passionate love ; toiling there, amid the 
 din and bustle and anxieties of the overgrown city ; or 
 busily engaged from day to day in the hum and rattle 
 of the noisy mill ; or speeding, with rich and varied 
 cargo, on the broad ocean, impelled by towering mast 
 
REVERIES. 91 
 
 and swelling sail, or by the clanking engine and 
 revolving wheel ; or earnestly and skilfully peering at 
 the wonders of the Heavens, aided by every mechanical 
 power known to ourselves, and estimating by instruments 
 of observation, of rare delicacy, their form, their distance, 
 and their nature ; or deigning in the secret chamber 
 to raise to the ever-listening ear of the Most High the 
 penitential prayer ; or in the hallowed temple, in 
 assembled throng of thousand voices, lifting in exalted 
 strain the melodious measured hymn of grateful and 
 adoring praise. 
 
 The thought is captivating; and here, if anywhere, 
 amid all the marvels of astronomy, romance may fairly 
 have its mission, and can afford to revel with exuberant 
 delight. But our business is now, with calm considera- 
 tion, to inquire on proper grounds whether imagination 
 thus stirred has been rightly or wrongly directed ; and, 
 taking into view all the facts which philosophical 
 investigation has brought to light, to form a sound and 
 rational conclusion. 
 
 Yet ere we proceed to do so, it will be advisable, as 
 briefly as possible, to glance at the views which from 
 time to time have been entertained, and at the con- 
 troversy which has been waged on this large, most 
 interesting, and, as I doubt not it will be found, this 
 
92 'PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 most instructive subject. '\Ve shall then be in a position 
 more thoroughly to comprehend and more easily to 
 examine the various reasons which have in times past 
 been assigned in favour of plurality, and from such 
 examination to pass to consider in detail all the circum- 
 stances which bear upon the question, and especially 
 those which influence determination regarding the 
 various members of the solar system. 
 
I. 
 
 JOSEPH JEROME LALANDE, director of the Observatory 
 of Paris, and the author of a treatise in three quarto 
 volumes (which for a century was the standard work) on 
 astronomy, thus expounds the conceptions of the ancients 
 regarding our subject, and the history of opinion to the 
 time of Fontenelle : 
 
 * I have remarked, in the twentieth book of my 
 Astronomy, that in every period of time it has been 
 believed that the planets were inhabited, on account of 
 their resemblance to the Earth. The idea of the plurality 
 of worlds is expressed in the Orphics, those ancient 
 Grecian poems attributed to Orpheus (Plut. de Placitis 
 Philosopk. 1. 2, cap. 13). Proclus has preserved some 
 verses, in which we find that the writer of the Orphics 
 places mountains, men, and cities in the Moon. The 
 Pythagoreans such as Philolaiis, Hicetas, Heraclides 
 taught that the stars were all worlds. Several ancient 
 philosophers even admitted an infinity of worlds beyond 
 the reach of our sight. Epicurus, Lucretius, and all the 
 Epicureans were of the same opinion ; and Metrodorus 
 thought it as absurd to imagine but one world in the im- 
 mensity of space as to say that only one ear of corn could 
 grow in a great extent of country. Zeno of Eleusis, Anaxi- 
 menes, Anaximander, Leucippus, Democritus, asserted the 
 same thing. In short, there were some philosophers who, 
 although they did not consider the rest of the planets 
 
94 ' PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 inhabited, placed inhabitants in the Moon ; such were 
 Anaxagoras, Xenophanes, Lucian, Plutarch (Di Oraculor. 
 defectu. De facie in orbe Lunce), Eusebius, Stobius. We 
 may see a long list of the ancients who have treated of 
 the subject in Fabricius (Biblio. Grcecce, t. 1, cap. 20) ; 
 and in the Memoir e de Bonamy (Acad. des Inscriptions, 
 torn, ix.) Hevellus appeared as firmly persuaded of this 
 opinion in 1647, when he talked of the difference between 
 the inhabitants of the two hemispheres of the Moon : 
 he calls them Selenitce, and examines at length all the 
 phenomena observed on their planet after the example of 
 Kepler (Astron. Lunaris). It was maintained at Oxford, 
 in certain themes which are mentioned in the News of the 
 Republic of Letters, June 1764, that the system of Pytha- 
 goras on. the inhabitants of the Moon was well founded : 
 two years afterwards Fontenelle discussed the subject 
 in his agreeable work. There are further details of the 
 different astronomical opinions at the end of Gregory's 
 book. For the objections we may refer to Eiccioli (Alma- 
 gestum, torn. i. pp. 188, 204). In 1686, the Plurality of 
 Worlds was adorned by Fontenelle with all the beauties 
 of which a philosophical work was susceptible.' 1 
 
 Historically, these notices are interesting ; and the sub- 
 ject will be found more fully treated in Flammarion's 
 Mondes Halite's;^ but, as adding to the real consideration 
 of the subject, they are of no value. To the ancients, 
 lacking the telescope, the Heavens were in reality a 
 sealed book; and as they had no means of knowing 
 what the stars are, and in writing of them only originated 
 conceptions, often strange and fantastic, which they had 
 no means of verifying, their speculations regarding the 
 habitability were merely the dreams of philosophers who 
 
 1 'Critical Account of the Life and Writings of Fontenelle/ prefixed 
 to translation of the Plurality of Worlds. This does not appear in all 
 editions. 
 
 2 Book I. ch. i. 24th ed. (1876), pp. 13-31. 
 
NOTIONS OF ANCIENTS. 95 
 
 knew nothing. NOT, indeed, were the earlier modern 
 astronomers much better placed. They did know some- 
 thing more of the heavenly bodies, and formed more 
 accurate suppositions regarding both their nature and 
 their motions ; but the science which they practised 
 was in its nonage, and could afford no proper data 
 from which to draw legitimate conclusions. Indeed, 
 the ' little learning ' they had was then, according to 
 the saying, though in a different sense from that in 
 which it is commonly used, ' a dangerous thing.' Tor 
 Ciampoli, in 1615, wrote to Galileo: 
 
 ' Put a great reserve on what you say ; for when you 
 establish a certain resemblance between the terrestrial 
 globe and the lunar globe, another person immediately 
 exaggerates it, and says you suppose that there are 
 men inhabiting the Moon; and this other person soon 
 begins to inquire how they can possibly have descended 
 from Adam, or come out of the ark of Noah, with no end 
 of other extravagances of which you have never dreamt.' l 
 
 From which it would seem, that to suggest the habita- 
 bility of other planets was then likely to excite ridicule, 
 while not improbably it might be found to be a perilous 
 heresy. 
 
 During this infancy of astronomical science, various 
 writers appear to have touched upon our subject, or to 
 have expressed an opinion. 2 Nor had knowledge greatly 
 increased when Fontenelle published his Conversations 
 on the Plurality of Worlds, a book which has ever since 
 identified his name with the question. Whatever may 
 have been the merits or demerits of the work, it was 
 for many long years read, credited, and honoured. It is 
 
 1 Phipson's Mysteries, p. 266. 
 
 2 See Flammarion, pp. 32-38. 
 
96 < PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 indeed somewhat amusing to notice the attention it 
 obtained, the panegyrics with which it was the fashion 
 to commend it. Lalande says : ' Whenever I have 
 entered into a conversation with any sensible woman on 
 astronomy, I have always found that she had read 
 Fontenelle's Plurality of Worlds, and that his book had 
 excited her curiosity on the subject. As it has been so 
 much read already, it must continue to engage attention.' 
 Then mentioning the numerous editions through which 
 it had passed in various countries, he quotes a sentence 
 from Voltaire, declaring that he considered it one of the 
 best books that ever was written. In a biographical 
 notice of the author, prefixed to a French edition of 
 Fontenelle's works, it is also stated that it had a 
 prodigious success ; and as the ladies adored Fontenelle, 
 whose bon - mots and smart repartees enlivened the 
 salons of Paris, one is not surprised to learn from it 
 that 'les femmes surtout le lurent avec impressement 
 et c'est encore (1825) celui de tous les ouvrages de 
 Fontenelle qui est le plus generalement connu.' 1 Sir 
 David Brewster, writing long after, in referring to ' this 
 singular work,' says it ' excited a high degree of interest, 
 both from the nature of the subject, and the vivacity 
 and humour with which it was written. It was read 
 with unexampled avidity, and was speedily circulated 
 through every part of Europe. Wherever it was read 
 it was admired.' 2 
 
 The plan adopted by Fontenelle, as expressed in his 
 preface, was to ' discourse of philosophy, but not directly 
 in a philosophical manner, and to raise it to such a 
 pitch that it shall not be too dry and insipid a subject 
 
 1 (Euvres de Fontenelle, Paris, 1825. Notice Historique sur Fontenelle, 
 vol. i. p. 28. 
 
 - More Worlds than One, p. 2. 
 
FONTENELLE. 97 
 
 to please gentlemen, nor too mean and trifling to enter- 
 tain scholars.' In other words, it was intended to be 
 the beau -ideal of popular philosophical treatment of 
 the age in which it appeared. 
 
 On perusing it, however, one cannot help feeling 
 surprised, not merely at the- feeble shallowness of its 
 reasonings, but at the marvellous scantiness of its 
 astronomical facts. The few elementary points, inaccu- 
 rately stated as historical truths, and enclosed within a 
 cloud of a long exploded system of vortices projected 
 by Descartes, who was then a living philosopher, are 
 chopped up into spoon meat, and diluted by all the 
 verbosities and digressions, the compliments and the 
 badinage, the doubts, and the resolution of doubts, of 
 concocted conversation ; while into this diluted mixture 
 a few indeterminate crumbs of argument are from, time 
 to time dropped, and lie soaking in empty incon- 
 clusiveness, till indeed it is difficult to extract precisely 
 even the author's real views upon his great theme. 
 
 Apparently, however, his opinions were these. Hold- 
 ing the Sun to be a place not to be inhabited,, he says 
 the Moon is inhabited, because she is like the Earth ; 
 but, being also unlike, her inhabitants are of a different 
 order ; the other planets (for Moon& in those days were 
 called planets) are inhabited, because they are like the 
 Moon. The fixed stars are like the Sun, and therefore 
 not inhabited ; but they have each a planetary system^ 
 the members of which must be inhabited ; but comets, 
 being reckoned as planets coming from other systems, 
 are likewise inhabited. Very curious speculations are 
 indulged in with regard to the Milky Way, which is 
 supposed to be nothing but ' an infinity of small stars 
 not to be seen by our eyes, because they are so very 
 little, and they are sown so thick one by another that 
 
 G 
 
98 < PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 they seem to be one continued whiteness,' 1 and so near, 
 'that the people in one world may talk and shake 
 hands with those of another; at least, I believe/ the 
 author says, ' the birds of one world may easily fly into 
 the other, and that pigeons may be trained up to carry 
 letters as they do in the Levant!' 2 With all this 
 superficiality of statement and reasoning, it is not 
 surprising that the existence of inhabitants is a point 
 assumed ; leaving the Sage and his Marchioness free to 
 discuss with all vivacity the wonderful character and 
 qualities of those conjectural tenants of the various hot 
 and cold celestial orbs or dwelling-places, to which, by 
 the grace of Fontenelle, these tenants, willingly or 
 otherwise, have been assigned a habitation. 
 
 But a still stranger, though generally less known 
 work was shortly after written by the Dutch philoso- 
 pher Christian Huygens, discoverer of the ring and one 
 of the satellites of Saturn, and the inventor of, among 
 other things, the pendulum in its application to clocks. 
 For at the age of 65, Huygens spent his last days in 
 writing the Cosmothereos, or, as it is called in the English 
 translation, The Celestial Worlds discovered ; or, Con- 
 jectures concerning the Inhabitants, Plants, and Produc- 
 tions of the Worlds in the Planets ; and left instructions 
 for its publication, which took place in 1698, after 
 his death. 3 
 
 Eegarding this book, Sir David Brewster, 4 a keen 
 advocate, as we shall see, for the plurality, wrote : ' The 
 
 1 P. 133. 2 P. 134. 
 
 3 Fontenelle's work is not now to be found in every private library, 
 but Huygens' is still more scarce. I could only see it in the library of 
 the University of Edinburgh. 
 
 4 More Worlds than One, p. 4. 
 
HUYGENS' COSMOTHEREOS. 99 
 
 Cosmothereos is a work essentially different from that of 
 Fontenelle. It is didactic and dispassionate, deducing 
 by analogical reasoning a variety of views respecting 
 the plants and animals in the planets, and the general 
 nature and condition of their inhabitants.' The work 
 which Humboldt, taking a juster view, describes as 
 consisting ' of the dreams and fancies of a great man,' 1 is 
 of so singular a character, that I must, as briefly as 
 possible, exhibit its contents and nature. 
 
 After referring to the affirmations of the ancients and 
 of later authors, that the planets, and even the stars, 
 are furnished with inhabitants, and saying that ' the 
 ingenious French author of the Dialogues about the 
 Plurality of Worlds had not carried the business any 
 farther,' he imparts to the reader that there was room 
 for his own conjectures ; and, making certain explana- 
 tions regarding the bodies of the solar system, he 
 proceeds : 2 
 
 ' Having thus explained the two schemes, there's 
 nobody, I suppose, but sees that in the first the Earth is 
 made of the same sort with the rest of the planets. For 
 the very position of the circles shows it. And that the 
 other planets are round like it, and like it receive all the 
 light they have from the Sun, there's no room (since the 
 discoveries made by telescopes) to doubt. Another thing 
 they are like it in is, that they are moved round their 
 own axis ; for since 'tis certain that Jupiter and Saturn 
 are, who can doubt it of the others ? Again, as the Earth 
 has its Moon moving round it, so Jupiter and Saturn have 
 theirs. Now, since in so many things they thus agree, 
 what can be more probable than that in others they agree 
 too ; and that the other planets are as beautiful and as 
 well stocked with inhabitants as the Earth ? or what 
 shadow of reason can there be why they should not ? 
 ' If any one should be at the dissection of a dog, and 
 
 i Humboldt's Cosmos, iii. p. 22. 2 Hnygens' Cosmothereos, p. 17. 
 
zoo ' PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 be there shown the Entrails, the Heart, Stomach, Liver, 
 Lungs, and Guts, all the Veins, Arteries, and Nerves, 
 could such a man reasonably doubt whether there were 
 the same Contexture and Variety of Parts in a Bullock, 
 Hog, or any other Beast, tho' he had never chanc'd to 
 see the like opening of them ? I don't believe he would. 
 Or, were we thoroughly satisfied on the nature of one of 
 the Moons round Jupiter, should not we straight conclude 
 the same of the rest of them ? So if we could be assured 
 but in one Comet, what it was that is the cause of that 
 strange appearance, should we not make that a standard 
 to judg of all others by ? 'Tis therefore an argument of 
 no small weight that is fetched from Relation and Like- 
 ness ; and to reason from what we see and are sure of to 
 what we cannot, is no false Logick. This must be our 
 method in this Treatise, wherein, from the nature and 
 circumstances of that Planet which we see before our eyes, 
 we may guess at those that are farther distant from us.' 
 
 He then concludes the probability of the planets 
 being solid like the earth, and not wanting in gravity. 
 
 ' But now/ he goes on to say (p. 19), ' to carry the 
 search farther, let us see by what steps we must rise to 
 the attaining some knowledge in the more private secrets 
 concerning the State and Furniture of these new Earths. 
 And first, how likely is it that they may be stocked with 
 plants and animals as well as we ? I suppose nobody 
 will deny but there's somewhat more of Contrivance, 
 somewhat more of Miracle, in the production and growth 
 of plants and animals than in lifeless heaps of inanimate 
 Bodies, be they never so much larger, as Mountains, 
 Eocks, or Seas are. For the finger of God and the wis- 
 dom of Divine Providence is in them much more clearly 
 manifested than in the other. One of the Democritus's 
 or Cartes' scholars may venture perhaps to give some 
 tolerable Explication of the appearances in Heaven and 
 Earth, allow him but his atoms and motion ; but when 
 he comes to Plants and Animals, he'll find himself non- 
 plus'd, and give you no likely account of their Produc- 
 
HUYGENS COSMOTHEREOS. 101 
 
 tion. For everything in them is so exactly adapted to 
 some design, every part of them so fitted to its proper 
 use, that they manifest an infinite Wisdom, and exquisite 
 knowledge in the laws of Nature and Geometry, as to 
 omit those Wonders in Generation we shall by and by 
 show, and make it an absurdity even to think of their 
 being thus haply jumbled together by a chance motion 
 of, I don't know what, little Particles. Now, should we 
 allow the Planets nothing but vast Deserts, lifeless and 
 inanimate Stocks and Stones, and deprive them of all 
 those Creatures that more plainly speak their Divine 
 Architect, we should sink them below the Earth in 
 Beauty and Dignity a thing that no reason will permit, 
 as I said before/ 
 
 Now follows a paragraph characteristic of the whole 
 book; for having built up an argument on conjecture, 
 he forthwith assumes a conclusion to be proved, and 
 thence goes on, upon like suppositions, to infer and 
 build up more : 
 
 ' Well, then, now we have gained the Point for them, and 
 the Planets may be allow'd some Bodys capable of moving 
 themselves not at all inferior to ours (for why should 
 they ?), and these are animals. Now, for fear of starving 
 these poor creatures, we must have plants, you know. 
 And so the other point is gain'd. And as for their Growth 
 and Nourishment, 'tis no doubt the same with ours, seeing 
 they have the same Sun to warm and enliven them as 
 ours have.' 
 
 After qualifying this by stating that the plants and 
 animals of the other planets l ' have indeed some differ- 
 ence in their shape, to distinguish the plants and 
 animals of these countries from ours/ the author con- 
 cludes the planets must each have water of a kind 
 adapted to its individual heat, and inter alia, that the 
 plants and animals must have modes of propagation 
 1 Huygens' Cosmothereos, p. 23. 
 
102 'PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 similar to those of Earth, and assuming l ' all this 
 furniture and beauty the Planets are stock'd with/ 
 
 ' The Planets seem to have been made in vain, without 
 any design or end, unless there were some in them that 
 might at the same time enjoy the Fruits, and adore the 
 Wise Creator of them.' 
 
 And then he proceeds on this, as a concluded basis, 
 to detail that in all things these supposed rational crea- 
 tures must resemble man. One among the many curious 
 conclusions he forms is that the inhabitants must be 
 astronomers, and being astronomers, must have all the 
 implements and practise all the arts necessary to culti- 
 vating it, only, singularly enough, he ' dare not ' allow 
 them telescopes 2 
 
 ' For fear people should be so disturbed at the ridiculous 
 extravagancy of such an opinion as to take the measure 
 of my other conjectures by it, and hiss them all off upon 
 the account of this alone.' 
 
 Having thus to his own satisfaction ' gain'd our point, 
 and 'tis probable that they are as skilful Astronomers as 
 we can pretend to be,' he deduces they must have hands, 
 feet, upright carriage, senses, and faces like ourselves. 3 
 In short, he ' cannot, without horror and impatience, 
 suffer any other figure for the habitation of a reasonable 
 soul ' ' than our own.' In other words, the inhabitants 
 must be men similar to ourselves, enjoying the pleasures 
 of society, dwelling in houses, having ships, ' with sails, 
 anchors, ropes, pullies, and rudders ; ' 4 ' and perhaps 
 they may not be without the use of the compass too.' 
 Geometry they must have, being a science ' of such singu- 
 
 1 Huygeus' Cosmothereos, p. 37. 2 Ibid. p. 66. 
 
 3 Ibid, p. 77. 4 Ibid. p. 83. 
 
HUYGENS' COSMOTHEREOS. 103 
 
 lar worth and dignity/ l nay, would ' venture somewhat 
 farther/ and tell us ' that they have our inventions of the 
 tables of Sines, 2 Logarithms, and Algebra.' And then 3 he 
 argues they must have music, physic, clothing, coaches ; 
 must dig metals out of the ground ; and probably may 
 manufacture gunpowder ; be possessed of mills, engrav- 
 ings, paintings, and practise useful arts, such as printing, 
 glass and clock-making. Nay, would have them making 
 the same discoveries as ourselves, as, for example, of the 
 circulation of the blood. Indeed, in nothing can these 
 imagined inhabitants differ from ourselves, except pos- 
 sibly in shape of body ; and even this difference Huygens 
 seems to abandon, and sums up his first chapter in saying 
 all this had been ' proved ; ' but, thoughtfully considering 
 the reader requires a ' breathing while/ makes a pause. 
 
 In the second chapter, or second part of the book, our 
 author visits the several planets, and considers their 
 position, and the condition of their inhabitants ; seems to 
 discard the idea of the Sun being inhabited, but peoples 
 the Moon, and affirms that whatever can be said of the 
 Moon may, with very little alteration, be supposed to be- 
 long to the attendants of the other planets, passes 4 to the 
 fixed stars, and concludes they are like our Sun, attended 
 by retinues of planets, and finishes by saying : 5 
 
 ' What we allowed the Planets upon the account of our 
 enjoying it, we must likewise grant to all those Planets 
 that surround that prodigious number of Suns ; they must 
 have their plants and animals, nay, and their rational 
 ones too, and those as great admirers and as diligent 
 observers of the Heavens as ourselves ; and must conse- 
 quently enjoy whatsoever is subservient to and requisite 
 for such knowledge.' 
 
 1 Huygens' Cosmolhereos, p. 84. 2 Ibid, p. 85. 3 Ibid. p. 86. 
 4 Ibid. p. 129. 5 Ibid. p. 150. 
 
io 4 ' PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 Such is the castle, I fear of cards, which Huygens 
 builds up. Truly the inhabitants resting in it ' must be ' 
 light as phantasmagorial shadows painted by the magic 
 glass. We had imagined people in dreamy thought 
 half-consciously conceiving such notions ; but here they 
 are gravely realized, and reduced to the pleasing assur- 
 ance of print. Applying his own words in reference to 
 suppositions of Descartes, we may well ' wonder how 
 an ingenious man could spend all that pains in making 
 such fancies hang together;' 1 and yet we are told that 
 the astronomer Flamstead, a contemporary of Huygens 
 recommended the Cosmothereos to Dr. Plumer, Arch- 
 deacon of Eochester, who was so pleased with it that he 
 left by his will 1800 to found the Plumian Professor- 
 ship of Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy at 
 Cambridge ! 
 
 Lalaude, from whom I have already quoted, expresses 
 his views in favour of the plurality in a passage which 
 I also quote, both for the sake of showing the grounds 
 of the opinion he maintained, and as containing a 
 mention of some of the eminent men who, subsequently 
 to Huygens, had up to the time (1802) he, Lalande, 
 wrote, discussed the subject. It will be seen (and 
 perhaps in such discussions the precision of logical 
 reasoning is not always perceptible) that Lalande pro- 
 ceeds to a certain extent on views of his own : 
 
 ' The resemblance between the Earth and the other 
 planets,' he says, ' is so striking, that if we allow the Earth 
 to have ~been formed for habitation, we cannot deny that the 
 planets were made for the same purpose ; for if there is, in 
 the nature of things, a connection between the Earth 
 and the men who inhabit it, a similar connection must 
 
 1 1 Huygens' Cosmothereos, p. 160. 
 
LALANDES VIEWS. 105 
 
 exist between the planets and beings who inhabit 
 them. 
 
 ' We see six planets around the Sun, the Earth is the 
 third ; they all move in elliptical orbits ; they have all a 
 rotatory motion, like the Earth, as well as spots, irregu- 
 larities, mountains. Some of them have satellites, the 
 Earth has one satellite : Jupiter is flattened like our 
 world ; in short, there is every possible resemblance 
 between the planets and the Earth : is it, then, rational 
 to suppose the existence of living and thinking beings is 
 confined to the Earth ? From what is such a privilege 
 derived but the grovelling minds of persons who can 
 never rise above the objects of their immediate sensa- 
 tions. Lambert believed that even the comets were 
 inhabited (Systeme du Monde, Bouillon 1770). Buffoii 
 determines the period when each planet became habitable, 
 and when it will cease to be so from this refrigeration 
 (Supplemens, in 4to, torn. 11). What I have said of planets 
 that turn round the Sun, will naturally extend to all the 
 planetary systems which environ the fixed stars ; every 
 star being an immoveable and luminous body, having 
 light in itself, may properly be compared with our own 
 Sun. We must conclude that if our Sun serves to attract 
 and lighten the planets which surround it, the fixed stars 
 have the same use. It is thought that the Sun and fixed 
 stars are uninhabitable, because they are composed of 
 fire ; yet M. Knight, in a work written to explain all 
 the phenomena of nature by attraction and repulsion, 
 endeavours to prove that the Sun and stars may be 
 habitable worlds, and that the people in them may 
 possibly suffer from extreme cold. M. Herschel likewise 
 thinks the Sun is inhabited. Philos. Trans. 179, p. 155 
 et suiv. 
 
 ' Some timid superstitious writers have reprobated this 
 system as contrary to religion : they little knew how to 
 promote the glory of their Creator. If the immensity of 
 His works announce His power, can any idea be more 
 calculated than this to exhibit their magnificence and 
 sublimity ? We see with the naked eye several thousands 
 
1 06 'PL URALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 of stars; in every part ; '6f the firmament we discover 
 with telescopes, innumerable others ; with more perfect 
 telescopes we still find a multitude more. We compute 
 from the number seen through Herschel's telescope in 
 one region of the sky, that there are a hundred millions. 
 Imagination pierces beyond the extent of vision, behold- 
 ing multitudes of unknown worlds infinitely more in 
 number than those which are visible to our sight, and 
 ranges unrestrained in the boundless space of creation. 
 
 ' Our only difficulty with respect to the inhabitants of 
 so many millions of planets is the obscurity of the final 
 causes, which it is difficult to admit when we see into 
 what errors the greatest philosophers have fallen; for 
 instance, Eermat, Leibnitz, Maupertius, etc., in attempt- 
 ing to employ these final causes or metaphysical supposi- 
 tions of imagined relations between effects that we see 
 and the causes we assign them, or the ends for which we 
 believe them to exist. 
 
 ' If the plurality of worlds be admitted without 
 difficulty ; if the planets are believed to be inhabited, it 
 is because the Earth is considered merely as a habitation 
 for man, from which it is inferred that were the planets 
 uninhabited, they would be useless : but I will venture to 
 assert that such a mode of reasoning is confined, unphilo- 
 sophic, and at the same time presumptuous. What are we 
 in comparison of the Universe ? Do we know the extent, 
 the properties, the destination, and the connections of 
 nature ? Is our existence, formed as we are, of a few 
 frail atoms, to be considered anything when we think of 
 the greatness of the whole ? Can we add to the perfec- 
 tion and grandeur of the Universe ? These ideas are 
 expressed by Saussure, who, in speaking of a traveller to 
 Mont Blanc, says : If during his meditations the thought 
 of the insignificant beings that move on the face of the 
 Earth offers itself to his mind, if he compares their dura- 
 tion with the grand epochs of nature, how great will be 
 his astonishment that man, occupying so small a space, 
 existing so short a time, can ever imagine that his being 
 is the only end for which the Universe was created ! 
 
HERSCHELLA PLACE. 107 
 
 ' From these considerations D'Alembert, in the Ency- 
 clopedia (article " World "), after examining the arguments 
 for supposing the planets inhabited, concludes by saying 
 the subject is enveloped in total obscurity. But Buffon 
 affirms that wherever there is a certain degree of heat, 
 the motion produces organized beings; we need not 
 inquire in what way, but imagine these to be the inhabi- 
 tants of the planets : if that should be the case, we may 
 conclude it highly probable that they are inhabited, not- 
 withstanding the preceding objections.' 
 
 Sir William Herschel is referred to by Lalande. He 
 had adduced in a paper on the ' Nature and Construc- 
 tion of the Sun and Fixed Stars,' arguments in favour of 
 the habitability of both Sun and Moon. ' But/ says his 
 biographer, Holden, writing in 1881, ' they rest more 
 on the metaphysical than on scientific basis, and are 
 to-day justly forgotten,' 1 an observation which applies 
 in truth to much which has been quoted from the 
 authors already named. 
 
 La Place seems to have taken a view similar to that 
 of Lalande, but in a less reverent, if not indeed in a 
 sceptical spirit. 
 
 ' Seduced,' he says, ' by the illusions of sense and by 
 self-conceit, we have considered ourselves as the centre 
 of these motions. We imagine, forsooth, that this is for 
 us, and that the stars influence our destinies. But the 
 labours of ages have convinced us of our error, and we 
 find ourselves in an insignificant planet, almost imper- 
 ceptible in the immensity of space. Inhabitants of this 
 peppercorn, we think ourselves the peculiar favourites of 
 Heaven ; nay, the chief objects of care to a Being the 
 Maker of all ' and so forth. 
 
 It was to meet infidel views pointing in this direction 
 
 1 HerscheVs Life and Works, by E. S. Holden, p. 149. 
 
io8 'PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 that Dr. Chalmers in 1'SlG preached, and soon after 
 published, his famous astronomical discourses. Advanc- 
 ing in them reasons for the plurality of worlds, he goes 
 beyond all the requirements of his argument to combat 
 the presumption that Christianity was designed ' for the 
 single benefit of this world.' Whether Dr. Chalmers 
 was warranted in suggesting a proposition which seems 
 to pass the limits of all reasonable speculation, captivat- 
 ing the ear and the mind by the burning eloquence in 
 which it was expressed, may well be questioned. But 
 the arguments used for the actual plurality, although 
 adding nothing to what had been already advanced, 
 state the case perhaps better than they were ever stated 
 previously, and on that account, were it on no other, 
 fall to be given. They are contained in his first dis- 
 course. After referring to the magnitude of the 
 heavenly bodies, he thus proceeds : l 
 
 ' Now, what is the fair and obvious presumption ? The 
 world in which we live is a round ball of a determined 
 magnitude, and occupies its own place in the firmament. 
 But when we explore the unlimited tracts of that space, 
 whicli is everywhere around us, we meet with other balls 
 of equal or superior magnitude, and from which our Earth 
 would either be invisible or appear as small as any of 
 those twinkling stars which are seen in the canopy of 
 Heaven. Why then suppose that this little spot, little 
 at least in the immensity which surrounds it, should be the 
 exclusive abode of life and of intelligence ? What reason 
 to think that those mightier globes which roll in other 
 parts of creation, and which we have discovered to be 
 worlds in magnitude, are not also worlds in use and 
 dignity ? Why should we think that the Great Architect 
 of nature, supreme in wisdom, as He is in power, would 
 call these stately mansions into existence and leave them 
 unoccupied ? When we cast our eye over the broad sea 
 
 1 Astronomical Discourses, "Works, vol. vii. p. 21. 
 
DR. CHALMERS. 109 
 
 and look at the country on the other side, we see nothing 
 but the blue land stretching obscurely over the distant 
 horizon. We are too far away to perceive the richness 
 of its scenery, or to hear the sound of its population. 
 Why not extend this principle to the still more distant 
 parts of the Universe ? What though, from this remote 
 point of observation, we can see nothing but the naked 
 roundness of yon planetary orbs ? Are we therefore to 
 say that they are so many vast and unpeopled solitudes ; 
 that desolation reigns in every part of the Universe but 
 ours ; that the whole energy of the divine attributes is 
 expended on one insignificant corner of these mighty 
 works ; and that to this Earth alone belongs the bloom of 
 vegetation, or the blessedness of life, or the dignity of 
 rational and immortal existence ? But this is not all. 
 We have something more than the mere magnitude of the 
 planets to allege in favour of the idea that they are in- 
 habited. We know that this Earth turns round upon 
 itself ; and we observe that all those celestial bodies which 
 are accessible to such an observation have the same move- 
 ment. We know that the Earth performs a yearly revolu- 
 tion round the Sun ; and we can detect in all the planets 
 which compose our system a revolution of the same kind, 
 and under the same circumstances. They have the same 
 succession of day and night. Thev have the same agree- 
 able vicissitude of the seasons. To them light and dark- 
 ness succeed each other ; and the gaiety of summer is 
 followed by the dreariness of winter. To each of them 
 the Heavens present as varied and magnificent a spectacle ; 
 and this Earth, the encompassing of which would require 
 the labour of years from one of its puny inhabitants, is 
 but one of the lesser lights which sparkle in their firma- 
 ment. To them, as well as to us, has God divided the 
 light from the darkness, and He has called the light day, 
 and the darkness He has called night. He has said, Let 
 there be light in the firmament of these heavens, to divide 
 the day from the night ; and let them be for signs, and 
 for seasons, and for days, and for years ; and let them be 
 for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light upon 
 
no ' PLURALITY OF WORLDS.' 
 
 their earth ; and it was so. And God has also made them 
 great lights. To all of them he has given the Sun to rule 
 the day ; and to many of them has He given Moons to 
 rule the night. To them He has made the stars also. 
 And God has set them in the firmament of heaven to give 
 light upon their Earth ; and to rule over the day, and 
 over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness ; 
 and God has seen that it was good. 
 
 ' In all these greater arrangements of divine wisdom 
 we can see that God has done the same things for the 
 accommodation of the planets that He has done for the 
 Earth which we inhabit, and shall we say that the 
 resemblance stops here, because we are not in a situation 
 to observe it ? Shall we say that this scene of magni- 
 ficence has been called into being merely for the amuse- 
 ment of a few astronomers ? Shall we measure the 
 counsels of Heaven by the narrow impotence of the 
 human faculties ? Or conceive that silence and solitude 
 reign throughout the mighty empire of nature ; that 
 the greater part of creation is an empty parade; and 
 that not a worshipper of the Divinity is to be found 
 through the wide extent of yon vast and immeasurable 
 regions ? 
 
 ' It lends a delightful confirmation to the argument, 
 when, from the growing perfection of our instruments, we 
 can discover a new point of resemblance between our 
 Earth and the other bodies of the planetary system. 
 It is now ascertained, not merely that all of them have 
 their day and night, and that all of them have their vicissi- 
 tudes of seasons, and that some of them have their Moons 
 to rule their night and alleviate the darkness of it ; we 
 can see of one that its surface rises into inequalities, that 
 it swells into mountains, and stretches into valleys; of 
 another, that it is surrounded by an atmosphere which 
 may support the respiration of animals ; of a third, that 
 clouds are formed and suspended over it, which may 
 minister to it all the bloom and luxuriance of vegetation ; 
 and of a fourth, that a white colour spreads over its 
 northern regions as its winter advances, and that on the 
 
THE ASTRONOMICAL DISCOURSES. in 
 
 approach of summer this whiteness is dissipated, giving 
 room to suppose that the element of water abounds in it, 
 that it rises by evaporation into its atmosphere, that it 
 freezes upon the application of cold, that it is precipitated 
 in the form of snow, that it covers the ground with a 
 fleecy mantle, which melts away from the heat of a more 
 vertical Sun ; and that other worlds bear a resemblance 
 to our own in the same yearly round of beneficent and 
 interesting changes. 
 
 ' Who shall assign a limit to the discoveries of future 
 ages ? Who can prescribe to Science her boundaries, or 
 restrain the active and insatiable curiosity of man within 
 the circle of his present acquirements ? We may guess 
 with plausibility what we cannot anticipate with con- 
 fidence. The day may yet be coming when our instru- 
 ments of observation shall be inconceivably more powerful. 
 They may ascertain still more decisive points of resem- 
 blance. They may resolve the same question by the 
 evidence of sense, which is now so abundantly convincing 
 by the evidence of analogy. They may lay open to us 
 the unquestionable vestiges of art and industry and intel- 
 ligence. We may see summer throwing its green mantle 
 over these mighty tracts, and we may see them left naked 
 and colourless after the flush of vegetation has disappeared. 
 In the progress of years or of centuries we may trace the 
 hand of cultivation spreading a new aspect over some 
 portion of a planetary surface. Perhaps some large city, 
 the metropolis of a mighty empire, may expand into a 
 visible spot by the powers of some future telescope. 
 Perhaps the glass of some observer in a distant age may 
 enable him to construct the map of another world, and to 
 lay down the surface of it in all its minute and topical 
 varieties. 1 But there is no end of conjecture ; and to the 
 men of other times we leave the full assurance of what 
 we can assert with the highest probability, that yon 
 planetary orbs are so many worlds, that they teem with 
 life, and that the Mighty Being who presides in high 
 
 1 This anticipation in the case of the Moon, and, it may be said, also 
 in that of Mars, has been realized. 
 
ii2 ' PL URALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 authority over this scen^'of grandeur and astonishment 
 has there planted the worshippers of His glory.' 
 
 I do not pause to examine the correctness of the 
 learned divine's statements, which contain assumptions, 
 or at least suppositions, of fact, upon which ' instru- 
 ments of observation more powerful' have since borne 
 their evidence or shed a light. I will not anticipate in 
 which direction, but I may observe that underlying all 
 this burst of noble eloquence is the idea that worlds can 
 only be created for habitation. Farther on he advocates 
 the view that each of the ' stars may be the token of a 
 system as vast and as splendid as the one we inhabit. 
 Worlds roll on these distant regions ; and these worlds 
 must be the mansions of life and of intelligence.' l 
 
 It is not surprising that the great preacher should 
 have been assailed for the positions he had thus taken ; 
 but, so far as I have seen, his assailants were foes 
 unworthy of his steel, and he does not appear to have 
 deigned to notice them. He was attacked principally 
 upon the religious view of the question ; the subject of 
 the plurality itself being all but ignored, and scarcely 
 discussed. One writer, Alexander Maxwell, in a book 
 of 265 pages, an elaborate series of prosy 'letters, 
 notes, and memoranda, philosophical and critical,' occa- 
 sioned by these discourses, setting out by disputing 
 astronomical verities, and telling us how much he was 
 indebted to the study of mathematics under one of the 
 first mathematicians of .the age, argued with a great 
 want of dialectic pertinence, and with much semblance 
 of learning, to very little effect. Disputing as he does 
 the doctrine of plurality, he advances nothing of any 
 moment bearing on the question. 
 
 1 Astronomical Discourses, Works, vol. vii. p. 31. 
 
DICK'S CELESTIAL SCEN**^ 
 
 After this the subject seems to have 
 twenty years. No one had ventured boldly into the 
 arena to contend, on adequate grounds, for the non- 
 plurality. 
 
 But in 1837, Dr. Thomas Dick, originally a minister 
 of the Scotch Secession Church, who abandoned the 
 clerical profession to teach, to lecture, and to write popu- 
 lar works, published his Celestial Scenery, descriptive 
 mainly of the bodies composing the solar system, yet 
 devoting a considerable portion to the enforcement of 
 the doctrine of plurality of worlds. His books, which 
 contain much information, can scarcely be called autho- 
 ritative ; but, so far as I have observed, Celestial Scenery 
 seems to have been, in point of time, the next work in 
 which the subject is considered at any length. It enters 
 upon the question in a novel manner ; for its. first office 
 in the case of each body is to settle the number of its 
 population, which is done by estimating the total extent 
 of superficial area, and taking as the standard of cal- 
 culation the population of England, reckoned at 280 
 inhabitants for every square mile. Thus doing, the 
 population of each planet and its satellites is calculated 
 by the multiple of its square mileage. As if to make it 
 as absurd as possible, no deduction is made for ocean, 
 desert, or ice, and no allowance is granted for difference 
 in size or description of the inhabitants presumed to exist 
 upon each. The grand total, it readily may be imagined, 
 is astonishing. The results are gathered together in a 
 table interesting to the curious, and persuasive to the 
 credulous : 
 
n 4 PLURALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 Planets . Population . 
 
 'Mercury, . . . . . 8,960,000,000 
 
 Venus, 53,500,000,000 
 
 Mars, 15,500,000,000 
 
 Vesta 64,000,000 
 
 Juno, 1,786,000,000 
 
 Ceres, 2,319,962,400 
 
 Palles, 4,009,000,000 
 
 Jupiter, 6,967,520,000,000 
 
 Saturn, 5,488,000,000,000 
 
 Outer ring of Saturn, . . .\ 
 
 Inner ring, 8,141,963,826,080 
 
 Edges of the ring, . . . . ) 
 
 Uranus, 1,077,568,800,000 
 
 The Moon, 4,200,000,000 
 
 Satellites of Jupiter, . . . 26,673,000,000 
 
 Satellites of Saturn, . . . 55,417,824,000 
 
 Satellites of Uranus, . . . 47,500,992,000 
 
 Amount, . . . 21, 894,974, 404,480.' l 
 
 Dr. Dick cannot be blamed for the omission of the 
 planets subsequently discovered. Neptune and his satel- 
 lites, and the 150 additional planetoids, besides the little 
 moons of Mars, would, with all their populations, have con- 
 siderably swollen the splendid total to which, without them, 
 the enthusiastic doctor had thus, with ever-to-be-praised 
 solicitude, attained. Elsewhere he reckons the population 
 of the Earth at a modest 800,000,000, and of the Sun 
 (which, though not positive on the subject, he 2 evidently 
 leans to holding inhabited) at 681,184,000,000,000, 
 or equal to the inhabitants of 850,000 worlds such as 
 our own. Indeed, it will be observed that, with the 
 single exception of the small planetoid Vesta, every one 
 of the bodies is credited with a population greater, and 
 in some cases many thousand times greater, than that 
 of the Earth. Even our Moon receives more than five 
 times the population of the planet upon which it humbly 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 285. 2 Ibid. pp. 219. 220. 
 
DR. DICK'S ARGUMENT. 115 
 
 waits. The calculation is truly wonderful. But when 
 he was so agreeably engaged, it is surprising he did not 
 study arithmetical exactness to the extent of condescend- 
 ing to detail the hundreds and the units ; and as there 
 must in all cases be many, in all of the planets, who 
 are under age, infants that travel half-price, why 
 did he not both serenely estimate the units, and secure 
 that one at least should honourably ride off with an odd 
 half? Dean Swift, with that feeling attention to. the 
 exigencies of vraisemblance for which he was distin- 
 guished, could scarcely have omitted the odd half; nor 
 would Defoe. 
 
 Starting with these magnificent visions of planetary 
 population, he 1 devotes a considerable portion of his 
 l>ook to the demonstration of the plurality of worlds. 
 His arguments are these : 
 
 1. There are bodies in the planetary system of such 
 magnitudes as to afford ample scope for myriads of 
 inhabitants. It would be a very gloomy view of the 
 Creator to imagine them barren and desolate. 
 
 2. There is a general similarity 2 among the planetary 
 bodies, tending to prove that they were all intended to 
 subserve the same ultimate designs. They are all 
 (1) spherical, (2) solid. (3) They all revolve round the 
 Sun, (4) and on their axis. They are all (5) opaque 
 bodies deriving their lustre from the Sun, (6) kept 
 together by the law of gravity round the central lumi- 
 nary, obeying the same laws and subjected to the same 
 influences ; so that the reasonable conclusion is, that 
 the ultimate destination is the same, and that they are 
 all replenished with inhabitants. 
 
 3. There are special arrangements, indicating adapta- 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 342. * Ibid. p. 342. 
 
1 1 6 PL URALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 tion to the enjoyment of sensitive and intelligent beings, 
 proving this to be the ultimate design of their creation; 1 
 because they are (1) diversified into hill and dale ; 
 (2) environed with atmosphere ; (3) provided with 
 means of distribution of light, heat, and colour ; (4) pro- 
 vided with moons ; (5) adjusted by comparative density 
 and rapidity of rotation to their respective sizes to 
 suit organized intelligences. 
 
 On the assumption of the truth of the statements 
 thus made, Dr. Dick argues that God has a design in 
 view in all His arrangements ; that whenever we find a 
 contrivance exactly adapted to accomplish a given end, 
 we may be sure that was the end to be accomplished ; 
 that we see in all the planets special contrivances 
 calculated to promote the enjoyment of myriads of 
 intelligent agents ; and, as God is possessed of infinite 
 wisdom, to suppose them uninhabited would be unworthy 
 of infinite wisdom, and ' the thought would be impious, 
 blasphemous, and absurd:' a conclusion, I must observe, 
 which may perhaps be reached very logically from the 
 premises, provided always the premises be, as matter 
 of fact, true. But are they so ? We shall see. 
 
 4. The scenery of the Heavens, as viewed from the 
 surfaces of the larger planets and their satellites, forms 
 a presumptive proof they are inhabited by intellectual 
 beings; and the reverend doctor 2 tells us how much 
 grander the views obtained from these satellites are 
 than any we poor inhabitants of Earth enjoy ; and con- 
 cludes it is impossible to suppose that such magnificent 
 views would be unless there were rational beings capable 
 of appreciating them. The proper corollary from which 
 conclusion, I suppose, is that the inhabitants of our 
 Moon must be many degrees more intellectual than the 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 353. ~ Ibid. p. 364. 
 
DICK'S SIDEREAL HE A VENS. 1 1 7 
 
 men of Earth ; and still more should the favoured 
 inhabitants of Jupiter's moons, whose views, we take it, 
 are so transcendently more magnificent. 
 
 5. Every part of nature in this world, he says, 1 has 
 been destined to be the support of animated beings, and 
 therefore it would be absurd to suppose the planets to 
 be destitute of life. Matter was evidently formed for 
 mind ; and as God delights in conferring existence and 
 happiness on every order of beings, it must be in accord- 
 ance with our conceptions of the Divine Being to suppose 
 that the planetary regions are peopled, and with beings 
 beyond doubt possessed of rational and intellectual 
 natures. 
 
 Apart from the assertions in point of fact contained 
 in Dr. Dick's statements, his argument, thus epitomised, 
 is pervaded by the general assumption that the orbs must 
 be created for habitation, which, if not implying assertion 
 of the final cause, may be said to be the de quo queritur. 
 
 In his Sidereal Heavens, 2 published subsequently, after 
 setting out in a separate chapter his view that the stars 
 were constructed as centres of planetary systems, he 
 enters, very much on the same lines, 3 upon a further 
 argument for the plurality of worlds, drawn chiefly from 
 his suppositions regarding the perfections of the infinite 
 Creator ; and he also attempts to prove his position by 
 quotations from Scripture. 4 One chapter is devoted to 
 describing the inhabitants, very much on Huygens' plan 
 of resembling them to men. 
 
 It would not seem that either work produced any 
 visible movement, or evoked any fresh literature. If 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 366. c P. 208, c. 14. 
 
 3 C. 16, p. 234. C. 17, p. 252. 
 
n8 PLURALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 the slumber was broken, it was but a drowsy wakening 
 to listen half - consciously to the reverend divine's 
 cogitations, which only squared with preconceived 
 views ; for, indeed, the plurality was then tacitly 
 assumed. 
 
 But not long after there appeared a notable work, the 
 Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, wherein the 
 unknown writer went a step farther, and advanced thf 
 position that organic beings are produced or evolved in 
 all the orbs by virtue of a general law of nature, and 
 out of an original fiat of the divine will, by which 
 
 ' The whole train of animated beings are to be regarded 1 
 as a series of advances of the principle of development j' 1 
 and so, the author informs us, 'organic life presses in 
 wherever there is room and encouragement for it, the 
 former being always such as meet the circumstances.' 2 
 ' We have to suppose that any one of these numberless 
 globes is either a theatre of organic being, or on the way 
 of becoming so.' 3 ' Inorganic matter must be presumed to 
 be everywhere the same with differences in the propor- 
 tions of ingredients in different globes, and also some 
 difference of conditions.' 4 He then assumes that 'where 
 there is light there will be eyes, and these in other 
 spheres will be the same in all respects as the eyes of 
 tellurian animals, with only such differences as may be 
 necessary to accord with minor peculiarities of condition 
 and of situation. It is but a small stretch of the argument 
 to suppose that one conspicuous organ of a large portion 
 of our animal kingdom being thus universal, a parity in 
 all the other organs species for species, class for class, 
 kingdom for kingdom is highly likely, and that thus 
 the inhabitants of all the other globes of space bear not 
 only a general, but a particular resemblance to those of 
 our own.' 5 
 
 1 Vestiges of Creation, 4th ed. p. 208. * Ibid. p. 164. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 165. * Ibid. p. 167. * Ibid. p. 168. 
 
THE VESTIGES. 119 
 
 Taking such views, the inevitable conclusion to which 
 this author was led, was that organic beings have ' all 
 come into existence by the operation of laws everywhere 
 applicable.' l 
 
 The literal meaning of the book was simply this, that 
 God having once for all spoken His will and put the 
 wheels of nature in motion, for ever afterwards restrained 
 His hand. The author could not imagine the possibility 
 of God exercising the creative power at each successive 
 new form of life, and so, because the ways of Him who 
 letteth not a sparrow fall on the ground without His 
 will were incomprehensible to the imperfect knowledge 
 and finite powers of the feeble creature, the thought 
 was to be regarded as taking ' a very mean view ' of 
 Him it was, in short, ' ridiculous.' One thing, how- 
 ever, is observable, that after endeavouring to trace the 
 successive steps of change from one condition of being 
 to the immediately higher, as if the fact of resem- 
 blance in the successions proved their descent the one 
 from the other, or proved it to happen without the 
 interposition of divine direction and divine power, he 
 stops short of man at the quadrumana, and concludes 
 by saying, ' Here such obscurity prevails that I must be 
 content to leave the task to other inquirers.' 2 
 
 The author of the Vestiges was by no means the first 
 to suggest the view of development, for he had been 
 preceded by several writers who raised the question; 
 but the boldness of his views and the dogmatic vigour 
 of his style produced a sensation and an influence 
 which probably had not been previously experienced, 
 and he may be said, therefore, practically to have given 
 birth to the doctrine of evolution now so popular among 
 many naturalists, and with which we shall have after- 
 
 1 Vestiges of Creation, p. 169. 2 Ibid. p. 272. 
 
120 PLURALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 wards more particularly to deal. The Vestiges was first 
 published in. 1844, to which was added a sequel of 
 Explanations in 1846, and it rapidly passed through 
 ten editions, in which there are numerous alterations 
 and excisions apparently indicating from time to time 
 some slight modifications or some slight developments 
 of its author's daring opinions. It experienced a wide 
 criticism, and it is to be feared the answers made were 
 not always on the correct lines. 
 
 Hitherto, it will be seen, although all would not have 
 indorsed the views of the Vestiges, the opinion of every 
 one of those to whose writings I have adverted had 
 been in favour of plurality. About 1853 or 1854, 
 however, there appeared a book, called The Plurality of 
 Worlds : an Essay, anonymously though speedily and, 
 as it proved, rightly attributed to the Eev. Dr. William 
 Whewell, 1 Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and 
 author of the Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and 
 General Physics considered with reference to Natural 
 Theology. In the Bridgewater Treatise, while discours- 
 ing of 'the vastness of the Universe/ Dr. Whewell 
 
 1 In The Life and Selections from, the Correspondence of William 
 Whewell, D.D., by Mrs. Stair Douglas (1881), there occurs this incidental 
 acknowledgment of the authorship in a letter ' to Kate Marshall, ' dated 
 2d January 1854 (p. 433) : 'There is a little, not mystery, for that I 
 hate, but reserve to be used in talking of it as my book, for it is 
 published without my name, and contains notions that may be startling 
 to some persons, though I am persuaded that they tend to give us a true 
 view of God's government of the world. I suppose, after all, you must 
 have heard me talk of a book about The Plurality of Worlds, which I 
 was writing or finishing when you were here, and now the murder (of the 
 inhabitants of Jupiter) is out.' This Life, which is nearly altogether 
 made up of letters, is disappointing. There is no direct mention of the 
 publication either of the essay or of the treatise, nor any mention of the 
 reception of either by the public, notwithstanding the amount of dis- 
 cussion to which the essay especially gave rise. 
 
WHE WELZS ESS A Y. 121 
 
 incidentally observed that ' no one can resist the temp- 
 tation to conjecture that these globes' (the planets and 
 the satellites), ' some of them much larger than our own, 
 are not dead and barren ; that they are, like ours, 
 occupied with organization, life, intelligence.' But in 
 the Essay he entered the lists as a champion to 
 combat that view, and so far as I have observed he 
 seems to have been the first who did so, or did so with 
 any force of reason. 1 For he discusses the whole 
 subject fully and systematically, though not always so 
 as to command concurrence, indeed also with all the 
 overlading amplitude of a theologian. In 'the early 
 chapters he sets out the difficulties which had originated 
 the famous Astronomical Discourses of Dr. Chalmers, 
 gives due weight to the doctor's argument, and discusses 
 the subject. He then proceeds to point out from 
 geology the antiquity of life upon the Earth as compared 
 with the recent creation of man, and considerations to 
 which this fact gives rise. Thence he proceeds to the 
 stars and planets, and argues from scientific facts against 
 the conjecture of their being inhabited, and against even 
 the probability of the fixed stars being, at least in every 
 case, surrounded by planetary systems, because, among 
 
 1 Such obiter dicta as those of John Wesley, quoted in Powell's Unity 
 of Worlds, p. 302, can hardly be considered, in this collocation, as 
 offering an exception. "Wesley's words, however, are remarkable : 
 ' Suppose there were millions of worlds, yet God may see in the abyss of 
 His infinite wisdom reasons which do not appear to us why He saw good 
 to show this mercy to ours in preference to thousands or millions of other 
 worlds. I speak this even upon the common supposition of the plurality 
 of worlds, a very favourite notion with all those who deny the Christian 
 revelation, and for this reason, because it affords them a foundation for 
 so plausible an objection to it. But the more I consider that supposi- 
 tion, the more I doubt of it, insomuch that if it were allowed by all the. 
 philosophers in Europe, still I could not allow it without stronger proof 
 than any I have met with yet.' 
 
122 PLURALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 other reasons, of the large proportion of double stars. 
 He argues from the advance of our planet to a peculiar 
 condition and situation in a temperate zone, and the 
 high nature and destiny of man to the Earth being the 
 special seat of God's peculiar care, and that man has 
 been placed upon it as a preparatory stage to fit him for 
 eternity, and that the Universe is subordinate to man ; 
 while he combats the idea that the refusal to acknow- 
 ledge inhabitants in other stellar bodies is adverse to the 
 thought of the goodness, benevolence, or majesty of God. 
 It was a thoughtful, able work, although many of the 
 views it contains, such as the assumption that the Universe 
 was created for man, are unnecessary to the conclusion, 
 and are far from carrying conviction. It excited so much 
 attention, as within a year to run to a fourth edition. 
 
 The Essay stirred up discussion. Apart from the 
 observations and comments of reviewers, he was attacked 
 by two writers. One of them anonymously assailed 
 him in a small book, called The Plurality of Worlds: 
 The Positive Argument from Scripture, with Answers to 
 some late Objections from Analogy. It was a dreary 
 argument, which may be put aside without remark. 
 The other was from the pen of the venerable Sir David 
 Brewster. But the want of temper manifested in Sir 
 David's book, called More Worlds than One the Creed of 
 the Philosopher and the Hope of the Christian, disfigures 
 it, and manifests an amount of 'bias which disqualified 
 him from forming calm and sound conclusions. View- 
 ing the essay 'as an elaborate attack upon opinions 
 consecrated by reason and revelation,' having a ' direct 
 tendency to ridicule and bring into contempt the grand 
 discoveries in sidereal astronomy,' he allows himself to 
 ' reject the ignoble sentiments with indignation/ and 
 
BREWSTERS MORE WORLDS. 123 
 
 hints at the writer being either ' a fool or a madman, 
 writing only from a love of notoriety.' On the other 
 hand, the fantastic views of Fontenelle and Huygens 
 receive unbounded regard ; and, indeed, he follows to 
 some extent in their wake, and arguing with the aid of 
 additional scientific facts, or supposed or assumed facts, 
 he easily takes his conclusions, by adopting Huygens' 
 method even to the using of his very words : ' it must 
 be.' The idea underlying the whole book is that all the 
 orbs must have been made for some use, and that use 
 must have been for the abode of rational beings ; that 
 all the stars are suns, each one of which is the centre of 
 a system of planets, and there being one planet, at least, 
 in the solar system inhabited, there must be at least 
 one in each of these assumed systems similarly inhabited. 
 It is rather curious to find that Sir David's dogmatical 
 assertions of astronomical fact are in some instances 
 distinctly set aside by the later discoveries of the 
 spectroscope and otherwise ; as, for example, his asser- 
 tion that all nebulae are resolvable into stars, that there 
 are volcanoes in the Moon and an atmosphere surround- 
 ing it, together with his views regarding the planets and 
 the eternity of the Sun. In the overbearing spirit in 
 which it was written, well-founded argument was not to 
 be expected ; and, straining his views as he does, it may 
 almost be said that, in speculating on the plans of the 
 Almighty, he is sometimes, to use his own words applied 
 to the essayist/ bordering on the blasphemous.' 1 While 
 Whewell laid himself open to attack, I cannot, however, 
 say that Sir David Brewster was remarkably successful 
 in his assault, even when, in common with some other 
 writers, he is armed with words of Scripture, which he 
 vainly wrests in support of his conclusions. 
 1 More Worlds than One, ed. 1870, p. 229. 
 
i2 4 PLURALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 A far more philosophical and valuable communication 
 was made at same time by Professor George Wilson, 
 in a small publication of 50 pages, which he called 
 The' Chemistry of the Stars. Exception might be taken 
 to the fanciful clothing in which some of his ideas were 
 dressed, to his jury of chandler, stoker, sailor, and the 
 like, and their professional remarks. But the idea 
 which permeates the treatise is to point out the differ- 
 ences, actual and possible, between the Earth and the 
 other orbs of creation, and hence to reason against the 
 plurality of worlds. The argument is exactly in the 
 right direction, and, so far as it goes, is supported by 
 chemical facts and proofs of the most telling character. 
 But the knowledge then possessed w T as more limited 
 than it is now ; and it is only much to be deplored that 
 the talented popular chemist did not survive to carry 
 his demonstration to a wider field, to do which no 
 philosopher was more competent. His tract afforded, so 
 far as I have seen, the most important support to the 
 position taken by Whewell. 
 
 On the other hand, Mr. Montague Lyon Phillips 
 entered the lists to champion the side of plurality. 
 His book, Worlds leyond the Earth, is mainly occupied 
 with a demonstration of the Nebular hypothesis. But 
 lie has not been so successful in his attempt to prove 
 the plurality. He is forced to admit that the Sun, 
 Moon, and planets exist in conditions differing from 
 those of the Earth. The chemical substances the 
 gases, the fluids, the atmospheres are different; and, 
 driven to admit that human beings could not exist on 
 those other bodies, he only finds his way out of the 
 difficulty by suggesting that these inhabitants must 
 be differently constituted. How far this is an ad mis- 
 
POWELLS UNITY OF WORLDS. 125 
 
 sible position in the present question may afterwards 
 appear. 
 
 The Eev. Baden Powell, in his Unity of Worlds, took up 
 the parable, and, with a show of impartiality, disclaim- 
 ing controversialism, hitting both sides, he not the less 
 turns the scale for the plurality, to his own satisfaction, 
 by quietly placing the weight of his foot in the balance. 
 Eeferring to the discussions on the Nebular hypothesis, 
 he pointed out that there was no necessary connection 
 between that hypothesis and the question of plurality, 
 although he leans to it, and supposes a common origin 
 for all the planets, and that all are suffused with the 
 same material (a fact which Phillips did not admit) ; 
 and, discussing the views relative to the Sun, Moon, and 
 planets, seems to arrive at the conclusion that they are 
 of the same kind or character, but only differ in degree ; 
 and dismisses the geological difficulty of man's recent 
 appearance by assuming a theory of progressive develop- 
 ment or preparation ; so that if a world is not at present 
 inhabited, it is because it has not reached, or has passed, 
 the condition of fitness for habitation. He also at great 
 length discusses the arguments maintained on both 
 sides from the theological point of view, maintains 
 that it was a mistake to remove the subject from the 
 region of inductive conjecture to that of supporting 
 theological belief, and condemns the impropriety of 
 attempting to solve a philosophical problem on any 
 ground but physical analogy. In doing so he hits both 
 sides, hits Sir David Brewster, who starts with the 
 assumption that the worlds were made for the sole pur- 
 pose of being inhabited, which was just begging the 
 question, and an assumption of final causes not warranted 
 by sound principles of reasoning. But then Whewell, 
 
126 PL URALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 in the essay, he thinks, was equally wrong in seeming to 
 advance (for it is rather a gloss upon his argument) that 
 the rest of creation must be supposed a waste in order to 
 dignify man. The argument from assumed final causes 
 was thus, he says, applied with equal force for opposite 
 conclusions. It was likewise a mistake, which some 
 had made, to deny the existence of inhabitants in other 
 worlds, lest it should clash with our thoughts regarding 
 man, and revelation, and the sacrifice of the Son of God 
 for man all this was to disregard the proper province 
 of theology. But though thus apparently reproving all, 
 there is an under-current pervading the section, indi- 
 cating his favour for the subordination of man and the 
 peopling of other worlds. 
 
 The controversy thus raised by Whe well's essay 
 brought some other writers into the field ; but it seems 
 to have died down, and apparently was resuscitated in 
 France, in 1862, by the French astronomer Flammarion, 
 in the publication of his popular work, ' La Plurality dcs 
 Mondes Habitts : Etude ou Ton expose les conditions 
 d'habitabilite" des terres celestes discutees au point de 
 vue de I'astroiiomie de la physiologic et de la philo- 
 sophic naturelle,' written, he tells us, for the purpose of 
 demonstrating that the plurality of worlds is a doctrine, 
 at once scientific, philosophical, and religious, of the 
 highest importance. He followed it up in 1865 by 
 another, 'Les Mondes Imaginaircs et les Mondes R6ds, 
 voyage pittoresque dans le ciel et revue critique des 
 theories humaines scientifiques et Romanesques, anciennes 
 et modernes sur les habitants des astres.' This work, 
 which is for the most part occupied with a very detailed 
 history of the theories, ancient and modern, regarding 
 the inhabitants of the stars, is in this respect an enlarge- 
 
FLAMMARION' S WORKS. 127 
 
 inent of the previous book, and in the last chapter he 
 states that the appearance of his former work was the 
 signal for the revival of attention to the subject. It 
 was rapidly disseminated throughout France and in 
 Europe, and was translated into all the languages of 
 the two continents, and was at the time he wrote 
 in its 21st French edition. 1 It had given birth to 
 'many books and the reproduction of others, and he 
 catalogues over thirty, principally French, published 
 since 1862. 
 
 Flammarion likewise devoted a chapter of Les Mer- 
 veilles Celestes to the plurality of inhabited worlds. But 
 it hardly appears to me that he added anything to the 
 views which had been advanced by earlier writers, and, 
 indeed, the little he does advance may be summed up 
 in resting his view for plurality on the insignificance of 
 this Earth, the abundance of life upon it, and similarity 
 of this planet to the others. 
 
 Meantime the English press had been almost silent. 
 At length, in 1870, Mr. Proctor published Other Worlds 
 than Ours, the remark upon which by Flammarion 2 is, 
 ' Aux yeux de tous ses lecteurs, 1'auteur n'a evidemment 
 qu'un tort : c'est de paraitre igriorer que d'autres ecrivains 
 ont traite la meme question avant lui, et de la meme 
 maniere, et de ne citer que des auteurs anglais, comme 
 
 . J My copies are dated 1876, and La Pluralite is the 24th, the other the 
 14th edition. The two books run to nearly 1000 pages, and I must 
 confess to have done not more than glance at them. In both works 
 Flammarion has industriously gathered together apparently everything 
 that has been written for or against the plurality, and whether purposely 
 or merely cursorily, whether seriously or in jest. Probably, therefore, 
 those desirous of making themselves fully acquainted "with the whole 
 literature of the subject may find the means of study in his pages. 
 2 Mondes Jmaginaires, p. 582. 
 
128 PL URALITY OF WORLDS. 
 
 si 1'idee de la pluralite des mondes etait nee en Angle- 
 terre et n'avait ete cultivee que dans cette ile.' 
 
 Mr. Proctor in this treatise, however, proceeds in an 
 orderly manner to examine the conditions in which the 
 various bodies are placed, and his views on each will 
 best be referred to as each comes to be afterwards dis- 
 cussed. Mars, he believes, is the only planet unmis- 
 takeably showing signs of life, and he by no means 
 maintains life at present in any of the others. There 
 are conditions in them inimical to life, as, for example, 
 in Jupiter, which ' is still a glowing mass, fluid probably 
 throughout, still bubbling and sending up continually 
 enormous masses of cloud, to be gathered into bands 
 under the influence of the swift rotation of the giant 
 planet.' But Mr. Proctor takes the view that the 
 worlds were created for life, and leans to the supposition 
 that the beings which people other globes are adapted 
 to the conditions of each, and that if not at the present 
 time habitable, these globes have been or may yet 
 become so. He touches on the subject or deals with it 
 in several others of his many works, and particularly in 
 The Orls around us, Flowers of the Sky, The Expanse of 
 Heaven, and Our Place among Infinities, ' a series of 
 essays contrasting our little abode in space and time 
 with the infinities around us.' 
 
 In the last-mentioned book he devotes a special 
 chapter to considering ' A new Theory of Life in other 
 Worlds.' 1 Contrasting the views of Whewell and Brew- 
 ster, he starts by observing that Whewell did good service 
 in breaking the chains of old-fashioned ideas and inau- 
 gurating freedom of discussion, and while admitting that 
 the balance of evidence was in favour of Whewell's 
 theory, considers that Brewster's is the one which com- 
 1 Our Place among Infinities, 1875, p. 48. 
 
PROCTORS WORKS. 129 
 
 mends itself more favourably to the mind which would 
 believe that God hath done all things well, and nothing 
 that He hath made was made in vain. And having 
 forced on us the belief that the support of life is the 
 object for which the Earth was created, we are thus 
 1 led to regard the other orbs, which, like her, circle 
 round a central Sun, as intended to be the abode of 
 life. 1 But there was a middle course ; and pointing to 
 the short duration of life, and especially rational life upon 
 Earth, as a mere ripple on the great ocean of time, 
 leading to the thought that rational life was but a sub- 
 ordinate object of the Earth's creation, that there is 
 no ground to suppose that this particular epoch is the 
 epoch for life everywhere, and that the probabilities are 
 that it is only the epoch for a small proportion, the 
 view he takes is, that the planets of this and other 
 systems are passing through stages, and the stage of 
 life has only been treached or is occurring in a propor- 
 tion of the planets ; but this proportion, over the whole 
 Universe, will amount to millions. 
 
 I have not observed that of late years any other 
 English writer has ventured to take the matter up as a 
 separate subject of discussion, although some have dealt 
 with it along with other themes. Thus Dr. Phipson 
 devotes a chapter of his Mysteries of Nature to inha- 
 bited planets, in the course of which he thus writes : 2 
 
 ' To any person tolerably devoid of prejudice, and 
 slightly acquainted with the teachings of modern astro- 
 nomy, it must appear absurd in the extreme to suppose 
 that these magnificent worlds which revolve round the 
 Sun should nofe have been as highly endowed by the 
 Creator as our little Earth, a mere point in the Universe, 
 
 1 P. 57. 2 Phipson's Mysteries of Nature, 1876, p. 268. 
 
 I 
 
1 30 'PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 which constitutes so moderate a feature among them. 
 And it may perhaps be quite as fanciful to imagine that 
 our globe is for man the best possible of worlds. One or 
 two prodigious difficulties arise, however, when we wish 
 to bring forward some palpable proof of the planets being 
 in reality inhabited by creatures at all like ourselves. 
 Not the slightest doubt can exist as to the possibility of 
 this, as far as certain planets are concerned, more espe- 
 cially Venus, Mars, and Mercury, reasoning from the 
 little we know of their physical properties and their 
 telescopic appearance, so similar to what our Earth must 
 appear viewed from one of them/ 
 
 Dr. Phipson, however, has his doubts about the 
 satellites, the Sun, and the larger planets. How far 
 his views are justified remains to be seen. Professor 
 Newcomb, an American astronomer, devotes a few pages, 
 at the close of his work on astronomy, to the subject. 
 He says : l ' When we contemplate the planets are worlds 
 like our own, and the stars as suns, each perhaps with 
 its retinue of attendant planets, the idea naturally sug- 
 gests itself, that other planets, as well as this, may be 
 the abode of intelligent beings ; ' and after alluding to 
 the importance attached to the discovery of evidence 
 of life in them, says : ' It is therefore extremely disap- 
 pointing to learn that the attainment of any direct 
 evidence of such life seems entirely hopeless, so hope- 
 less, indeed, that it has almost ceased to occupy the 
 attention of astronomers/ and observes that it is ' quite 
 possible that retinues of planets revolving in circular 
 orbits may be rare exceptions rather than the rule 
 among the stars ; ' 2 but granting planets, all the chances 
 are decidedly against the idea that any considerable 
 fraction of the heavenly bodies is fitted- to be the abode 
 of such animals as we have on earth, and that the 
 
 1 Newcomb's Astronomy, p. 516. 2 P. 517. 
 
NEWCOMERS VIEWS. 131 
 
 number of those which have the requisites for support- 
 ing civilisation is a very small fraction indeed of the 
 whole. This conclusion, he says, rests on the assump- 
 tion that the conditions of life are the same in other 
 worlds as in our own, and this again on whether there 
 be limits to adaptability on earth; and then states that 
 such limits do exist, and the higher the condition of 
 life the more restricted are the conditions, and if great 
 changes are to occur on the surface- of the globe, the- 
 higher forms of life would be destroyed. He- i& there- 
 fore led to the conclusion, that ' in view of the immense 
 diversity of conditions which probably prevails in the 
 Universe, it would be only in a few favoured spots we 
 should expect to find any very interesting development 
 of life.' Professor Newcomb therefore adopts* a view 
 different from that of Dr. Phipson. But scientific men 
 have been too much engaged within the last twenty 
 years in making investigations with the spectroscope 
 and other astronomical appliances, and thus getting at 
 astronomical facts, to deal with what has always been 
 regarded by astronomers as a pure speculation. The 
 discoveries made by means of spectrum analysis must 
 necessarily have proved, and have truly proved, of 
 greatest consequence, and they tend to lead to more 
 certain conclusions on many points of the question 
 involved. Mr. Proctor seems to think, in one of the 
 chapters of The Orbs around us, that the discoveries by 
 this analysis refute some of the arguments or positions 
 of Mr. Whewell ; but I have purposely reserved all dis- 
 cussion on the matters they involve to their proper 
 place in the after pages. 
 
II. 
 
 SUCH is a sketch of some of the leading stages in the 
 history of the question^ and of the views of some of the 
 leading writers.. Those who believe in the plurality are 
 not quite agreed regarding the nature of the inhabitants-, 
 But their general contention seems to be that these 
 inhabitants are rational beings; and, indeed, it seems 
 difficult to reconcile the theory of life in those other 
 orbs unless upon the footing that the life is rational, 1 
 that the occupants are intelligent and capable, like man, 
 of apprehending the existence of the Creator, for to* 
 this the argument naturally leads. Some, like Huygens, 
 have even contended for their resembling man in all 
 respects. Others do not give their ideas this concrete 
 form, and content themselves with simply affirming the 
 habitability of all orbs, believing that the beings which 
 constitute their population must vary in shape and kind 
 in accordance with the constitution of the planets on 
 which they severally dwell, and the varied circum- 
 stances in which they are respectively placed. While 
 others again contend merely for the potentiality of the 
 different orbs to receive life, and say that they, or many 
 of them, may only yet be in a state of preparation for 
 life, or that they have ceased to sustain it. 
 
 But it will also be noticed that the arguments 
 
 1 See p. 171. 
 133 
 
i 3 4 ' PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 advanced in support of the plurality are various. They 
 may be resolved into several propositions : 
 
 1. It is said that many passages in Scripture imply 
 that the orbs are inhabited. In 1801, the Kev. Edward 
 Nares, Eector of Beddinden, Kent, was at pains to write 
 a whole book of 404 pages, entitled 'EIS BEOS 
 EIZ MESITHS : or, An attempt to show how far 
 the philosophical notion of a -plurality >of worlds is 
 consistent or not so with the language of the Holy 
 Scriptures ;' and it is only fair to say that, while it is a 
 prolix, mild, and inconclusive work, it appears to be 
 honest and, ..as far ,as possible, impartial, although one 
 is much tempted to think the writing of it was labour 
 wasted. 
 
 In a very different spirit Sir David Brewster devoted 
 a chapter of his More Worlds than 'One to the -subject, 
 and to this I would particularly refer. 
 
 Without specifying the several passages in detail, I 
 may notice a few. Thus .he refers to the words of 
 David flowing from an 'inspiration which no doubt 
 revealed to him the magnitude, the distances, and >the 
 final causes of the glorious spheres which fixed his 
 admiration,' 1 an assumption large enough indeed, 
 ' when I consider .the Heavens, the work of Thy fingers, 
 the Moon and the stars which Thou hast ordained, 
 what is man that Thou art mindful of him, and the 
 son of man that Thou visitest him ? ' 2 or those of Job : 
 ' The Heavens being spread out as a tent to dwell in ;' 3 
 'the chambers of -the south ;' to other writers speaking of 
 the ' host of Heaven ' (a well-known synonym for the 
 stars) ; to Isaiah : ' the Lord who created the Heavens ' 
 
 1 More Worlds than One, p. 10. 2 Ibid. p. 10. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 12. 
 
ARGUMENTS FOR CONSIDERED. 135 
 
 and the Earth ; ' He created it not in vain, He formed it 
 to be inhabited ' (a passage which, literally taken, would 
 imply that the Earth only was formed to be inhabited) ; 
 or to the New Testament in the use of such words as 
 ' worlds,' ' the Heavens/ or ' all things.' But if other 
 similar passages of Scripture were taken literally, what 
 should we make of such words as these : ' The stars shall 
 fall from Heaven ;' ' The stars of Heaven fell on the 
 Earth ;' ' Praise Him, Sun and all ye stars of light '? It 
 is in vain to take such words literally, and to catch at a 
 hidden meaning of this nature from the fervid utterances 
 of the poet or the prophet, while it is manifest that the 
 passages in question neither directly affirm that the stars 
 are inhabited, and, indeed, it is a proposition now all 
 but abandoned that the stars themselves are so, the con- 
 tention being merely that their supposed but invisible 
 planetary attendants are, nor can they, not one of 
 them, sanction the deduction of such a meaning. The 
 Bible was not given for the purpose of teaching us scien- 
 tific facts, nor does it. It is only the extravagant fancy 
 of a keen and inexact advocate which can torture unde- 
 signed expression to suit his argument in a way which 
 will not brook the smallest investigation or criticism. It 
 is a method of argument to be decried and dismissed. 
 
 2. It is maintained that the supposition of the orbs 
 being inhabited redounds to the glory, and manifests 
 the wisdom of God ; and the contrary supposition would 
 be to lessen the glory and impeach the wisdom of God. 
 But this is truly to affirm that it consists with the 
 knowledge of those who so aver that the glory and 
 wisdom of God can only be manifested in the other orbs 
 by peopling them ; or to declare what it has not been 
 given to man to know wherein the glory and wisdom 
 
1 36 PL URALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 of God consist. It is, however, just another form of 
 saying 
 
 3. That the orbs were all made for the express 
 purpose of being inhabited, and would be useless unless 
 they were, which, besides being a begging of the question, 
 is an assumption of the final cause, for which it cannot 
 be pretended we have the smallest warrant. 
 
 The idea in this assumption truly lies at the bottom 
 of nearly all that has been said in support of the 
 plurality. Looked fairly in the face, it cannot stand. 
 
 For it must be acknowledged that we are all finite 
 beings. We know very little, even of the Earth on 
 which we live, and we are apt to measure everything by 
 our own narrow conceptions and limited experiences, 
 and to imagine there can be nothing existing different 
 from what we have seen or heard. But this we do 
 know, that everywhere, so far as it comes within our 
 observation, the Great Creator has manifested His 
 almighty power by a most wondrous diversity of gifts 
 and operations. We find in endless multiplicity varied 
 forms of matter, of animal and of vegetable life, in the 
 different regions of the globe. There are no two 
 countries, or even two districts of a country, alike. 
 There are no two mountains, or valleys, or rivers, or 
 trees alike. And passing from this Earth, ' there is one 
 glory of the Sun, and another glory of the Moon, and 
 another glory of the stars ; for one star differeth from 
 another star in glory.' Nay, even in things which are 
 most alike is there special difference. No two men 
 or women are alike; no two sheep are alike, for the 
 shepherd can tell them all by name, and the ewe knows 
 its own lamb among the largest flock. 
 
 We should therefore be led rather to suppose that, while 
 
ARE ORBS MADE FOR LIFE? 137 
 
 the allwise and bountiful Creator has seen fit to bestow 
 upon this world the gift and adornment and the glory 
 of life as its peculiar heritage, He has, out of His 
 immeasurable treasury, imparted to the other orbs each 
 a separate blessing in special benefactions to which our 
 experience does not reach, and of which our finite minds 
 can form no conception. It may be so. We cannot tell. 
 In this life at least it must, without a special revelation, 
 be from us for ever hid. 
 
 Or it may be that He, in the plenitude of His sub- 
 limity, has created them without a use, and that He 
 delights in them simply for their beauty and their 
 perfection, and as a manifestation of His glory. It may 
 be so. We cannot tell. But He has given to us the 
 glowing opal and the lustrous diamond ; and these may 
 be to man in themselves useless, apart from their soft 
 light or their brilliant radiance, and yet for this useless 
 glitter they may to him have priceless value. And may 
 not He who covers Himself with light as with a garment, 
 and stretches Himself, through varied scenes of grandeur 
 inconceivable, to infinity, like ' as a bride adorneth her- 
 self with her jewels,' delight to crown His royal head 
 with a universe of sparkling orbs ? Or as we, finite 
 beings, made in His image and given to share somewhat 
 in His thoughts, can never tire of looking up to the 
 star-studded sky and drinking unbounded pleasure from 
 the mere contemplation of those far-off worlds, dwindled 
 down in the distance, in our puny sight, to specks of 
 light upon the firmament ; or as master spirits among 
 men regard with complacent satisfaction the works which 
 their own hands have designed or reared, so may He, 
 with His all-seeing eye to which nothing in all its 
 grandeur or in all its loveliness is lost behold with a 
 majestic serenity, to which we cannot soar, the stupend- 
 
138 < PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 ous fabric which His omnipotence has ' spread out like 
 a curtain ' in all its circling wonders, where the great 
 is perceived in all its magnitude and the small is not 
 obscured or hidden by the vast, createcPin all that 
 amazing perfection which constitutes to our minds the 
 matchless beauty of nature, and bend to it that appro- 
 bation which, when looking on it at the first, we are 
 told in the simple words of the inspired creation hymn, 
 ' God saw that it was good.' Can we not realize that 
 these, His works, made an the fulness of that holy 
 exaltation in which .they were conceived, have through- 
 out eternity brought to that glorious Being the joy 
 unspeakable which fills His presence and abides with 
 Him for evermore? F@r it is written, 'Thou hast 
 created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and 
 were created.' 
 
 But when the argument leads, -by a necessary sequence, 
 to speculations like these, we feel that we are pass- 
 ing beyond the region of legitimate reasoning; for we 
 are moving into .depths we cannot fathom. We can 
 drop no anchor there. Arguments which rest on con- 
 jectures regarding final .causes can lead to no result. 
 The view, therefore, which has been propounded, must 
 be disregarded as worthless. 
 
 With this reason there are several others which must 
 also be cast aside as involved in it, or as just other 
 ways of putting the same idea. Among them the 
 following may be placed : 
 
 4. That every part of the World is full of life, there- 
 fore it would be absurd to say that the other planets 
 are destitute of life. 1 
 
 1 It may be noted that the Earth has not throughout its whole career 
 borne life, and that, as we shall afterwards see, the period during which 
 
OTHER REASONS CONSIDERED. 139 
 
 5. The finger of God and the wisdom of the divine 
 government are more clearly manifested in the supposi- 
 tion of endowing the other orbs with life. Are we to 
 deprive the other planets of plants and animals which, 
 more plainly than inanimate matter, speak the divine 
 Architect ? 
 
 6. That to give life alone to 'the Earth, an insignifi- 
 cant body on the Universe, is to subordinate all the 
 others. 
 
 7. The Earth having been made for habitation, the 
 other orbs must be presumed to have been so too ; 
 although, perhaps, .these other -erbs, or some of them, 
 have not yet reached the stage fitting them -to receive 
 life. 
 
 8. That life is the proper object for which these orbs 
 were created, the use for which they were made. 
 
 These .propositions, after what has been said, require 
 no comment or answer ; for the -reasons why the third 
 proposition cannot be legitimately maintained apply to 
 and cover them also. 
 
 But it has been suggested 
 
 9. That the peopling of this world solely is to sup- 
 pose that the whole remaining creation was made for 
 the gratification of man. 
 
 Now, though it be evident that all things on this 
 Earth were subordinated to man created in the image 
 of God, and that t@ -him. was given '^dominion over the 
 fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air, and over 
 every living thing that moveth upon the Earth,' and 
 that to him was also given ' every herb bearing seed 
 
 it has been fitted for man's occupation has been only a speck or point in 
 its history. The future duration of this condition may possibly not 
 increase materially the magnitude of the point or speck. 
 
140 < PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 which is upon the face of all the Earth, and every tree 
 in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed/ to ' be 
 for meat/ that the Earth has been adapted in many 
 ways, and adjusted in the system to which it belongs, to 
 support his life, it cannot be said that the remainder 
 of creation has been made for him. If any opponent of 
 the theory of plurality of worlds has advocated this idea, 
 he has been clearly, mistaken.. The Sun and Moon and 
 stars are in their respective ways useful to man, and 
 that usefulness is doubtless the result of design, -but 
 to say that they were made fbr man, would be to state 
 a position which is unwarranted by revelation, and, 
 on the face of it, unjjustifiable, were it for no other 
 reason than this, that millions of the- shining orbs are 
 even beyond the sweep of telescope of strongest power. 
 It was for God's pleasure, not man's- pleasure, they 
 are and were created, and to say otherwise is a mis- 
 take which does- not flow out of the negation of 
 plurality. 
 
 Clearing, therefore;, the atmosphere of these various 
 positions or suggestions, the question) is reduced in reality 
 to narrow limits, and it is well, before entering upon 
 what are its real merits, we should postulate some 
 positions which will) aid us in arriving at a just deter- 
 mination. 
 
 And, in the first place, it will not db to say that, as 
 all things are possible with God, so God could give to 
 each and every orb on the Universe life, and life as it 
 exists on the Earth. To attain the conclusion for such 
 plurality would require the establishment of another 
 premiss, which, as we have seen, cannot be predicated, 
 that life is the proper object or utility of all such orbs 
 
POSITIONS POSTULATED. 141 
 
 the design for which they were all created. The 
 Gordian knot must not be so cut. 
 
 In the second place, neither will it do to say that, even 
 supposing the other orbs were in all respects and condi- 
 tions similar to the Earth (however much such a fact 
 would prepare our minds to receive the information), that 
 life must exist as a necessary sequence, and for this simple 
 reason, that life, whether of plants or animals, must be 
 originated. Buffon, no doubt, says that wherever there is 
 heat there must be life, and the author of the Vestiges of 
 Creation would have us believe that life presses in every- 
 where, in pursuance of an original divine law. But these 
 are mere assertions, they are not facts, or admitted facts, 
 and, as we shall afterwards see, the position is disproved 
 by the investigations which have been made. 
 
 On the other hand, in ?the third place, seeing :that 
 the whole doctrine of plurality is an argument of 
 analogy, derived from the fact of life upon the Earth, 
 so wherever we find a situation of matters which would 
 be inimical to or destructive of life on Earth, all pre- 
 sumption .for life must there cease. For example, we 
 find here that life cannot exist in fire or in ice, and 
 hence we are entitled to conclude it cannot exist any- 
 where else in fire or in ice in extreme heat or in 
 extreme cold. 
 
 In the fourth place, the demonstration that even one 
 other world is uninhabitable destroys conclusion for all 
 worlds being habitable, and the wider this demonstra- 
 tion, the more cogent will be that conclusion. 
 
 These obvious propositions being stated, lead directly 
 
142 ' PL URALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 to an inquiry into the condition of the surrounding orbs. 
 And in approaching the subject systematically, we are 
 not only naturally led to commence with the central 
 luminary of our system> but by doing so it will be found 
 largely to clear the way, and to tell most forcibly upon 
 what remains, and thus upon the whole question. 
 
 We shall combine in the next section the Sun, the 
 Stars, and the supposed Stellar Systems, 
 
III. 
 
 1. THE SUN. 
 
 NOTWITHSTANDING Fontenelle advocated the peopling of 
 all the planets, he freely abandoned claim for the Sun. 
 
 * After Mercury,' he says, 1 on his fourth evening with 
 the Marchioness, ' conies the Sun ; but there is no possi- 
 bility of peopling it, nor any room left for a wherefore. 
 By the Earth, which is inhabited, we judge that other 
 bodies of the same nature may be likewise inhabited ; but 
 the Sun is a body not like the Earth, or any of the planets ; 
 the Sun is the source or fountain of light, which, though 
 it is sent from one planet to another, and receives several 
 alterations by the way, yet all originally proceeds from 
 the Sun ; he draws from himself that precious substance 
 which he emits from all sides, and which reflects when 
 it meets with a solid body, and spreads from one planet 
 to another those long and vast trains of light which cross, 
 strike through, and intermingle in a thousand different 
 fashions, and make, if I may so say, the richest tissues in 
 the world. The Sun, likewise, is placed in the centre, 
 from whence, with most convenience, he may equally 
 distribute and animate by his heat ; it is, then, a parti- 
 cular body, but what kind of body has often puzzled 
 better heads than mine. It was thought formerly a body of 
 pure tire, and that opinion passed current till the begin- 
 ning of this age, when they perceived several spots on 
 its surface. A little after they had discovered new planets, 
 as we shall presently hear of, these, some said, were the 
 spots ; for those planets moving round the Sun, when 
 1 Plurality of Worlds, ed. 1749, p. 102. 
 
 143 
 
i 4 4 ^PLURALITY OF WORLDS: 
 
 they turned their dark half to us, must necessarily hide 
 part of it ; and had not the learned with these pretended 
 planets made their court before to most of the princes in 
 Europe, giving the name of this prince to one, and of that 
 prince to another planet, I believe they would have quar- 
 relled who should be master of these spcts, that they might 
 have named them as they pleased.' 
 
 1 1 cannot approve that notion ; it was but the other 
 day,' says she, ' you were describing the Moon, and called 
 several places by the names of the most famous astrono- 
 mers. I was pleased with the fancy ; for since the 
 princes have seized on the Earth, it is fit the philosophers, 
 who are as proud as the best of them, should reserve the 
 Heavens for themselves, without any competitors.' 
 
 ' Oh/ answered I, ' trouble not yourself, the philosophers 
 make the best advantage of their territories ; and if they 
 part with the least star it is upon very good terms ; but 
 the spots on the Sun are fallen to nothing ; it is now dis- 
 covered that they are not planets, but clouds, streams, or 
 dross, which rise upon the Sun, sometimes in a great 
 quantity, sometimes in a less ; sometimes they are dark, 
 sometimes clear, sometimes they continue a great while, 
 and sometimes they disappear as long. It seems the Sun 
 is a liquid matter, some think of melted gold, which 
 seems to boil over continually, and by the force of its 
 motion casts the scran or*dross<on its surface, where it is 
 consumed and others rise. Imagine, then, what strange 
 bodies these are, when some of them are as big as the 
 Earth ; what a vast quantity must there be of this melted 
 gold, and what must be the extent of this great sea of 
 light and fire which they call the Sun ? Others say the 
 Sun appears, through their telescopes, full of mountains, 
 which vomit fire continually, and are joined together like 
 millions of Etnas. Yet there are those who say these 
 burning mountains are pure vision, caused by a fault in 
 the optics ; but what shall we credit, if we must distrust 
 our telescopes, to which we owe the knowledge of so 
 many new objects ? But let the Sun be what it will, it 
 cannot be at all proper for habitation ; and what pity that 
 
THE SUNFONTENELLE. 145 
 
 is, for how pleasant would it be ? You might then be 
 at the centre of the Universe, where you would see all 
 the planets turn regularly about you ; but now we are 
 only possessed with extravagant fancies, because we do 
 not stand in the proper place ; there is but one place in 
 the world where the study or knowledge of the stars is 
 easily obtained, and what pity it is there is nobody there.' 
 
 ' You forget yourself, sure/ says she ; ' were you in the 
 Sun you would see nothing, neither planets nor fixed stars. 
 Does not the Sun efface all ? So that, could there be 
 any inhabitants there, they might justly think themselves 
 the only people in nature.' 
 
 ' I own my mistake, madam. I was thinking of the 
 situation of the Sun, and not of the effect of its light. I 
 thank you for your correction, but must take the freedom 
 to tell you that you are in an error as well as myself ; 
 for were there inhabitants in the Sun, they would not see 
 at all. Either they could not bear the strength of its 
 light, or, for want of a due distance, they could not receive 
 it ; so that, things well considered, all the people there 
 must be stone blind, which is another reason why the 
 Sun cannot be inhabited. But let us pursue our voyage.' 
 
 While accepting Eontenelle's conclusion, we cannot 
 help, in the light of present knowledge, smiling at some 
 of the ideas mentioned as then entertained regarding 
 the Sun, particularly the idea that it is composed of 
 molten gold ; the fact being that gold appears to be 
 altogether wanting in the Sun. The passage, however, 
 may be taken as a favourable specimen of the style of 
 discussion characterizing the book. 
 
 Huygens took a different view. 1 He said that the 
 
 Sun was hot and fiery, and that our bodies could not 
 
 live in such a furnace (a fact beyond dispute), and that 
 
 its inhabitants must be a new kind of animal made 
 
 1 Cosmothereos, p. H3. 
 
 K 
 
146 PLURALITY THE SUN. 
 
 fl 
 
 with a noble end and purpose, a notion adopted by 
 some modern writers who have thought that the heat 
 difficulty was met by supposing the beings inhabiting 
 the Sun are differently constituted from man. But 
 when Wilson, in 1*7*74, announced the opinion that the 
 spots on the Sun were depressions on its surface, and 
 that the black spot in the centre is the nucleus or 
 opaque body of the Sun disclosed by this depression 
 or void, a new theory was started, that the supposed 
 interior nucleus, surrounded by two strata of clouds, is 
 inhabited, and that the inner stratum is a cool barrier 
 interposed to protect the inhabitants from the heat and 
 brilliancy of the other stratum or outer covering con- 
 stituting the region of light and heat. There was a 
 difficulty, however, here, because the cloud which pro- 
 tected from the fierce rays of the Sun would exclude 
 sight of the Heavens. But this objection was con- 
 veniently overcome by according to the inhabitants the 
 power of peeping through the holes formed by the 
 continually changing spots. Sir William Herschel and 
 M. Arago both lent the weight of their authority to this 
 astounding idea. 
 
 Sir David Brewster, discussing the subject in the 
 fifth chapter of his More Worlds than One, mentions the 
 general grounds of these opinions, and adds that 
 
 ' The probability of the Sun being inhabited is doubt- 
 less greatly increased by the simple consideration of its 
 enormous size. Admitting, with Sir William Herschel, 
 that the Sun may have a temperature adapted even for 
 human constitutions, it is difficult to believe that a globe 
 of such magnificence, 882,000 miles in diameter, upwards 
 of 111 times the size of our Earth, and 1,384,472 times 
 its bulk, should occupy so distinguished a place without 
 intelligent beings to study and admire the grand arrange- 
 
BRE WSTERPO WELLLARDNER. 1 4 7 
 
 merits which exist around them ; and it would be still 
 more difficult to believe, if it is inhabited, that a domain 
 so extensive, so blessed with perpetual light, is not 
 occupied by the highest order of intelligence.' 1 
 
 Powell strikes out the view that the solar heat is of 
 peculiar nature, and 
 
 ' Is conveyed, as it were, in the rays of light as a vehicle, 
 and never becomes sensible as heat till the light is 
 absorbed. It is therefore probable that these rays may 
 owe their extrication from the Sun to some other cause 
 than elevation of temperature.' 2 
 
 In other words, this would mean that there is no 
 such heat in the Sun itself as to forbid existence in it. 
 
 This was directly opposed to the opinion of Dr. 
 Lardner, who said : 
 
 ' The Sun is a vast globe invested with an ocean, or 
 rather an atmosphere of flame, in which the most 
 astonishing convulsions and eruptions are continually 
 manifested. Here is no moderated and regulated tem- 
 perature, no alternations of light and darkness, no succes- 
 sion of seasons, no varieties of climate, no divisions of 
 land and water. The Sun is, in fact, a vast globular 
 furnace, the heat evolved from each square foot of which 
 is seven times greater than the heat which issues from a 
 square foot of the fiercest blast furnace. How utterly 
 removed from all analogy with the Earth such a globe of 
 fire must be, is apparent.' 3 
 
 With this opinion Sir John Herschel apparently 
 coincided in a work published by him in 1830 ; when 
 alluding to the researches of De la Eoche on the solar 
 heat, he says : 
 
 * This discovery is very important, as it establishes a 
 community of nature between solar and terrestrial heat, 
 
 1 More Worlds than One, p. 102. 2 Ibid. p. 224. 
 
 3 Quoted in Philip's Worlds beyond the Earth, p. 253. 
 
148 PLURALITY THE SUN. 
 
 while at the same time it leads us to regard the actual 
 temperature of the Sun as far exceeding that of any 
 earthly flame.' 1 
 
 Dr. Dick, who disavows any decided opinion on one 
 side or the other regarding the Sun's habitability, but 
 who is extremely unwilling to give it up, tells us : 
 
 ' For anything we know to the contrary, or can demon- 
 strate, the Sun may be one of the most splendid and, 
 delightful regions of the Universe, and scenes of magnifi- 
 cence and grandeur may le there displayed far surpassing 
 anything that is to le found in the planets which revolve 
 around it, and its population may as far exceed in 
 number .that of other worlds as the immense size of this 
 globe exceeds that of all the other bodies in the system. 
 But, on the other hand, we know too little of the nature 
 and constitution of the Sun and the plans of divine 
 wisdom to warrant us in making any positive assertions 
 on this point.' 2 
 
 But these speculations regarding the habitability of 
 the Sun were all given to the world during a period of 
 ignorance of its true nature. The discoveries which 
 have of very recent years been made, principally by aid 
 of the spectroscope, have put us in possession of such 
 an amount of acquaintance with the actual constitution 
 of the Sun, as enables us at once to see that no room 
 can be left to doubt that the conditions prevailing in it 
 are utterly inimical to life. 
 
 In the previous chapters on the nature and constitu- 
 tion of the Sun, I have entered fully upon the results 
 of recent investigations, and it is only necessary here to 
 state briefly what these are so far as bearing on the 
 subject involved. They are the following : 
 
 1. The idea of the black spots disclosing an opaque 
 
 1 Natural Philosophy, p. 315. 2 Celestial Scenery, p. 220. 
 
RECENT INVESTIGATIONS RESULTS. 149 
 
 interior body is altogether exploded. These spots, 
 varying from day to day in size and shape and position, 
 are simply temporary depressions of the photosphere 
 or shining cover, produced by a downpour of metallic 
 gases, and the black central spot is nothing more than 
 the metallic mass at the bottom of the well formed by 
 such downpour. 
 
 2. The Sun is surrounded by layers of gases and 
 metallic fumes or vapour to a height of at least 500,000 
 miles above its shining surface. These do not consist of 
 gases capable of sustaining life. On the contrary, they 
 are, to an enormous height, not merely partly metallic 
 and partly hydrogen, and partly gases unknown to us 
 here, but they are incandescent, or hot or burning flame. 
 
 3. The photosphere, or what might be termed the 
 crust or shining cover of the Sun, is itself gaseous, and 
 is a mass of gigantic burning waves, produced by motion 
 of fiery currents rushing down or rushing up with a 
 speed of thousands of miles in a second, causing con- 
 tinual displacement of its surface. 
 
 4. The surface is further subjected to the formation 
 of gigantic spots or frightful chasms, causing most rapid 
 separation and reunion of parts to an extent hardly 
 conceivable. 
 
 5. It is also in such a state of disintegration, that 
 apparently the portion of covering at the equator moves 
 round with a rapidity of course differing materially from 
 the rate of revolution nearer the poles. 
 
 6. It is also swept by tornadoes of such violence as 
 to be comparable to nothing on Earth, 7000 miles 
 per minute having on occasions been estimated for this 
 frightful force. 
 
 7. The Sun shines in its own and not a borrowed 
 light, and the power of light-rays is enormous. 
 
150 PLURALITY THE SUN. 
 
 8. The heat of the photosphere of the Sun has been 
 estimated, at the lowest computation, to be many times 
 that necessary to boil water, or even to melt iron. 
 
 Putting aside as superfluous the consideration of the 
 effect of the tremendous pressure which the power of 
 gravity would have upon inhabitants of the Sun at 
 its surface, a point which has sometimes been made 
 also regarding Jupiter and the other larger planets, it 
 is therefore plainly impossible to hold that life can exist 
 in the Sun. Animals could not live ; plants, the food 
 of animals, could not grow. Even supposing animals 
 could possibly live in the heat, they would be continu- 
 ally, with tremendous vehemence, shot down or shot up 
 through the photosphere, or blown about on its surface 
 in one direction or another. It is evident to demon- 
 stration that life in the Sun cannot be. The circum- 
 stances which have been stated would subject the 
 thought to a reductio ad absurdum. 
 
 Sir David Brewster found it difficult to believe that 
 a globe of such dimensions could exist without being 
 inhabited by intelligent beings. But from what has 
 been stated we see beyond doubt, according to all that 
 regulates animal existence, life on that fiery body is 
 impossible ; and, with much better cause, we can use 
 the words of Huygens, and say : ' We have gained a 
 point/ We not only depopulate the Sun, but in doing 
 so we depopulate a body which is at least 600 times 
 larger than all the other bodies of the solar system put 
 together. Not only so, but we thus deprive a star (for 
 the Sun is a true star) of life. The importance of 
 this conclusion becomes manifest when we proceed to 
 consider, in the next place 
 
2. THE FIXED STARS. 
 
 BEFORE the discoveries made by means of the spectro- 
 scope, it was a fact admitted on all hands, that the 
 fixed stars must of necessity be self-luminous. From 
 the immense distances at which they were situated no 
 reflected light could have reached us from them. Even 
 the advocates of plurality were therefore constrained 
 to admit that this circumstance was adverse to their 
 habitability. Thus Powell stated 
 
 ' That the stars are self-luminous, and therefore (it might 
 be argued) probably consist of matter in a state of incan- 
 descence or combustion of some kind, is the strongest 
 fact against their being inhabited. This, however, is no 
 more than the same argument relative to the Sun, and, 
 like it, susceptible of the same answer, from conjecture, 
 as to the existence of an exterior photosphere.' * 
 
 In other words, some of the advocates of plurality 
 believed that the fixed stars might be, as they imagined 
 the Sun is, composed of an opaque solid nucleus capable 
 of life, surrounded by a shining envelope or photosphere. 
 But they generally, if not universally, adopted another 
 or further opinion, to which I shall immediately advert. 
 In the meantime it is necessary, by a few words, to 
 dispose of this view. 
 
 Dr. Huggins, in his lecture on ' Spectrum Analysis in 
 its application to the Heavenly Bodies/ delivered in Man- 
 chester in November 1870, related the means taken by 
 
 1 Unity of Worlds, p. 213. 
 151 
 
152 PLURALITY FIXED STARS. 
 
 him and the late Dr. William Allan Miller to analyse 
 the heavenly bodies by application of the spectroscope, 
 aided by the telescope. He then showed the spectrum 
 of the stars Aldebaran and Betelgeux, pointed out what 
 substances the spectra disclosed, and stated 1 that we 
 thus learnt that they were subjected to the same force 
 as in the solar system, the force of heat, and that 
 they emitted light in the same way as terrestrial sub- 
 stances emit light. They had examined some fifty of the 
 stars, and they were found to differ from one another, but 
 were all constructed upon the same type, all of them 
 contained some terrestrial substances, but apparently in 
 different- proportions, and also, it might be, many other 
 new elements entirely unknown to us. They subse- 
 quently, I believe, extended their investigations to a 
 much larger number of stars. 
 
 From another source we learn that 
 
 ' While Huggins and Miller had thus been investigating 
 about a hundred of the brightest stars, Secchi, favoured 
 above his English fellow-labourers by the purity of an 
 Italian sky, had already extended his observations over 
 more than 500 fixed stars, and gave the results to the 
 world, in 1867, in his work, entitled Catalogo delle Stelle 
 di cui si e determinate lo spettro luminoso, air osservatorio 
 del Collegia Eomano. Since then above a hundred more 
 stars have been added to this catalogue by this industrious 
 astronomer, so that there exists at present a rich mass of 
 spectrum observations of the fixed stars, which Secchi 
 has so far provisionally arranged as to be able to group 
 them into four principal types, into which all stars, with 
 only a very few remarkable exceptions, may be classified.' 2 
 
 Those who have thus examined the stars seem to be 
 agreed that they are in constitution similar to the Sun. 3 
 
 1 Pp. 39, 40. 2 Schellen's Spectrum Analysis, p. 495. 
 
 3 We have said before that the Sun is a star ; and this statement may 
 
STELLAR CONSTITUTION SCHELLEN. 153 
 
 Like the Sun, they possess an incandescent photosphere, 
 and are surrounded by a hot or incandescent vaporous 
 atmosphere. But the substances of which their respec- 
 tive atmospheres are composed differ in each. In other 
 words, while the stars all shine in consequence of their 
 great heat and burning atmosphere, the vapour which 
 manifests them springs from various substances, some of 
 them known to us on Earth, and some of them unknown. 
 L)r. Schellen, whose work on Spectrum Analysis (1872) 
 is one of the most recent, and the translation of which 
 has been edited by Dr. Huggins, says : 
 
 ' As the spectra of the stars bear, in general, a marked 
 resemblance to the spectrum of the Sun, being continu- 
 ous and crossed by dark lines, there is every reason for 
 applying KirchhofFs theory also to the fixed stars, and 
 for accepting the same explanation of these similar pheno- 
 mena that we have already accepted for the Sun. By the 
 supposition that the vaporous incandescent photosphere 
 of a star contains, or is surrounded by, heated vapours, 
 which absorb the same rays of light which they would 
 emit when self-luminous, we may discover from the dark 
 lines in the stellar spectra the substances which are 
 contained in the photosphere or atmosphere of each 
 star.' ! 
 
 now be reversed, and we may say that the stars are distant suns. Their 
 spectra are similar to that of the Sun ; but the greater difficult)' of 
 examining them renders the results comparatively meagre. The follow- 
 ing may be cited as examples of stars which have been examined 
 spectroscopically : 
 
 Aldebaran contains hydrogen, sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, 
 bismuth, tellurium, antimony, mercury. 
 
 Betelguex (a, Orionis) contains sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, 
 bismuth, thallium (?). 
 
 Seruis contains sodium, magnesium, iron, hydrogen. 2 
 
 1 Schellen, p. 489. 
 
 2 Skertchley's Physical System of Universe, p. 79. 
 
154 PLURALITY FIXED STARS. 
 
 Then, after stating tne results of investigation, he 
 concludes thus : 
 
 ' From all these observations, it may be concluded that 
 at least the brightest stars have a physical constitution 
 similar to that of our Sun. Their light radiates, like that 
 of the Sun, from matter in a state of intense incande- 
 scence, and passes in like manner through an atmosphere 
 of absorptive vapours. Notwithstanding this general 
 conformity of structure, there is yet a great difference in 
 the constitution of individual stars ; the grouping of the 
 various elements is peculiar and characteristic for each 
 star ; and we must suppose that even these individual 
 peculiarities are in necessary accordance with the special 
 object uf the star's existence, and its adaptation to the 
 animal life of the planetary worlds by which it is 
 surrounded.' l 
 
 The last observation has no necessary connection with 
 the present branch of inquiry, and it assumes both the 
 existence of planetary worlds and life upon them. 
 
 Eoscoe, in his Lectures on Spectrum Analysis, even 
 more clearly expresses himself thus : 
 
 ' We have then now arrived at a distinct understanding 
 of the physical constitution of the fixed stars ; they con- 
 sist of a white hot nucleus, giving off a continuous 
 spectrum, surrounded by an incandescent atmosphere, 
 in which exist the absorbent vapours of the particular 
 metals. These results are interesting, as bearing on 
 Laplace's nebular theory, because they show that the 
 visible Universe is mainly composed of the same 
 elementary constituents, although certain of the stars 
 differ from one another widely in their chemical con- 
 stitution.' 2 
 
 Now we have seen that the Sun exists in conditions 
 
 1 P. 506. - Eoscoe's Lectures on Spectrum Analysis, p. 237. 
 
CONCL USION REGARDING. 1 5 5 
 
 which render life in it impossible. Of course the 
 accumulation of such conditions renders it all the more 
 impossible ; but it may be said each different condition 
 is of itself sufficient to prevent even presumption for life. 
 The stars may not be exactly alike to the Sun in all 
 these respects; but the simple fact of the intense heat 
 contained in them is sufficient to satisfy us of the im- 
 possibility of life, either animal or vegetable (the support 
 of animal) life, existing on any of them. 
 
 Here, then, is a second point established. Every one 
 of the stars which we see, and every one of the stars 
 which the telescope brings to sight, is uninhabitable. 
 This inevitable conclusion sweeps the firmament, saving 
 the planets of our system, which fall to be separately 
 and carefully considered in detail, and excepting the 
 comets and the nebulae, both of which, the spectroscope 
 reveals, are gaseous bodies. 
 
 ' The nebulae/ says Skertchley, 1 ' are found to consist 
 of incandescent gases, chiefly hydrogen, and some of the 
 comets of a compound of carbon.' 
 
 Plainly neither comets nor nebulae are habitable, and 
 any fanciful supposition that they, or at least the first 
 mentioned, are, which formerly may have been held, 
 has been now, I think, fairly abandoned; but after- 
 wards we shall note a few facts regarding comets, 
 which will show how entirely their condition is irre- 
 concilable with the idea of their .being the abodes of 
 life. 
 
 Yet the fact, now so indisputable, that the stars them- 
 selves are uninhabitable, only removes the question to 
 another stage. Both before the application of the spec- 
 
 1 Skertchley's Physical System, p. 79. 
 
156 PLURALITY FIXED STARS. 
 
 troscope to the stars and since, the view has been taken 
 that every star is, like the Sun, attended by a system of 
 planets, so that the star exists for the sake of its planets, 
 and these hypothetical planets exist for the sake of the 
 life with which they are presumed to be endowed. The 
 next point for consideration therefore is 
 
3. THE SUPPOSED STELLAR PLANETARY SYSTEMS. 
 
 FERGUSON, in his Astronomy, 1 after showing ' that the 
 stars are of the same nature with the Sun,' proceeds to 
 
 say: 
 
 * It is noways probable that the Almighty, who always 
 acts with infinite wisdom, and does nothing in vain, should 
 create so many glorious Suns, fit for so many important 
 purposes, and place them at such distances from one 
 another, without proper objects near enough to be bene- 
 fited by their influences. Whoever imagines they were 
 created only to give a faint glimmering light to the 
 inhabitants of this globe, must have a very superficial 
 knowledge of astronomy, and a mean opinion of the divine 
 wisdom, since by an infinitely less exertion of creating 
 power the Deity could have given our Earth much more 
 light by one single additional moon. Instead, then, of one 
 Sun and one World only in the Universe, as the unskilful 
 in astronomy imagine, that science discovers to us such an 
 inconceivable number of suns, systems, and worlds, dis- 
 persed through boundless space, that if our Sun, with all 
 the planets, moons, and comets belonging to it, were 
 annihilated they would be no more missed by an eye 
 that could take in the whole creation than a grain of 
 sand from the sea-shore.' 
 
 Sir David Brewster, 2 a century later, expressed him- 
 self more dogmatically thus : 
 
 ' We are compelled to draw the conclusion that 
 wherever there is a Sun, a gigantic sphere, shining by its 
 own light, and either fixed or moveable in space, there 
 must be a planetary system, and wherever there is a planetary 
 system there must ~be life and intelligence? 
 
 1 6th edition, 1778, p. 3. - More Worlds than One, p. 170. 
 
 157 
 
158 PLURALITY STELLAR SYSTEMS. 
 
 These are peremptory statements which are inad- 
 missible. Besides assuming that the object of creating 
 worlds is for life, they also assume what is erroneous, 
 that a Sun must necessarily be attended with planets. 
 There is indeed a possibility, especially having regard 
 to the claims of the nebular hypothesis, that at least 
 many of the stars are surrounded by planets. But this 
 is not to be taken for granted. For, in the first place, 
 we have no knowledge that they in point of fact are so. 
 Whether we shall ever be able to ascertain the fact by 
 means of the inventions and discoveries of the future 
 we cannot tell, and the fact, therefore, in our present 
 state of knowledge, is not to be assumed ; but this much 
 may be said, that in all likelihood, as there are nebulae 
 sheets of nebular or star -forming material which 
 remain unconverted into stars, and are nothing but huge 
 tracts of hot gas, so there are many stars which have 
 not reached the stage of throwing off planets, while per- 
 haps there are many others which never will. Accord- 
 ing to the nebular hypothesis, which, as applicable to 
 our system, seems to be placed beyond doubt, there was 
 a time when our Sun existed without a single planet 
 circling round him ; and in this condition is it not pos- 
 sible that, for example, such a huge sun as Sirius may 
 now be ? It is a circumstance far from improbable. On 
 the other hand, we know that there are great orbs in 
 space which are dark, and therefore cannot be seen by 
 us ; and knowing, as we do, that our Sun is gradually 
 cooling, and will some day, however distant, become 
 black, we may suppose that there are orbs no longer suns 
 which are, if any are, attended by planets, and yet 
 nothing can be more certain, in the view of all the 
 facts connected with the maintenance of life, than 
 that such planets are uninhabitable. Therefore Sir 
 
DOUBLE AND MULTIPLE STARS. 159 
 David Brewster's imperative assertions are clearly 
 
 But there is a further fact which has been much 
 discussed as bearing on the impossibility that every star 
 can be attended by planets. It is that of double or 
 binary stars stars which are connected by circling 
 round each other, or round a common centre in regular 
 orbits. Professsor Nichol thus explains the pheno- 
 menon : 
 
 ' Have you ever/ .he says, 'walked in a mood of tranquil 
 thought along the side of a quiet river, whose waving 
 banks reflect a thousand currents by the intermingling 
 of which numerous dimples or whirlpools are produced, 
 their easy glide only waking the river's stillness ? Have 
 you seen these dimples follow and pursue each other as 
 if in gambol, or watched the phenomenon of the near 
 approach of two or three ? Then have you witnessed the 
 secret of the mystery of the double and triple stars.' l 
 
 The subject of such stars (also found triple, quadruple, 
 and multiple) is fully discussed by Sir John Herschel 
 in his Outlines of Astronomy, 833 et seq. But the 
 point which is of main importance in this inquiry is 
 the fact of the short periods, in general, of their common 
 revolution. Sir John has given 2 a table of the chief 
 results of investigation in regard to binary stars, in one 
 column of which the calculated duration of their revolu- 
 tions is stated, and it appears that the majority are 
 under 100 years, one being so low, according to Madler's 
 estimate, as only 3 years. 3 The highest reaches up to 
 
 1 Nichol's Architecture of Heavens, p. 172. 
 
 2 Outlines, 843, p. 615. 
 
 3 Sirius would appear, from recent investigations, to be a binary star, 
 its nearly dark companion being distant from it rather more than the 
 
160 PLURALITY STELLAR SYSTEMS. 
 
 736 years. It would seem, however, that other double 
 stars have longer periods. Now, bearing in mind that 
 Saturn revolves round the Sun in about 30 years, and 
 Neptune in about 165 years, and if a planet outside 
 Neptune be, as it is expected, discovered, its revolution 
 will probably extend to about 320 years, it seems 
 manifest that some, if not many, of these binary stars 
 are nearer to each other than some of our planets are to 
 the Sun, and none of them are removed from each other 
 to distances many times greater than the most remote 
 planet is from the Sun. And Sir John Herschel makes 
 this important observation with reference to the planets 
 supposed to revolve round these binary suns : 
 
 1 Unless closely nestled under the protecting wing of 
 their immediate superior, the sweep of their other sun 
 in its perihelion passage round their own might carry 
 them off, or whirl them into orbits utterly incompatible 
 with the conditions necessary for the existence of their 
 inhabitants.' 1 
 
 Dr. Whewell in his essay on Plurality follows up 
 this remark by observing 
 
 ' A system of planets revolving around or among a pair 
 of suns which are at the same time revolving about one 
 another is so complex a scheme, so impossible to arrange 
 in a stable manner, that the assumption of the existence 
 of such schemes without a vestige of evidence can hardly 
 require confutation.' 2 
 
 And then referring to the ' sweep ' of one upon the 
 supposed planets of the other, he says that the only 
 safety would be in supposing them placed so close to 
 
 distance of Neptune from the Sun. Heleraholz, Popular Lectures, 2d 
 series, p. 151. 
 
 1 Outlines, 847, p. 618. 2 Plurality, chap. viii. p. 259. 
 
BREWSTERS VIEW. 161 
 
 one Sun as to be out of reach of the other, and this 
 might involve their plunging through a luminous vapour 
 and being arrested, impeded, attracted, and lost in the 
 central nucleus. Equally fatal, at least to inhabitants, 
 would, I think, be the close proximity to such suns. 
 
 Sir David Brewster's method of overcoming the 
 objection is curious. He concludes from analogy that 
 
 ' If Madler's speculation is correct, our Sun and the star 
 Alcyone form a binary system, and therefore, since our 
 Sun is attended with planets, and one of these inhabited, 
 we are entitled by analogy to conclude that all other 
 binary systems have planets, at least round one of their 
 suns, and that one of these planets is the seat of vegetable 
 and animal life.' 1 
 
 Sir David, however, forgets that even were our Sim 
 a binary star, its revolution takes not 30, nor even 
 30,000 years, but 18 millions of years; and even the 
 star nearest to us is immensely removed from the 
 power of exercising attraction over the planets of 
 the solar system, so that there can be no reasoning by 
 analogy from our Sun to any of the binary stars. 
 
 But the matter does not rest here. For Sir John 
 Herschel has, by taking the discovered parallax of the 
 double star 61 Cygni, and calculating the distance 
 between the two stars, been enabled ' to calculate the 
 sum of the masses of the two stars, which on these data 
 we find to be '0'353, the mass of our Sun being 1.' 
 Thus the mass of each of the two stars is somewhat 
 about one-sixth of the mass of the Sun, and I think it 
 is only a reasonable conclusion, that being diffused so 
 largely as to appear a star to us at its great distance, 
 the star is six times less dense ; in other words, it is 
 
 1 More Worlds than One, chap. x. p. 109. 
 L 
 
162 PLURALITY STELLAR SYSTEMS. 
 
 six times more vapourous than the Sun, which has only 
 the one-fourth of the density of the Earth, and hence it 
 is in a condition in which the Sun is not at present, 
 whatever it may have been when he first threw off the 
 outermost planet. Thus, it may be inferred, that this 
 double star has not yet reached, if it ever will reach, 
 the condition of capacity for forming planets. Taking 
 this view, the probabilities are that there are many in 
 similar condition, and we thus arrive at a conclusion 
 adverse to these stars having planets, not to say habit- 
 able planets, moving round them, and therefore were 
 not made to sustain life by means of a surrounding 
 planetary system. 
 
 Now this is important, not merely as respects these 
 two individual stars making up a binary star, but as 
 bearing upon the whole question of starry systems. 
 If it be satisfactorily shown that some stars cannot 
 presumably be supposed to be surrounded by planets, 
 then a conclusion cannot be arrived at that all stars have 
 a planetary system, and this assists to some extent, in 
 the absence of every evidence to the contrary, to destroy 
 the presumption for any star being so attended. 
 
 But it will be said that if these stars are not now 
 surrounded by planets, they will be they are in a state 
 of preparation. It may be so. We cannot tell. One 
 very awkward preparation for the double stars would, 
 however, seem to be that (in Professor Mchol's words) 
 1 they must, on approximation, act upon each other as 
 two wheels, so that a revolution of each around the 
 other must immediately supervene and increase in 
 rapidity until, by external pressure, they are forced into 
 one.' So that before they can begin to acquire the 
 
ARE THEIR PLANETS HABITABLE? 163 
 
 condition in which they may be enabled to throw off 
 double planetary rings, they must come into a collision 
 of which it would be terrible to think. Perhaps such a 
 collision would be fatal to the formation of planets. 
 But if otherwise, all that can be said is, that at some 
 future time they may become attended by planets ; 
 meantime, they are not, and meantime these stars, 
 which are numerous, do not support life. 
 
 In any view, then, what has been said goes to this, 
 that at present some, or it may be many, stars are without 
 planets, whether habitable or not. However, without 
 making any positive affirmation on a point so far 
 beyond our discovery, I have said sufficient to discredit 
 the existence of stellar planetary systems, and for holding 
 that in any view they cannot be universal, and that we 
 can only deal with the subject hypothetically for the 
 purposes and further progress of the argument. 
 
 But now arises the question : assuming, for the sake 
 of argument, that the stars, or many of the stars, are 
 attended by planets, Can these planets be presumed 
 habitable ? The only mode of answering or consider- 
 ing this question is by taking the analogy of the solar 
 system, and seeing how far, if at all, it will bear out the 
 theory of plurality. The subject, then, now for con- 
 sideration is 
 
 Are the supposed stellar planets by analogy to be 
 presumed life bearers, and - inhabited by rational beings 
 akin to man ? 
 
 Here we are met at the very threshold of inquiry by 
 a very staggering fact. 
 
 For the researches of the spectroscopists have revealed 
 
164 PLURALITY STELLAR SYSTEMS. 
 
 to us what might only previously have been matter of 
 supposition, that the stars while similar, or so far 
 similar, in constitution, and possessing many properties 
 or substances in common, differ not only from each 
 other, but from our own Sun, in the gases of which they 
 are respectively composed. This appears from the 
 quotation I have already made from Schellen's Spectrum 
 Analysis, and I would refer to the subject as treated by 
 him at p. 489 et seq., from which it will be seen that, 
 in accordance with Father Secchi's arrangements, he 
 groups the stars into four principal types, besides others 
 of apparently rarer occurrence ; and he proceeds to 
 mention the coloured stars, stars which are of all 
 shades of red, green, blue, and violet, and are most 
 conspicuous among the double stars, ' the number of 
 which already (1872) exceeds 6000,' and with the 
 phenomena of variable and new or temporary stars. 
 
 Professor Eoscoe has also dealt with the subject ; L and 
 when referring to the investigations of Dr. Huggins and 
 Dr. Miller into the spectra of Aldebaran and Betelgeux, 2 
 the star known as a in the constellation of Orion, makes 
 these observations : 
 
 ' In the first place, then, the result at which we have 
 arrived is, that the constitution of the star light, although 
 not identical with the light given off by the Sun, is yet 
 similar ; that is to say, the light of a fixed star gives off 
 .a continuous spectrum, interspersed by dark shadows or 
 bands ; and hence the conclusion we come to is, that the 
 physical constitution of the fixed stars is similar to that 
 of our Sun, that their light also emanates from intensely 
 white hot matter, and passes through an atmosphere of 
 absorbent vapours in fact, that the stars are suns of 
 different systems. We find, for instance, 1 in these two 
 particular stars to which I am now referring, the JD line 
 
 1 Lectures on Spectrum Analysis, p. 231 et seq. * Ante.a, p. 152. 
 
STELLAR ELEMENTS. 165 
 
 caused by sodium exists ; the three lines which we know 
 as 1} are produced by luminous vapour of magnesium. 
 The lines of these substances exactly agree in position 
 with the dark stellar lines, hence both sodium and 
 magnesium are present in the atmosphere of these far 
 distant stars. We also find in Aldebaran that two 
 hydrogen lines, C and F, are present, but if you look at 
 the spectrum of a Orionis, we find that the hydrogen 
 lines C and F are wanting. Hence we come to the con- 
 clusion that hydrogen is present in the atmosphere of the 
 Sun and in that of Aldebaran, but that it is wanting in 
 that of Betelgeux. And so I might show you that silver 
 is not present in Aldebaran, nor seen in a Orionis, but 
 that four bright lines of calcium, also seen in the Sun's 
 spectrum, are present in both stars. The lines observed 
 in these two stars are, at least, seventy in number, and 
 Mr. Huggins and Dr. Miller have found that in Aldebaran 
 we have evidence of the presence of no less than nine 
 elements namely, (1) hydrogen, giving the lines C and 
 F ; (2) the metal sodium, giving the double line 1) ; 
 (3) magnesium, giving the lines- b; (4) calcium, giving 
 four lines ; (5) iron, giving four lines and E ; (6) bismuth, 
 giving four lines (bismuth is not found in the Sun) ; 
 (7) tellurium, four lines ; (8) antimony is also found, 
 three lines; and (9) mercury, four lines. Thus the 
 element tellurium, whose name implies a purely earthly 
 origin, is found in the star, although it does not exist in 
 the Sun, and is very rare in this Earth. There are only 
 two stars Betelgeux, to which 1 have just referred, and 
 another star called /3 Pegasi in which the hydrogen lines 
 are wanting ; all the other stars contain hydrogen.' l 
 
 We are thus shown that the stars differ from each 
 other in the elements contained in them, or in the gases 
 into which they are by their heat thrown. While it is 
 extremely likely that even where the elements are the 
 same, the quantities of each element may vary very 
 much, and this warrants certain deductions. For 
 
 1 Roscoe, p. 236. 
 
166 PLURALITY STELLAR SYSTEMS. 
 
 4 + 
 
 1. It is not at all improbable that a very large 
 number of the stars may not contain the ingredients, or 
 sufficient quantities of particular ingredients, necessary 
 to constitute a solid planet similar to the Earth. We 
 have example in comets of planetary bodies in our 
 solar system which the spectroscope tells us are wholly 
 or principally gaseous, 1 are composed partly of matter 
 gaseous and self-luminous, and partly of minute par- 
 ticles held together by mutual attraction and gravitation, 
 but so rare that stars are visible through the body 
 and tail of the comet. 2 Now, without going the length 
 of supposing planets attached to other stars to be of a 
 composition of such extreme tenuity as that of comets, 
 the existence of comets shows and the facts I shall 
 have afterwards to state regarding certain of the mem- 
 bers of our system confirm the thought that it is quite 
 possible that if stellar planets exist there may be many 
 of them possessed of little solidity, perhaps none of 
 them have sufficient density to be life-supporting, this 
 being all the more probable in the case of stars which 
 are themselves more gaseous, or rather, possessed of less 
 density than the Sun. 
 
 2. Supposing, on the other hand, that other stars 
 contain elements which are calculated to give solidity 
 to their planetary attendants, it may be that the solidity 
 is of such a character as would be fatal to the thought of 
 vegetation or life. We have example in meteoric stones, 
 which are just minute planets, of bodies of hard metallic 
 composition which are incapable of supporting vegetation. 3 
 
 1 Roscoe, pp. 251 et seq., 297 et seq. Manchester Science Lectures, 
 1871, Huggins, pp. 44-46. 
 
 2 Schellen, pp. 568 et seq., 579. 
 
 3 The chief constituent of meteors which have fallen to the earth in 
 
PLANETARY CONDITIONS. 167 
 
 It is not improbable, therefore, that many others of 
 the supposed stellar planets are equally hard, and are 
 possessed of no aqueous vapour or water, or other gas 
 capable of pulverizing or of reducing them to a condition 
 susceptible of promoting vegetable growth, and conse- 
 quently they would be incapable of sustaining animal 
 life. 
 
 3. The elements in others of the stars may be such 
 as will not produce an atmosphere adapted for life. Here 
 again the comets come to our aid. For Dr. Huggins' 
 examination of a comet by the spectroscope l elicited the 
 spectrum of carbon and carbon volatilized, it is pre- 
 sumed, is destructive to animal life. But we are not left 
 to form an opinion from comets, for, as we shall after- 
 wards see, we have an example in one at least, if not 
 more, of the planets of our solar system of the presence 
 of a deadly atmosphere. Meantime it is important to 
 bear in mind that as it is not every soil or substance in 
 which plants will grow, so it is not every atmosphere 
 which plants and animals can breathe. And it is the 
 more necessary to say so because it seems to have been 
 taken by many for granted that if an atmosphere of any 
 kind be found surrounding a planet, the planet must 
 forthwith be supposed capable of maintaining life. The 
 
 the form of meteoric stones is ' metallic iron, mixed with various silicious 
 compounds ; in combination with iron, nickel is always found, and some- 
 times also cobalt, copper, tin, and chromium among the sillicates. 
 Olivine is specially worthy of remark as a mineral very abundant in 
 volcanic rocks, as also augite. There have also been found in tho 
 meteoric stones hitherto examined oxygen, hydrogen, sulphur, phos- 
 phorus, carbon, aluminium, magnesium, calcium, sodium, potassium, 
 manganese, titanium, lead, lithium, and strontium.' Schellen, pp. 583, 
 584. See also Phipson's Mysteries of Nature, p. 239 et seq., and Hum- 
 boldt's Cosmos, i. p. 117 et seq., iv. p. 592. 
 
 1 Roscoe, Lectures on Spectrum Analysis, p. 300. 
 
1 68 PLURALITY STELLAR SYSTEMS. 
 
 atmosphere which we find capable of maintaining life 
 consists of oxygen, nitrogen, and carbonic acid in certain 
 given proportions, varying in a very slight degree in 
 different situations, together with aqueous vapour and 
 other ingredients, to a minute and varying extent, hardly 
 to be reckoned, and generally ignored. 1 No animal can 
 live in nitrogen ; and although oxygen nourishes life, 
 too much of it, or too long inhaling of it alone will, 
 by the production of an excess of vital action, produce 
 death. As Cooley says :- 
 
 ' In an atmosphere of pure oxygen gas vital action 
 would go on so fast as to terminate in an instant, 
 destroyed by its excessive energy.' 2 
 
 An admixture of nitrogen is therefore needful to 
 reduce the stimulus to a proper and healthful degree. 
 In like manner, the minute proportion of carbonic acid 
 must not be exceeded. A writer on colliery manage- 
 ment says : 
 
 ' Let it be increased to one hundredth, and its effects 
 begin to be felt in headache, langour, and general depres- 
 sion. In the case of a recent accident in England, one of 
 the Government Inspectors stated that 2 per cent, of 
 carbonic acid was most injurious, and 4 per cent, would 
 speedily kill.' 3 
 
 1 There is minute difference of statement of the proportions in differ- 
 ent books. In ten or twelve different books as many differing statements 
 will be given, but the discrepancies are not in the least material to the 
 present question. Commonly the proportions stated are nitrogen 79, 
 oxygen 21 in 100 ; but a half per cent, is allowed by Herschel for car- 
 bonic acid *05, aqueous vapour '45. Herschel's Meteorology, p. 17. 
 The amount of carbonic acid is by different writers variously estimated. 
 See Hartley's Air, pp. 29, 30 ; Hopkins' Atmospheric Changes, p. 1 ; 
 Griffith's Chemistry of Fire, Air, etc., p. 186 ; Ansted's Physical Geo- 
 graphy, p. 233, and many others. 
 
 2 Cooley, Physical Geography, p. 108. 
 
 3 Colliery Management, by Jonathan Hyslop, p. 391. 
 
LIFE-SUPPORTING AIR. 169 
 
 In like manner it maybe stated 1 that nitric oxide 
 gas is composed of 55*95 oxygen, 44*05 nitrogen, and 
 animals are instantly suffocated on being immersed in 
 it. Further, according to the experiments of Lavoisier 
 and Seguin, a mixture containing 40 of azotic, 45 oxygen, 
 and 15 carbonic acid destroyed animals confined in it. 2 
 
 Such being the ingredients of life-supporting air, and 
 such the delicacy of their proportional admixture that a 
 deviation from it is fatal, it is easy to see that even where 
 conditions in stars are or may be supposed to be somewhat 
 similar to those of the Sun, and there has been produced 
 on planets belonging to their systems an atmosphere, it 
 by no means follows that such atmosphere is capable of 
 supporting life, a very little variation would be effectual 
 to destroy, or would fail to sustain it. Now it is hardly 
 possible to suppose two suns exactly alike, or two 
 systems alike, or like our own. For there are many 
 circumstances which will combine to produce distinctive 
 variety of condition, and these distinctive varieties will 
 necessarily affect the nature of the atmosphere, if any, 
 which will be produced in the planets. Among them 
 will mainly be the shade of difference in the composition 
 of the individual stars, both of kind and amount, the 
 differences of heat and light and power of the stellar 
 rays, the distances of the several planets and their 
 different compositions, and the various other influences 
 to which they are subjected. In many cases there is 
 also the difference of colour of the stars, and even the 
 combination of colours in binary systems. 
 
 So that we can well suppose the chances for an 
 atmosphere similar to our own are exceedingly slight. 
 Probably, upon the theory of probabilities, the chance 
 might be calculated. In many cases, too, the atmo- 
 
 1 Robertson's Atmosphere, ii. p. 42. 2 Ibid. ii. p. 87. 
 
i7o SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS CONCLUSIONS. 
 
 sphere may be wholly of a positively noxious gas, such 
 as carbonic acid. 
 
 We have thus seen 
 
 1. That the Sun cannot be inhabited. 
 
 2. That neither can the stars be. 
 
 3. That it is not to be assumed that the stars are 
 surrounded by planetary systems, and that in the case 
 of binary stars the probabilities are against it, and by 
 displacing such systems from some stars a presumption 
 arises against any. 
 
 4. Separately, that assuming the possibility of other 
 planetary systems, many of the stars may not have 
 reached the state of throwing off planets, while others 
 may have reached the planet-bearing stage, and passed 
 to that stage when their light has burnt out, so that 
 these planets cannot be life supporting. 
 
 5. Supposing other planetary systems to exist, the 
 revelations of the spectroscope are adverse to the idea 
 of the planets of such systems being habitable, in 
 respect 
 
 (1) That many stars may not be capable of producing 
 solid planets. 
 
 (2) That where capable of producing solid planets 
 the solidity may be of a character unfitted to support 
 life, either vegetable or animal. 
 
 (3) That the stars, or many of them, may be incap- 
 able of producing an atmosphere in their planets which 
 is life supporting, and this incapacity is to be presumed 
 generally throughout them all, in respect of the difference 
 of composition, situation, and other conditions subsisting 
 between the stars and our Sun. 
 
UNIVERSITY 
 
 IV. 
 
 WE are now brought more nearly to consider what is 
 really the main question. As the habitability of the stars, 
 or rather of their supposed planetary systems, is inferred, 
 and only inferred from analogy to the Earth and the 
 members of the solar system, we have to ask, primarily, 
 What are the facts attendant upon Life on the Earth ? 
 and then, What is the condition of each of the other 
 planets ? Do circumstances warrant conclusion for their 
 being habitable ? and from their presumable condition, 
 what are we to infer regarding stellar planets ? 
 
 THE EARTH. 
 
 And in order to consider this pretty wide subject 
 satisfactorily, we must begin by first of all looking a 
 little at the case or predicament of the Earth on which 
 we dwell, which has been tenanted by rational beings 
 for a limited period of time. 
 
 For it is with the conception of rational life existing 
 in other worlds we have truly to deal. Mr. Proctor has 
 very justly observed : 
 
 ' It would be difficult to show that mere life without 
 the power which man possesses of appreciating the 
 wonders of the Universe, is a more fitting final purpose 
 in creation than the existence of lifeless but moving 
 masses like the suns and their attendant planets. The 
 insect or the fish, the bird or the mammal, the minutest 
 microscopic animalcule, or the mightiest cetacean, may 
 afford suggestive indications of what we describe as 
 
 171 
 
172 PLURALITY THE EARTH. 
 
 beneficent contrivance ; ;^et it is hard to see in \vhat 
 essential respect a Universe of worlds beyond our own, 
 inhabited only by such animals, would accord better with 
 those ideas which the believers in the plurality of worlds 
 entertain respecting the purpose of the Almighty than a 
 Universe with none but vegetable life, or a Universe 
 with no life at all, yet replete with wonderful and 
 wonderfully moving masses of matter. It is rational 
 life alone to which the arguments of our Brewsters and 
 Chalmers really relate.' 1 
 
 Now the first observation which falls to be made in 
 regard to the Earth is, that man, the only rational being 
 inhabiting it, has been its occupant for only a compara- 
 tively brief term. 
 
 Admittedly, on all hands, he was the last being 
 placed upon the Earth. But some have claimed for him 
 a high, a marvellous antiquity; 100 r OOO, 300,000, 
 500,000, and even 9,000,000 years are among the 
 periods which learned and sanguine men have assigned 
 for the past duration of the human race, arriving at 
 such startling enunciations only by means of conjecture 
 based upon facts, or supposed facts, which in themselves 
 afford no such data for computation. The antiquity 
 theory seems to be specially favoured by the Evolu- 
 tionists, who find it impossible to reconcile a recent 
 date for the creation of man with the demands of 
 Darwinism. 2 
 
 The facts upon which those contending for antiquity 
 have proceeded, have mainly been the discovery of 
 
 1 Our Place among Infinities, p. 62. 
 
 ! ' In the meanwhile, if any form of the doctrine of progressive 
 development is correct, we must extend by long epochs the most liberal 
 estimate that has yet been made of the antiquity of man.' Huxley's 
 Man's Place in Nature, p. 1 59. 
 
ANTIQ UITY OF MAN. 1 7 3 
 
 human implements, or what are thought to be so, or 
 remains of a supposed age, in conjunction with the 
 remains of animals believed by them to have become 
 extinct at remote times, or underlying certain layers 
 imagined to have taken enormous periods for their 
 deposition or formation ; or, in other situations or 
 circumstances, regarded as indicating a vast antiquity. 
 They will be found set forth in such books as Sir 
 Charles Lyell's somewhat cautious work on the Antiquity 
 of Man. Principal Dawson of M'Gill's University, 
 Montreal (who has examined the subject at considerable 
 length in his Origin of the World (12th to 15th chapters), 
 and satisfactorily disposes of these notions), thus sum- 
 marizes the arguments from geology in favour of a great 
 antiquity for man : 
 
 ' (1) Human remains are found in caverns under 
 very thick stalagmite crusts, and in deposits of earth 
 which must have accumulated before these stalag- 
 mites began to form, and when the caverns were 
 differently situated with reference to the local drainages. 
 (2) Eemains of man are found under peat bogs which 
 have grown so little in modern times that their antiquity, 
 on the whole, must be very great. (3) Implements, 
 presumably made by men, are found in river gravels 
 so high above existing river beds, that great physical 
 changes must have occurred since they were accumulated. 
 
 (4) One case is on record where a human bone is believed 
 to have been found under a deposit of glacial age. 
 
 (5) Human remains have been found under circum- 
 stances which indicate that very important changes 
 of level have taken place since their accumulation. 
 
 (6) Human remains have been found under circumstances 
 which indicate great changes of climate as intervening 
 between their date and that of the modern period. 
 
 (7) Man is known to have existed, in Europe at least, 
 at the same time with some quadrupeds formerly 
 
174 PLURALITY THE EARTH. 
 
 supposed to have been xtinct before his introduction. 
 (8) The implements, weapons, etc., found in the oldest of 
 these repositories are different from those known to have 
 been used in historic times.' l 
 
 The case of the antiquaries is shortly but more fully 
 stated by one of themselves, Mr. Thomas Dunman, in a 
 chapter of Talks about Science, 2 published since his death. 
 In this (his lecture on ' Prehistoric Man ') he has adduced 
 within small compass all the facts on which reliance is 
 placed in support of great antiquity. 
 
 Many of these facts, with the inferences built upon 
 them, have from time to time been shown to be 
 altogether unreliable. Principal Dawson, in the work 
 above referred to, as well as in his Story of Earth and 
 Man, and his Fossil Men and their Modern Representa- 
 tives, has dealt with them. But it has been reserved 
 for another American, Dr. James C. Southall, in works 
 evidencing great research and erudition, systematically to 
 demonstrate in a manner, and with a force of reasoning 
 which appears conclusive, that every one of the circum- 
 stances which have been relied upon is to be put aside. 
 The first of these, a large volume of 6 closely printed 
 pages, called The Recent Origin of Man, published in 
 1875, is a very storehouse of learning and research, 
 and to those who desire to study the subject fully, 
 it must afford the most ample information. But it 
 was published in America, and is rarely seen here. 3 
 Probably the author had thought it too bulky for popular 
 reading, and in 1878 published in England another, 
 The Epoch of the Mammoth, which apparently is, to a 
 great extent, an epitome of the other, and is, perhaps, 
 
 1 Origin of World, 2d ed. p. 295. 
 
 2 Dunman's Talks about Science, p. 36, Lecture iii. 
 
 3 I could only find it in one library in Edinburgh the Antiquarian. 
 
DR. SOUTH ALL'S WORKS. 175 
 
 better adapted for those who do not wish to go pro- 
 foundly into the subject. At all events, it affords 
 sufficient material for such an incidental reference to it 
 as only is needful here. It may therefore be referred 
 to for the amount and weight of evidence brought 
 forward in support of the triumphant stand this 
 American gentleman has made against the doctrines 
 which have been in some quarters so confidently main- 
 tained. I will only mention a few of his demonstra- 
 tions. 
 
 Thus he has shown that those animals supposed to 
 have been extinct at immensely remote epochs, have all 
 lived down to a recent or historical period ; that the 
 stalagmite, supposed to take thousands or millions of 
 years to produce a few feet, forms, in favourable circum- 
 stances, with rapidity j 1 that the river gravel and the 
 peat mosses, the lake dwellings arid the kitchen 
 middens, are all comparatively recent ; that there was 
 no real separation into stone, bronze, and iron ages, 
 and, indeed, stone sometimes succeeded ages of higher 
 civilisation, but that the use of all was intermingled or 
 coeval partly so, and there is no vast antiquity for the 
 stone ages. 
 
 Passing by the hoaxing to which antiquaries have 
 on this question been subjected, as in the case of the 
 bones of an African elephant, which for half a century 
 were palmed off as the skeleton of a genuine Columbian 
 Mastodon, a deception only revealed at last by a death- 
 bed confession ; 2 it may be mentioned that sometimes 
 
 1 It may be stated, but it is by no means necessary to the question, 
 that ' the fossils of the older Post- Pliocene must often, by the process of 
 sorting by water, have been mixed with those of the river,' a circumstance 
 which doubtless may explain an occasional difficulty. Pawson's Story, 
 p. 288. 
 
 2 Paragraph in Daily Ttl?graph. 
 
176 PLURALITY LIFE ON THE EARTH. 
 
 the discovery of supposed evidence of antiquity is 
 pitilessly upset by the further discovery, at one time in 
 juxtaposition, at another at a lower level, of a Roman, 
 coin. On one occasion a supposed ancient carving was 
 determined, upon better examination, to be the gunwale 
 of a modern boat. Indeed, the antiquaries who glory 
 over what they consider to be precious ' finds/ must 
 sometimes share the mortification of Jonathan Oldbuck 
 as he smarted under the matter of fact explanations of 
 Edie Ochiltree. Mr. Pengelly's beaming 'delight' over 
 the relics of Kent's Hole, as affording proof of a hoary 
 human antiquity, far past the conceptions of that 
 ancient -and incredible historian Moses, must, one would 
 suppose, have been considerably dashed by the awkward 
 revelations and observations of Prs. Southall and 
 Dawson. 
 
 But the subject is a very wide one, and can only 
 be thus incidentally referred to. One or two further 
 circumstances show that man is not only of recent 
 origin, but that he has not lived upon Earth for more 
 than about 6000 to 7000 years. 
 
 1. Although a fossil state does by no means imply 
 antiquity (and the dripping well of Knaresborough, 
 Yorkshire, affords a curious example of the extreme 
 rapidity with which things may be fossilized), there is 
 apparently no evidence of man being found in that 
 condition. Baron Cuvier, writing in 1812, states as 
 matter of fact, ' It is quite undeniable that no human 
 remains have been hitherto discovered among the ex- 
 traneous fossils,' 1 and IJ have not observed that any 
 human bones truly fossil, or of great antiquity, have been 
 discovered since. What have been called the fossil 
 
 1 Cuvicr's Theory of the Earth, Jamieson's translation, p. 127. 
 
MAN'S RECENT ORIGIN. 177 
 
 skeletons of Florida, of Guadeloupe, of New Orleans, of 
 Mentone, are either not fossil, or can be shown to belong 
 to merely an early period of man's history, sometimes 
 only to a few centuries back. 1 
 
 2. Dr. Southall shows that man appeared on Earth 
 not earlier than the later post-pliocene period ; and by 
 various converging facts and corresponding calculations 
 made by different men, that the glacial period terminated 
 just about 6000 years ago. 2 
 
 3. Man must have left his Creator's hands perfect, as 
 
 1 See Southall and Dawson, also a little book by the Rev. J. Brodie on 
 The Antiquity and Nature of Man. 1864. 
 
 2 Lieut. -Col. Drayson, who has- devoted special attention to the sub- 
 ject of the glacial epoch, does not seem greatly to differ. ' The period 
 spoken of in geology as the glacial period would have occurred between the 
 dates about 6000 B. c. and about 22,000 B.C. At the date midway between 
 these two periods would have been the height of the cold or glacial period. 
 Hence from about 12,700 B.C. down to the present time we have the 
 interval during which the alluvium and surface soil formations took place, 
 a space of time which probably some geologists may consider too brief, 
 unless they bear in mind that far more powerful causes were then at 
 work than there are at present.' The Last Glacial Epoch in Geology, 
 by Lieut. -Col. Drayson, p. 167. At another place (p. 159), where he 
 has placed the height of the last glacial epoch at 13,700 B.C., he tells 
 us there would be an epoch of 8000 years subsequently, ' during which 
 masses of frozen snow and ice would be annually floating over the Earth's 
 surface,' bringing down the termination of the glacial period to 5700 
 years B. c. In dealing with the antiquity of man, the writer says : ' "We 
 may bring the mammoth period nearer our own time than those hundreds 
 of thousands of years which have been assumed by some writers as 
 absolutely necessary. ' Mr. Prestwick has also, from geological investiga- 
 tions, come to a similar conclusion, as shown in the following extract 
 
 ' Whilst abstaining from any general hypothesis in explanation of the 
 phenomena, there is, however, one point to which I must refer before 
 concluding, although I cannot at present venture beyond a few gene- 
 ralities respecting it. It might be supposed that in assigning to man an 
 appearance at such a period, it would of necessity imply his existence 
 during long ages beyond all exact calculations, for we have been apt to 
 
 M 
 
178 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 ' 
 perfect for his place as the leaf upon the tree, as perfect 
 
 as any even of the very earliest and humblest of the 
 animate creation was for the lowly purpose for which it 
 was designed. His knowledge from experience would 
 necessarily be at first nil, and for a time scanty, but his 
 bodily frame would be faultless and finely formed 
 sound, strong, robustly healthy ; his mental faculties cor- 
 respondingly complete vigorous, clear and penetrating, 
 nay, doubtless, to compensate deficiency of knowledge, 
 endowed and quickened with an instinctive sagacity to 
 which we have now no approach. The notion that the 
 first man was savage is a strange theory, and receives 
 
 place even the latest of owr geological changes at a remote and to us 
 unknown distance. The reasons on which such a view has been held 
 have been mainly the great lapse of time considered requisite for the 
 dying out of so many species of great mammals ; the circumstance that 
 many of the smaller valleys have been excavated since they lived ; the 
 presumed non-existence of man himself ; and the great extent of the later 
 and more modern accumulations. But we have in this part of Europe no 
 succession of strata to record a gradual dying out of the species, but much, 
 on the contrary, which points to an abrupt end, and evidence only of 
 relation, not of actual time ; while the recent valley deposit, although often 
 indicating considerable age, shows rates of growth which, though variable, 
 appear on the whole to have been comparatively rapid. The evidence, 
 in fact, as it at present stands, does not seem to me to necessitate the 
 carrying of man back in past time so much as bringing forward of 
 extinct animals towards our own time ; my own previous opinion, 
 founded on an independent study of the superficial drift or pleistocene 
 deposits, having likewise been certainly in favour of the latter view. 
 There are numerous phenomena which I can only consider as evidence of 
 a sudden change and of a rapid and transitory action and modification of 
 the surface at a comparatively recent geological period, a period which, 
 if the foregoing facts are truly interpreted, would seem nevertheless to 
 have been marked before its end by the presence of man on a land 
 clothed with a vegetation apparently very similar to that now flourishing 
 in like latitudes, and whose waters were inhabited by testacea, also of 
 forms now living ; while on the surface of that land there lived mam- 
 malia, of which some species are yet the associates of man, although 
 accompanied by others, many of them of gigantic size, and of forms now 
 extinct' (p. 248). 
 
EARLY RACES OF MEN. 179 
 
 no support from the appearance of the earliest skulls 
 which have been discovered, which, although evidently 
 belonging to men who were driven ta seek their susten- 
 ance in parts remote from the first seat of life, and 
 among ferocious wild beasts, are yet, at least some of 
 them, of a superior type, superior to those of their suc- 
 cessors. 1 When man became savage it could only have 
 been the result of degeneracy, and that this was so is 
 abundantly accounted for on the reasons assigned by the 
 Duke of Argyll. 2 
 
 4. Hence we should expect to- find that? the first men ; 
 or the early races, were long-lived and powerful, that 
 they followed peaceful occupations, were cunning work- 
 men, made great advances in arts and sciences, and with 
 this expectation history and investigation accord. We 
 are told of the patriarchal longevity, 3 of giant size, of 
 the immediate cultivation of the land, and the tending 
 of sheep and cattle, the building of cities, of the inven- 
 tion of musical instruments, of artificers in metals, of 
 astronomical skill ; and besides the remains of art dug 
 out of the Assyrian mounds, we have standing to this 
 day in Egypt, not only the ruins of ancient temples, but 
 pyramids and obelisks, and masterly sculpture, and other 
 
 1 See Dawson's Fossil Men, pp.. 181, 189. 
 
 2 Primeval Man, Part iv. The fact stated by Guizot (Earth O9id Man 
 104), that the races of the southern continents are inferior to those of 
 the northern, tends to corroborate his Grace's views, while the civilisa- 
 tion implied in the works of the mound builders of America, mentioned 
 in "Wilson's Prehistoric Mem, vol. i. chap, x.., shows that a civilised race 
 may be succeeded by a savage one. 
 
 3 Mr. Dawson, referring to the skeletons (whether fossil or otherwise) 
 discovered of primitive men, speaks of the indication ' they seem to pre- 
 sent of an extreme longevity,' of ' a slow maturity and great length of 
 life,' also of great strength, and of brain, power. See Fossil Men, pp. 
 181, 189, 198, 202. 
 
i8o LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 evidences of the power and skill of the early workers 
 outrivalling the efforts of modern times. None of these 
 can claim to be as much as 6000 years old, though 
 verging on them. 1 
 
 1 Since the above was written a book has been published by N. Joly, 
 Professor at the Science Faculty of Toulouse, called Man before Metals, 
 in which the great antiquity of the human race is advocated. Singularly 
 enough, M. Joly appears to be unacquainted with the writings of the 
 Americans, at least makes no allusion to their works. In a section titled 
 'The Great Antiquity of Man proved by Egyptian Monuments,' this 
 author, after referring to a statement by Alfred Maury, that on the banks 
 of the Nile art and civilisation date from a time anterior to all history, 
 says, ' The development of this idea, which strongly supports our own 
 theory, forms the subject of a learned paper by this well-known academi- 
 cian, with which the readers of the Revue des deux Mondes are doubtless 
 acquainted. In order to dissipate any legitimate doubt as to the great 
 antiquity of the Egyptian people, and of their civilisation and their arts, 
 it is not necessary to cross the sea, to go to Karnac, and to penetrate 
 into its temple, four times as large as Notre Dame in Paris, although it 
 was reserved exclusively for the devotions of the king. It was enough 
 to visit the little temple of Philse in the Champ de Mars, where the 
 rich treasures of the Egyptian Exhibition (1867) were displayed to the 
 eyes of all nations. Their artistic beauty and richness, and above all, 
 the art displayed in the adorning of the sepulchres, were very remark- 
 able. This is due to the fact that the inhabitants of the Nile, ever pre- 
 occupied with the idea of a future life, looked upon the tombs " as their 
 true abodes throughout eternity " ' (Alfred Maury). Here were exposed 
 coffins in the form of mummies, entirely covered with symbolic figures 
 whose colours have resisted the ravages of time, and two statues, the 
 one of diorite, the other of green basalt, representing King Chafra or 
 Chephren (the fourth king of the fourth dynasty, and the builder of the 
 second of the great pyramids), statues so well preserved, one of them 
 especially, that they appear to be fresh from the hands of the able sculp- 
 tor by whom they were carved more than 5000 years ago. 
 
 ' Art does not attain at once to that grace of line and truth of expres- 
 sion of which the face of Pharaoh, son of Ra, the Sun god (Chafra), offers 
 us an example. Side by side with these statues of King Chaefra or 
 Schaffra, we may place the wooden statue of one named Ra-em-ke, remark- 
 able for its wonderful state of preservation, and also for its beauty as a 
 work of art, unsurpassed by any of the Greeks, as we are told by a com- 
 petent judge (M. Fr. Lenormant). This Ra-em-ke was the governor of a 
 province during the fifth dynasty, that is to say, about a century later than 
 
ANTIQ U1TY IMPR OB ABLE. 1 8 1 
 
 5. If man had lived for a hundred thousand years 
 upon the Earth, the Earth would, long before historic 
 
 King Schaffra. Lastly, the door of the Great Pyramid of Sakkara, now 
 one of the most precious treasures of the Berlin Museum, formed part of a 
 monument which, if it were really built, as it is generally believed, under 
 the first dynasty, has withstood for nearly sixty-eight centuries the 
 destroying hand of man and of time. 
 
 'Such figures terrify the imagination. Forty-nine centuries before 
 the birth of Christ is a great age for a work of human hands, and above 
 all, for a true work of art. Neither India, Asia, nor Assyria have any 
 relics of a time which approaches so nearly to the origin of humanity. 
 But that which is really overwhelming to the mind is to find at that 
 date not savage tribes, but a powerfully constituted society, of which 
 the formation must have required the lapse of centuries ; a civilised 
 people advanced in science and art, and in the knowledge of mechanics, 
 capable of raising monuments of immense size and of indestructible 
 solidity.' 
 
 Then, after referring to certain Egyptian jewels 'of unequalled finish 
 and beauty,' of the time of Joseph, and of other articles prior to that of 
 Abraham, and averring that ' there can be no doubt that Egyptian art, 
 so perfect under the reign of Chephren and his successors, began by 
 equally rude attempts,' and that 'No one can tell with certainty the 
 number of centuries they must have passed through before attaining to 
 so complex a civilisation,' he concludes by saying, 'The whole history 
 of Egypt confirms our belief in the immense antiquity of the human 
 race.' Man before Metals, by N. Joly, 1883, pp. 30-34. 
 
 There are several circumstances in this statement which invite observa- 
 tion. M. Joly tells us that no other nation than the Egyptian have relics 
 of a period so near the origin of humanity, and this period, although it 
 terrifies his imagination, he does not put farther back than 6800 years 
 ago. It required, however, a few centuries to attain so great a civilisa- 
 tion, and from this he jumps to the conclusion that the antiquity of the 
 human race is immense. Whatever observation may be made on the 
 logic of this argument, it would appear that M. Joly conceives that the 
 Egyptians could only have attained to such perfection in art after a 
 lapse, perhaps he means a great lapse, of time. But there is no proper 
 foundation for such a conclusion. If man was, as we believe, created 
 perfect, it would need no great lapse of time, especially during the 
 times of patriarchal longevity, to attain through experience to great 
 skill in art. Perhaps the skill then attained very soon far exceeded all 
 that is now possessed. Indeed, the wonder is, that after the long course 
 of degradation to which in successive generations man has been sub- 
 jected, man should now possess so much capacity as he now enjoys. It 
 
182 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 times, have been filled with inhabitants. An old writer 1 
 presents a table of the increase which would naturally 
 result from generation to generation, and at the end of 
 933 years the result would be 805,306,368 as the 
 number of those then alive. Darwin places it higher, 
 for he says 2 that in less than a thousand years there 
 would literally <not be standing room for man's progeny. 
 Many causes, however, concur to keep down population. 
 It would never grow and be sustained in the extraordi- 
 nary numbers which may be arrived at by arithmetical 
 calculation. -Still it is obvious that only a few thousand 
 years would have sufficed to people the world adequately. 
 We should expect, therefore, had the Earth been peopled 
 for 100,000 years, or even say 20,000 years, whether 
 upon the progressive theory or not, to find not merely 
 well authenticated histories of the race during these 
 early ages, but everywhere evidences both of the exist- 
 ence of man, and that in masses, with -extensive traces 
 of his intelligent labour, it might be buried, and to be 
 dug up, but still there. Yet not only does it appear 
 that the population even of the most favoured lands was 
 scanty, but out of certain central districts all that can be 
 discovered only evidences a few early inhabitants roving, 
 it may .have been at rst either adventurously or in 
 search of food, from their former homes, without the 
 
 exhibits a wonderful recuperative power in nature. As regards the 
 antiquity of the Egyptian nation, there is one passage in Exodus which 
 tells strongly against the supposition. It is contained in the 24th verse 
 of the 9th chapter, in which the plague of hail is incidentally men- 
 tioned as so grievous 'as there was none like it in all the land of 
 Egypt since it became a nation.' This is one of those little bits of 
 indirect evidence which are sometimes as convincing as more direct 
 testimony. 
 
 1 Numbers of Mankind in Ancient and Modern Times (Edin. 1753), 
 p. 7. 
 
 2 Origin of Species, 6th ed. p. 51. 
 
HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 183 
 
 means and appliances of their forefathers, and perhaps 
 rapidly falling into a savage degeneracy. But nowhere 
 are traces of intelligent operations to be found, save in 
 those parts of the world of which Assyria and Egypt 
 may be said to be centres. 
 
 6, And it was somewhere in these quarters that man 
 originated. As stated by Southall, 1 ' the best opinion 
 among ethnologists is that the migrations of the human 
 race (supposing one original centre) commenced from 
 Central or Western Asia/ Here then we ought, if any- 
 where, to find traces of this vast antiquity. But it is 
 not so. Not a vestige of the existence of man or his 
 implements beyond a period of 5000 or 6000 years 
 can there be found. 2 
 
 7. Lastly, we come to the only historical, or only 
 reliable historical record we possess, a record confirmed 
 by external evidence at every turn the Bible. And 
 here it is incumbent to observe that while it is true that 
 the Bible was not given to teach us scientific truths, 
 yet we cannot discard it as a witness to historical facts, 
 even although it may be found to be itself the real 
 defendant in the cause. It may present itself as a 
 foreign witness, wearing a foreign garb, and speaking a 
 foreign tongue, and requiring, it may be, a skilled inter- 
 preter. The interpreter may, indeed, mistake the mean- 
 ing of the witness, and we require therefore to receive 
 what he -says with caution, the more particularly if the 
 witness be speaking, and that very briefly and meagrely, 
 to what he does not specially appear to prove. But 
 here we have in Genesis, the oldest book in the world, 
 written by one who had been taught everything that 
 
 1 Epoch of Mammoth, p. 3. 2 Ibid. p. 5. 
 
1 84 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 was known to the most learned of early ancient nations, 
 written, too, within a period not very far remote from 
 those patriarchal times when men lived long, 1 and could 
 transmit the knowledge of pristine times to a posterity 
 through whose generations Moses could count his descent 
 by recorded names. And if the interpreter be not mis- 
 taken as to the witness' meaning, we have here clear 
 evidence of an antiquity for man which does not extend 
 back from present times to more than 6000 or TOGO 
 years. 
 
 But for the purposes of the present question it really 
 is not of vital import whether man has lived 6000 or 
 60,000 or 600,000 years upon the Earth. The longest 
 period which antiquity hunters could possibly name 
 brings us to a time when man did not exist upon Earth ; 
 and in the history of onr planet, which is by many 
 reckoned by hundreds of millions of years, to say nothing 
 of the history of creation, that period at the longest is 
 comparatively short. Still it is right to think of it, as 
 it truly ought to be thought, as not extending to 10,000 
 years, and really to a much shorter era, for it adds point 
 to observation. Now if any Intelligence had visited 
 this earth, say ten thousand years ago, he would not 
 have found a single rational being existing on it. At 
 that time, therefore, the analogy of this Earth ivould have 
 led to the conclusion that no rational "being existed on any 
 of the other planets that the worlds, indeed, were not 
 made for rational life. But this ten thousand years is 
 a mere point in eternity ; and because what may be 
 
 1 ' Before the flood men are said to have lived five, seven, nine hundred 
 years ; and as a physiologist I can assert positively that there is no fact 
 reached by science to contradict or render this impossible.' Longevity, 
 by John Gardiner, M.D., p. 150. 
 
CONCLUSION FROM RECENT ORIGIN. 185 
 
 represented as a speck or point in eternity has on our 
 planet been blessed with rational life, is it to be inferred 
 that other planetary bodies have been endowed with 
 such life ? Nor does it affect the consideration that 
 for a long period, it might be millions, perhaps many 
 millions, of years previously, organic life which was not 
 rational, whether as mammal, or bird, or reptile, or fish, 
 had dwelt on the earth or inhabited its waters. The fact 
 only throws us (with the difference of excluding rational 
 life} back a very little. Eternity remains- unaffected ; 
 the speck is hardly bigger, if at all. Travel back to the 
 time when the first vegetable form appeared, and the 
 same observation applies. 
 
 Now this undoubted fact goes, I think, a long way, 
 after all that has been already advanced, so long a 
 way that I think I am almost fairly entitled to say 
 that no presumption whatever arises from analogy to 
 reason for life elsewhere because of present life upon the 
 Earth. 
 
 Such a view is rendered the more reasonable when it 
 is considered what life, and especially rational life is. 
 Let us only look realizingly at it, and we shall be filled 
 with amazement. 
 
 How wonderful is vegetation I The insignificant seed 
 cast into the ground germinates, bursts, sends down its 
 root, and sends up its shoot, and by an operation which 
 we cannot comprehend, or even watch, slowly adds to 
 both, till the root enlarges, and, piercing the ground, 
 draws from it nourishment, and the shoot swells and 
 rises little by little in gradual invisible progress, and 
 grows and expands in stalks and trunk and leaves, beau- 
 tifully veined, to draw nutrition from the air ; and so, 
 
1 86 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 - 
 
 by imperceptible extension, addition after addition issues 
 from the daily increasing stem, till the little shoot 
 becomes a great tree, and the birds of the air lodge in 
 its branches, while round and round, embosomed among 
 the foliage, the flower unfolds, and, in graceful form and 
 enlivening colour, adorns the waving boughs, and having 
 served its day and brightened its generation, withering, 
 gives place to fruit, pleasant to the sight and good for 
 food both for man and beast, and to seed to reproduce 
 its kind. 
 
 Biat proceeding to the higher kingdom, and passing 
 by the inferior animal world, with all its interest and 
 mysterious -arrangements and adaptations, think of Man, 
 who offers to 'Consideration the most wonderful object of 
 thought manifested in creation. 
 
 For he is wonderful in very naany different ways. 
 Wonderful in capacity to move about at will, wonderful 
 in the faculty of perceiving, through material, fleshly 
 organs, surrounding nature and its accompaniments, 
 wonderful in that harmonious and complete combination 
 of beautiful contrivances for the support and delight of 
 existence exhibited in his bodily frame, wonderful in 
 ability, in accordance with his own desire, to exercise 
 power over the external world, bending the forces of 
 nature to aid him in his operations, wonderful in the 
 possession of the emotional sensations, in the impulse to 
 love and to fear and to hate, to rear, to invent, and to 
 destroy, wonderful in the endowment of thought, the 
 capacity to -comprehend and mentally combine, to remem- 
 ber, to imagine, to reason, to deduce, to convince, 
 wonderful in the gift of speech, whereby to communicate 
 the thoughts passing within his own inner consciousness 
 to the inner consciousness of -other similar living beings : 
 
and, not suggesting other traits calculate 
 upon reflection to excite astonishment, am 
 of view what does not appeal so vividly to the outer obser- 
 vation, that most mysterious and most amazing charac- 
 teristic of all, the carrying about within him of a spirit 
 upon which its great Maker 1ms breathed immortality, 
 and adapted it to dwell with Him for -ever, how won- 
 derful is the gift that lofty faculty which raises him so 
 far above every other terrestrial creature to know, and 
 the power to revere, the Being from whom he derived his 
 life and soul ! When we think of all, how forcibly do 
 the Psalmist's words strike conviction to our hearts, we 
 are ' fearfully and wonderfully made ' ! 
 
 Now mere matter is not so endowed. There is no 
 love or hate, there is no moral consciousness, or con- 
 sciousness of any kind, there is no intelligence, no 
 knowledge, no power of recognising and worshipping 
 God in a stone or any inorganic thing, nor in any 
 inanimate organic thing. It is only when life is super- 
 a-dded that these qualities are found, and when life is 
 withdrawn they disappear. The corpse, the skeleton of 
 the dead, is as unconscious as the stone. Nor can man 
 of himself, with all his bestowed powers, and still less 
 can the inferior animals, impart to matter one of the 
 properties or virtues named. Were it not that life is so 
 common, so familiar to our experience, we should (if we 
 can suppose the possibility of our looking upon the 
 Earth with merely spiritual eyes) be astonished beyond 
 measure at its feeblest manifestation. But because we 
 are so habituated to it in its many forms, are so con- 
 scious of it within ourselves, we ought not to reckon it 
 the less an exceeding great, a mysterious marvel. It is, 
 in short, when rightly considered, in one sense of the 
 
1 88 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 term, a miracle. It is such a miracle on this Earth. 
 What reason have we to suppose the miracle has been 
 repeated elsewhere ? Literally none. 
 
 Ex nihilo nihil fit. The stone, the senseless atom, 
 cannot communicate what it does not possess. Matter 
 cannot of itself produce what is grander than itself. It 
 has no life, and cannot give life. Life must be imparted 
 to it, directly or indirectly, by Him who is Life, the great 
 and only Being who is the fountain of life. Therefore 
 the mere existence of other bodies precisely similar to 
 the Earth (if the similarity can be established) affords no 
 sufficient reason to suppose that the miracle of life has 
 been repeated in them. Unless the Creator has so willed, 
 this miracle has not been produced. 
 
 The difficulty of the introduction of life upon the Earth 
 without miracle has been in various ways attempted to 
 be met. Sir William Thomson some years ago suggested 
 that life might be brought to this world on the tail of a 
 comet, which was treated as a piece of Scotch humour 
 (which probably it was), or in meteors ; and it has been 
 thought that some of the aerolites showed traces of 
 organic matter abiding in them. But examination (see 
 postea) has disproved this supposition, and besides, 
 it is most evident that any life which by possibility 
 could have existed in these aerolites, whether animal 
 or vegetable, would most effectually be burnt out upon 
 entering the earth's atmosphere. The idea at one time 
 entertained, that life can be initiated by ' spontaneous 
 generation/ experiment has disproved. 1 M. Pasteur has 
 
 1 The Edinburgh Review of April 1867, in an article on spontaneous 
 generation, places at its head the following works : 1. ' Sur les Corpus- 
 cules Organises qui existent dans 1'Atmosphere, Exam en de la doctrine 
 des generations spontane"es. Par M. L. Pasteur' (Annales de Chimie 
 et de Physique, tome LXIV. 1862). 2. Traite de la generation spon- 
 
EVOLUTION. 189 
 
 shown it to be untenable; and the experiments of 
 others subsequently have apparently set the matter 
 now at rest. 
 
 As little can the theory of evolution stand the test, 
 and explain the production of life upon the earth, and 
 especially the life of the rational being Man, without 
 miraculous intervention. Evolution is a popular con- 
 ception of the present day, just as in times past we 
 have had notions of philosophers which, acquiring popu- 
 larity, have lasted a transient existence ; and notwith- 
 standing the overbearing confidence of some naturalists, 
 in whom the wish may be father to the thought, this 
 new notion possibly will not endure any longer. For 
 it is a mere unsupported hypothesis, and in any view it 
 is incapable of explaining the presence or origination of 
 life in this world. Let us, however, see upon what 
 basis it rests, and what bearing the subject and the 
 
 tante. Pouchet, Paris 1859. 3. 'Rapport fait a 1' Academic des 
 Sciences sur les experiences relatives a la generation spontanee ' 
 (Annales de Chimie et de Physique, tome IV. 1865). 4. 'Further 
 Experiments on the Production of Organisms in closed Vessels. 
 By George Child, M.D." (Proc. Royal Society, 1865). This article 
 reviews the position of the investigation as at its date, and, stating 
 the difficulty of proving a negative, leans to the conclusions of M. 
 Pasteur. 
 
 Three years later Dr. Bastian experimented, and thought he had made 
 out a case of spontaneous generation ; but was promptly met by other 
 experimenters, and it was shown that his results had been obtained by 
 failure to take due precautions. The whole subject has been discussed 
 at considerable length by Walter Noel Hartley, Demonstrator of 
 Chemistry, etc., King's College, London, in his work, Air and its 
 Relations to Life (1875). Mr. Hartley, who himself experimented with 
 the utmost care, in a very interesting series of chapters (p. 132 et seq.) 
 gives the history and state of the subject, confutes Dr. Bastian, and 
 shows that the life supposed to be spontaneous is derived from germs 
 floating in the air, and with which the air everywhere, except in higher 
 regions, appears to be charged. 
 
7 9 o LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 thoughts to which it gives rise have on the conclusions 
 to be reached in the present question. 
 
 Evolution is not exactly a new doctrine. Lamark 
 in 1801 broached the dogma of progressive develop- 
 ment by acts of volition on the part of the animals 
 themselves (a phase of the theory now given up, for the 
 phases seem to be always shifting), and the descent of 
 all species from other species. Similar views were 
 stated by others, although the subject was not brought 
 into public notice until 1844, when the author of the 
 Vestiges of Creation first published that remarkable work, 
 containing the idea that an original impulse was given 
 to the forms of life aided by the influence of external 
 circumstances, which advanced them through grades of 
 organization. But Mr. Darwin, fifteen years later, in 
 treating of ' the origin of species,' practically made the 
 subject his own, so that Darwinism and Evolution, 
 though not coincident, are commonly held to be con- 
 vertible terms. His great theory to account for the 
 diversity of species was that it, was due to what he 
 termed ' natural selection/ in stating which, or ' the sur- 
 vival of the fittest,' as his own, he appears to have met 
 with claims of earlier origination on the part of Mr. 
 Owen and Mr. Wallace. His conclusion was that all 
 animals and plants are merely varieties of other and 
 former forms, and by the operation of chance influences 
 existing in nature through a long course of ages one 
 individual acting on another have all been developed 
 from one common ancestor. Mr. Darwin has, indeed, 
 with great candour confessed to many of the weighty 
 difficulties which beset his theory; at the same time 
 endeavouring, with laboured ingenuity, to combat them 
 by bringing ' natural selection ' to his aid, so that the 
 
DAR WINBREEMIVART. \ 9 1 
 
 impression is given throughout of a petitio principii or 
 of a reasoning in a circle. 
 
 His opinions were assailed by many, and among others, 
 very shortly after the issue of the book, by Dr. Bree, in 
 a work now perhaps not so much known, called Species 
 not Transmutable nor the Eesult of Secondary Causes, 
 where many telling facts and circumstances are adduced 
 to show that Darwin's positions are untenable ; Dr. 
 Bree's declared object being 1 ' to show that Mr. Darwin's 
 case is not proved, and that consequently it cannot 
 supersede that theory of special creation of which we 
 have the most convincing proof.' An attack in some 
 respects more formidable, inasmuch as it was more 
 systematic, and that it emanated from a friend and 
 believer in Evolution, was afterwards made by Mr. St. 
 George Mivart in his Genesis of Species. Mr. Mivart 
 took up successively the different positions maintained 
 by Mr. Darwin, and showed conclusively their error. 
 But, after demolishing Mr. Darwin, Mr. Mivart failed in 
 making out his own view, which is, that species have, 
 in sudden and considerable changes, been evolved by 
 ordinary laws (for the most part unknown), aided by the 
 subordinate action of natural selection. And in a loose 
 way adding, 2 ' there is nothing in physical science which 
 forbids them (his readers) to regard these natural laws 
 as acting with the divine concurrence, and in obedience to 
 a creative fiat originally imposed on the primeval cosmos 
 in the beginning by its Creator, its Upholder, and its Lord,' 
 or, as Mr. Mivart elsewhere expresses it, ' throughout the 
 whole process of physical evolution supernatural action 
 is not to be looked for! So that the distinct issue raised 
 
 1 Bree's Species not Transmutable, p. 14. 
 
 2 Mivart's Genesis of Species, p. 333. 
 
1 92 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 by Evolution, so far as tlie present question is concerned, 
 seems to be : Are the separate forms of life the result of 
 miracle ? that is, are they produced under the immediate 
 act or direction of God, 1 evidenced by their being accom- 
 plished either by the use of means in an extraordinary 
 manner, or without apparent means by the exercise of 
 Divine Will, the manner of the accomplishment being 
 here immaterial. 
 
 1 I do not pretend to have read the multifarious writings which have 
 been published on Evolution, and in dealing with it in this incidental 
 way I have, availing myself in part of some of the observations made by 
 other writers, taken my own method, others have taken different 
 methods. But one thing is noticeable, that Evolutionists are very 
 anxious that it should not be supposed that their doctrine militates 
 against religion. Yet no one can intelligently read the works of 
 Evolutionists without observing how carefully many, if they do not 
 openly seek to eliminate the action of the Creator, evade acknowledging 
 it, and, when anything is reluctantly said on the subject, the impression 
 is conveyed that it is so said as it were to gain the suffrages of religious 
 people, or not altogether to shock them. Principal Dawson thus 
 expresses himself (Story of Earth and Man, p. 317) : 'This Evolutionist 
 doctrine is itself one of the strangest phenomena of humanity. It 
 existed, and most naturally, in the oldest philosophy and poetry, in 
 connection with the crudest and most uncritical attempts of the human 
 mind to grasp the system of nature ; but that in our day a system 
 destitute of any shadow of proof, and supported merely by vague ana- 
 logies and figures of speech, and by the arbitrary and artificial coherence 
 of its own parts, should be accepted as a philosophy, and should find 
 able adherents to string upon its thread of hypotheses our vast and 
 weighty stores of knowledge, is surpassingly strange. It seems to 
 indicate that the accumulated facts of our age have gone altogether 
 beyond its capacity for generalization ; and, but for the vigour one sees 
 everywhere, it might be taken as an indication that the human mind 
 has fallen into a state of senility, and in its dotage mistakes for science 
 the imaginations which were the dreams of its youth. In many respects 
 these speculations are important and worthy of the attention of thinking 
 men. They seek to revolutionize the religious beliefs of the world, and 
 if accepted would destroy most of the existing theology and philosophy. 
 They indicate tendencies among scientific thinkers which, though 
 probably temporary, must, before they disappear, descend to lower 
 strata, and reproduce themselves in grosser forms and with most serious 
 
DARWIN'S THEORY OBSERVATIONS. 193 
 
 First, then, with regard to the Darwinian theory, upon 
 which these observations among others occur. 
 
 1. It is at once conceded that species are ' under the 
 Divine concurrence ' subject to variation, in some cases 
 
 effects on the whole structure of society.' On the other hand, Mr. 
 George St. Clair, who seems to have given himself over, body and soul, 
 to the Evolutionists, and, if I have not mistaken his meaning, to contend 
 for The Vestiges doctrine of original fiat out of which everything has 
 sprung, has written a book, Darwinism and Design; or, Creation by 
 Evolution (1873), bearing that his endeavour is to ' show that if Evolu- 
 tion be true all is not lost, but on the contrary something is gained ; 
 the Design argument remains unshaken, and the wisdom and beneficence 
 of God receive new illustration. ' But obviously it is a truism to say 
 that if Evolution be true it has been the result of design. The ante- 
 cedent question must first be answered. Is it true ? Is it satis- 
 factorily proved? There is no escape from this position. If it were 
 true, it would clearly form part of the Creator's plan. But to attribute 
 to Almighty design seems no part of the Darwinian doctrine. Dr. 
 Charles Hodge, in a work called Darwinism and its Relation to the 
 Truths of Natural and Revealed Religion, enters at some length into the 
 theology of the question, and may be consulted as stating the views of 
 many writers, and thus expresses himself (p. 173): 'The conclusion of 
 the whole matter is, that the denial of design in nature' is virtually the 
 denial of God. Mr. Darwin's theory does deny all design in nature, 
 therefore his theory is virtually atheistical ; his theory, not he himself. 
 He believes in a Creator.' [How far does this accord with his lately 
 published letter ?] ' But when that Creator, millions and millions of 
 ages ago, did something called matter and a living germ into existence 
 and then abandoned the Universe to itself, to be controlled by chance 
 and necessity, without any purpose on His part as to the result, or any 
 intervention or guidance, then He is virtually consigned, so far as we 
 are concerned, to non-existence. It has already been said that the most 
 extreme of Mr. Darwin's admirers adopt and laud his theory, for the 
 special reason that it banishes God from the world ; that it enables them 
 to account for design without referring it to the purpose or agency of 
 God. This is done expressly by Biichner, Hseckel, Vogt, and Strauss. The 
 opponents of Darwinism direct their objections principally against this 
 element of the doctrine. This, as was stated by the Rev. Dr. Peabody, 
 was the main ground of the earnest opposition of Agassiz to the theory. 
 America's great botanist, Dr. Asa Gray, avows himself an Evolutionist ; but 
 he is not a Darwinian. Of that point we have the clearest possible proof'.' 
 
 N 
 
i 9 4 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 
 
 to a pretty wide degree; And no doubt this is a sus- 
 ceptibility which has been implanted by the Creator not 
 merely to manifest His own wonderful power, and to 
 gratify His own grand love of multiplied diversity, but 
 for various good ends, and especially the better adapta- 
 tion of animals to changed and surrounding circum- 
 stances, and, above all, both the better to minister to the 
 wants of man, to whom the whole inferior creation was 
 subjected, and the more to stimulate his energies and 
 quicken his intelligence. 
 
 2. But this susceptibility, which may be regarded as 
 part of- the Divine mandate, ' Be fruitful and multiply,' 
 has its limits. According to Mr. Darwin's doctrine, 
 the lion and the lamb, the crocodile and the ape, the 
 elephant and the animalcule, the spider and the whale, 
 the sparrow and the shark, the centipede and the man, 
 the owl and the ass, the goose and the gull, have all 
 sprung from one common ancestor, all arriving at their 
 respective forms by minute, gradual, successive changes. 
 This is a community of origin which obviously cannot 
 claim for itself the smallest shadow of probability. But 
 what are the facts ? 
 
 (1.) The different races of animals keep themselves 
 apart. They herd together; they pair together. We 
 see no disposition on the part of two different kinds of 
 animals to form unions with each other. There may 
 be, and when it does happen it is only noticeable for 
 its singularity, an affection springing up between two 
 animals of different genera ; but it is purely Platonic. 
 
 (2.) Even animals which may be regarded as kin to 
 each other seldom pair. It happens among domestic 
 animals, or animals which are directly useful to man, 
 and have been brought under his mastery, and therefore 
 
SPECIES LIMITS OF VARIATION. 195 
 
 conceivably created with this special power of adapta- 
 tion ; but it has only been observed while in a state of 
 domesticity, and therefore under the control and guidance 
 of man ; and it would almost seem to be admitted by 
 the Evolutionists that among wild animals, or animals in 
 a state of nature, it does not happen, or if it does happen, 
 that it can only be in the rarest cases. 
 
 (3.) There is, it seems, as stated by Darwin himself, 
 corroborated by Mivart, 1 a tendency to revert in time, 
 after passing through the change of variation, to the 
 original typical form. 
 
 (4.) When pairing takes place between animals of 
 different genera, the offspring is as a rule sterile. 2 The 
 conditions under which absolute sterility does not 
 follow may be regarded as exceptions proving the rule, 
 
 (5.) There appears to be an increasing 'difficulty 
 found in producing by ever such careful selection any 
 further extreme in some change already carried very far, 
 such as the tail of the " fan-tailed pigeon " or the crop 
 of the pouter.' 3 
 
 (6.) There are some animals, such as the goose, the 
 peacock, and the guinea fowl, 4 which are almost incapable 
 of variation, and others 5 which have remained unvaried 
 since the time of their creation. 
 
 In short, every circumstance goes to show what Mr. 
 Mivart calls the ' stability ' of species ; 6 and even 
 Mr. Darwin seems to admit that in the great divisions 
 of the animal kingdom it is impossible that the one can 
 become the other. ' Mammals and fish hardly come 
 into competition with each other ; the advancement of 
 
 1 Origin of Species, 6th edition, p. 11 ; Genesis of Species, p. 137. 
 
 2 Darwin, p. 241. 3 Mivart, p. 131. * Ibid. p. 134. 
 5 Darwin, p. 308. 6 Mivart, p. 127. 
 
196 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 the whole class of mammals, or of certain members iu 
 their class, to the highest grade, would not lead to their 
 taking the place of fishes.' l In fact, is it not that the 
 various branches of the animal kingdom have obeyed 
 the original Divine order, ' Let the Earth bring forth 
 the living creature after his kind, cattle and creeping 
 thing and beast of the Earth after his kind : and it was 
 so.' And so beautifully separated into kinds by dis- 
 tinguishing characteristics are they, that while naturalists 
 have arranged the whole according to peculiarities into 
 scientific systems, in which the animals are classified 
 into distinct genera, which again are subdivided into 
 varied species, the partitions, in at least their greater 
 divisions, are so marked as to be palpable to every eye, 
 from that of our great progenitor who called each kind 
 by its individual name as it passed before him, to that 
 of the tiniest nursery child of the present day. 
 
 3. There are many facts in natural history adduced 
 by naturalists which are irreconcilable with Mr. 
 Darwin's theory ; as, for example, the existence of the 
 same fresh-water fish in fresh-water lakes in different 
 regions of the Earth, 2 and the possession of perfect eyes 
 and ears 3 in animals living in the earliest times 4 
 organs which ' could never have been produced by insig- 
 nificant beginnings.' 5 And of another kind, the fact 
 mentioned by the Duke of Argyll in regard to the specific 
 variation in the humming birds 
 
 * That every variety which is to take its place as a new 
 species must be born male and female ; because it is one 
 of the facts of specific variation in the humming birds, 
 that although the male and female plumage is generally 
 
 1 Mivart, p. 99. 2 P. 165. 3 P. 152. 
 
 4 P. 84. 5 P. 58. 
 
OBJECTIONS TO DARWINISM. 197 
 
 entirely different, yet the female of each species is as 
 distinct from the female of every other as the male is 
 from the male of every other ; ' with which the further fact 
 has to be coupled that there is no 'hybridism between any 
 two species however nearly allied.' x 
 
 4. The apparently rapid succession of races or species 
 in geologic times is opposed to the Darwinian theory. 
 
 Discussing the succession of life upon the globe, and 
 in dealing with Evolution, Dr. Nicholson says : 
 
 ' On the other hand, there are facts which point clearly 
 to the existence of some law other than that of Evolution, 
 and probably of a deeper and more far-reaching character. 
 Upon no theory of Evolution can we find a satisfactory 
 explanation for the constant introduction throughout 
 geological time of new forms of life, which do not appear 
 to have been preceded by pre-existent allied types. The 
 Graptolites and Trilobites have no known predecessors, 
 and leave no known successors. The insects appear 
 suddenly in the Devonian, and the Arachnides and 
 Myriapods in the Carboniferous, under well differentiated 
 and highly specialized types. The Debranchiate Cephalo- 
 pods appear with equal apparent suddenness on the older 
 Mesozoic deposits, and no known type of the Palaeozoic 
 period can be pointed to as a possible ancestor. The 
 Hippuritidae of the Cretaceous burst into a varied life to 
 all appearance almost immediately after their first intro- 
 duction into existence. The wonderful Dicotyledonous 
 flora of the upper Cretaceous period similarly surprises 
 us without any prophetic annunciation from the older 
 Jurassic.' 2 
 
 5. Evolution from a mere sentient existence cannot 
 explain the possession of passions, such as love or hate ; 
 or moral feelings, such as the sense of right and wrong ; 
 
 1 Rdgn of Law, p. 237. 
 
 2 The Ancient Life History of the Earth, by H. Alleyne Nicholson, 
 M.D., p. 373. 
 
198 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 * /* 
 
 nor can it explain in man, what is absent in the brute, 
 the conception and reverence of God, and, without 
 putting it higher, his hope of immortality. 
 
 6. Mr. Darwin admits as a serious difficulty, started 
 by Sir W. Thompson, ' probably one of the gravest yet 
 advanced/ 1 that the lapse of time since our planet was 
 consolidated is not sufficient for the amount of organic 
 change to be produced, according to his theory, by 
 minute succession and favourable variations a diffi- 
 culty in which Professor Huxley seems to participate. 
 For, according to estimates formed on the principles 
 of inquiry followed by Sir W. Thompson, life on the 
 Earth must be limited within some such period of time 
 as one hundred million years. 2 Whereas, according to 
 computations founded on the Darwinian theory, it 
 would require 2500 millions of years 3 for the complete 
 development of the whole animal kingdom to its piesent 
 state, even were such development by natural selection 
 possible. These are calculations which, supposing the 
 theory well founded, are necessarily speculative, and 
 both of them might be largely either too great or too 
 small. But the least reflection will show that upon 
 the Darwinian supposition of the formation of animals 
 of the most opposite kinds say of the Megatherium 
 and the Ammonite of the early world, or the elephant 
 and the lark of the present time, or of the giant whale 
 and the animalcule (one million to the bulk of a grain 
 of sand) all from the Eozoon, or whatever was the first 
 created animal form, and that by minute successive 
 changes accidentally happening and long in maturing, 
 would, were it possible, require an inconceivable length 
 of time. 
 1 Origin of Species, p. 409. 2 Mivart, p. 154. 3 P. 160. 
 
DARWINISM UNSUPPORTED. 199 
 
 7. Further, it is found that existing animals have 
 lived on Earth back to the glacial period without change. 
 It seems that 98 species of mammalia inhabited Europe 
 in the post-glacial period, of which 57 still exist, not 
 one of which has been modified into a new form. 
 Principal Dawson, in mentioning this fact, adds 1 that 
 he had examined about 200 species of molluscs and 
 other marine animals, some of which lived back to the 
 Tertiary period, and he had arrived at the conclusion 
 that they are absolutely unchanged. 
 
 8. But a more tangible and formidable, nay, insuper- 
 able objection is to be found in the admitted fact that 
 there is an entire absence of all proof where proof, 
 ought to have been abundant of the theory. It would, 
 indeed, if well founded have been a matter of everyday 
 observation. Yet we neither see such changes happening 
 before our eyes, nor do we read of them in the history 
 of the past. While there is not a trace of them such 
 as is requisite to be found in the geological records, 
 where, had the race of animals now or formerly existing 
 been produced by the development supposed, there 
 must necessarily have been preserved to us specimens 
 of animals in all the intermediate or transitional stages. 
 Mr. Darwin admits 2 that the number of these ' inter- 
 mediate varieties which have formerly existed must be 
 truly enormous,' and that l geology assuredly does not 
 reveal any such finely graduated organic change ; and 
 this, perhaps, is the most serious and obvious objection 
 which can be urged against the theory. The explana- 
 tion,' he adds, ' lies, as I believe, in the extreme 
 imperfection of the geological record.' 3 But this is 
 
 1 Story of the Earth and Man, p. 358. 
 
 2 Origin of Species, p. 264. 3 P. 265. 
 
200 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 an explanation of a fact {so strongly against him which 
 cannot be taken. The simple answer to it is, to use 
 Mr. Mivart's words, that ' the absence not in one, but 
 in all cases of such connecting links, is a phenomenon 
 which remains to be accounted for;' 1 but is it not 
 conclusively adverse to the theory ? 
 
 The more recent Evolutionists, it is true, have taken 
 courage from finding, not indeed an ' enormous number 
 of intermediate varieties,' but a few isolated individuals, 
 affording what they consider to be examples of the 
 1 links ' of which they are in quest. Some of them, if 
 they are to be assumed the results of Evolution, would, 
 no doubt, be cases of that development of which, as 
 already stated, species are or may be susceptible. 
 Others are thought to typify a class exemplifying con- 
 nection between different 'races or genera, and of these 
 the Archseopteryx is paraded with triumph as furnishing 
 prdbatio probata of the Darwinian theory. This singular 
 animal, which united the feathers and certain limbs of 
 the bird to the structure of the reptile, and has there- 
 fore been set up to constitute a link by Evolution 
 between the reptile and the bird, may doubtless be 
 regarded as a product of a period of transition between 
 two geological epochs ; the epoch which was favourable 
 to reptilia, and that newer epoch in which the atmo- 
 sphere became suitable for the bird ; and, no doubt, 
 it was created in that particular form as well for its 
 own preservation as for the purpose of enabling it 
 the better to pursue its peculiar prey, and otherwise 
 fulfil its place in creation. We may rest assured that 
 such an animal was needed, and that the special form 
 of this to us seeming lusus naturce was what was 
 
 1 Mivart, p. 125. 
 
SUPPOSED LINKS Ml V ART. 201 
 
 best adapted for the purpose for which it was intro- 
 duced. 
 
 But, dealing with the matter as a scientific question, 
 a far stronger reason, and one applicable to ' links ' of 
 all kinds, is this, that even could it be established that 
 they were related in time, it must also be established 
 that they were the product of Evolution. The mere fact 
 of correspondence or similarity is obviously insufficient. 
 The one must be proved to be the parent of the other, 
 and this ought to be demonstrated by evidence either 
 direct or circumstantial, though sure and relevant. Now 
 it may be admitted that in the circumstances neither is 
 possible. The question, therefore, can only be deter- 
 mined, if at all, by reasoning from analogy, from the 
 known and visible facts of the present we may reason 
 back to the unknown and hidden secrets of the past. 
 But so far from finding the known and visible to afford 
 evidence in favour of the theory, we have already seen 
 that all the facts are opposed to the hypothesis. Hence 
 it finds as little support from analogy as from evidence. 
 
 There exists, therefore, abundant reason for putting 
 aside the Darwinian theory ; and we may now turn to 
 the other supposition propounded by Mivart, and which 
 receives no countenance from the views of Darwin, 1 and 
 see whether it be any better that the changes have 
 been sudden and considerable, and ' have been evolved 
 
 1 'It may be doubted whether sudden and considerable deviations 
 of structure, such as we occasionally see in our domestic productions, 
 more especially with plants, are ever permanently propagated in a state 
 of nature. Almost every part of every organic being is so beautifully 
 related to its complex conditions of life, that it seems as improbable that 
 any part should have been suddenly produced perfect, as that a complex 
 machine should have been invented by man in a perfect state.' Or iyin 
 of Species, p. 33. 
 
202 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 by natural laws (for the inost part unknown), aided by 
 the subordinate action of natural selection.' 1 
 
 Mr. Mivart, like all Evolutionists, proceeds on the 
 footing that similarity of parts is evidence of affinity ; 
 and his position is, that the production of this similarity, 
 or what has been termed the ' homologies ' of the limbs, 
 is the result of ' an internal force or tendency}^ without 
 excluding the contributing action or effects of ' external 
 conditions/ but excluding all supernatural action of the 
 Creator. 
 
 On looking, however, for the proofs, it will be found 
 that the whole rests on an assumption of the doctrine of 
 affinity because of resemblance of parts or members, or, in 
 other words, of Evolution, which is nothing more than 
 a complete begging of the question, and, basing his 
 remarks on this footing, that it is ' inconceivable ' that 
 indefinite variation with survival of the fittest can ever 
 have built up these serial, bilateral, and vertical homo- 
 logies ' without the action of some innate power or tendency 
 so to build up possessed by the organism itself in each 
 case,' This is clearly a method of argument which is 
 false ; and true proofs of this theory there are none. 
 Indeed, he himself 3 is forced to rest on assertion, 
 and to admit that the c balancing ' which results in the 
 given phenomena ' must be due to an internal cause, 
 which at present science is utterly incompetent to 
 explain/ 
 
 Now we know that the Creator usually works by 
 means or instrumentalities, and therefore it is not at all 
 incredible that He should implant in His creatures a 
 power which, acted upon by Him, and intensified by 
 
 1 Mivart, p. 333. 2 P. 185. 3 P. 207. 
 
CREATION. 203 
 
 Him, and directed by His infinite knowledge for His 
 own purposes, would result in a rapid change of form, 
 or a change of form in descendants. But while this 
 method may have been adopted by Him in some cases, 
 although there is nothing to show that it has been 
 adopted, we cannot suppose it to have happened, in any 
 case, unless He had directly so willed and ordained, and 
 had given the impetus to produce in this way and in 
 the specific forms ; but this assuredly would have been 
 a miracle, in the sense of being that supernatural 
 interposition of God in the affairs of this world which 
 every devout reader of his Bible is accustomed to con- 
 template, and to believe without difficulty. 
 
 But if a miracle be needed, it can be exerted by the 
 Creator in any way He sees proper. His purpose may 
 be effected by the exercise simply of His will. It may 
 be brought about, in a way we know not, by animating 
 the dust ; for ' He can animate the dust as easily as 
 make the dust itself ; ' or, as He did at the first, He can 
 create out of nothing. People forget, when they speak 
 of a miracle, that everything around us is not only mar- 
 vellous, but incomprehensible. The rain that falls to 
 the ground mounts, by a wonderful process, into the 
 vine, and becomes the juice of the grape, which, sub- 
 jected by man employing the forces imparted to matter 
 by the Creator to certain processes, becomes wine. 
 But, attentively considered, this result is not in reality 
 a whit less wonderful than our Saviour's exerting His 
 Almighty Power and at once, and by the exercise of His 
 will, without the means which the forces of nature 
 had derived originally from His Power, turning the 
 water into wine. These forces of nature came from 
 Him. They were nowhere till He implanted them ; and 
 
204 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 He who could originate and implant them, and was thus 
 above them and could control them as He pleased, could 
 surely accomplish the, same end, without their aid or 
 instrumentality, by the exercise of the same Power 
 which brought these means and forces out of nothing 
 and implanted them in matter. 1 
 
 The action of man, the creature, who derives all his 
 finite powers from the Creator, and who can only use 
 the means which the Creator has provided, but who can 
 even influence by a look, is admitted ; and yet the 
 action of God, whose power is infinite, is excluded from 
 the world He has Himself framed. Man can alter the 
 face of nature, man can do many things in exercise of 
 his will ; but surely what can be done by man can be 
 done, and much more abundantly, by the Almighty, and 
 that by ways and means which to man are unknown. 
 
 I have put it as if the creation of the animal world 
 was accomplished by the mere exercise of will ; for it is 
 well to keep in view that the Creator can so act. ' That 
 God is not limited to ordinary law in the production of 
 results, that He can and that He does produce events 
 without the ordinary instruments of nature, is/ says 
 Henry "Ward Beecher, ' the very spirit of the whole 
 Bible.' 2 But it by no means follows that the creation 
 was, at least in all its parts, accomplished without what 
 we call means. It may have been that there are special 
 laws of creation of which we know nothing, or special 
 modes of operating upon known forces which produce 
 
 1 I have not ventured here, where it would be out of place, into the 
 general question of miracles, but only said sufficient logically to reach 
 my conclusion applicable to the present question. 
 
 2 Beecher's Life of Christ, p. 36. 
 
E VOL UTION OF MAN. 205 
 
 creation. But then this special law, or these special 
 forces, in the very nature of the case, will never be 
 brought into operation until the Divine Being will and 
 direct, and the evidence of such direction lies in the 
 beautiful marks of design manifested everywhere in 
 creation. 1 The adaptations we see everywhere around 
 us, the exquisite contrivances (so well exemplified by 
 the noble duke 2 in the wing of a bird), indicate, in the 
 plainest manner, design and the hand of a Designer ; 
 and they are riot fashioned in an iron and rigid form, 
 are not turned out of a common mould, with that 
 identity of construction which a machine, subject to no 
 control, put in motion would produce, but are mani- 
 festly obedient to a guidance which shapes them to the 
 immediate requirement ; and when they obey external 
 influences, these are influences which have only derived 
 their power from the Creator Himself. 
 
 The Evolutionists have found it necessary to their 
 doctrine to carry it the length of including man. Now 
 it might have been that the inferior creation was, at 
 least to a large extent, derived from other of the sub- 
 ordinate forms, and yet it would not follow that man, 
 so specially made the subject of the Divine decree, ' Let 
 us make man in our image,' was evolved from a brute. 
 
 That man was descended from the brute creation 
 is, however, so much a dogma of Darwin, that, in his 
 Descent of Man, we are favoured with the exact descrip- 
 tion of the human ancestry. ' The early progenitors 
 
 1 The evidences of design would fill volumes. Take, for example, the 
 elephant's trunk. Cuvier found that in it the number of distinct 
 muscles, each having its separate action, is not far short of forty 
 thousand. Or take the beautiful, the marvellous and minutely exact 
 adjustments everywhere manifested in the solar system. 
 
 2 Reign of 'Law ', chap. iii. 
 
206 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 of man were no doubt ("once covered with hair, both 
 sexes having beards ; their ears were pointed and cap- 
 able of movement, and their bodies were provided with 
 a tail having the proper muscles.' 1 ' The foot was pre- 
 hensile, and our progenitors were no doubt arboreal in 
 their habits.' And as, according to the Evolution theory, 
 we must have sprung from the lowest form of life, he 
 tells us : ' At a still earlier period the progenitors of 
 man must have been aquatic in their habits.' 2 And, as 
 if ' the art of sinking ' could no farther go : ' These early 
 predecessors of man must have been as lowly organized 
 as the lancelet or amphioxus, or even still more lowly 
 organized.' 
 
 It is to the monkey Evolutionists proximately ascribe 
 their descent. 3 But in so contending, there is one 
 staggering fact which is ignored by most of them, per- 
 haps is not known to many. Professor Owen, who 
 considers the gorilla to be the most anthropoid ape 
 known (and it will be borne in mind it is the habitant 
 of equatorial Africa, far removed from the received birth- 
 place of the human race), has collected the differences 
 which distinguish that species 4 of monkey from man, 
 amounting in all to 44 separate peculiarities, leading 
 him to the conclusion that man forms one species. 5 But 
 
 1 Descent of Man, p. 206. 2 P. 207. 
 
 3 So recently as at a meeting of the British Association held at South- 
 ampton in September 1882, this view was contended for by Mr. Stewart 
 Duncan in a paper read to the Association. However, it is somewhat 
 satisfactory to know from the newspaper report, that ' some members 
 tried to throw over the ape theory ;' although, it is added, ' Mr. Duncan 
 held that if it could be shown man walked on all-fours, and was other- 
 wise very low in the scale, then practically man was an ape.' 
 
 4 See Dr. Bree's Species not Transmutable, p. 111. 
 
 6 See also Dawson's Story of Earth and Man, p. 363 et seq. Principal 
 Dawson shows not only distinctive differences between them and the 
 
MAN NO CONNECTING CHAIN. 207 
 
 the mass of differences would, according to the Darwinian 
 theory, contrary to the simplicity characterizing the 
 Divine modes, have involved innumerable transitions 
 and enormous time for its development from one to the 
 other, till they culminated in man. Yet not a trace of 
 these transitional forms can be discovered. The author 
 of the Vestiges gave it up. ' It might now be desirable,' 
 he said, 1 ' to trace the connections of that order in the 
 upward progress towards the highest of animated beings ; 
 but here such obscurity prevails that I must be content to 
 leave the task to other inquirers! Darwin himself, in his 
 work expressly treating of the descent of man, 2 is forced 
 to speak of ' the great break in the organic chain between 
 man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over 
 by any extinct or living species;' and all he can urge in 
 favour, 3 is that many forms have become extinct, a 
 position altogether inadmissible in the face of the pre- 
 sent state of historical and geological knowledge. 4 It 
 might, indeed, be sufficient to remark, Why do we not 
 
 lower animals, but that man was truly a new and isolated creation, a 
 new type of life having been produced in him. I have not thought it 
 necessary to advert to the discussion which has arisen as to the place 
 man should hold in the zoological order. This seems to turn upon the 
 structure of the brain and other anatomical considerations which, in the 
 view I take, do not affect the question. See Lyell's Antiquity of Man, 
 chap. xxiv. 
 
 1 Vestiges, 4th ed. p. 272. 2 Darwin's Descent, p. 200. 3 P. 187. 
 
 4 Mr. Huxley, who was at least a conditional Darwinian, writes to 
 much the same effect : * Every bone of a gorilla bears marks by which it 
 might be distinguished from the corresponding bone of a man ; and in 
 the present creation, at any rate, no intermediate limb bridges over the 
 gap between Homo and Troglodites.' Man's Place in Nature, p. 104. 
 M. Paul du Chaillu, whose remarkable adventures among the gorillas at 
 the time he published his famous book were much canvassed, but who 
 probably has become better acquainted with that animal than any one 
 before or since, discussing the physiological resemblances and differences 
 between the gorilla and man at full length, observes : ' Though there 
 
208 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 now, at the present day, observe apes becoming, or 
 giving birth to, a human being, or any intermediate 
 form ? 
 
 But what has always appeared to me as lying at 
 the root of the Evolution fallacy, is in imagining that 
 resemblance of body, or limb, or embryo, denotes affinity. 
 This idea pervades the whole system, and is present 
 with every writer. Look, for example, at Huxley's 
 book, Man's Place in Nature, with its grotesque skeleton 
 procession, a book written to establish the resemblance 
 of man to the monkey, and our descent from that animal 
 because of such resemblance. Eliminate this element, 
 and Evolution is nowhere. 
 
 Now when we see several buildings all marked by 
 the same general pattern, or having one pervading cast, 
 in ascribing them to a common designer we infer that 
 it is his ideal, rightly or wrongly conceived, of the best 
 or most perfect form for structure of the particular style 
 or class to which it belongs ; in building which he does 
 
 is a great dissimilarity between the bony frame of man and that of the 
 gorilla, there is also an awful likeness, which in the gorilla resembles an 
 exaggerated caricature of a human being. . . . While I resided among 
 the tribes found on the mountains near the banks of the Ovenga river, 
 where the gorilla is rather more common than anywhere else, I searched 
 in vain if an intermediate race, or rather several intermediate races or 
 links, between the natives and the gorilla could be found ; and I must 
 say here I made those inquiries conscientiously, with the sole view of 
 bringing before science the facts which I might collect. But I have 
 searched in vain : I found not a single being, young or old, who could 
 show an intermediate link between man and the gorilla, which would 
 certainly be found if man had come from the ape. I suppose from these 
 facts we must come to the conclusion, that man belongs to a distinct 
 family from that of the ape, the first belonging to the order Biinana, 
 and the latter to the other quadrumanous series.' Explorations and 
 Adventures in Equatorial Africa, by Paul B. du Chaillu, p. 378. John 
 Murray, 1865. 
 
A FUNDAMENTAL FALLACY. 209 
 
 not necessarily employ the same workmen, or extract 
 the material from the same quarry. And so, though 
 infinitely more, when we find in nature a large number 
 of forms of life of a similar kind, having structural 
 resemblance in common, the true inference is, that they 
 all have proceeded from the hand of the one Great 
 Designer, and that He, in the perfection of His wisdom, 
 lias chosen that general form which is the most completely 
 adapted for the purpose in creation which each animal of 
 the kind was designed to subserve, and which was best 
 calculated to sustain or otherwise minister to its existence ; 
 so that it could not be said that any other would be as 
 perfect ; and therefore to have employed any other would 
 not have been in accordance with Divine wisdom. When 
 one animal proceeds from another, it is because of the 
 Divine Power which has been communicated, for without 
 the Divine Power the forces used would have been as 
 inefficient as dead matter. But the resemblance of any 
 two species does not necessarily establish that the one 
 proceeds from the other ; and really Evolutionists must 
 think people extremely credulous, or extremely illogical, 
 when they adduce their so-called ' links ' to verify 
 their theory. All that resemblance certainly proves, is 
 not that the one proceeded from the other, but that 
 the similar creatures have been originated by the one 
 Great Being, and that that Being designs and fashions 
 in that particular form which is the most perfectly 
 adapted, in the time and place., for their subservient 
 purpose. 
 
 Applying this view to man, we find him formed and 
 endowed according to the most perfect model ; and if 
 in any part or member its form resembles that of the 
 inferior animals, it is simply because the form is that 
 
 o 
 
2io LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 . 
 
 H 
 
 which the Great Architect and Designer considered to le, 
 and which unquestionably is found to le, lest adapted for 
 loth man and least to attain the end which the particular 
 part was intended to fulfil. And so clearly was the 
 introduction of man the effect of design, that he and 
 woman (differing in many ways from each other, but the 
 one being the true complement of the other), the male 
 and female of the human family, were approximately 
 coeval in their creation ; without which co temporary 
 formation the race could not have been perpetuated 
 unless by continually renewed miracle. It was also, or 
 must have been, the same with the male and female of 
 every other creature. 
 
 Mr. Wallace, 1 notwithstanding he is a pronounced 
 Evolutionist, and a strong advocate of natural selection, 
 albeit his own statement of the striking adaptation 
 of animals in form and colour, to enable them to elude 
 their enemies, is a strong argument against his theory 
 of survival of the fittest, has found the facts for the 
 separation of man to be so conclusive, that, regarding 
 specially the size of his brain, the absence of hairy 
 covering on the back, the structure of the hands 
 and feet, his mental faculties, and the possession 
 of the moral sense, he is driven to the conclusion 
 (apparently) that man cannot be the product of natural 
 selection ; and (although he cannot shake himself free of 
 the theory of development as the instrumentality) ' that 
 a superior intelligence has guided the development of man 
 in a definite direction and for a special purpose, just 
 as man guides the development of many animal and 
 vegetable forms.' An admission which he unhappily mars 
 by adding, 'I must confess that this theory has the 
 1 Wallace's Contributions to Theory of Natural Selection, p. 52 et seq. 
 
UNIVERSITY 
 
 SS MIRACULOUS. 
 
 disadvantage of requiring the intervention of 
 intelligence to aid in the production! l 
 
 One would have thought that, so far from a dis- 
 advantage, it afforded the simplest method to solve a 
 difficulty which can never otherwise be solved. But it 
 implies supernatural intervention in the case of man ; 
 and the admission of miracle in the case of man, although 
 he is the highest in rank of all, necessarily gives room 
 for the intervention of miracle in other or in all cases. 
 
 Leaving, therefore, naturalists to do battle over 
 details which they alone are competent to discuss, 2 and 
 to account for a desire which some of them have to 
 trace their origin to the ape and to still lower orders, 
 rather than rise to the nobler thought, coming to us 
 from a higher source and a superior authority, that the 
 genealogy of man stopped short at Adam, ' who was 
 the son of God ; ' and dealing with the matter on the 
 broad principles which can be applied to a doctrine 
 
 1 P. 359. 
 
 2 For this reason I have taken no note of one of the latest works on 
 the subject, Dr. Andrew Wilson's. Chapters on Evolution, which is a 
 book for the naturalist to discuss. I am afraid were I to attempt to enter 
 upon it I should make as awkward a mistake as he has himself done in 
 venturing into the demesnes of law to explain a law term, which has not 
 without advantage been imported into logic, or rather into argument 
 the ' taking an objection to the relevancy.' This he expounds to mean, 
 ' showing that certain parts of the statement of facts made by the 
 opposing side involve items whicli may be absolutely untrue or incor- 
 rect, and which therefore require to be expunged from the list of matters 
 involving litigation.' Now, on the contrary, an objection to relevancy 
 assumes the truth of the averment, but denies that on this assumption 
 it affects or warrants the conclusion. Just as if we were admitting all 
 Dr. Wilson's statements of fact to be true, but saying they do not infer 
 demonstration of the proposition he maintains. It would be well indeed 
 if in all cases the relevancy or adequacy of statements to infer conclu- 
 sions were duly considered. 
 
2i2 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 which is only at best a hypothesis, a hypothesis which 
 must yield to facts, in place of our trying to bend the 
 facts to it, there is in reality nothing to warrant our 
 regarding the unsupported theory as affording any ex- 
 planation of the production of life upon the Earth by a 
 process of development. On the contrary, examination 
 of the subject shows that all life, and, above all, the 
 existence of rational man, i-s due to the exercise of 
 miraculous agency. 
 
 Indeed, the cessation of new production is both an 
 evidence of miracle in the past and a miracle in itself, 
 were there any truth in Evolution. 
 
 After all, Evolution does not "explain the origin of life. 
 As one of its advocates says, ' the history of develop- 
 ment but environs the puzzles connected with life and 
 its nature. It leads us to the beginnings of life, it is 
 true, but it leaves 'these beginnings unaccounted for, 
 and as mysterious as before.' l 
 
 The author of the Vestiges perceived the length to 
 which he must carry his theory, if he maintained it at 
 all; for the tracing back to one -original form of life left 
 the production of that form unexplained, and so he was 
 driven to the doctrine of ' spontaneous generation,' and 
 in the Sequel to his work he presented the incon- 
 clusive experiments of Mr. Weekes. But better investi- 
 gation than that of Mr. Weekes, and more careful 
 experiment, have entirely disproved the supposition ; and 
 it may clinch the argument to say that if all life and 
 seeds of life on Earth were to be now destroyed, say by 
 the precipitation of a planet into the Sun, or by our 
 planet being brought into close proximity to the Sun, 
 1 Wilson's Chapters on Evolution, p. 168. 
 
EARTH SPECIALL Y ADAPTED. 213 
 
 so that every vestige of life should be burnt out (just 
 as if, could it possibly have previously existed, it must 
 have been burnt out in the primeval fires), life would 
 not return ; a miracle would be needed to replenish and 
 repeople the Earth. 
 
 We thus start with this most important consideration, 
 that life on Earth does not necessarily or spontaneously 
 spring up, but is produced in all its manifestations no 
 matter how, for the manner of origination is immaterial 
 by the will and miraculous intervention of the Creator. 
 
 But we do not stop short here. For we find, that 
 the Earth has been peculiarly fitted for life, so that a 
 reason existed for its receiving- life. Placed at a medium 
 distance from the great source of light and heat in* the 
 planetary system, the light and heat are of that exact 
 degree which favour existence. They neither scorch 
 nor chill ; vegetation adapted to support animal life 
 receives the exact measure which conduces to its growth. 
 It possesses an atmosphere composed of the needful 
 elements, in the precise combination which is calculated 
 to maintain life, both animal and vegetable. It is 
 supplied with water of a quality exactly suited to 
 nourish and maintain life. Its surface is so, planned 
 and laid out in mountain, valley, river, and sea as to 
 promote in the best manner these operations by cloud, 
 and frost, and wind, and everything else without which 
 Earth would be uninhabitable. It has been so adjusted 
 in distance from the Sun and Moon, in the extent and 
 form of its oceans, and in the bounds set by the shore, that 
 the tides do not rise to inundate the land ; and the proud 
 wave, carrying salubrity in its swell, is shut up within 
 doors, and told hitherto shall thou come, and no farther. 
 
214 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 Furthermore, the Earth was not left as a mere locality 
 for life. All nature was put in operation to prepare it 
 specially for man. After the great nebular gaseous 
 globe, of which it at first consisted, had, in the course 
 of incalculable ages, cooled down, and contracted to its 
 present dimensions, and the hot, enveloping mist had 
 broken up and cleared away, and changed into an 
 aqueous covering, and the volcanic forces within had 
 upheaved the great mountains, millions of years of 
 preparation were needed to bring it by successive 
 operations and succeeding races of animal and vegetable 
 life, exactly suited to their time and place, into fitness 
 for man; and from the minutest organism from the 
 earliest known form of animated existence, from the 
 Eozoon, 1 discovered far down in the geologic depths, 
 which multiplied and extended till it filled whole seas, 
 and produced enormous tracts of rocks of chalk to the 
 gigantic monsters, the unwieldy Megatheria, the huge 
 Mastodons and Mammoths, which were fitted to grapple 
 with the luxuriant tropical forests equally gigantic, all 
 were set to work to make Earth a suitable and pleasant 
 habitation for man, and having made it so the monsters 
 were caused to disappear; and, evidencing the grand 
 preparation plan, there were in their stead along with 
 man, or shortly before, introduced ' several mammalian 
 species not known in the Pliocene period, and some of 
 which, as the sheep, the goat, the ox, and the dog, have 
 ever since been his companions and humble allies.' 2 
 
 And thus it is we find coal formed and stored in the 
 far back ages for man to burn in the present age. But 
 no other animal uses fire or digs for coal. And stone 
 
 1 The Dawn of Life, where Dr. Dawson has devoted a book to the 
 subject of Eozoon. 
 
 2 Dawson's Story of Earth and Man, p. 289. 
 
PREPARA TION FOR MAN. 215 
 
 is found fashioned and in deposits slowly laid at the 
 bottom of the ocean in remote epochs, and then elevated 
 within man's reach by volcanic force to afford to man 
 the materials with which to build and embellish ; but 
 no other animal builds or embellishes with stone. 
 And the rare and valued jewel is found sometimes in 
 the depths of Earth, and sometimes washed up by the 
 sea ; but no other animal knows or appreciates its 
 charms, searches for it, cuts and polishes and sets in 
 costly gold, or adorns its person with the sparkling 
 brilliant, the finished gem. And metals are in due 
 measure found streaking the Earth in veins and lodes, 
 and have been given to man to aid his industry, 
 augment his powers and resources, and to increase his 
 knowledge ; but no other animal sinks a shaft, raises 
 the ore, eliminates the metal, forms it into shape, or 
 uses a tool. And animal life has been given that he 
 may use it in a way that he alone can use it the furry 
 skin, the soft wool, the silken cocoon, the tough hide 
 for clothing and other purposes ; the horse, the ass, the 
 camel to ride, or to draw, or bear his burdens. While 
 the vegetable world is also largely laid under contribu- 
 tion to meet the wants of man alone. Flax and cotton 
 grow that man may, by the aid of invented machinery, 
 manufacture dress ; but no other animal invents 
 machinery, or spins, or weaves, or requires or uses 
 clothing. Wheat, corn, and the other cereals which, if 
 not coeval with man, were, apparently at least, the result 
 of man's cultivation, and would disappear if man ceased 
 to cherish them are the staple support of the human 
 race, and sometimes also of the domesticated animals 
 dependent on man ; but no other animal sows, or tends, 
 or reaps. Other vegetable as well as mineral substances 
 afford medicines for disease ; but no other animal can 
 
216 LIFE ON EARTH. 
 
 detect the cause of disorder, can extract the drug, pre- 
 scribe the remedy, or effect the cure. Others present the 
 pigment wherewith man can paint a scene or decorate 
 a dwelling; but no other animal uses a brush, or 
 comprehends its power, or is gratified by its product. 
 Nay, the very landscape in all its beauty, the sky in all 
 its splendour, the flower in all its loveliness, have no 
 charms for the inferior creature. To their unconscious- 
 ness they are as a sealed book. For man alone of all 
 the creatures on Earth were this beauty, and splendour, 
 and loveliness provided, that, made in the Creator's 
 image, he might share the Creator's joy when He beheld 
 what He had made, and pronounced it to be good. 
 
 But, indeed, it would be possible to show that 
 everything on Earth is contrived to contribute directly or 
 indirectly to the benefit of man, that even the noxious 
 animals and the poisonous plants and minerals have 
 ends in this way to subserve. And if this be so, and 
 who can doubt it, do we not find here that life on Earth 
 has one special end, that of ministering to the rational 
 being, Man, who, unless the Earth had been so pre- 
 pared for him, could not have existed upon it, or have 
 existed upon it as a rational being. So that, in other 
 words, the Earth was not only specially adapted, but 
 specially made for man, again proving the miraculous 
 intervention of the Supreme Being. And if so, what 
 reason can there be for presuming life on other globes. 
 Presumption for it thus disappears, and leaves little 
 further to be said. 
 
 Yet the matter by no means rests here, or is alto- 
 gether dependent on these views. For we must now 
 proceed to examine the whole solar system the only 
 
THE FURTHER INQUIRY. 217 
 
 planetary system of which we, with certainty, know, or 
 which can at present be brought, if any other exist, within 
 our ken, and see whether what we can learn regarding 
 the condition of the other planetary bodies warrants the 
 assumption of resemblance to the Earth, or gives any 
 countenance to the idea that they can be inhabited. If 
 it do not, then a still stronger argument arises against 
 life in other systems. For, if even the displacement 
 of a single planet from being a life-bearing body be a 
 fatal blow to the plurality thought, how much more 
 conclusive will the fact be if there be found reason 
 sufficient to displace them all. 
 
V. 
 
 AND naturally we begin with 
 
 THE MOON. 
 
 For it is similarly distant from the Sun, and being the 
 body nearest by far to us, we have greater facilities for 
 its examination than we possess in regard to any other 
 of the members of the solar system. And it is well 
 also to keep in view its close affinity, for, upon the 
 principle of the formation of the planetary bodies accord- 
 ing to the Nebular hypothesis, the Moon must have 
 been formed either out of a ring separated from the 
 Earth, the most probable supposition, or from the 
 same zone out of which the Earth was formed. Con- 
 sequently, and especially if regarded as the offspring of 
 the Earth, there ought to be a close resemblance or 
 family likeness between the two bodies, a parity of 
 condition far beyond what might be expected to be found 
 subsisting between the Earth and any other planet of our 
 system. 
 
 Sir William Herschel lent the authority of his name 
 to the supposition that the Moon is inhabited. In a 
 passage quoted by Sir David Brewster, who clung to 
 his skirts in this matter, Sir William said, ' I believe 
 the analogies that have been mentioned sufficient to 
 establish the high probability of the Moon's being 
 inhabited like the Earth.' 1 And Sir David sets himself 
 
 1 More Worlds than One, p. 99. 
 218 
 
MOON'S PHYSICAL APPEARANCE. 219 
 
 assiduously to assign reasons, of which the main one was 
 rested on imagined discovery of volcanoes in the Moon, 
 as doubtless inferring the presence of a supporting atmo- 
 sphere (though fire and smoke are not very friendly to 
 life) for a similar opinion ; but winds up by asserting 
 that ' independent of these considerations, we maintain 
 that every planet and satellite in the solar system must 
 have an atmosphere.' 1 
 
 The matter, however, is not one to be decided on 
 authority, but upon fact and deduction from fact, upon 
 observation and scientific consideration. 
 
 And the first remark which falls to be made is the 
 extraordinary appearance which the Moon presents to 
 view when examined by a powerful telescope. For it 
 is studded all over with mountains rising to a great I 
 height and of peculiar shape, and rugged, bare, and / 
 terrifying. Dr. Dick, 2 who furnishes a pretty full 
 description, classifies them into (1) insulated moun- 
 tains rising from level plains like a sugar loaf, 
 thirty of which are from two to five miles in perpen- 
 dicular height ; (2) ranges of mountains extending in 
 length two or three hundred miles, in some places four 
 miles in perpendicular altitude ; (3) circular ranges 
 from 1/5 th of a mile to 3^ miles high, and enclosing 
 plains from 40 to 50 miles in diameter; (4) central 
 mountains in the midst of circular plains. There are, 
 likewise, he mentions, numerous caverns, whose depth 
 below the surface of the Moon varies from one-third of 
 a mile to three miles and a half. 
 
 ' Twelve of these cavities as measured by Schroeter are 
 found to be above two miles in perpendicular depth. 
 These cavities constitute a peculiar feature in the scenery 
 
 1 More Worlds than One, p. 107. 2 Celestial Scenery, p. 234. 
 
220 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 of the Moon and in her physical constitution, which bears 
 scarcely any analogy to what we observe in the physical 
 arrangements of our globe.' l 
 
 Eambosson says that the circular mountainous 
 enclosures have diameters of 130 or 140 miles, so 
 immensely larger than the craters of our volcanic 
 mountains as to suggest forces of terrific grandeur sadly 
 inimical to life. 2 These are thought to be volcanic 
 mountains ; but Sir John Herschel mentions that there 
 are here and there chains of mountains whose appear- 
 ance suggests no suspicion of volcanic origin. 3 
 
 Although Sir John also says that there are large 
 regions perfectly level, and apparently of a decided 
 alluvial character, it would strike one that, apart from 
 other considerations, to be immediately adverted to, a 
 world so formed to say nothing as to whether it 
 would or would not ever be adapted for the growth of 
 plants and trees, to which water as well as air are 
 necessary would not offer any attractions as a residence 
 for a being like man. It would be dismal, horrible, and 
 unfit for intelligent beings. Nor is there, upon examina- 
 tion of the lunar surface, any trace visible either of 
 vegetation or of intelligent life. There are no patches 
 of green, such as might indicate forests or grassy fields ; 
 no cities or extensive works, to indicate the operations 
 of rational beings. 
 
 Professor Nichol tells us that the Moon 
 
 ' shines with most various colours. In the Mare Sereni- 
 tatis, for instance, large districts shine with a most 
 beautiful green, intermingled with grey portions and 
 several other tints. These varieties seem constant, and 
 therefore indicate differences on the Moon's soil or sur- 
 face, suggesting the different aspects of light reflected 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 245. 2 Astronomy, p. 190. 3 Outlines, 430. 
 
NO APPEARANCE OF LIFE. 221 
 
 from a desert of Sahara, a golden savannah in the New 
 World, or a field of luxuriant and freshening fern.' l 
 
 But this statement requires to be taken along with that 
 made by Mr. Proctor, that ' although there are varieties, 
 there has never yet been delected any variation, of colour. 
 Nothing has been seen which could be ascribed with 
 any appearance of probability to the effects of seasonal 
 change.' 2 
 
 So that vegetation evidently does not exist. And as 1 
 for changes resulting from the action of beings like man,/ 
 Mr. Proctor stating that we could only see edifices far 
 greater than those yet constructed by man (which is 
 surely much overstating the case), but that from the less 
 force of gravity at the Moon's surface it would both be 
 needful and in the power of inhabitants to build to 
 much greater size than we do concludes by saying, that 
 though such structures might be visible in our largest 
 telescopes, ' no object that could with, the slightest appear- 
 ance of probability be ascribed to the labours of intelligent 
 creatures, has ever been detected on the Moon's surface' 
 
 Dr. Whewell, 3 mentioning that Professor Phillips had 
 stated, at the meeting of the British Association in 1853, 
 that astronomers could discern the shape of a spot on 
 the Moon's surface of a few hundred feet in breadth, 
 and that such changes as have occurred upon the Earth 
 would be visible through telescopes in the Moon, remarks 
 that we should see like changes, if they are going on, 
 upon the face of the Moon. 
 
 ' Yet no such changes/ he says, ' have ever been 
 noticed. Nor even have such changes been remarked 
 as might occur in a mere brute mass without life, 
 the formation of new streams of lava, new craters, new 
 
 1 Phenomena of Solar System, p. 170. 2 Proctor's Moon,, p. 263. 
 3 Of the Plurality of Worlds: an Essay, p. 289. 
 
222 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 crevices, new elevations;' The Moon exhibits strong 
 evidences, which strike all telescopic observers, of an 
 action resembling, in many respects, volcanic action, by 
 which its present surface has been formed. But if it 
 have been produced by such internal fires, the fires seem 
 to be extinguished, the volcanoes to be burnt out. It is 
 a mere cinder, a collection of sheets of rigid slag and 
 inactive craters. And if the Moon and the Earth were 
 both, at first, in a condition in which igneous irruptions 
 from their interior produced the ridges and cones which 
 roughen their surfaces, the Earth has had this state 
 succeeded by a series of states of life in innumerable forms, 
 till at last it has become the dwelling-place of man ; 
 while the Moon, smaller in dimensions, has at an earlier 
 period completely cooled down, as to its exterior at least, 
 without ever being judged fit or worthy by its Creator of 
 being the seat of life, and remains hung in the sky as an 
 object on which man may gaze, and perhaps from which 
 he may learn something of the constitution of the Uni- 
 verse ; and among other lessons this : that he must not 
 take for granted that all the other globes of the solar 
 system are tenanted, like that on which he has his 
 appointed place.' 
 
 Still we have been dealing hitherto only with negative 
 ^ considerations, we must now look to the reasons which 
 exist for a positive exclusion of life. 
 
 And the first of these is the absence in the Moon of 
 Jthe slightest trace of water or of cloud. Upon this all 
 ''astronomers are agreed. 
 
 Thus Professor Nichol, referring to a map of the 
 Moon prepared by Messrs. Baer & Ma'dler of Berlin, 
 says : 
 
 ' On the face of that map there may be seen a 
 number of comparatively dark and untroubled spots, 
 visible in general to the naked eye, and which were at 
 
NO WATER IN MOON. 223 
 
 first thought to be seas, whence their present names. 
 Not a drop of water, however, or of any fluid akin to it, 
 is now in the Moon ; for when the line of light in the 
 crescent luminary passes through these so-called seas, its 
 edge, instead of following a fine and unbroken course, is 
 (]uite irregular, proving that those flats are land, although 
 comparatively unbroken and undisturbed probably they 
 are in some cases the subsided parts of the outer shell or 
 bed of that globe. Besides, there are no clouds ; and as 
 the Moon has a small atmosphere, this alone is decisive ; 
 for otherwise vapours would float there, and the purity 
 of the disc appear variable.' ! 
 
 Dr. Dick 2 also observes that the so thought seas are 
 simply extensive plains diversified with gentle elevations 
 and depressions, and consisting of substances calculated, 
 to reflect the light of the Sun with a less degree of 
 intensity than the other parts of the lunar surface. 
 
 Professor George Wilson 3 says : ' The Moon has no 
 clouds or rain, nor dew, nor lakes, nor rivers, nor seas.' 
 
 Mr. Proctor says : 
 
 ' There are no seas or oceans in the Moon. Were 
 there any large tracts of water, the tremendous heat to 
 which the Moon is subjected during the course of the 
 long lunar day (lasting a fortnight of our time) would 
 certainly cause enormous quantities of water to evaporate; 
 and not only would the effects of this process be distinctly 
 recognisable by our telescopists, but the spectroscope 
 would exhibit in an unmistakeable manner the presence 
 of the aqueous vapour thus formed.' 4 
 
 A supposition has indeed been made, that at one 
 time the Moon possessed seas, but that the water has 
 been drawn to the interior by the force of gravity or of 
 pressure, and that the same process is proceeding, or has 
 
 1 Phenomena, p. 161. 2 Celestial Scenery, p. 248. 
 
 3 Chemistry of the Stars, p. 25. 4 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 176. 
 
224 PLURALITY THE MOON, 
 
 proceeded, upon the Earth and other planets. But I 
 am not aware that this theory rests on any reliable 
 evidence or data ; and it is opposed by many objections, 
 the more especially if it be assumed as necessary to its 
 maintenance that the Moon is older than the Earth, and 
 the interior planets are older than the exterior, which 
 would seem to be in opposition to the views obtained 
 from the Nebular hypothesis. Supposing, however, that 
 water had at one time existed and was now so with- 
 drawn from the Moon, would not the influence of the 
 Earth's attraction, exerted upon it with a force more 
 than tenfold the power which the Moon exerts upon 
 our seas, .together with the, to us, horrible nature of the 
 Moon's surface, have rendered our satellite entirely unfit 
 for the abode of rational beings ? The likelihood, indeed, 
 rather is, that the Moon, as the smaller body, cooled 
 down while the Earth was still in its original nebular 
 glow, and perhaps extended far out towards the Moon 
 itself, and, it may be, attracted to it every particle of 
 moisture which -could form into the shape of water. 
 Leaving this theory, which remains to be substantiated, 
 and if true, would not necessarily infer life, life of 
 any kind while the fluid lasted, it is clear that no seas 
 do exist in the Moon. 1 
 
 Equally important is it that there does not exist in 
 the Moon an atmosphere. On this philosophers are all 
 but agreed ; and even those who suppose that any 
 atmosphere exists, believe it to be very scanty and 
 finely attenuated. Nor does it at all follow that if 
 there were any, it would be life-supporting. This is a 
 
 1 Supposing this theory maintainable as regards the other planets, it 
 would not suffice to have made them habitable, and does not meet the 
 positions with regard to them which have been already and will be stated. 
 
NO ATMOSPHERE. 225 
 
 circumstance never sufficiently regarded, and which I 
 cannot press too strongly. However, there seems no 
 room to hold that an atmosphere of any kind encircles 
 the Moon. 
 
 At one time the luminous corona of the Sun, seen 
 during an eclipse to surround the Moon, was believed to 
 be due to a lunar atmosphere. But this idea has long 
 since been disproved and abandoned. 
 
 Sir John Herschel says, that were there any atmo- 
 sphere it could not fail to be perceived in the occultations 
 of stars and the phenomena of solar eclipses, as well as 
 a great variety of other phenomena ; and concludes, 
 ' the non-existence of any atmosphere at the Moon's 
 edge dense enough to cause a refraction of 1", i.e. having 
 1/1 9 8 Oth part of the density of the Earth's atmo- 
 sphere.' l 
 
 Mr. Grant, in his History of Physical Astronomy? 
 discusses the subject carefully. 
 
 From the uniform appearance presented by the lunar 
 spots, he says, it is reasonably supposed that they are not 
 occasionally obscured by clouds, and hence the Moon 
 cannot be, like the Earth, encompassed by a gaseous fluid. 
 Again, he points to the fact of there being no sensible 
 change of colour and diminution of lustre on stars pass- 
 ing into occultation as another evidence ; and the very 
 rare cases in which the contrary has been observed not 
 being general, cannot establish the existence of a lunar 
 atmosphere. In like manner he disposes of individual 
 cases where, when a star has come up to the Moon, it 
 has been observed to hang on the margin of its disc for 
 three or four seconds previous to disappearance, a cir- 
 cumstance sufficiently disposed of by the observation of 
 Mr. Proctor, after mentioned. 3 
 
 1 Herschel's Outlines, 431. 2 Grant, p. 230. 3 Proctor's Moon, p. 2&0 
 
 P 
 
226 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 Another reason is, that were there an atmosphere, its 
 refraction would cause the star to be visible for a short 
 time previous to disappearance, and for a like period 
 prior to its emergence ; but calculation shows there is 
 no such refraction. 
 
 He adduces in further evidence of there being no atmo- 
 sphere to cause refraction, 1 the circumstance that planets 
 do not, in coming in contact with the limb of the Moon, 
 suffer distortion of figure. He also refers to certain 
 investigations of Du Sejour, a French astronomer, upon 
 supposed refraction exhibited during solar eclipses, 
 which, if well founded, would give a lunar atmosphere 
 1400 times rarer than common atmospheric air, and 
 consequently ' exceeding the most perfect vacuum which 
 had been hitherto formed by means of the air-pump.' 
 
 Lastly, astronomers had failed to discover any twi- 
 light, though Schroeter had at length succeeded in 
 observing such an appearance, which, if correct, would 
 give a small amount of atmosphere. It would appear, 
 however, that Schroeter must, for the reasons assigned by 
 Mr. Proctor, 2 have been mistaken, and that in reality 
 there is no twilight, and hence no atmosphere. 
 
 Mr. Proctor, in his work on the Moon, 3 shows that, 
 supposing the Moon had an atmosphere equal to our 
 own, it would, under the small attractive power of the 
 body, extend to a height of 22 miles, and would be so 
 attenuated that ' men would perish if placed ' in it. 
 
 It will be readily seen that if, instead of being equal 
 to our own, it is so minute in quantity, as is supposed 
 by these philosophers, life would be altogether impossible. 
 
 A heavier gas, Mr. Proctor proceeds to show, would 
 produce the effect of refraction, and even were the atmo- 
 
 1 See Leitch's God's Glory in the Heavens, pp. 38, 39. 
 
 2 Proctor's Moon, p. 297. 3 Ibid. pp. 286, 287. 
 
MOON AIRLESS. 227 
 
 sphere possessed of only a fourth part of the refractive 
 power of our own, a star in reality behind the Moon's 
 disc would appear as a ring of light, the light from the 
 star being increased as by an enormous lens. 
 
 Mr. Proctor l further states that sometimes a star has 
 been observed to diminish just before disappearance, 
 which may be attributable to the star being a close 
 binary or a multiple star, or perhaps a nebulous StarB- 
 and that, on the other hand, a star has seemed to advance 
 for some distance on the Moon's disc before vanishing, 
 which may be attributed to its chancing 2 ' to cross the 
 Moon's limb where a valley or ravine has caused a notch 
 or depression which is too small to be indicated by any 
 ordinary method of observation.' He adds that the 
 evidence thus obtained is strengthened by spectroscopic 
 evidence, Dr. Huggins finding that the spectrum of a star 
 disappears as instantaneously as the star itself. 
 
 But the strongest evidence, in Mr. Proctor's view, 3 
 that the Moon has no atmosphere, or so little that she 
 may be regarded as practically airless, is that in a solar 
 eclipse the Sun would not disappear at all, even at the 
 moment of central eclipse, because if there were a lunar 
 atmosphere it would act as a lens, and reveal the Sun 
 as a ring of blazing lustre, ' as really sunlight as the 
 light of our setting Sun,' ' a very shallow lunar atmo- 
 sphere would suffice.' 
 
 It was at one time thought, as already mentioned, 
 that the existence of active volcanoes had been dis- 
 covered in the Moon, and that this, as indicating fire, 
 would prove an atmosphere. 
 
 ' As soon,' says Professor Leitch, 4 ' as the telescope 
 unveiled a world so like our own in its general aspect, 
 
 1 Proctor's Moon, p. 2,88. 2 Ibid. p. 290. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 293. 4 Ibid. p. 38. 
 
228 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 the popular imagination peopled it with living forms, and 
 astronomers strove with one another to gratify the popular 
 wish. On the dark surface active volcanoes were dis- 
 covered, the flames were seen to burst forth with great 
 fierceness, and then slowly expire, showing that there was 
 air to sustain the combustion. Planets and fixed stars 
 were seen to linger on the Moon's edge before they passed 
 behind its disc, just as they ought do if there was an 
 atmosphere. All these observations are now discredited ; 
 and the inexorable decision of scientific research is that 
 there is no valid argument for the existence of an atmo- 
 sphere.' 
 
 That astronomers, however, and men like Sir William 
 Herschel, have fancied they had perceived volcanoes is 
 true ; and Sir David Brewster, observing, in his usual 
 positive manner, 1 ' that volcanoes or burning regions 
 have been observed in the dark portion of the Moon's 
 disc cannot le doubted,' adduces the supposed instances. 
 
 But Schroeter and -ethers, even including Dr. Dick ~ 
 (prone as he is, like Sir David Brewster, to contend for 
 the habitability of the orbs), ascribe the appearances to 
 light reflected from the earth. 
 
 Mr. Proctor in his Moon discusses the supposed 
 instances, showing how unreliable were the observations, 5 ' 
 although changes such as have been supposed might 
 probably arise from other causes than fire, and concludes, 
 ' the inference would seem to be that the supposed 
 changes have been merely optical! 
 
 Perhaps the most conclusive evidence of all, however, 
 is afforded by spectrum analysis. 
 
 Mr. Proctor 4 alludes to this, remarking that 
 * when the spectrum of the lunar light has been ob- 
 served (by Dr. Huggins first, and later by others) it has 
 
 * Brewster, p. 105. 
 
 2 Dick's Celestial Scenery, pp. 246, 247 ; Proctor's Moon, p. 264. 
 
 * Proctor's Moon, p. 272. * Ibid. p. 292. 
 
SPECTROSCOPIC OBSERVATION. 229 
 
 been found to be absolutely similar to the solar spectrum, 
 that is, there is no trace whatever of absorptive action 
 exerted by a lunar atmosphere upon the solar rays which 
 are reflected by her to the Earth. This evidence is, of 
 course, not demonstrative of the absolute want of air of 
 any sort in the Moon, because a very rare and shallow 
 atmosphere would produce no appreciable absorptive 
 effect; but it confirms the other evidence,. showing that 
 any lunar atmosphere must not only be extremely shallow, 
 but extremely rare.' ' An atmosphere sufficient in quan- 
 tity to give traces of its presence in lunar shallows, but 
 not extending higher than the summits of the lunar 
 mountains, must be of a specific gravity so greatly exceed- 
 ing (under the same conditions) that of common air, or 
 indeed of any gas known to us on earth, that we are 
 justified in regarding the theory of its existence as alto- 
 gether unsupported by evidence.' 
 
 ' The conclusion to which we seem forced by all the 
 evidence obtainable is, 1 that either the Moon has no 
 atmosphere at all (which seems scarcely possible), or that 
 her atmosphere is of such extreme tenuity as not to be 
 perceptible by any means of observation we can apply.' 
 
 This slender atmosphere, if it exist, is not, as we have 
 already seen, capable of sustaining life. But the spec- 
 troscopists state the same thing, and even more unquali- 
 fiedly. Mr. Eoscoe, referring to the observations of Dr. 
 Huggins and Dr. Miller, says : 2 
 
 ' The conclusion must be drawn that the Moon is devoid 
 of any appreciable atmosphere." 
 
 And Schellen 3 
 
 ' The observations of Fraunhofer (1823), Brewster, and 
 Gladstone (1860), Huggins and Miller, as well as Jannsen, 
 agree in establishing the complete accordance of the lunar 
 spectrum with that of the Sun. In all the various por- 
 tions of the Moon's disc brought under observation no 
 
 1 Proctor's Moon, p. 298. 2 Roscoe, p. 230. 3 Schellen, p. 481. 
 
230 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 difference could be perceived on the dark lines of the 
 spectrum, either in respect of their number or relative 
 intensity. From this entire absence of any special 
 absorption lines it must be concluded that there is no 
 atmosphere in the Moon, a conclusion previously arrived 
 at from the circumstance that during an occultation no 
 refraction is perceived on the Moon's limb when a star 
 disappears behind the disc. Moreover, a small telescope 
 of only a few inches' aperture suffices to show the spectrum 
 of the Moon very distinctly.' 
 
 But what for sometime was regarded as a grand 
 discovery, calculated to upset the notion that the Moon 
 is entirely uninhabitable, was made or thought to be 
 made by M. Hansen. Professor Leitch, introducing the 
 matter with a great flourish of trumpets, tells us that 
 the cause of an irregularity in the Moon's path was 
 solved by M. Hansen finding the centre of gravity and 
 the centre of the figure of the Moon to be 
 
 ' distant about 37 miles from the other. Most moment- 
 ous results flow from this. The one hemisphere must be 
 lighter than the other.' x The application is very direct 
 and startling. * Supposing the sphere of the Moon 
 originally covered with water, and enveloped in an 
 atmosphere, both water and air would flow to the heavier 
 side, and leave the lighter side destitute of both, just 
 as water and air leave the summits of our mountains, 
 and gravitate towards the valleys. They seek the lowest 
 level, or in other words, the point least distant from the 
 centre of gravity. In the case of the Moon, the side 
 turned to us is virtually one enormous mountain, and the 
 opposite side the corresponding valley. We could not 
 expect to find traces of air on the summit of a terrestrial 
 mountain 134 miles high. The conclusion, therefore, is 
 that though the near hemisphere is a lifeless desert, 
 having neither water nor air to sustain life, the hidden 
 
 1 God's Glory in the Heavens, p. 42. 
 

 A GRAND DISCOVERY. 231 
 
 hemisphere may have a teeming population, rejoicing in 
 all the comforts and amenities of life. The imagination 
 is set free to picture broad oceans, bearing on their 
 bosom the commerce of this new world, rivers fertilizing 
 the valleys through which they flow, a luxuriant vegeta- 
 tion, and buildings of colossal size.' l 
 
 Mr. Leitch devotes a whole chapter to this discovery. 
 Sir John Herschel 2 adopted it as not improbable, and 
 it was currently credited by others. One would have 
 thought that the attraction of the Earth would rather 
 have drawn away air and water on the Moon towards 
 the side exposed to the influence, just as the Moon, with 
 a greatly less power, influences tides upon the Earth, 
 and, failing water and air, that the attraction would be 
 as suggested upon the body of the planet itself, causing 
 it to bulge. 
 
 The question has, however, been taken up by Mr. 
 Proctor with his usual ability, and, referring to examina- 
 tions made by M. Gussew 3 and others, he says : 
 
 ' But pleasing though the idea may be that on the 
 farther hemisphere of the Moon there may be oceans and 
 an atmosphere, it appears to me impossible to accept this 
 theory. In the first place, it has not been demonstrated, 
 and is in fact not in accordance with theoretical con- 
 siderations, that the Moon is egg-shaped, or bispherical, 
 according to Gussew's view. The farther part may also 
 project, as the nearer part does (supposing Gussew's 
 measurements and inferences to be trustworthy). But 
 even if we assume the Moon to have the figure assigned 
 to it by Gussew, the invisible part is not that towards 
 which the atmosphere would tend. The part of the 
 surface opposite the centre of the visible disc is in fact 
 not nearest to the centre of gravity, but (assuming the 
 
 1 God's Glory in the Heavens, p. 43. 
 
 2 Herschel's Outlines, 436, a and b. 3 Proctor's Moon, p. 301. 
 
232 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 unseen part spherical, and :pf the radius indicated by the 
 visible disc) is 30 miles farther from the centre of gravity 
 than are points on the edge of the visible disc. The band 
 or zone of the Moon's surface lying on this edge is the 
 region where oceans and an atmosphere should be col- 
 lected (if water and air existed in appreciable quantity) 
 on the Moon's surface.' 
 
 In a footnote he quotes the argument presented in 
 another form, as contained in a paper contributed by 
 him to the monthly notices of the Astronomical Society. 
 
 In a later work (Expanse of Heaven, p. 45) Mr. Proctor 
 gives an additional reason against the existence of water 
 and air on the farther side of the Moon, in the fact that 
 Ave see partly round it the parts seen at one time 
 amounting in all to 589 out of 1000, the parts never 
 seen amounting to only 411, and no signs of air or 
 ocean detected on those revealed portions. 
 
 Mr. Kalley Miller, 1 giving also a lively account of 
 the supposed discovery resulting from the Moon being 
 observed on a certain occasion to have got no less than 
 three seconds behind her proper calculation, assigns the 
 shattering of the theory to Professor Adams, who 
 
 ' showed that the calculated three seconds' discrepancy 
 could be accounted for by more natural causes,' proving 
 ' that the Moon's eccentricity was both unnecessary and 
 untenable, and dealt a death-blow to the antipodean 
 Selenites, by cutting off their water supply and putting 
 them under an air pump.' 
 
 Dismissing, therefore, the idea of an atmosphere on 
 either hemisphere of the Moon, some strange results 
 follow, and are thus described by Flammarion : 2 
 
 1 Romance of Astronomy, pp. 80-85. 
 
 2 Flammarion's Marvels of the Heavens, p. 24C. 
 
NO ATMOSPHERE EFFECTS. 233 
 
 ' On approaching the Moon nothing is seen of the 
 physical causes which make the Earth a vast laboratory 
 wherein a thousand elements contend or unite with each 
 other. There are none of those tumultuous tempests 
 which sometimes sweep over our inundated plains ; none 
 of those hurricanes which descend in waterspouts, to be 
 swallowed up in the depths of the sea ; no wind blows, no 
 cloud rises to the heavens. There white trains of cloudy 
 vapours are not seen, nor those leaden masses with heavy 
 cohorts ; the rain never falls ; and neither snow nor hail nor 
 any of the meteorological phenomena are manifested there. 
 
 ' But, on the other hand, the magnificent tints which 
 colour our sky at sunrise and twilight, the radiations of 
 the heated atmosphere, are never seen there ; if winds and 
 tempests never blow, neither is there the balmy breeze 
 which descends upon our coasts. In this kingdom of 
 sovereign immobility, the lightest zephyr never comes to 
 caress the hill tops ; the sky remains eternally asleep in a 
 calm incomparably more complete than that of our hottest 
 days, when not a leaf moves in the air. This is because 
 on the surface of this strange worM there is no atmosphere. 
 From this privation results a state of things difficult to 
 realize. In the first place, the absence of air implies also 
 the absence of water and every liquid, for water and liquids 
 can only exist under atmospheric pressure ; if this pressure 
 is taken away they evaporate, and their beds are dried up. 
 . . . From the absence of air follows another very curious 
 fact the absence of sky. On the surface of the Moon, 
 when the looks are directed towards the sky, there is none 
 to be seen. An immensity without depth is traversed by 
 the sight without resting on, any kind of form, and in the 
 day as in the night are seen the stars, planets, comets, 
 and all the bodies of- our Universe. The Sun passes 
 among them without extinguishing them, as it does to us. 
 Not only does the Moon not possess this perpetual 
 diversity which the movements of the air produce in our 
 world, but it has not the azure vault which covers the 
 Earth with such a magnificent dome ; space is a black, and 
 a perpetually black, abyss. 
 
234 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 ( Whilst on high there teigns darkness, below there is 
 silence. Not the least sound is ever heard; the sigh 
 of the wind in the woods, the rustling of foliage, the 
 song of the morning lark, or the sweet warbling of the 
 nightingale never awakens the eternally dumb echoes of 
 this world. No voice, no speech has ever disturbed the 
 intense solitude with which it is overspread. Unchange- 
 able silence reigns there in sovereignty.' 
 
 Similarly Professor Leitch says : 
 
 ' Eternal silence must reign there. A huge rock may 
 be precipitated from the lofty lunar cliffs, but no sound 
 is heard it falls noiselessly as a flock of wool. The 
 inhabitants can converse only by signs. The musician 
 in vain attempts to elicit sweet music from his stringed 
 instrument; no note ever reaches the ear. Armies in 
 battle array do not hear the boom of the cannon, though 
 rifled arms, from the low trajectory of the ball, must 
 acquire a fatal precision and range. No moving thing 
 can live aloft ; the eagle flaps its wings against the rocks, 
 and in vain attempts to rise ; the balloon instead of 
 raising the car, crushes it with the weight of its im- 
 prisoned gas.' l 
 
 These are the descriptions of two advocates of 
 plurality. It is evident that even were life possible in 
 the Moon, it could not be the abode in such circum- 
 stances of intelligent beings. 
 
 But there is a still further fact now to be stated a 
 fact destructive of any life, and therefore, and in any 
 view taken along with the absence of water and air, 
 conclusive against the habitability of the Moon. It 
 lies in the enormous length of the lunar days and 
 nights. In the words 'of Mr. Proctor : 
 
 ' The lunar day lasts about a fortnight, and the lunar 
 
 1 God's Glory in the Heavens, p. 33. 
 
THE HEAT AND COLD. 235 
 
 night is, of course, equally long. Were this all, the 
 inconvenience of the arrangement would be unbearable 
 by beings like ourselves. But far more serious conse- 
 quences must result from the combination of the 
 arrangement with the want of an atmosphere ; for 
 whereas during the lunar day the surface of the Moon 
 is exposed to an inconceivably intense direct heat, 
 undoubtedly sufficient to heat that surface far above 
 the boiling point, during the lunar night the heat is 
 radiated rapidly away into space (no atmosphere check- 
 ing the process), and an intensity of cold must prevail of 
 which we can form but imperfect conceptions.' * 
 
 With this agree the statements of Eambosson, p. 191; 
 Herschel, 431, 432 ; Leitch, p. 34, and others. 
 Professor Leitch says : 
 
 1 The inhabitants having no atmosphere to shelter 
 them from the Sun, and store up its heat, must recoil 
 with terror from its fierce rays. During the long lunar 
 day the ground must become as burning marl, from 
 which the scorched feet shrink with pain; during the 
 equally long night it must be colder than frozen mercury. 
 No fuel will burn to mitigate the rigour of the cold, and 
 none but the electric light can avail to dispel the 
 darkness.' 
 
 ' It has been calculated,' says Cooley, ' that the 
 side of the Moon facing the Earth has a few days 
 after full Moon a maximum temperature of 750 F. 
 (400 C.), and again soon after new Moon sinks to 
 187 F. (122 C.).' 2 Lord Eosse was enabled to 
 estimate the difference of temperature to be more than 
 500, so that probably when the Sun was not shining 
 on it the temperature would be two or three hundred 
 degrees below zero, which, under the vertical Sun, it 
 
 1 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 177. 
 
 1 Cooley's Physical Geography, p. 106. 
 
236 PLURALITY THE MOON. 
 
 would be as much above zero, or hotter than boiling 
 water. 1 
 
 Vegetation and life of all kinds could not abide 
 exposure to such scorching heat or to such inconceivable 
 cold. The sudden and constant alternation from a far 
 less extent of either would also of itself be equally 
 fatal. We are therefore shut up to the conclusion, that 
 the Moon a body so large as to contain a surface of 
 14,600,000 square miles is incapable of life, and in 
 this opinion all, or nearly all, are now agreed. 
 
 But the fact has a most telling bearing upon the 
 present inquiry. It is not the mere displacement of 
 one solitary body from the worki of life ; it breaks the 
 argument for alL 
 
 Among the writers on plurality I have only noticed 
 one Dr. Whewell who has perceived the deduction 
 to which this momentous fact inevitably leads. He 
 thus forcibly puts it : 
 
 ' If it appear by strong evidence that the Moon is not 
 inhabited, then is there an end 1 of the general principle 
 that all the bodies of the solar system are inhabited, and 
 that we must begin our speculations about each with this 
 assumption If the Moon be not inhabited, then, it would 
 seem, the belief that each special body in the system is 
 inhabited must depend upon reasons specially belong- 
 ing to that body, and cannot be taken for granted without 
 such reasons. Of the two bodies of the solar system 
 which alone we can examine closely, so as to know any- 
 thing about them, the Earth and the Moon, if the one be 
 inhabited and the other blank of inhabitants, we have 
 then no right to assume at once that any other body in 
 the solar system belongs to the former of these classes 
 rather than to the latter. If even under terrestrial con- 
 ditions of light and heat we have a total absence of the 
 
 1 Newcomb, p. 319. 
 
CONCLUSION. 237 
 
 phenomenon of life known to us only as a terrestrial 
 phenomenon, we are surely not entitled to assume that 
 when these conditions fail we have still the phenomenon 
 life. We are not entitled to assume it ; however, it may 
 be capable of being afterwards proved in any special 
 case by special reasons; a question afterwards to be 
 discussed.' l 
 
 At the time Dr. Whewell wrote, it will be kept in 
 view further that spectrum analysis had not been 
 employed to the extent it has now been in the investi- 
 gation of the stars. 
 
 1 Essay, p. 288. 
 
VI. 
 
 BUT leaving the Moon, we shall proceed to consider the 
 various planets, commencing with the minor ones, and 
 with Mercury, the nearest to the Sun ; for I put aside 
 Vulcan, which, notwithstanding the circumstantial 
 account of its supposed discovery by the rustic French 
 doctor, as graphically narrated by Professor Leitch, 1 is 
 now generally discarded as having been an illusion ; or, 
 at least, it is regarded as of very doubtful reality. 2 Had 
 it really existed, the blaze of heat alone to which its 
 proximity to the Sun would subject it would have 
 scorched up and destroyed every species of life upon its 
 surface. 
 
 MERCURY. 
 
 This small planet is so comparatively near to the 
 Sun that it is not well adapted for observation, and on 
 various points opinions have in consequence differed, 
 but most of these points are not very material to the 
 present inquiry. Its year is found to be 88 days, and 
 its day is about 24 hours, or slightly more. Its velocity 
 in its orbit is 109,360 miles per hour, and it has no 
 satellites. Upon these points, and also upon its distance 
 from the Sun, there is a general agreement. But in 
 regard to its size, density, mass, weight, surface, gravity, 
 there is more or less difference. It has been said to 
 have lofty mountains, ten or twelve miles high. 3 The 
 
 1 God's Glory in the Heavens, p. 81 et seq. 2 Lardner, 309. 
 
 3 Rambosson, p. 113 ; Grant, p. 233. 
 
MERCURY'S AXIS ORBIT. 239 
 
 points upon which it is here material to dwell are the 
 inclination of its axis, its varying distance from the 
 Sun, its light and heat, and the question of its atmo- 
 sphere. 
 
 It has been stated that the axis is 7 degrees ' inclined 
 to the plane of the equator, so that there must be a 
 great inequality in the days and seasons.' 1 But although 
 it is generally considered that there is such an inclina- 
 tion, the point is one which does not appear to be 
 conclusively settled. The safer course is to put it aside 
 till it be so. 
 
 Upon another point there is not uncertainty. ' The 
 orbit of Mercury,' says Sir John Herschel, ' is very 
 elliptical, the eccentricity being nearly one-fourth of the 
 mean distance,' 2 which may be stated to be in round 
 numbers 36,000,000 miles. Lardner states (others 
 agreeing) the distance from the Sun in aphelion to be 
 42^ millions, and in perihelion to be 28 millions of 
 miles. The practical effect of this amazing difference 
 in the Mercurial year of 88 days is mentioned by Mr. 
 Proctor : 
 
 ' When he is nearest to the Sun he receives ten and 
 a half times more light and heat from that luminary than 
 we do ; but when he removes to his greatest distance, the 
 light and heat he receives are reduced by more than one 
 half. Even then, however,' he adds, ' the sun blazes in 
 the skies of Mercury with a disc four and a half times 
 larger than that which he presents to the observer on 
 Earth.' 3 
 
 Fontenelle himself seems, from a consideration of the 
 
 1 RambossoTi, p. 115. 2 Outlines, 482. 
 
 3 More Worlds than Ours, p. 58. 
 
240 PLURALITY MERCUR Y. 
 
 'ft 
 
 tremendous heat, almost to have renounced the thought 
 
 of its habitability. 
 
 1 But what do you think, then, of the inhabitants of 
 Mercury. They are yet nearer to the Sun, and are so 
 full of fire that they are absolutely mad. I fancy they 
 have not any memory at all, no more than most of the 
 negroes ; that they make no reflections, and what they 
 do is by sudden starts, and perfect haphazard ; in short, 
 Mercury is the Bedlam of the Universe. The Sun 
 appears to them much greater than it does to us, because 
 they are much nearer to it than we ; it sends them so 
 vast and strong a light that the most glorious day here 
 would be no more with them than a declining twilight. 
 I know not whether they can distinguish objects, but the 
 heat to which they are accustomed is so excessive that 
 they would be starved with cold in th e torrid zone/ l 
 
 And in order to relieve -the supposed inhabitants he 
 says : 
 
 1 In China there are countries which are extremely hot 
 by their situation, yet in July and August are so cold 
 that the rivers are frozen. The reason is, they are full 
 of saltpetre, which, being exhaled in great abundance by 
 the excessive heat of the Sun, makes a perfect winter at 
 midsummer. We will fill the little planet with saltpetre, 
 and let the Sun shine as hot as he pleases.' * 
 
 Very different is the account given by Flammarion 
 as the view of one of the numerous romancers who 
 feigned voyages o the planets, and who 
 
 ' pretended to know that the mountains of Mercury 
 were all crowned with beautiful gardens, in which grew 
 naturally not only the most succulent fruits, which 
 served as food to the Mercurians, but also the greatest 
 variety of dishes. It would appear that in this happy 
 world it is not necessary to prepare, as with us, things 
 for food. Fowls, hams, beefsteaks, cutlets, entremets, 
 
 1 Fontenelle, p. 99. Ibid. p. 101. 
 
ROMANCE HEAT. 241 
 
 small side dishes, etc., were raised there in the same 
 manner as the apples on our apple trees, and when a 
 repast was wished for it was sufficient to spread the 
 cloth ; then arrived bird-waiters for your orders, who 
 knowingly flew away, and in the twinkling of an eye, 
 from the mountains, where the desired dishes are to be 
 found, brought you them with 'the greatest haste. It is 
 better, perhaps, to believe that the vegetables of Mercury 
 possess these precious gifts, and that its birds are of such 
 delightful intelligence, than to think, with Fontenelle, 
 that the inhabitants of Mercury are all mad, and that 
 their brains are burned with the violent heat which the 
 Sun pours upon their heads.' 1 
 
 To avoid this enormous heat, Mr. Proctor suggests 
 that possibly if the planet's axis be not so much inclined 
 as it is considered to be, the polar regions ' may not 
 form a disagreeable abode ;' 2 but he further suggests the 
 probability of an atmosphere of great rarity, 3 and that 
 from the analogy of lofty mountains on the Earth, 
 which are cooler than the plains below, yet goes on to 
 say: 
 
 ' We cannot thin the Mercurial air without adding to 
 the direct effects of the Sun upon the Mercurial inhabi- 
 tants. Whether in this way we increase the habitability 
 of the planet may be doubted when we consider that 
 the direct action of the Sun's rays upon the tropical 
 regions of Mercury, thus deprived of atmospheric protec- 
 tion, would produce a heat four or five times greater than 
 that of boiling water.' 4 
 
 Dissatisfied with this theory, he proceeds to take up 
 the opposite one, of there being a dense atmosphere sur- 
 rounding Mercury. 5 And this is a view which others 
 have advocated to mitigate the consuming heat. But 
 
 1 Flammarion's Marvels, p. 160. 2 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 61. 
 3 Ibid. p. 62. * Ibid. p. 64. s See Guillemin's Heavens, p. 62. 
 
 Q 
 
242 PL URALITY MERCURY. 
 
 this theory he mentions is not satisfactorily established, 1 
 and is disproved by the fact that the planet does not, 
 as it would were it surrounded by a cloudy envelope, 
 shine more brilliantly. Indeed it does not, although 
 so favourably situated for doing so, reflect the same 
 proportion of light as some of the other planets do. 
 
 Driven from this position, and also from supposing it 
 to be surrounded by a double cloud envelope, he thinks 
 the reader may probably prefer the thought of a polar 
 residence with tunnels of communication. 
 
 All this theorizing, and along with it speculation 
 regarding the nature of the atmosphere and its life 
 sustaining power, has been put at rest by the observa- 
 tions made a few years ago by Dr. Zollner by the use of 
 his photometer : 
 
 ' This instrument is a very beautiful application of the 
 principle that if light be reflected from a smooth surface, 
 such as a plate of glass inclined at a certain angle, it 
 undergoes a modification of such a nature that the 
 amount reflected from a second plate inclined to it at the 
 same angle varies as the plate is turned about the ray as 
 an axis, being greatest when the two plates are parallel, 
 and nothing when the second plate is turned round 
 through a right angle from this position.' 2 'From his 
 measures of the brightness of Mercury with this photo- 
 meter, he concludes that the reflective power of this 
 planet is much the same as that of the Moon (being a 
 little higher than quartz porphyry), and that the change 
 of brightness with the phase is just what would hold for 
 a rough surface in which the average slope of the hills 
 was 52; from this he infers that Mercury must there- 
 fore le without an atmosphere. The reflective power of 
 the other planets, with the exception of Mars, is very 
 
 1 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 66. 
 
 2 Year Book of Facts in Science and Arts for 1875, p. 251. 
 
NO WATER OR VEGETATION. 243 
 
 mucli larger, and they have therefore probably very dense 
 atmospheres, which reflect nearly all the Sun's rays.' 
 
 It is therefore obvious that Mercury cannot be 
 inhabited. But further, as it has no atmosphere and 
 no clouds, it can have no water ; and, indeed, the great 
 heat of the Sun would speedily cause all water to 
 evaporate and disappear from the planet. There being 
 no water, there can be no vegetation to support life a 
 fact which those anxious to secure inhabitants for the 
 planets seem regularly to ignore, or rather to forget. 
 
 We thus start with first depopulating the Moon, 
 and then the planet nearest to the Sun. Let us see 
 whether we find any different state of matters when 
 we come to the second planet. 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
VENUS. 
 
 IN some things this planet resembles the Earth. It 
 is very nearly the same in size (the diameter being a 
 little over 200 miles less), in density volume and 
 mass, gravity, and length of day. These similarities 
 have been founded on as inferring the habitability of 
 Venus. But, in reality, they do not affect the question, 
 which must be determined by other circumstances. It 
 should, however, be mentioned that there are circum- 
 stances, not material to the present inquiry, in which 
 Venus differs from the Earth. Various observers, from 
 time to time, fancied they descried a satellite. But 
 it is now considered, as stated by Lardner, ' that the 
 supposed appearances were illusive.' 1 The subject is 
 also discussed in Dick's Celestial Scenery, p. 8 ; Proctor's 
 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 71 ; Proctor's Orbs around 
 us, p. 82. Although there has not been conclusive 
 agreement on the subject of the mountains in Venus, 
 yet it seems generally held, and the appearances seem 
 to justify the opinion, that the mountains in Venus are 
 of great height five times higher than the highest 
 mountains on Earth; a fact which must necessarily 
 create a considerable difference on the natural features 
 of the planet, and may indicate at one time an appalling 
 amount of volcanic energy, which possibly may have 
 pervaded the whole surface, and corrugated it to such 
 an extent as to render it unfit for cultivation and 
 habitation. See Eambosson, p. 122 ; Herschel's Out- 
 1 Lardner 's Handbook of Astronomy, 345. 
 
 244 
 
FEATURES OF VENUS HEAT. 245 
 
 lines, 509; Dick's Celestial Scenery, pp. 77, 78; Grant's 
 History, p. 235; Proctor's Orbs around us, p. 90; 
 Nichol's Phenomena, p. 150. 
 
 But although mountains apparently exist, the features 
 of the planet are indiscernible, and it is not disputed 
 that there is no appearance of seas. The only things 
 seen are spots, and the spots have not always been 
 perceptible long periods of time having elapsed 
 between observations of them. See Dick, pp. 73, 74; 
 Grant, pp. 234-236; Proctor's Orbs, p. 91. By watching 
 these spots, however, astronomers have been enabled to 
 calculate the period of its rotation on its axis, or length 
 of its day. 
 
 But the planet is not well situated for observation, 
 principally because when nearest to the Earth we see 
 the side which is in shade, and because when in opposi- 
 tion the surface is of dazzling lustre. 
 
 Venus is nearly 30 millions of miles nearer the Sun 
 than is the Earth, and the light and heat showered 
 down upon it from the Sun are about twice what are 
 received by the Earth, Dr. Dick says : 
 
 ' It has been calculated that the greatest heat of Venus 
 exceeds the heat of St. Thomas on the coast of Guinea or 
 of Sumatra about as much as the heat in these places 
 exceeds that of the Orkney Islands or that of the city of 
 Stockholm.' 1 
 
 Mr. Proctor says : 
 
 ' I suppose no one doubts that quite possibly this great 
 light and heat may be so tempered as to be not only 
 endurable, but pleasant to people in Venus. But so far 
 as terrestrial experience is concerned, we are assuredly 
 not justified in saying that this must be so. Un- 
 doubtedly, if the Sun began suddenly to pour twice as 
 1 Dick's Celestial Scenery, p. 88. 
 
246 PL URALITY VENUS. 
 
 much light and heat upon 'the Earth as he actually does r 
 the human race would be destroyed in a very few months. 
 In tropical regions the destruction would be completed in 
 a single day. In temperate regions the beginning of the 
 first summer would be fatal. Nor would the denizens of 
 arctic and sub-arctic regions live through the heat of a 
 midsummer's nightless day.' * 
 
 To this has to be added the fact that the orbit of 
 Venus has little eccentricity, the difference between its 
 perihelion and its aphelion being only one million of 
 miles, 2 so that it may be said there can be no percep- 
 tible difference in the power or intensity of the Sun's 
 rays throughout its whole year of 225 days. 
 
 To escape the difficulty thus arising, believers in the 
 plurality of worlds have imagined that the intense heat 
 may be modified by the existence of a dense atmosphere. 
 But upon this Mr. Proctor proceeds to observe : 
 
 ' All that we know of the effects of a deep atmosphere 
 would lead us to believe that the heat in Venus must be 
 intensified by the action of her deep and dense atmo- 
 sphere. As matter of fact it may not be so. All I urge is, 
 that judging from the only analogy we have to guide us, 
 the depth and density of the atmosphere of Venus seem 
 to promise no relief from the intense solar heat to which 
 she is exposed.' 3 
 
 But now let us see what is said in regard to this 
 atmosphere. 
 
 ' From several of Mr. Schroeter's observations,' says 
 Mr. Dick, ' he concludes that Venus has an atmosphere 
 of considerable extent,' and refers to an observation 
 made by him on 10th September 1791 : 
 
 ' From these and various other observations, which it 
 would be too tedious to detail, he concludes, on the 
 
 1 Orbs around us, Planet of Love, p. 98. 
 
 ? Lardner, 325. . 3 Orbs, p. 99. 
 
DENSE ATMOSPHERE. 247 
 
 ground of various calculations, that the deme part of the 
 atmosphere of Venus is about 16,020 feet, or somewhat 
 above three miles high ; that it must rise far above the 
 highest mountains ; that it is more opaque than that of 
 the Moon ; and that its density is a sufficient reason why 
 we do not discover on the surface of Venus those super- 
 ficial shades and varieties of appearance which are to be- 
 seen on the other planets.' 1 
 
 Grant also says :< 
 
 ' Various circumstances concur to prove that Venus is 
 surrounded by an atmosphere of considerable density. 
 During the transits of the planet over the Sun's disc- 
 in 1761 and 1769, the planet was observed by several 
 astronomers to be suirrounded by a faint ring of light similar 
 to the appearance which would be occasioned by the pas- 
 sage of the solar rays through a circumambient fluid.' 2 
 
 A similar ring of light was observed at the transit on 
 8th December 1874. 3 
 
 Indeed, there seems general agreement regarding the 
 existence of this atmosphere and its density, which is 
 also proved by the circumstance that while Mercury, 
 wanting an atmosphere, gives out little light,. Venus, 
 farther from the Sun, sheds a brilliant light. 
 
 But I think the fact goes a very great deal further 
 than is generally supposed. Spectrum analysis appears 
 to show that the atmosphere of Venus contains aqueous 
 vapour, 4 and it appears to me that the excessive extent 
 and density of the atmosphere is due to the heat to 
 which it is subjected, 5 and that in all probability the 
 whole seas and oceans which would otherwise exist are 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 78. c History of Physical Astronomy, p. 235. 
 3 Year Hook of Facts in Science and Arts for 1875, p. 252. 
 * Schellen's Spectrum Analysis, p. 482. 
 
 5 Proctor's Other Worlds than Ours, p. 80, referring to Father Secchi's 
 observations. 
 
248 PL URALITY VENUS. 
 
 evaporated and held in moisture over it, a supposition 
 the more probable when it is considered that the dense 
 portion of it extends to over three miles high, while the 
 atmosphere itself extends, rarer, it is true, to a height 
 of probably thirty miles. The effect of this would be 
 to drain the oceans and to stop the rivers, and as no 
 changes are discerned on the face of the planet there is 
 doubtless an absence of winds to dislodge the clouds 
 and open up the land to the rays of the Sun. Under 
 this constant dense and probably never displaced cloud, 
 obscuring the heavens, it is clear that no vegetation 
 could spring up, no life could subsist, and obviously it 
 would be an unfit abode, not merely for rational beings, 
 but for beings of any sort. 
 
 Mr. Proctor l has adduced a circumstance which may 
 prove to be, if possible, still more conclusive, in the 
 supposed inclination of the planet's axis to the plane of 
 her orbit. Assuming that the observation is correct, 
 that the axis is inclined 15, he shows that this would 
 be fatal to human life. I would refer to what he has 
 said on the subject. But as he adds 
 
 ' Fortunately for our belief in the habitability of Venus, 
 astronomers are far from accepting with confidence the 
 assertions of those observers who have assigned to Venus 
 an inclination so remarkable.' 2 
 
 The point may well be left until the fact be more 
 conclusively ascertained. If the fact should really be 
 as has been supposed, and the difficulty arises, doubt- 
 less, from the featureless character of the fair goddess' 
 face, indicative of the sullen thickness of the veil in 
 which she is enwrapped, we shall have an additional 
 reason for concluding that life is also absent from this 
 the second planet of the system. 
 
 1 Other Worlds, pp. 74-78. 2 Ibid. p. 73. 
 
MARS. 
 
 FONTENELLE, in his fourth evening, remarking that Mars 
 afforded nothing curious that he knew of, hastily dismisses 
 the planet by observing, ' Let us leave Mars, he is not 
 worthy our stay.' But it has been upon Mars the hopes 
 of modern pluralists have been most largely built. In- 
 deed, Mr. Powell, with a curtness even greater than 
 that of Fontenelle, and a confidence equal to that of 
 Phipson, 1 dismisses it by saying : ' The planet Mars is 
 on all hands admitted to be circumstanced so similarly 
 to our Earth, that little discussion can be needed.' 2 More 
 recent opinion, however, is not quite so unanimous. 
 Mr. Proctor has, indeed, advocated its habitability at 
 some length in a chapter of Other Worlds than Ours, 
 and in another chapter of The Orbs around us, setting 
 out by laying it down to be ' singular that among all 
 the orbs which circle around the Sun, 3 one only, and that 
 almost the least of the primary planets, should exhibit 
 clearly and unmistakeably the signs which mark a 
 planet as the abode of life.' 4 On the other hand, Mr. 
 Maunder, superintendent of the Physical department at 
 the Eoyal Observatory, Greenwich, in several papers 
 contributed by him to the Sunday Magazine for 1882, 
 after a discussion of the subject, says, ' We can scarcely 
 suppose that any living beings can exist upon a planet 
 so unhappily circumstanced.' 
 
 1 Phipson's Mysteries, p. 268. 2 Powell's Unity, p. 232. 
 
 3 Other Worlds, p. 84. 
 
 4 The observation is practically repeated in The Orbs, p. 105. 
 
 . 249 
 
25Q PLURALITY MARS. 
 
 While I shall be foun'd to concur in a conclusion 
 akin to that of the last named, I do not propose to 
 adopt all the inferences of either writer, but extracting 
 from both, just as from other sources, whatever facts 
 can be elicited to bear upon the subject, I shall endea- 
 vour briefly to state the views which occur to me leading 
 up to that conclusion. 
 
 And, first of all, it is proper to* give those physical 
 facts about which astronomers, differing, no doubt, slightly, 
 as usual, in their figures, are agreed. 
 
 Perhaps more- differences occur in stating the size of 
 Mars than in other particulars. Mr. Proctor states its 
 diameter to be 5000 miles; Lardner, only 4363 miles, 
 and others a good deal less. It may be considered as 
 a little over half the diameter of the Earth. But the 
 diameter at the poles is less than the equatorial diameter 
 by 1/1 6.th, or about 250 miles, 1 while the difference 
 between the two- diameters of the Earth is only 26^ 
 miles, showing a much greater, I may say an immense 
 flattening at the poles of Mars. 2 
 
 Its density was supposed to be nearly equal to that 
 of the Earth, and Mr. Phillips- 3 considered it to be a 
 hollow globe, ' with an average thickness of crust equal- 
 ling 569 miles.' However, since the weight of the 
 planet is now said to be 1/1 Oth that of the Earth, the 
 density, I presume, is to be considered very greatly less. 
 
 1 Grant's History of Physical Astronomy, p. 236. 
 
 2 The estimates made by different astronomers of the amount of flatten- 
 ing at the poles have varied much. See Guillemin's Heavens, p. 185. 
 
 3 Worlds beyond the Earth, p. 122. He estimates the crust of the 
 Earth may be 2095 miles thick, but not solid throughout. 
 
GRA VITYSA TELLITESAXIS ORBIT. 2 5 1 
 
 It results that the force of gravity, which has an 
 important bearing on the present question, is much less 
 upon Mars than upon the Earth. 1 It is- indeed less than 
 half, one pound weighing only about six ounces, less or 
 more, according to the authority stating it. 
 
 The weight has been ascertained by means of the two 
 tiny satellites recently discovered. Their existence had 
 been conjectured, but it was not till 1877 they were 
 found. The outer moon, at a distance of 15,000 miles, 2 
 revolves round Mars in 30 hours 14 minutes. The 
 inner one, at a distance of 6000 miles, in 7 hours 38 
 minutes, or 3^ times in one day. The sizes of these 
 small moons have not, I believe, been, and perhaps 
 cannot be ascertained. 3 Mr. Proctor suggests that each 
 of them may not be more than ten miles in diameter. 4 
 The two together cannot give 1/1 27th of the light of 
 GUI Moon. 
 
 The inclination of the axis of the planet to the plane 
 of its orbit differs a few degrees from that of the Earth, 
 or, according to the authority taken, from 4 to 7 degrees 
 more inclined from the perpendicular. 5 Its day in length 
 resembles our own, being nearly 40 minutes longer than 
 ours; but, consequently, as it is a smaller body, it 
 revolves more slowly nearly twice as slowly. 
 
 Its year is 687 of our days, or within six weeks of 
 two of our years. 
 
 Its orbit, it is important to observe, is eccentric. 
 
 1 Leitch, p. 49 ; Other Worlds, p. 87 ; Maunder, p. 104. 
 
 2 Knowledge, i. p. 167. 3 Year Book of Facts for 1878, p. 161. 
 
 4 Flowers of the Sky, p. 187. 
 
 5 Proctor, 3f ; Herschel, 7 ; Dick, 7. 
 
252 PLURALITY MARS. 
 
 The mean distance of Mars from the Sun is about 
 145,000,000 miles, above 50 millions of miles more 
 distant than the Earth; but when in aphelion it is 
 152^ millions of miles, and when in perihelion it is 
 126^ millions of miles distant from the Sun, so that 
 there is a difference of no less than 26 millions of miles 
 between its position when nearest and its position when 
 farthest from the orb from which, in common with all 
 the planets, it derives its light and heat. And it may 
 be here noted that the effect of a far less eccentricity 
 in the Earth's orbit continued during a long period is 
 stated to have produced a glacial period. See Cooley's 
 Physical Geography, p. 411. 
 
 When at mean distance from the Sun the light and 
 heat he receives are less than we receive in the propor- 
 tion of about 4 to 9, or, as Leitch expresses it in 
 decimals, Earth being reckoned = 1, Mars= 0'43. Mr. 
 Proctor tells us 1 
 
 ' The axis of Mars is so situated that the summer of 
 his northern hemisphere occurs when he is at his greatest 
 distance from the Sun. The same relation holds in the 
 case of the Earth, the Sun being 1,500,000 miles nearer 
 to us in winter than in summer ; whereas to those who 
 live in the southern hemisphere he approaches nearer in 
 summer than in winter. But the effects resulting from 
 the relation in the case of Mars must be very much more 
 striking than those we recognise. For whereas the Sun 
 gives only one fifteenth more heat to the whole Earth in 
 January than he does in July, the Sun of Mars gives half 
 as much light again in perihelion as in aphelion. The 
 summer of the northern hemisphere of Mars must be 
 rendered much cooler, and the winter much warmer, 
 by this arrangement. On the other hand, the contrast 
 
 1 Proctor's Other World*, p. 88. 
 
SEASONS OBSER VA TION. 253 
 
 between the summer and winter of the southern hemi- 
 sphere is rendered more striking than it would otherwise 
 be.' 
 
 In consequence of the greater length of year, the 
 seasons of Mars are nearly double in length those of our 
 planet, the spring and summer of the northern hemi- 
 sphere lasting 76 days longer than they do in the 
 southern hemisphere, while by reason of the greater 
 inclination of its axis the tropical and arctic zones 
 extend farther, reducing correspondingly whatever of 
 temperate zones there may be to a minimum. 
 
 Mars becomes favourably situated for observation only 
 ' once in every two .and a quarter years, continuing to 
 be well placed for only a few months/ J and though 
 observed for more than two hundred years, Mr. Proctor 
 states that, ' taking into account all the requirements for 
 good definition, it may be said that Mars has not been 
 under really effective observation for more than a very 
 few days.' 
 
 But the observation which has been made has dis- 
 covered certain markings upon its surface which are 
 not temporary, but form permanent features, so much so 
 that a chart of the appearance of Mars has been made 
 exhibiting green portions, red portions, and white portions. 
 These have been described and considered to be seas, land, 
 and ice-poles respectively, and I shall assume that they 
 are correctly so designated, and take the map given by 
 Mr. Proctor as truly representing what is so seen. 2 
 
 1 Other Worlds, p. 102. 
 
 2 The history of the charting of Mars, and a description of the charter, 
 will be found stated in Proctor's Other Worlds, p. 91, and more fully in 
 his Orbs around us, pp. 107-115. 
 
254 
 
 PL URALITYMARS. 
 
 A theory was indeed propounded, at a meeting of the 
 Eoyal Astronomical Society in 1877, by Mr. Brett, 1 that 
 the glowing red colour of Mars is red-heat, so that the 
 planet is not, he considers, in a condition similar to the 
 Earth ; while the white polar patch is not only not snow, 
 but it constitutes no part of the solid mass of the planet, 
 and is nothing more than a patch of cloud, the only 
 real cloud existing in Mars. But this view does not 
 appear to be approved by other observers, and as there 
 seems really nothing either to confirm or to warrant it, it 
 may, I think, be thrown out of consideration ; although, 
 were it established as a fact, it would effectually exclude 
 the thought of Mars being habitable. 
 
 CHART OF MARS. 
 
 1. Lockyer Land. 
 
 2. La Place Land. 
 
 3. Hooke's Sea. 
 
 4. Maraldi Sea. 
 
 5. Dawes 1 Ocean. 
 
 6. Delarue Sea. 
 
 7. Arago Strait. 
 
 8. /. Herschel Strait. 
 
 9. Nasmyth Inlet. 
 
 10. Huggins 1 Inlet. 
 
 11. Besset Met. 
 
 The above, then, is a rough reduction from Mr. 
 Proctor's chart of Mars, given in Other Worlds than 
 Ours, which was so very beautifully executed as really 
 
 1 Year Book of Facts for 1878, p. 161. 
 
LAND AND SEA. 255 
 
 to suggest it to be ' too good to be true.' The shaded 
 portions, intended to represent what are said to be ocean 
 and sea, are rather heavier or larger in this small scale 
 than in the original. How very different the represen- 
 tations of Mars are in .other books may be observed 
 upon comparison, as, for example, with those presented 
 in Guillemin's Heavens, p. 181. 
 
 Taking, therefore, Mr. Proctor's chart, here introduced 
 on a smaller scale, for convenience of reference, as 
 exhibiting what have been considered as land, seas, 
 and ice-poles, the first observation which it elicits is the 
 vast difference between the superficial extent of sea and 
 land upon Earth and upon Mars, On Earth the sea 
 covers nearly three-fourths of its surface. In Mars the 
 proportion of land is much greater. Williams 1 estimates 
 the proportion of land to water as five times greater 
 than the proportion of land to water on the Earth. But 
 calculations widely differ, although by the smallest com- 
 putation land and sea are equal. Mr. Lockyer, in one 
 of his books, computes it at four times the extent of 
 sea. Mr. Proctor says : ' There is little disparity between 
 the extent of oceans and continents,' 2 and in another 
 book, 3 mentions he 'cut out with a pair of scissors the 
 parts representing land and the parts representing water 
 (leaving the polar parts as doubtful), and carefully 
 weighed them in .a delicate balance.' He ' found that 
 they were almost exactly equal ; whatever preponder- 
 ance there was seemed to be in favour of the land.' 
 Of course the accuracy of this computation depended 
 entirely on the accuracy of the map so weighed. 
 
 1 Williams' Fuel of Sun, 250. 
 , ? 2 Orbs around us, p. 116. 
 
 3 Flowers of the Sky, the Planet Mars, p. 183. 
 
256 PLURALITY MARS. 
 
 Which of these two authorities is correct ? Perhaps the 
 truth lies between the two, in saying that in superficial 
 measure the land of Mars is double the extent of sea. 
 
 But the mode of distribution is very different. The 
 sea is* not, as on Earth, one body, but seerns divided into 
 separated portions, and, in particular, the arctic seas are 
 separated from those adjoining by belts of land : La Place 
 Land at the North, and Lockyer Land at the South Pole. 
 
 Further, the seas are not only peculiarly shaped, but 
 they are for the most part laid out in long narrow 
 strips or inlets, such as JSTasmyth's Inlet, Huggins' Inlet, 
 Besset's Inlet, Arago and Herschel's Straits, and the 
 Hooke and Miraldi Seas. 
 
 Not only so, but when it is considered how great 
 is the flattening of the poles of Mars, for according 
 to Herschel it is l/16th, and to Arago, l/32nd of its 
 diameter (though the latter 1 believes it to be more), or 
 . causing a depression of say from 60 to 120 miles at each 
 pole, we might expect, upon the principle that the seas 
 "ought to flow to the lower level, not only that they should 
 have been connected between the polar and the other 
 seas, but that the whole water of the planet would have 
 been concentrated at the poles. It is not so, and hence 
 it probably is that what are called seas, if seas at all, 
 are merely shallow basins or lagoons ; and it lends 
 countenance to the supposition to bear in mind that the 
 surface, covered in winter with what appears to be snow 
 or ice, rapidly loses this covering with the adyent of 
 summer, indicating a very thin layer. It is in striking 
 contrast with our poles, and especially our South Pole, 
 
 1 Humboldt's Cosmos, p. 503. 
 
NOT MO UNTAINO US. 2 57 
 
 which in the height of summer are extensive unapproach- 
 able ice-fields. 
 
 If the seas be shallow, the land is not likely to be 
 mountainous. Probably there are only elevations suffi- 
 cient to hem in the seas ; and this seems the more 
 probable because the land does not exhibit shining 
 peaks,. which, if they existed, would be covered, or some- 
 times covered, with snow or ice. The only exceptions 
 appear to be two, a spot in the middle of Delarue Sea, 
 and another spot in Dawes Ocean, which in all likeli-. 
 hood are mountains, and that not of any height, as, if 
 the brightness occasionally seen be attributable to snow, 
 it is not permanent. 1 
 
 As the seas occupy so much smaller surface than on 
 
 1 I have stated this on the authority of Mr. Maunder, 2 who says : 'On 
 September 29 (1877), Mr. Green, an astronomer, who was watching the 
 planet at Madeira, noticed that a large part 6f it was no longer dark, but 
 bright. Three days later an Italian astronomer saw that the greater 
 part of the spot was dark as usual, but that a white strike jutted out into 
 it from the neighbouring lighter markings. Two or three days later 
 these had vanished, and the dark spot had resumed its ordinary appear- 1 
 ance. Another large spot, called after a clergyman named Dawes, noted 
 for his keen sight and the skill with which he effected the most delicate 
 observations, is very frequently concealed from view in the same manner. 
 Thus in 1877 it was generally seen in its entirety, dark and distinct ; but 
 in 1879, as a rule, only portions of it could be caught here and there, 
 the greater part appearing as bright as any part of the general disc.' If 
 these be mountains with snow upon them, their elevation must be low, 
 and the snow remarkably thin and evanescent. Mr. Proctor does not 
 entirely differ, but states : ' In Delarue Ocean there is a large island 
 which presents so strikingly brilliant an aspect that it has been supposed 
 to be cohered (ordinarily) with snow. It has been called Dawes Ice 
 Island,' Proctor's Other Worlds, p. 93. Mr. Proctor does not notice the 
 other island or mountain. 
 
 2 Maunder, Sunday Magazine for 1882, p. 32. 
 S 
 
258 PL URALITYMARS. 
 
 the Earth, the land stretches in extensive and oddly- 
 shaped continents, and has a ruddy appearance, so much 
 so that Mars shines a ruddy star. With this ruddy 
 appearance I shall have immediately to deal. 
 
 The bright spots at the poles of Mars were carefully 
 observed by Sir William Herschel, 1 who supposed them 
 to be occasioned by light reflected from masses of ice 
 and snow accumulated in the polar regions, an opinion 
 which, though it has been doubted, is now generally 
 held. The remarkable circumstance connected with 
 them is, that they increase in extent so largely during 
 the winter months, and diminish so rapidly during the 
 summer months. The difference between the two 
 extremes is as much as 35. Mr. Maunder 2 says the 
 Cap has been watched until it was reduced to only 130 
 miles in radius ; and in 1877 the South Pole was 
 actually free from ice. Sometimes the one pole, 3 how- 
 ever, and sometimes the other is the brighter, or is 
 the more extensively covered. But if our Earth were 
 covered with snow and ice as extensively as is Mars 
 during winter, the covering would extend over nearly all 
 Europe, embracing the south of France and the whole 
 northern half of Asia ; while in the Southern hemi- 
 sphere it would cover New Zealand and part of South 
 Australia, reach into South America to Buenos Ayres, 
 and in Africa to the Cape of Good Hope. 
 
 And now the atmosphere of Mars claims consideration. 
 For that it has an atmosphere of some kind seems to be 
 admitted. 
 
 Dr. Dick 4 states : ' From the gradual diminution of 
 
 1 Grant, pp. 236, 237. * Maunder, p. 103. 
 
 * Ibid, p. 31. * Celestial Scenery, p. 119. 
 
ATMOSPHERE. 259 
 
 the light of the fixed stars when they approach near 
 the disc of Mars, it has been inferred that this planet 
 is surrounded with an atmosphere of great extent ; ' 
 although he mentions that the extent has been much 
 overrated. 
 
 Mr. Proctor * tells us, that ' towards the edge of the 
 disc the ruddy and the greenish tracts are lost in a 
 misty whiteness, which grows gradually brighter up to 
 the very border of the planet ; ' that ' a veil is some- 
 times drawn over it for hours or even days together;' 2 
 and that ' it has been noticed that when it is winter in 
 one hemisphere, and therefore summer in the other, the 
 former hemisphere is nearly always hidden from view 
 by just such a veil as I have spoken of above ; ' 3 and 
 this veil he considers to be clouds formed just as our 
 clouds are. 4 Mr. Maunder, on the other hand, says : 
 ' The clouds generally seen are only sufficient to lighten 
 a little, not to fully hide, the dark markings, and do not 
 reflect nearly so much light as our own heaven-clouds 
 do.' And this is what we may readily suppose from 
 the nature of things at Mars. There are clouds, there- 
 fore, but not to the same extent or having the same 
 density as on Earth, and clouds indicate both moisture 
 and air. 
 
 We should, however, be left in some uncertainty 
 with regard to this atmosphere were it not that the 
 spectroscope has come to our aid. 
 
 Mr. Koscoe, 5 referring to the observations of Dr. 
 Huggins, Dr. Miller, Padre Secchi, and Janssen, says : 
 
 1 Other Worlds, p. 90. 2 Ibid. p. 96. 3 Ibid. p. 97. 
 
 4 See Mr. Proctor's views as to clouds on Mars, Orbs around us, 
 pp. 120, 121. 
 
 Roscoe's Lectures, p. 231. 
 
2 6o PLURALITY MARS. 
 
 1 From observations upon Saturn, it appears probable 
 that aqueous vapour exists in the atmosphere of this 
 planet as well as in that of Jupiter. In Venus no 
 intensifying of the atmosphere could be observed; but 
 some remarkable groups of lines, corresponding to those 
 seen when the Sun is low, were noticed on the more 
 refrangible side of the line " D " on the Mars spectrum ; 
 and these indicate the existence of matter similar to that 
 occurring in our own atmosphere.' 
 
 Secchi and Janssen conclude that in all probability 
 the vapour of water exists in the planetary atmospheres. 
 
 There is appended to Mr. Eoscoe's lectures 1 an article 
 by Dr. fluggins, ' On the spectrum of Mars, with some 
 remarks on the colour of the planet,' in which he 
 observes to the same effect ; and after showing that the 
 Tuddy tint of Mars is not derived from its atmosphere, 
 he 2 gives us these important facts : that Mars resembles 
 the Moon in the variation of light reflected from it ; 
 that its mean reflective power ' is not more than one-half 
 greater than that of the lunar surface;' l that the light 
 is reflected almost entirely from the true surface of the 
 planet? in contrast with Jupiter and Saturn, where the 
 light ' has evidently come from an envelope of clouds,' 
 and which ' have an Albedo severally about four and 
 three times greater than that of the Moon.' The Albedo, 
 as appearing from the observations of Zbllner, being as 
 follows : 
 
 .Moon = '1736 of the incident light. 
 
 Mars =- '2672 
 
 -'Jupiter = '6238 
 
 Saturn = '4981 
 
 White Paper = 700 
 
 White Sandstone = '237 
 
 So that Mars reflects just a little more strongly than 
 
 1 Roscoe's Lectures, p. 266. 2 Ibid. p. 268. 
 
ATMOSPHERE RARE. 261 
 
 white sandstone, probably indicating a character of 
 surface akin to it. 
 
 Dr. Huggins thinks it highly probable that the con- 
 ditions of surface which give rise to the phenomena to 
 which he refers are common to the Moon and Mars, 
 
 But the importance of the observation upon this- 
 reflection of light from Mars is, that it indicates a very 
 slender or rare atmosphere surrounding the planet ; for 
 we have seen that the Moon is altogether devoid of 
 atmosphere, and the condition of Mars must in this- 
 respect approach that of the Moon. 
 
 The atmosphere l itself has been, said most probably 
 to resemble that of the Earth in general constitution, 
 and it may possess the elements which enter into the 
 composition of our atmosphere, but we cannot, as- yet at 
 least, tell whether they are combined in the same pro- 
 portions, or whether it may not contain, as very likely 
 it does, other elements fatal to life. The mere proof of 
 the existence of an atmosphere does not necessarily 
 establish it to be fit for the support of life. A slight 
 excess of one element alone may be sufficiently adverse. 
 
 Dr. George Wilson^ writing in 1855, referring to 
 Mars, says: 
 
 ' A globe with water and an oxygen atmosphere might 
 certainly put in some chemical claim to be a sister of the 
 Earth. But such speculation is premature. The presence 
 of water does not justify the inference that free oxygen 
 is also existent ; nor does it warrant the conclusion that 
 more than fifty other elements must be there also.' 2 
 
 All the circumstances I have now stated combine 
 with each other in militating against the habitability of 
 
 1 Proctor's Orbs, p. 122. 2 Chemistry of the Stars, p. 24. 
 
262 PL URALITYMARS. 
 
 Mars. The smaller size arid smaller gravitating power ; 
 the greater distance from the Sun, and unusual eccen- 
 tricity of orbit ; the greater extent of land surface, and 
 lesser extent of sea surface, and their configuration ; 
 the rarity of the atmosphere, all have an effect, and 
 inseparably act and re-act on each other. 
 
 The greater distance of Mars from the Sun, combined 
 with the smaller extent of sea surface, ought to have the 
 effect of producing less amount of evaporation from the 
 seas, and of diminishing the size and density of the 
 clouds of Mars, which will rise slowly and reach greatly 
 higher ; and though expanding more as they rise, and 
 in expanding losing heat or cooling more than the 
 clouds of Earth. They will therefore afford a lesser 
 covering to the body of the planet. The result of this 
 must be that the heat which it receives during day will 
 more freely irradiate into space through the night than 
 happens upon Earth, so that any heat which it may 
 gain from the Sun by day will be largely lost by night ; 
 and during night at least the cold which results from 
 the greater distance of the planet from the Sun will 
 necessarily be greatly increased by this cause. 
 
 Mr. Williams says 1 that as the intensity of the Sun's 
 heat upon Mars is to that of the Earth as 0'431 to 1, 
 the mean temperature 
 
 ' must be considerably below the freezing-point ; from 
 the thinness of the atmosphere, and the small quantity 
 of aqueous vapour it must contain, the variations of 
 temperature between day and night must be very great.' 
 ' The seas must be frozen to the bottom ; but the surface 
 of the water on all parts of the planet, which are exposed 
 
 1 Fuel of the Sun, p. 167. 
 
HEAT. 263 
 
 with only moderate obliquity to the Sun's rays, would 
 be thawed to a depth varying with the duration and 
 verticality of such exposure. Its surface would thus le 
 thawed during the day and frozen again at night, like the 
 surface of our own Alpine glaciers, but the variations 
 would be far more sudden and severe on the Martial 
 ocean.', 1 
 
 And Mr. Williams thinks there should be a feathery 
 dew of hoar frost beginning to fall before sunset, and a 
 current flowing towards the dark side of the planet 
 corresponding with this, the outer portions being more 
 luminous. 2 
 
 Mr. Maunder, in discussing the habitability of Mars, 
 points to the anomaly of a long narrow sea, called 
 Nasmyth's Inlet, situated N. lat. 43, not being 
 apparently frozen in winter like the Caspian and other- 
 seas, in corresponding latitudes in the Earth, as a 
 circumstance which would lead to the inference that 
 Mars has as warm a climate as the Earth, and that 
 something on Mars tends to counterbalance the effect of 
 distance of the Sun. This cannot, he shows, be either 
 the result of internal heat or of greater density of the 
 atmosphere. To maintain as much heat on Mars by 
 means of atmosphere as is enjoyed by the Earth, Mars 
 would require to have six times as much air as we 
 have above every square inch, and 'this vast atmo- 
 sphere would extend not merely six times as far from 
 the planet as our own, but nearly thrice as far again as 
 that.' 3 This (which would be equivalent to 9 miles 
 deep) could not but be perceivable, 4 and not only would 
 obscure or hide the markings of the planet, but would 
 
 i Williams' Fuel of the Sun, p. 168. 2 Ibid. p. 178. 
 
 3 Maunder, p. 104. Ibid. p. 170. 
 
264 PL URALITYMARS. 
 
 ' : < t* 
 
 reflect far more light than it does. On the contrary, it 
 
 is the case that the atmosphere is meagre and as rare 
 as it is on the tops of our highest mountains, ' and yet 
 these peaks are lifeless solitudes even when placed in 
 the tropics, the hottest regions of the Earth ; how much 
 more, then, would it be impossible for anything to live 
 when to so rare an air is added the far more intense 
 cold that must prevail in the lands of distant Mars.' 1 
 Mr. Maunder then explains that the Sun's rays would 
 pass through the rare atmosphere without warming it, 
 but would warm the land, and cause evaporation on the 
 sea, and the vapour exhaled would be better kept, and 
 it would hang on the sea whence it is derived, and 
 prevent the radiation of heat, and might so keep the 
 seas from freezing. Bat Mars when observed by us is 
 seen at mid-day, while under the power of the Sun's 
 rays, while in winter it is badly placed for being seen 
 by us. The conclusion, then, apparently to which Mr. 
 Maunder comes (if I have rightly apprehended his 
 meaning) is, that from its position when we see Mars 
 we see it under sun heat, and it appears warmer than 
 it really is. Seas which seem to us to be unfrozen 
 may be frozen when not under our vision, or during 
 night and during winter. His words are : ' So the 
 parts of Mars which we see best at any time are just 
 those which are for the interval the warmest ; as if the 
 stout-hearted little planet, true to his warrior reputa- 
 tion, strove always to hide his calamities, and put the 
 best face upon his rather unpropitious circumstances.' 2 
 
 Mr. Maunder's view seems corroborated by a fact 
 
 stated by Captain Scoresby (Journal, p. 291), that in 
 
 clear, calm weather the sea in the interstices of the ice 
 
 generally freezes on the decline of the Sun towards the 
 
 1 Maunder, p. 170. * Ibid. p. 172. 
 
EFFECT OF COLD ON LIFE. 265 
 
 meridian below the pole, though the temperature be 
 32 or higher. 1 
 
 But may we not rather adopt the supposition, con- 
 sistent with the fact that water being a non-conductor 
 of heat, so that the lower portions of the seas must 
 always be cold, 2 that the seas are constantly frozen, 
 and ' consist of pure ice throughout, retaining the 
 partial transparency and greenish colour of deep-sea 
 water.' 3 
 
 Whichever view be taken seems to justify the idea 
 that the seas of Mars, if they resemble our own, are 
 very shallow. 
 
 We now come to the important bearing of the 
 excessive cold in Mars on life. Skertchly 4 says : 
 
 ' If our Earth were removed to the orbit of Mars, all 
 life would be destroyed in consequence of the intense cold 
 that would prevail! The mean distance of Mars is about 
 twice that of the Earth, consequently an, equal area on 
 the surface of Mars will only obtain one-fourth of the 
 amount of heat received from the Sun upon such an area 
 on Earth. We may take, for instance, the mean annual 
 temperature of England at 50 F. ; then at the distance 
 of Mars its temperature would be 12'5 F. or 19'5 E. 
 below freezing-point, which is considerably below the 
 mean temperature of any known place,, and about equal 
 to the temperature of South Greenland in January. 
 Similarly, the mean temperature of the equator is about 
 80 F. ; at the distance of Mars it would be 20 F. or 
 12 F. below freezing-point, which is about the mean 
 temperature of Novaya Zernlia. Even the summer tem- 
 perature of the Sahara, which is now 95 F., would fall 
 to 237 F., or 8 - 3 below the freezing-point. 
 
 1 Daniel's Meteorology, ii. p. 132. 2 Herschel's Meteorology, p. 38. 
 
 3 Flotvers of Sky, p. 1 81 . 4 Skertchly 's Physical Syrtem, p. 1 36. 
 
2 66 PLURALITY MARS. 
 
 ' But these calculations dd not show the full extent of 
 the cold we should suffer at the distance of Mars. As 
 the oceans would be frozen, no currents could convey 
 heat from the tropics to the polar regions, which would, 
 in consequence, have their climates vastly more rigorous 
 than has been assumed. If we are right, then, in calling 
 the white polar patches on Mars ice-caps, it follows as 
 a necessary consequence that the physical conditions of 
 that planet are very different from those which prevail 
 on Earth.' 
 
 Mr. Maunder rests his conclusion mainly on the 
 fact of this extreme cold. 
 
 'But winter!' he says, 'when even the Sun's noonday 
 heat might not suffice to raise the thinnest vapour, and 
 when, as soon as the short day was over, the scanty heat 
 received during its few hours would be radiated off into 
 space through the dry and chill air without let or hind- 
 rance, How will it be with the red planet then ? Cold, 
 far colder than our poles, far colder than our loftiest 
 mountain tops, colder than aught of cold of which we 
 know, cold such as nothing living might endure, must 
 reign over the sunless hours of the Martial winter. Nor 
 would that winter last only for a few short weeks, but 
 more than three hundred days would roll by, and still 
 the ice king would sway an unchallenged sceptre over 
 the unhappy regions under his control. 
 
 ' But when the summer broke out at last on those 
 frozen realms, what mighty changes would take place ! 
 The winter's snow would melt, the imprisoned rivers be 
 released, and floods caused far more extensive indeed 
 than any we ever experience here so extensive, indeed, 
 that their traces can be clearly perceived across fifty 
 millions of miles. For a period considerably longer than 
 our entire year, the Sun beats on the northern pole of 
 Mars without once sinking below the horizon ; and when 
 we remember this we cannot be surprised that his polar 
 snows should disappear with the rapidity which we 
 
MAUNDERS CONCLUSIONS. 267 
 
 actually notice, nor that such immense quantities of water 
 vapour should be raised into the air as to make known 
 its presence to us by means of the spectroscope at this 
 immense distance. 
 
 ' We can scarcely suppose that any living beings can 
 exist upon a planet so unhappily circumstanced. To 
 endure such long and bitter cold, to breathe in so rare an 
 atmosphere, to escape deluges so mighty, would be impos- 
 sible to forms of life like those we see around us. Move- 
 ment and change there may be in abundance, but it will 
 be the change of inorganic matter. Winds will blow, 
 clouds gather and disperse ; it may be that earthquakes 
 will rend the rocks, or volcanoes scatter an ashen rain 
 over miles of country, but the wondrous changes of life 
 in all its infinite variety of form will never be noticed 
 there.' l 
 
 Such are Mr. Maunder's conclusions. But I think we 
 can go a good deal further. 
 
 The long narrow sea to which he refers evidently lies 
 in a fissure of the planet, and it may be that this is a 
 deep and dry fissure where there is no water to freeze, 
 and hence it would not shine as if it had been frozen. 
 
 But this is a supposition far from probable, and 
 there is another more likely. We know that salt water 
 does not freeze so readily as fresh. May it not, there- 
 fore, be that this inlet (together with others similarly 
 situated) contains a sea resembling the Dead Sea in 
 Palestine, or even composed of or containing ingredients 
 still less liable to freeze, a sea which may not resemble 
 any sea upon Earth, and one, it may be, containing 
 water in it, but water mixed with the most deadly 
 ingredients. 2 It will be kept in view that the proba- 
 
 1 Maunder, Sunday Magazine, 1882, p. 172. 
 
 2 Mr. Proctor argues that because of the detection of aqueous vapour 
 by the spectroscope, the seas must consist of water, and not of other 
 
268 PLURALITY MARS. 
 
 bilities of such a case are' great, for (1) neither Sun 
 nor Moon has power sufficient to create tides in Mars j 1 
 (2) the seas not being united as on Earth, there can 
 be no currents flowing through them such as flow 
 through our seas ; (3) if one authority be correct, the 
 winds on Mars can never be sufficiently violent to 
 produce storms, at all events, they are more gentle 
 than with us ; 2 (4) that there can be no heavy rains ; 
 (5) there are probably no rivers. Lastly, the sunlight 
 and heat, owing to greater distance, being less than 
 half what are received by the Earth, must create a 
 difference of influence on the water which, under the 
 preceding circumstance, can only be stagnant. Perhaps 
 the progress of science may reach the point of discover- 
 ing of what ingredients these so - called seas are 
 composed ; but it is quite open for us at present to 
 suppose, and not unreasonably, that the seas are 
 unfavourable to life; We know the following to be 
 scientific facts : (1) that in seas and lakes which have 
 
 fluids (Other Worlds, pp. 102-104) ; but this does not by any means 
 seem to follow. Vapours rise from the Dead Sea, and densely too, but 
 the salt remains only the water rises. 
 
 1 ' The effects of the Sun in producing tides must always be in- 
 appreciable in Mars' (Orbs around us,, p. 117). 
 
 2 One cannot,, indeed, speculate much regarding the winds in Mars 
 beyond this, that there being less moisture, there will be less room for 
 winds. The theories regarding the origin of winds differ. See Hopkins' 
 Atmospheric Changes, pp. 40 et seq.. and 313 et seq. But Mr. Proctor 
 states that * no winds would disturb the surface of the frozen seas, for 
 winds have their origin in heat, and with the death of the solar heat the 
 winds would utterly die out also ' (Flowers of Sky, p. 181). Guillemin, 
 on the contrary, in stating that notable differences distinguish the Earth 
 and Mars in their meteorology, refers to a remark of Professor Phillips, 
 that ' the considerable periodical exchange of moisture which is made 
 between the two hemispheres (of Mars), especially between the two poles, 
 must give rise to hurricanes, and storms of the violence of which we 
 can form no idea' (Guillemin' Heavens, p. 184). 
 
THE SEAS. 269 
 
 no outlet, and where, consequently, all the water passes 
 off by evaporation, the greatest degree of saltness is 
 attained, Buchan's Meteorology, and examples there cited, 
 180; (2) that the density of seas is dependent on 
 the quantity of fresh water poured into them from rivers, 
 Buchan, 181 ; (3) that the density is increased or 
 diminished according to the lightness or heaviness of 
 the rainfall, Buchan, 182. But there is another little 
 circumstance which may not be without its value. 
 Mr. Proctor describes the seas as ' being for the most 
 part darker ' (than the land) ' and of a somewhat greenish 
 hue' Now the Dead Sea, as described by Eobinson in 
 his Biblical Researches, when looking down upon it from 
 a lofty height, ' appeared decidedly green, as if stagnant, 
 though we afterwards saw nothing of this appearance 
 from below.' This may help, together with the other 
 circumstances, to suggest a resemblance to the Dead 
 Sea, of which it is said, according to the testimony of 
 all antiquity and of most modern travellers, 'no living 
 thing no trace in fact of animal or vegetable life 
 exists in this sea.' And this, chemical analysis has 
 shown, results from the matters contained in it differ- 
 ing greatly from those of sea water. 1 The great Salt 
 Lake of America is similarly fatal to animal and 
 vegetable life, and we are told that not a tree grows on 
 the shores of the lake nor on the adjacent plains. 2 
 
 Passing from the supposed seas to the land, the first 
 observation which occurs is, that it presents a ruddy 
 appearance or colour. This has been established by 
 Dr. Huggins not to be due to an absorptive power in 
 
 1 Elisee Reclus' Earth, p. 476. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 478. See also Mrs. Somerville's Physical Geography, 
 ii. p. 21. 
 
2 yo PL URALITYMARS. 
 
 the atmosphere of Mars, and Sir John Herschel states 
 that 1 ' it indicates, no doubt, an ochrey tinge in the 
 general soil, like what the red sandstone districts on the 
 Earth may possibly offer to the inhabitants of Mars, 
 only more decided.' Mr. Maunder, telling how the 
 Earth would look as seen from Venus, says : ' The great 
 sandy deserts, Sahara and Arabia, would appear to be 
 fully as ruddy as anything we see on Mars. It is hard 
 to say what colour England would show, with its green 
 woods, and its golden cornfields, and its black mining 
 districts ; probably a pale greenish yellow.' 2 Now there 
 is not a particle of green visible on these lands of Mars, 
 nor is there, as already stated, any variation from time 
 to time upon its hue, so that the conclusion is most 
 natural that there is no vegetation of any kind on its 
 surface. The land may be iron oxydised, but more 
 likely is either rock or desert sand, and there are various 
 circumstances which go to such an inference. 3 
 
 (1.) That the Albedo or reflective power of Mars so 
 closely approaches that of the Moon, the Albedo of 
 the Moon being '1736 and that of Mars '2672. 
 
 (2.) The great extent of land surface compared with 
 sea surface looking to the very different relations they 
 bear to each other on Earth shows that, even were the 
 evaporation of the sea equal to the evaporation of the 
 waters of Earth, the moisture which the land would 
 receive would be many times less than the moisture 
 received by the land upon Earth, probably it would 
 
 i 510. 2 Maunder, p. 32. 
 
 3 Dr. George Wilson says : ' The strange fiery red light of this star also 
 implies a peculiar condition of its whole uncovered surface, very unlike 
 what our Earth's exterior exhibits, and forbids any conclusion as to the 
 general identity of their superficial condition ingredients. It still more 
 forbids rash inferences as to terrestrial plants and animals existing on a 
 body of unknown composition,' p. 24. 
 
LAND VEGETATION. 271 
 
 not be one-tenth of what the Earth receives, and there- 
 fore altogether insufficient for the support of vegetation. 
 
 (3.) But, as already said, this moisture would not fall 
 in showers of rain, it would be merely at best a moist 
 mist, which would not reach the interiors of the 
 continents. If there be no mountains there would be 
 no rivers, nor would rivers be possible under the circum- 
 stances just mentioned. It may be said, therefore, 
 there would be no fresh water to support life or 
 vegetation. 
 
 (4.) The excessive cold of winter would destroy all 
 vegetation, if any did exist. ' It is pretty generally 
 believed that if the temperature fall below 40 the 
 growth of vegetation is arrested during the next day.' l 
 But as the solar heat upon Mars is of itself less than 
 half that of Earth, it is apparent that there could be no 
 vegetable growth on Mars. The effect of the severe 
 cold on Mars, however, may be still greater. It is 
 related that, in an attempt to sink a well in Siberia, 2 
 it was found that the Earth was frozen to a depth of 
 612 feet, although regarded as an aqueous rock, pro- 
 tected from change beyond the depth of a few feet by 
 the shortness of the summer and the general rigour of 
 the climate. 
 
 (5.) But vegetation would also be destroyed by the 
 extreme and sudden transition of warm to cold, and cold 
 to warm, during the days and nights. Mr. Buchan 
 says, 113: 
 
 ' In the north-western parts of the United States of 
 America the temperature in spring often rises to 83 
 during the day, and falls to freezing during the night. 
 Under such a climate the vital functions of plants, the 
 tissues of which abound in sap, are called into activity 
 
 1 Buchan, 119. 2 Cooley's Physical Geography, p.. 82. 
 
272 PL URALITYMARS. 
 
 during the day, but the sap being frozen during the 
 night the vessels containing it are ruptured by expansion, 
 and the plant, if not totally destroyed, is so seriously 
 injured that its successful cultivation becomes precarious 
 and uncertain.' 
 
 Now on Mars, where the air is so rare and evaporation 
 is so small, it is obvious that the change of temperature 
 from day to night and night to day must far transcend 
 anything we are acquainted with, and hence the greater 
 impossibility of vegetation existing on Mars. 1 
 
 (6.) The absence of vegetation, and especially of 
 forests, would of itself have the effect of depriving Mars 
 of the modifying influences they bring to climate ; 
 vegetation producing a cover which modifies the heat 
 of day and the cold of night, and equalizes the seasons. 2 
 
 (7.) But if Mars cannot support vegetation, then the 
 food of animal life is wanting. 
 
 Lastly, the very same causes which would be detri- 
 mental to vegetable life would also be fatal to animal 
 life. For the severity of the strain on the constitution 
 from an excessively warm climate to an excessively 
 cold one, from day to night and night to day, and from 
 winter to summer and summer to winter, and the more 
 so that there would be little twilight and no spring or 
 autumn, and only a narrow temperate belt, would be 
 such of itself as would be fatal to life. Add to this the 
 want of fresh water, and the rarity of the air, and the 
 absence of vegetable substance, and we shall see the im- 
 possibility of animal, much 'less of rational animal life 
 upon Mars. 
 
 1 Mr. Proctor has pointed out the effects of a greater length of year 
 and of the lesser gravity in Mars on vegetation in his Expanse, of 
 Heaven, p. 67 et seq., to which reference may be made. 
 
 2 Buchan, 132. 
 
VII. 
 
 BEFORE proceeding to the consideration of the Major 
 Planets, there are some bodies appertaining to the solar 
 system, and having a link of connection with each other, 
 which have claims to be treated by themselves. 
 
 1. THE ASTEROIDS AND METEORIC STONES. 
 
 The Asteroids, or as they are sometimes termed, the 
 Planetoids, or the Telescopic Planets, number, so far as 
 already detected, 230 or more, and additional ones are 
 being yearly discovered, and they are believed to extend 
 to many thousands in number. According to the calcula- 
 tions of M. Leverrier, they may even amount to 150,000.* 
 The history of the discovery of the earlier ones, com- 
 mencing with Ceres, on the 1st day of the present 
 century, will be found in Grant (p. 238 et seq.). Among 
 the popular works, particulars are to be more fully had 
 in Dr. Dick's Celestial Scenery than elsewhere, although 
 necessarily the information at his command was limited 
 to the date at which he wrote. 
 
 Great diversity of calculation has been made regarding 
 their sizes. Schroeter estimates at figures much higher 
 than those of Sir William Herschel, or than those of 
 recent astronomers. Thus Schroeter considered Ceres 
 to have a diameter of 1624 miles, and, including a 
 supposed atmosphere, 2974 miles. Pallas to have a 
 diameter of 2099 miles. But probably the largest of 
 
 1 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 192. 
 S 
 
274 PLURALITY THE ASTEROIDS. 
 
 these small planets is not 700 miles in diameter; while 
 Herschel's view was that none of them exceeded 163 
 miles ; 1 and Humboldt's, that probably ' the largest of 
 the small planets is at the utmost 145 geographical miles 
 in diameter.' 2 But many of the smaller planetoids must 
 be exceedingly minute ; nay, the possibility is that there 
 may be multitudes, perhaps millions, which are far too 
 microscopical for discovery by the telescope. Indeed, 
 even the larger ones, except occasionally Vesta, can only 
 be discerned by the aid of a telescope of high magnify- 
 ing power. 
 
 Now -those who are advocates of plurality must surely 
 admit a limit in point of size to the possibility of a 
 planetary body being inhabited. A body having the 
 diameter of a yard or a mile, whatever might be its 
 condition or position, could not be supposed to be the 
 scene of rational life; and on this ground exception 
 would fall to be extended to the most of these planetoids. 
 
 But the power of gravity being proportionally so 
 weak, would of itself be a determining force. On many 
 of these bodies, perhaps on the vast majority of them, 
 no small animal, no small object, would be safe. There 
 must be wanting a power of gravitation sufficiently 
 attractive to retain them on its surface. Exposed, as 
 most of them are, to a movement in their orbit at the 
 rate of upwards of 40,000 miles per hour, probably any- 
 thing slight, or even anything unattached, might be blown 
 or expelled from their surface, or in any view, might be 
 easily drawn from it by counter attraction, such as by 
 the attraction caused by one of themselves : for in a 
 manner strange and unique, and doubtless, were they 
 inhabited, terrific, they cross each other's orbits, and 
 
 1 Dick, Celestial Scenery, p. 132. * Cosmos, iv. p. 424. 
 
FORMS- DISTANCE ORBITS. 275 
 
 thus occasionally pass in dangerous proximity to each 
 other. 
 
 We know not the shapes of these bodies, or whether 
 even the larger ones are globular, or whether they revolve 
 on axes, or if they revolve on axes, whether these are 
 inclined to the ecliptic, and if so, at what degrees. If 
 the facts were known, they might have a bearing on the 
 question. 
 
 But this we do know, that their distance from the 
 Sun is about, on an average, 100 millions of miles 
 greater than that of Mars, and the light and heat they 
 receive may be on an average a sixth or a seventh of 
 that which is enjoyed by us upon Earth, so that their 
 climate must be cold, vastly colder than what we have 
 seen to be the unendurable coldness of Mars. But over 
 and above, they are remarkable for the great eccentricity 
 of their orbits. Mars, as already seen, has a difference 
 of 26 millions of miles between its perihelion and its 
 aphelion ; but while a few of the asteroids have a less 
 eccentricity than that of Mars, nearly all the others 
 have a vastly greater. Thus Pallas is nearer the Sun 
 at the one extreme than at the other by 129 millions 
 of miles. The difference in the case of Euridice (dis- 
 covered in 1862, after the date of Dr. Dick's book) is 
 20 millions of miles more. The distinctive extremes, 
 therefore, of heat and cold in the course of their orbits 
 must be beyond our conception ; and all that has been 
 said with reference to Mars on this subject applies with 
 greater force to the asteroids. 
 
 There is something noticeable too with regard to the 
 appearance of some of these small planets. Thus Vesta 
 sheds a light more intense and white than do others, 
 
276 PLURALITY THE ASTEROIDS. 
 
 , * 
 
 some of which are surrounded by nebulosity, and yet it 
 is devoid of nebulosity. What can this mean ? Can 
 it be that it reflects from a metallic surface, and is 
 therefore incapable of supporting vegetable and conse- 
 quently animal life ? 
 
 Then some of them which are said to have a nebulous 
 surrounding possess it of great density, insomuch that 
 Schroeter (who, however, seems to be here unreliable) 
 estimates the atmosphere of Ceres to be 675 English 
 miles in height, Pallas about a third less. What are 
 these nebulous atmospheres ? Are they remains of the 
 original nebula out of which they were formed ? or are 
 they portions detached from passing comets ? Or are the 
 planets possessing such atmospheres, small as they are, 
 not even yet cooled down to solidity ? It may be so. 
 Sir William Herschel l says that in viewing Pallas he 
 could not 
 
 ' perceive any sharp termination which might denote a 
 disc, it is rather what I would call a nucleus. The 
 appearance of Pallas is cometary, the disc, if it has any, 
 being ill-defined. When I see it to the best advantage 
 it appears like a much compressed, extremely small, but 
 ill-defined planetary nebula.' 
 
 Sir John Herschel, 2 who conjectures that this appear- 
 ance has possibly originated in some imperfection in the 
 telescope employed, or some other temporary cause of 
 illusion, thinks that the hazy appearance seen may only 
 be ' indicative of an extensive and vapourous atmo- 
 sphere, little repressed and condensed ~by the inadequate 
 gravity of so small a mass! But such a nebula as has 
 been supposed to exist could not correspond with an 
 atmosphere to support life. It is too dense, too opaque, 
 too close to render life, or in any view, rational life, 
 1 Dick, p. 131. 2 525. 
 
UE fy 
 
 METEORIC STONES.^ N I V Bfi, S I T Y 
 
 possible. It would exclude the light ^^^50^^ > 
 feeble at the best. There could be no possibility 
 vegetation. 
 
 But beyond all that has now been stated, we are 
 furnished with another fact which seems to bear, with 
 overwhelming force, against any supposition for life in 
 the asteroids, and it is derived from what we know of 
 the meteoric stones which have fallen upon Earth. For 
 meteoric stones may be regarded as only minute planets, 
 such as many of the asteroids (which, from their minute- 
 ness, have not been discovered) must be, planetoids 
 which are not to be found in all regions of the solar 
 system. ' These stones,' says Professor Leitch, 1 an advo- 
 cate for plurality, ' are now almost universally held to 
 be little planets ; and they certainly afford a presumption 
 that the other planets have similar chemical elements ; ' 
 and in supporting his cause, he advances an argument 
 upon them to which that of Dr. Wilson, to be imme- 
 diately mentioned, is an unanswerable reply. 
 
 Accounts of the various falls of such stones will be 
 found in Humboldt's Cosmos, vol. i. p. 103, and vol. iv. 
 p. 587; also in Phipson's Mysteries of Nature, in his 
 chapter on Aerolites. 
 
 Now the late Professor George Wilson, 2 who must 
 be taken as an authority on the subject, tells us 
 that 
 
 ' the meteorites have been put upon the rack by the chemist, 
 and all their secrets have been tortured out of them, but 
 they have revealed fewer marvels than at one time was 
 expected.' ' They contain no ultimate chemical com- 
 pound which the Earth does not contain.' 
 
 1 P. 300. 2 Chemistry of Stars, p. 28. 
 
278 PLURALITY METEORIC STONES. 
 
 And taking up the author of Vestiges of the Creation 1 
 where he states that 
 
 ' they contain the ordinary materials of the earth, but 
 associated in a manner altogether new, and unlike any- 
 thing known in terrestrial mineralogy,' contriving, ' by 
 an unwarrantable concealment, to convey a very false 
 impression of the true nature of meteoric stones.' They 
 are said to ' contain the ordinary materials of the Earth, 
 which, no doubt, they do, but it should have been added 
 that they contain only some of them, so far as we know, 
 but the smaller part.' 
 
 And Dr. Wilson adds that 
 
 ' so far as our knowledge extends, it does not appear that 
 a third of our earthly elements has been found in these 
 bodies. Hurnboldt, in his Cosmos, quoting from Bam- 
 melsberg, the greatest living authority on the subject, 
 enumerates only 18 of the 60 elements as occurring in 
 them. Professor Shepard counts 19 as certain, and adds 
 two more as doubtful. It is to be observed, on the other 
 hand, that not only are the majority of the terrestrial 
 elements, including many of the most important among 
 them, totally wanting from meteoric stones, but those 
 which are present are not mingled, as the quotation (from 
 Vestiges), indeed, acknowledges, in earthly proportions. 
 Our globe consists, speaking generally, of two opposite 
 classes of ingredients, namely, -metals and non-metallic 
 bodies, some of which, as oxygen in the one division and 
 the precious metals in the other, occur free, but the 
 greater number in combination with some body or bodies 
 of the unlike class. There are many more kinds of metals 
 than of non-metallic substances, but the latter, taken as 
 a whole, occur in much larger quantities than the former. 
 One non-metallic body alone, oxygen, is computed to 
 
 1 It would appeaf from Dr. "Wilson's Life that he had delivered a 
 course of lectures on the Vestiges, which unfortunately was never pub- 
 lished. 
 
THEIR COMPOSITION. 279 
 
 form a third of the weight of the crust of the Earth. In 
 meteoric stones, on the other hand, whilst non-metallic 
 elements are the less numerous constituents (only a half 
 of those occurring on the Earth being found on them), 
 they also occur in much smaller quantities than the metals. 
 Of some of them, indeed, traces only are found. 
 
 ' Many of the best marked aerolites are masses of 
 nearly pure metal, chiefly iron, with a small proportion of 
 nickel. Others contain cobalt, manganese, chromium, 
 copper, and other metals, diffused through them in minute 
 quantities, associated with a small percentage of oxygen, 
 sulphur, chlorine, etc. The stoney meteorites consist 
 chiefly of silica and metallic oxides. 
 
 ' Whilst thus meteoric stones contain only a portion of 
 the elements of the Earth, that portion is made up (in 
 the greater number of meteorites), so far as the relative 
 quantities of its components are concerned, almost entirely 
 of metals. A meteoric stone represents, therefore, only a 
 third of the whole constituents of the Earth, so far as 
 number is concerned, and except to a small extent, but 
 one class of them, so far as nature. A globe so consti- 
 tuted could never by any process of development (unless 
 its so-called elements suffered transmutation) become pos- 
 sessed of water, or an atmosphere, or give birth to terrestrial 
 plants or animals.' 1 
 
 Dr. Wilson 2 then illustrates, in a characteristic manner, 
 the consequence to a human being of the absence of only 
 one element. 
 
 The fact of the far greater density of the smaller 
 planets as compared with the greater ones, and the 
 still greater density of the meteoric stones, lends 
 countenance to the view that the asteroids, which are 
 all small, though differing in size, are of a density or 
 hardness, in all likelihood metallic, which precludes the 
 possibility of vegetation and life. 
 
 1 Chemistry of Stars, p. 30. 2 P. 32. 
 
280 PLURALITY METEORIC STONES. 
 
 I cannot, however, leave the meteoric stones without 
 noticing what was thought and has been represented as 
 a momentous recent discovery, evidencing life on other 
 celestial bodies. For it went forth that organic remains 
 had been found in meteoric stones, enabling us ' to see 
 with our own eyes the veritable remains of animate 
 beings from another celestial body.' Two Germans, 
 Dr. Hahn, a geologist, and Dr. Weinland, a zoologist, 
 have, it was stated, 
 
 ' recently investigated the subject to some extent, and 
 the result of their labour is that they find in these 
 stones fossil sponges, corals, and crinoids. They are also 
 of opinion that they have discovered a trace of vegetable 
 remains. These startling discoveries point to the fact 
 that in the world where these rocks and animal forms 
 originated, the cause of organic evolution was only 
 similar to that which has taken place upon Earth.' The 
 stones themselves were stated as 'believed by astronomers 
 to be the remains of a planet which had been destroyed 
 in some manner, shattered into fragments by forces which 
 to us may be set down as unknown or mysterious.' 
 
 Elsewhere, in mentioning this sensational ' discovery,' 
 it was stated 
 
 ' If confirmed, it proves that meteorites are not mere 
 wandering fragments of an exploded sun, but they have 
 formed part of a world furnished with water and 
 organized life.' ' It is the opinion,' it was added, ' of many 
 savants that meteorites do not belong to the solar 
 system, but are visitors from far distant spheres ; ' and it 
 would 'seem to prove that round these suns revolve 
 worlds with water and atmosphere, and an organized life 
 almost identical with our own.' l 
 
 Hartwig also devotes an interesting chapter of his 
 Aerial World 2 to aerolites, mentioning the various 
 
 1 Newspaper paragraph, Evening Standard, May 1882. 
 
 2 Hartwig's Aerial World, p. 350. 
 
ORGANIC LIFE UPON. 281 
 
 opinions which have been entertained regarding their 
 origin. Some supposing them to be the product of our 
 own volcanoes, others ascribing them to the Moon, 
 others to coming from the depths of space, others to 
 comets. 
 
 Skertchly l advocates a solar origin for at least some 
 of them, and for a stellar origin for others. 
 
 As it would not be possible for our own volcanoes to 
 hurl the meteoric stones to a point beyond the gravita- 
 tion power of Earth, so we may put aside the thought 
 that they are the product of volcanoes of other planets, 
 either of our own or of stellar systems. And it would 
 seem a wild view to suppose even that stones of a lew 
 pounds w eight, or a few tons weight, have been ejected 
 from any other sun beyond the power of their attracting 
 gravity, looking to the tremendous gulf which exists 
 between our Sun and the nearest of the fixed stars. 
 But whether possible or not, one thing is clear, that if 
 such meteoric stones have been projected from either 
 our Sun or from any other sun, they could bring with 
 them no organic life, either vegetable or animal, because, 
 as we have already seen, the Sun and stars are in a 
 condition in which no such life could exist. 
 
 Unfortunately for the grave discovery, it was speedily 
 demolished by Carl Yogt. ' The organisms announced 
 by M. Hahn have no existence; what has been described 
 and drawn as such, results from crystalline conforma- 
 tions which are absolutely inorganic.' 2 
 
 The antiquated thought that the asteroids or that 
 meteoric stones are pieces of an exploded planet may 
 be dismissed as altogether unwarranted. 
 
 But by means of the investigations of the Italian 
 
 1 Skertchly, p. 150. 2 Knowledge, i. 251. 
 
282 PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 astronomer Schiaparelli, and of Adams and Leverrier, 
 coincidence lias recently been found between the 
 meteoric system and comet paths, so that apparently 
 some of the meteoric showers are derived from 
 cometary tails. The subject has been fully treated of 
 in Guillemin's World of Comets} and it is not necessary 
 to the present question to enter upon it here, but the 
 fact naturally leads to our next looking at the case of 
 
 2. THE COMETS. 
 
 Kepler considered ' comets to be huge, uncommon 
 creatures, generated in the celestial spaces, and that 
 they were made to the end that the ethereal fluid 
 might not be more void of monsters than the ocean is 
 of whales and other great thieving fishes.' 2 
 
 But the notions regarding their appearance have been 
 equally strange. 
 
 ' The extraordinary aspect of comets/ says Sir John 
 Herschel, ' their rapid and seemingly irregular motions, 
 the unexpected manner in which they often burst upon 
 us, and the imposing magnitudes which they occasionally 
 assume, have in all ages rendered them objects of astonish- 
 ment, not unmixed with superstitious dread to the unin- 
 structed, and an enigma to those most conversant with 
 the wonders of creation and the operations of natural 
 causes.' 3 
 
 The superstition has principally taken the form of 
 imagining them to presage calamitous coming events, 
 such as the deaths of eminent personages. Nor has 
 the superstition been confined to the unlearned. Kings 
 
 1 Guillemin's World of Comets, chap. xii. pp. 417-451. See Mrs. 
 Somerville's Connection of the Physical Sciences, 10th ed. p. 376. 
 
 2 Milne's Essay, p. 43. 3 Outlines of Astronomy, 554. 
 
SUPERSTITIOUS BELIEFS. 283 
 
 and priests have mingled with the crowd. Pope 
 Calixtus, believing the appearance of the splendid 
 comet of 1456 
 
 ' to be at once the sign and instrument of divine wrath, 
 was so frightened at its appearance that he ordered 
 public prayers to be offered up in every town, and the 
 bells to be tolled at noon of each day to warn the people 
 to supplicate the mercy of Heaven. He at the same time 
 excommunicated both the comet and the Turks, whose 
 arms had lately proved victorious over the Christians ' ! l 
 
 Indeed, if a comet were not in its entirety a messenger 
 of evil, what was to hinder a part of it to be ; for we 
 are told by one writer 'that if the comet (of 1680) is 
 not a visible sign of the anger of God, the tail may be.' 2 
 The myths and superstitions which have arisen regard- 
 ing them have been many, and will be found mentioned 
 in various books. 3 Some people have from unknown 
 sources obtained wonderful information regarding them. 
 Thus we learn that Bodin, a French lawyer (1575), 
 thought with Democritus 'that comets are spirits which, 
 having lived on the Earth innumerable ages, and having 
 at last completed their term of existence, celebrate their 
 last triumphs, or are recalled to heaven in the form cf 
 shining stars,' 4 so that their absence from Earth by 
 their absorption or conversion into comets was, it 
 appears, the reason of famines, epidemics, and civil 
 wars ; nay, it would seem that the apparition of this 
 cometary spirit in one case, sad to say, occasioned all 
 the cats in Westphalia to be ill. 5 
 
 1 Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 332. 
 
 2 Flammarion's Marvels, p. 351. 
 
 3 See among others Flammarion's Astronomical Myths, also his 
 Marvels of the Heavens; Milne's Prize Essay on Comets (1828); 
 Gmllemin's World of Comets ; The Comet (Biela's), by Arago (1832). 
 
 4 Milne's Essay, p. 43. 5 Arago, The Comet, p. 77. 
 
284 PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 But the dread has extended somewhat more legiti- 
 mately to the fear lest a comet should tilt against the 
 Earth ; and it has even been thought that the great 
 deluge was produced by an awkward collision of this 
 kind. Such fear arose in 1773 from the apprehension 
 that a comet would cross the Earth's orbit, that ' persons 
 of weak minds died of fright, and women miscarried. 
 There were not wanting people who knew too well the 
 art of turning to their advantage the alarm inspired by 
 the approaching comet, and places in Paradise were sold 
 at a very high rate! 1 In 1832, therefore, to allay 
 similar apprehensions arising out of the expected 
 proximity of Biela's comet that year, M. Arago wrote 
 his little treatise on The Comet? in which he pointed 
 out, inter alia-, that collision would not occur, and gave 
 the comforting assurance that the calculations of proba- 
 bilities show that of 281,000,000 chances there is only 
 one unfavourable. However, this one chance is quite 
 possible to happen in our own day, and it has been 
 thought that the tails of the comets of 1843 3 and 
 1861 4 did graze the Earth, but without producing any 
 sensible effect. The direct charge of (for a comet) a solid 
 nucleus might possibly be another matter. 
 
 But our sole interest at present arises upon the 
 question of habitability, and notwithstanding the marked 
 differences which exist between the planets and the 
 comets, the latter have not been without advocates for 
 their being peopled, and that, too, by a race of intelligent 
 beings even superior to ourselves. 
 
 Fontenelle's Marchioness is probably responsible for 
 
 1 Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 314. 2 Arago's Comet, p. 62. 
 
 3 Somerville, p. 369. 
 
 * Guillemin's Heavens, p. 260, and other authorities. 
 
OCCUPA TION OF INHABITANTS. 285 
 
 suggesting the fanciful idea upon which the supposition 
 has been based. In the fifth evening, the conversation 
 having turned upon our present subject of discourse, 
 she observed 
 
 ' There can be nothing so diverting as to change 
 vortices. We that never go out of our own sphere lead 
 but a dull life ; if the inhabitants of a comet had but the 
 wit to foresee the time when they are to come into our 
 world, they who had already made the voyage could tell 
 their neighbours beforehand what they would see, and 
 could inform them that they would discover a planet 
 with a great ring about it, meaning our Saturn ; they 
 would also say you shall see another planet, which 
 has four little ones to wait on it ; and perhaps some of 
 them, resolving to observe the very moment of their 
 entrance into our world, would presently cry out, A new 
 sun, a new sun, as sailors used to cry, Land, land.' l 
 
 Lambert improved on this idea by figuring to himself 
 the comets as travelling globes peopled with astronomers, 2 
 carried from world to world to form enlarged concep- 
 tions, and thus apostrophizes the inhabitants as 
 
 ' happy intelligences, how excellent must be the frame 
 of your nature ! Myriads of ages pass away with you 
 like so many days with the inhabitants of the Earth. 
 Our largest measurements are your infinitely small quan- 
 tities,' and so forth. 3 
 
 Mr. Milne, 4 following in the same line, contended for 
 
 1 Fontenelle's Plurality of Worlds, p. 141. 
 
 2 Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 342. 
 
 3 Perhaps some troublesome objector might curiously desiderate in- 
 formation regarding the locale of the mines out of which these happy 
 intelligences would dig material for a twenty-five inch refractor, or 
 inconveniently ask upon which end of a comet's tail would secure founda- 
 tion be had for building an equatorial observatory, of largest human 
 measurement. 
 
 * Milne's Essay, p. 139. 
 
286 PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 the habitability of those comets ' whose advanced state 
 of maturity renders the Sun's influence incapable of 
 materially affecting the surface of the nucleus ; ' and, 
 ingeniously reasoning against the objections to the sup- 
 position, and disclaiming the necessity for assuming the 
 inhabitants to have bodily frames resembling those of 
 terrestrial beings, he would conclude (p. 144) that 
 
 1 if we estimate the intelligence of beings by the know- 
 ledge which their place in the Universe is fitted to 
 impart, we are compelled to regard the cometary in- 
 habitants as of an order even superior to the creatures 
 of the Earth. When, for example, they find themselves 
 passing through the midst of the satellites, those small 
 bodies which we can scarcely discern with telescopes, or 
 when they are brought so close to the planet Saturn that 
 they can examine the wonderful phenomenon of his rings 
 even with the naked eye, or when at the perihelion 
 passage they are able to observe everything on the sur- 
 face of the Sun, that great luminary, the mysterious 
 source of life, and light, and energy to the system, what 
 spectacles of delightful contemplation must they enjoy, 
 and what means of attaining an acquaintance with the 
 works of nature, infinitely greater than any which we 
 shall ever command ! Traversing as they do the whole 
 extent of that system of which the Earth forms so insig- 
 nificant a member, and directing their course far beyond 
 its known limits into those regions of space whose dark 
 and unfathomable nature it will for ever baffle human 
 penetration to explore, the beings who have their abodes 
 on comets must be familiar with many important truths 
 of which we can obtain only a few casual glimpses, and 
 witness such glorious and sublime displays of the mani- 
 fold wonders of creation as must afford to them the 
 noblest conceptions of that Almighty Being by whose 
 wisdom they were constructed, and by whose power they 
 are still sustained.' 
 
HABITATIONS OF THE HAPPY. 287 
 
 Dr. Dick 1 after referring to Mr. Winston's rather 
 different supposition, that the comets were, from their 
 exposure to the extremes of heat and cold, the places of 
 punishment for the wicked, but considering the bound- 
 less beneficence of the Divine Being, holding it was 
 impossible to suppose so vast a number of these bodies 
 would be created for such an end concludes (conform- 
 ably to his strong leanings to the habitability of all 
 Heavenly Bodies) a long discourse on comets by 
 saying : 
 
 ' What I conceive to be one of the main designs of the 
 Creator in the formation of such a vast number of splendid 
 bodies is, that they may serve as habitations for myriads 
 of intellectual beings, to whom the Almighty displays 
 His perfections in a peculiar manner, and on whom He 
 bestows the riches of His beneficence.' 'We ought to 
 contemplate the approach of a comet, not as an object of 
 terror or a harbinger of evil, but as a splendid world, of 
 a different construction from ours, conveying millions of 
 happy beings to survey a new region of the divine empire, 
 to contemplate new scenes of creating power, and to 
 celebrate in loftier strains the wonders of omnipotence. 
 Viewing the comets in this light, what an immense 
 population must be contained within the limits of the 
 solar system ! ' 2 
 
 Truly, were this assumption well founded, the con- 
 cluding exclamation would be just. For although Dr. 
 Dick seems to limit his thoughts to comets having a 
 solid nucleus, the number of comets of all kinds which 
 pervade or invade the solar system is great, and while 
 figures differ with opinions and modes of calculation, 3 
 yet all are agreed that they are to be counted by millions, 
 
 1 Sidereal Heavens, p. 338. 2 Ibid. p. 356. 
 
 3 See Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 350 ; Somerville, p. 377 ; and par- 
 ticularly Guillemin's Comets, chap. vi. 1. 
 
288 PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 and even, some say, by billions ; for, upon one estimate, 
 Guillemin reckons the number of comets traversing the 
 solar system within the orbit of Neptune at not less 
 than 45,500,000, while, taking in all which have 
 gravitated at least once round the Sun, he arrives at a 
 minimum of 74,000 billions. 
 
 The thought upon which the supposition rests is, 
 however, rather to be regarded as a fanciful conceit of 
 a philosophical imagination than as having any sub- 
 stantial groundwork, and a single observation may suffice 
 to put it aside. While we have a few comets of short 
 period, the average duration of the cometary orbit has 
 been said to be 1000 years, 1 but many have periods of 
 enormous length. Arago 2 specifies a number, ranging up 
 to 100,000 years; while a list made up by Guillemin 3 
 gives for the two longest respectively 1,840,000 and 
 2,800,000 years. Now the portions of these periods 
 during which the two comets pay flying visits to the 
 interior parts of the solar system form but small fractions 
 of the whole ; by far the larger part of their existence 
 is spent in distant regions, and, in the case of many, 
 thousands of cold years are occupied in slowly traversing 
 the dark realms of vacant space. Thus Donati's comet, 4 
 with a period of 2100 years, wanders out eighty times 
 the distance of Neptune. ' The comet of 1:845,' says 
 Guillemin, 5 ' recedes to a distance from the Sun of two 
 and a half times the mean distance of the Sun from the 
 Earth. The voyage outward, it is true, takes 1,400,000 
 years, and the return also 1,400,000 years.' 
 
 What ' spectacles of delightful contemplation,' may it 
 
 1 Dick, p. 323. 2 Arago's Popular Astronomy, vol. i. p. 572. 
 
 3 Guillemin's Comets, p. 145. 
 
 4 Herschel's Popular Lectures, p. 139. 5 Comets, p. 152. 
 
THE ACTUAL EXPERIENCE. 289 
 
 be asked, could the inhabitants have to observe, what 
 ' enlarged conceptions ' could they receive during even 
 two millions of the long years thus spent ? They would 
 be endured in blackest of cheerless darkness, without hail- 
 ing a solitary planet ; and even other comets, supposing 
 them possessed, like the luminous fishes of the great sea 
 depths, of inherent light capable of rendering them dimly 
 visible, if at all, would cross their paths at tremendous 
 intervals of time in that unfathomable ocean of space, 
 nay, perhaps in some voyages never. Then with what 
 length of life would it be needful to endow them ? or 
 would thousands of generations die and be buried in some 
 flickering ray or gassy clod without ever having witnessed 
 the glorious sights for the enjoyment of which these 
 ' superior ' persons were, according to the theory, created ? 
 Nay, rather let us suppose, were comets inhabited, the 
 approach to such unwonted sights would only inspire 
 the community with liveliest terror ; and when passing 
 from the chilly regions of sunless void they dashed into 
 the blinding presence of the great central solar fire, 
 these ' happy intelligences ' would experience doubtless 
 a 'familiarity with important truths;' but a proximate 
 familiarity of a kind which, if it did not at once utterly 
 destroy them, would leave burning impressions, in the 
 midst of which, dancing with agony round the nucleus 
 till frizzled up, with what patience could their distracted 
 minds regard the suggestion of tranquil astronomical 
 investigations ! The chimerical idea must therefore be 
 dismissed, while there are other and at least equally con- 
 clusive grounds on which the habitability may be rejected. 
 
 To enter fully upon the subject would, however, 
 be to occupy disproportionate space. It can only be 
 treated briefly. 
 
2 9 o PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 Guillemin describes the difference between a planet 
 and a comet in these words : 
 
 ' A globular mass, solid or liquid, surrounded on all 
 sides by a light and comparatively thin aeriform envelope, 
 is, perhaps, from a physical point of view, the simplest 
 description of a planet. The comparative stability is due, 
 on the one hand, to the preponderance of the central 
 globe, where general phenomena are modified only 
 at long intervals ; and, on the other, to the trifling 
 depth of the atmosphere, the portion of the planet the 
 most subject to variation and internal change. In 
 comets, we have seen, this relation is reversed, and the 
 atmosphere or nebulous envelope constitutes the entire 
 body, or at all events greatly preponderates. At the 
 utmost, we can only conjecture that in some comets the 
 nucleus is solid or liquid. Certainly its volume is 
 generally but a very insignificant portion of the entire 
 nebulosity, even if we except the tail.' * 
 
 There are, however, comets without a head or nucleus ; 
 others without a tail, others with an occasional tail. 
 But 'the distinctive sign of a comet' is to be found 
 in 'its orbit, its large eccentricity, great inclination, 
 direction/ etc. 2 
 
 1. In this, then, we discover the first element which 
 destroys resemblance to our planet. Comets 3 traverse 
 the starry vault and fly towards the Sun from every 
 direction, and unlike the planets, which all move in a 
 similar plane and from west to east, many move from 
 east to west ; and calculations made seem to show that 
 as many are ' retrograde ' as ' direct.' 4 But, in addition, 
 their course is sometimes elliptical, sometimes parabolical, 
 
 1 World of Comets, p. 247. 2 Ibid. p. 197. 
 
 3 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 241. 
 
 * Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 351 ; Guillemin's Comets, p. 188. 
 
PECULIARITIES. 291 
 
 and although there has been question about it, 1 yet lists 
 have been made 2 of some considered to be hyperbolical 
 that is to say, comets whose eccentricity of orbit is 
 such as to show us they entered our system for the first 
 time, and that having once visited it, they can never 
 return. These are circumstances which would indicate, 
 upon the Nebular Hypothesis, that they are not the off- 
 spring of the Sun, and therefore possess no community of 
 origin with its planets. Some have supposed that they 
 have come from other systems, or have been ejected 
 from other stars ; and Mr. Proctor, in propounding or 
 supporting this view, observes that, supposing projection 
 from the nearest star, ' eight million years would be the 
 shortest time in which any comet could traverse the 
 space separating our system from it.' 3 But whether 
 coming from other systems or not, this fact creates a 
 material and important difference from our world, and 
 indeed from every other orb. Laplace regarded them. 
 ' as small nebulae wandering from one solar system to 
 another, and formed by the condensation of the nebulous 
 matter scattered with such profusion throughout the 
 universe.' 4 And if I might venture to express an 
 opinion, this is a view which seems possessed of much 
 greater probability than that they are bodies ejected 
 from the Sun or from any star, whether near or remote. 
 
 2. The next peculiarity is the excessive changes to 
 which comets are subjected. 
 
 (1.) There is, first of all, the enormous difference 
 between their velocity at aphelion and at perihelion. 
 Thus the comet of 1680 was estimated by Sir Isaac 
 
 1 HerschePs Outlines, 564, p. 378. 2 World of Comets, p. 168. 
 
 3 Expanse of Heaven, p. 149. 
 
 4 Quoted without reference in World of Comets, p. 169. 
 
292 PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 Newton to move at its perihelion at the rate of 880,000 
 miles per hour; 1 a Mr. Squire, by two different cal- 
 culations, making it out to be no less than 1,240,000 
 miles per hour. While its motion when at aphelion, 
 when it is 13,000 bullions of miles distant from the 
 Sun, or seven times the distance of Uranus, is only 3 
 yards a second, or little more than 6 miles in an hour. 2 
 
 (2.) Comets are subject to sudden changes of bril- 
 liancy in the light of their tails ; see this described by 
 Guillemin, World of Comets, pp. 305-308. 
 
 (3.) As a comet approaches or retires from the 
 Sun, and owing in one way or another to the Sun's 
 action, its size alters rapidly. ' It is on the nucleus/ 
 says Milne, ' that the action of the Sun's heat produces 
 the most remarkable effects, bringing about physical 
 changes as sudden in their occurrence as they are often 
 difficult of explanation. Of this nature were the pheno- 
 mena observed by Schroeter in the comet of 1799 
 during the month of its greatest proximity to the Sun.' 3 
 And he mentions the changes which embraced a reduc- 
 tion in diameter of the nucleus in two days to two-thirds, 
 and in another day the nebulous matter had lessened 
 one fourth part. Guillemin, dealing with the same 
 subject, takes as an example Donati's comet (1858). 4 
 The diameter of its nucleus on 19th July was 4660 
 miles ; on 5th October, having gradually decreased, it 
 was only 400 miles, next day it attained 800 miles, 
 and on 8th October to 1120 miles ; on 10th was again 
 reduced to 630 miles. 
 
 While the head of the comet, or rather the nebulous 
 covering of the nucleus, is thus suffering vast change, 
 the production or prolongation of the tail, or its con- 
 
 1 Dick, p. 308. 2 Guillemin 's Heavens, p. 252. 
 
 3 Milne's Essay, p. 27. 4 World of Comets, p. 240. 
 
VIOLENT CHANGES. 293 
 
 traction, proceeds with inconceivable rapidity, and 
 stretches out often to enormous distances, where just 
 previously it was invisible. The tail of the comet of 
 1811 attained the length of 109,400,000 miles, that 
 of 1680 to 149,000,000 miles, that of 1843 to 
 198,800,000 miles. 1 Nor is this all, for the tail issues 
 on its approach to the Sun from nil, and upon retreat- 
 ing from the Sun returns to nil at least visibly. 
 Thus, in the case of Donati's comet (1858), 2 the first 
 appearance of the tail was observed on 14th August, 46 
 days before its perihelion passage, and it had then an 
 apparent length of but ten minutes. By the end of 
 August it attained two degrees; and, 10th October, 11 
 days after its perihelion passage, its maximum of 64 
 degrees rapidly began to decrease, till on 3rd December 
 it was reduced to only 55 minutes. 
 
 (4.) Comets are also subject to another species of 
 disturbance or change of form as they approach the 
 Sun, in the emanation from the nucleus of aigrettes or 
 triangular eruptions, or jets or streams of light from the 
 part turned towards the Sun. 3 In an interval of seven- 
 teen days, M. Chacornac was able to distinguish in the 
 comet of 1862 ' the formation of thirteen of these jets, 
 similar to jets of steam, and alternately directed towards 
 the Sun and to the east of it, that is to say, in a direc- 
 tion opposite to the movement of the comet ; after each 
 of these emissions the nebulous matter accumulated at the 
 end of the jet seemed driven back by a repulsive force 
 emanating from the Sun, and then flowed in the direction 
 of the tail.' 4 
 
 (5.) Not only is the cometary tail sometimes de- 
 veloped in two or more branches, but what, supposing 
 
 1 See list in World of Comets, p. 222. 2 Ibid. p. 227. 
 
 3 Herschel's Outlines, 569. 4 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 259. 
 
294 PLURALITYTHE COMETS. 
 
 comets to be inhabited; would be a terrifying cata- 
 strophe, one comet Biela's was observed to divide 
 into two distinct comets, which, after thus parting com- 
 pany, continued to journey on together at a separating 
 distance, at first, of about 180,000 miles, consider- 
 ably less than the distance of the Moon from us, but 
 afterwards much increased ; and the two portions 
 appear not again to have united. 1 It was probably 
 not a solitary instance among comets of what would to 
 inhabitants be such a dread disaster. 
 
 3. It is principally, however, upon the fact of the 
 vast extremes of temperature to which comets are sub- 
 jected, that opinion against the habitability is generally 
 rested. "We have seen to what immense distances in 
 space away from the Sun some comets reach. But 
 without taking such extreme cases, observe one, 'the 
 comet of short period,' that of Encke, which at perihelion 
 is 31 millions of miles from the Sun, or within the 
 orbit of Mercury; and at aphelion is 3*75,000,000 
 miles, or near the orbit of Jupiter. 2 Halley's, which is 
 of 76 years' period, approaches the Sun to 54,000,000 
 miles, or within the orbit of Venus, and removes from 
 it to a distance at aphelion of 3,100,000,000 miles, 
 or 250 millions of miles beyond the orbit of Neptune. 
 Upon this comet Guillemin observes : 
 
 ' These enormous variations in distance would lead us 
 to suppose most astonishing differences in the quantity 
 of light and heat received by the comet from the Sun ; 
 and, in fact, the intensity of these physical agents varies 
 in the ratio of 3000 to 1, or, as it may be put, the Sun's 
 
 1 See Herschel's Outlines, 580 ; also a pretty full account in Guille- 
 min's Comets, chap. viii. 3, pp. 258-267. 
 
 2 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 244. 
 
EXTREMES OF TEMPERATURE. 295 
 
 light and heat arrive at the comet with a force 3000 
 times more considerable at perihelion than at aphelion.' x 
 
 The comet of 1680, 2 whose period 3 has been estimated 
 at 3000 years, is at aphelion 853 times the distance of 
 the Earth from the Sun (or five-and-twenty times farther 
 than Halley's comet), 4 approached at perihelion about 
 146,000 miles from the surface or photosphere of the 
 Sun passing thus deep down through the corona ; and 
 was estimated by Newton to have been subjected to an 
 intensity of heat 2000 times that of red-hot iron 'a 
 term of comparison,' Sir John Herschel says, ' indeed of 
 a very vague description, and which modern thermotics 
 do not recognise as affording a legitimate measure of 
 radiant heat.' 5 
 
 But this approach was far exceeded by the wonderful 
 comet of 1843, which, with a period of 8813 years, 6 
 entered the corona at a distance of only 30,000 miles 
 
 1 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 243. 
 
 2 The superstitious panic which was excited by this comet was the 
 cause of publication by the French philosopher Pierre Bayle of his work, 
 called Miscellaneous Reflections occasioned by the Comet which appeared 
 in 1680, chiefly tending to explode Popular Superstitions : written to a 
 Doctor of the Sorbon. He seriously argued with special reference to his- 
 torical events against the mistake ' a remnant of pagan superstition' of 
 supposing that the comets were the presage of evils to the Earth, which, 
 if they were, would be a miracle an idea not to be approved. His 
 view, sound and rational (Translation, London 1708, vol. i. p. Ill), was 
 that ' we must believe that comets are the ordinary works of nature, 
 which, without regard to the happiness or misery of mankind, are trans- 
 ported from one part of the Heavens to another by virtue of the general 
 laws of motion ; ' but his book a curious exhibition of the kind of 
 thoughts afloat at that time is of so rambling a character, that it hardly 
 needed he should ingenuously tell us (vol. ii. p. 535), ' when 1 first sat 
 down to write I did not know what I should say at the third page, and 
 almost all I have said occurred as I wrote to you, without my ever having 
 had a thought on't before in the whole course of my life ' ! 
 
 3 Flammarion's Marvels, p. 197. 4 Dick's Sidereal Heavens, p. 308. 
 5 Outlines, 593. 6 Guillemin's Comets, p. 145. 
 
296 PLURALITYTHE COMETS. 
 
 from the Sun's photosphere, the effect of which Sir John 
 Herschel estimates to be equivalent to an exposure to 
 the glare of light and heat of '47,000 suns such as we 
 experience the warmth of, on the materials of which the 
 Earth's surface is composed.' And he adds : 
 
 'To form some practical idea of it, we may compare 
 it with what is recorded of Parker's great lens, whose 
 diameter was 32J inches, and focal length, six feet 
 eight inches.' ' The heat to which the comet was sub- 
 jected surpassed that in the focus of the lens in 
 question, on the lowest calculation, in the proportion of 
 24J- to 1 without, or 3J to 1 with the concentrating 
 lens. Yet that lens so used melted carnelian, agate, and 
 rock costal ! 1 
 
 But to this degree of heat, he explains, the comet 
 would be exposed only for little more than two hours ; 
 as it receded, the Sun's potency would, of course, gradu- 
 ally diminish, although, as comets generally shine more 
 brightly after passing the perihelion, much of that heat 
 would necessarily be retained for a period of time. 
 
 A body which could survive such a tremendous ex- 
 posure must be of a different constitution altogether 
 from that of our world, and this of itself destroys all 
 analogy to the Earth, and with it all claim to habitability. 
 Mr. Milne, 2 however, ingeniously argues that there is a 
 certain point in bodies beyond which, whatever may be 
 the means employed, their temperature never can be 
 elevated, and instances water, which can only be heated 
 up to 212; ' but all the 'heat which we employ in the 
 endeavour to raise this temperature higher is only dis- 
 sipated in the ensuing evaporation.' True, but this 
 means that, exposed to heat beyond a certain point, 
 dissolution happens; and he forgets that the question 
 1 Hcrscliel's Outlines, 592. 2 Milne's Essay, p. 140. 
 
THEIR MATERIAL. 297 
 
 is not about the comet itself, but as to the capacity of 
 beings possessing life to endure more than a certain 
 degree of heat, and with the possibility of vegeta- 
 tion, upon which animal life is dependent, enduring 
 a scorching temperature of fiery energy. It seems 
 enough to state the fact of such heat and especially 
 after what has been already said in reference to the 
 planet Mars of such violent extremes of heat and cold 
 as are implied in cometary existence, to exclude the 
 thought of their habitability. 1 
 
 4. Still it is well to exhaust the subject, for there is 
 yet another element of consideration in the nature or 
 constitution of comets. 
 
 (1.) And, in the first place, they are of the lightest 
 or most attenuated material. Flammarion forcibly 
 expresses himself thus : 
 
 ' Their rarity is such that out of the tails of certain 
 comets we should be able to cut a piece the size of Notre 
 Dame, and inhale it as a homosopathic inspiration. 
 Comets have been seen several million leagues long, 
 whose mass was nevertheless so small that it would have 
 been possible, without fatigue, to carry it on one's 
 shoulder.' 2 
 
 Sir John Herschel is even more emphatic ; for refer- 
 ring to a calculation of Newton's, he observes the tail 
 of a great comet, ' for aught we can tell, may consist of 
 only a few pounds or even ounces of matter.' 3 So small, 
 indeed, are the cometary masses, that they exercise no 
 
 1 There are doubtless comets whose approach to the Sun may not he 
 sufficiently near to entail great heat ; but this would mean the total, or 
 nearly total, exposure to incessant inconceivable frigidity, which would 
 be just as fatal. 
 
 2 Flammarion's Marvels, p. 209. 3 Outlines, 559, footnote. 
 
2 9 S PLURALITY THE COMETS. 
 
 appreciable influence oh the planets they approach. 
 That of 1770 passed within about six times the distance 
 of the Moon from us without affecting tides, 1 and the 
 same comet in 1779 passed near the moons of Jupiter 
 without disturbing them. 2 
 
 (2.) They can be possessed of no consistency or 
 solidity, seeing they are subject to such violent changes 
 as have been above mentioned. Indeed, Professor Tait has 
 suggested, although his suggestion has not been admitted, 
 that comets consist of a mass of meteorites, 3 or a cloud 
 of small stones ; but if they do, the meteorites must be 
 smaller than dust, and infinitely scattered or diffused. 
 In any view, so little solidity do they possess, that stars 
 are seen through the tails, and even through some 
 nuclei, which are in general more dense than the coma 
 which envelopes them. 
 
 (3.) But the spectroscope seems to disclose that the 
 nuclei of comets are partly self-luminous, and are partly 
 reflective of light from the Sun. There may be in 
 them some amount of incandescent solidity, but the 
 coma which surrounds and is derived from the nucleus, 
 and also forms the tail, is gaseous and incandescent. 
 Schellen deduces from the investigations made that 
 the nucleus ' is very possibly composed of glowing gas 
 containing carbon.' 4 Guillemin observes that 
 
 ' in a chemical point of view the comets few in number, 
 it is true which have as yet been subjected to examina- 
 tion are of very simple constitution. They consist of 
 simple carbon, or of a compound of carbon and hydrogen, 
 according to the comparisons made by Mr. Huggins ; 
 carbonic oxide or carbonic acid, according to the re- 
 
 1 Somerville, p. 358. 2 Guillemin's Comets, p. 278. 
 
 3 Tait's Recent Advances, p. 255. 
 
 4 Schellen's Spectrum Analysis, p. 578. 
 
ARE UNINHABITABLE. 299 
 
 searches of Father Secchi. The Italian astronomer was 
 therefore justified in saying, " It is very remarkable that 
 all the comets observed up to the present time have the 
 bands of carbon.'" 1 
 
 The spectroscopic investigations regarding comets will 
 be found mentioned in Schellen's Spectrum Analysis, 
 pp. 568-581, and in Guillemin's World of Comets, 
 pp. 315-327, up to their respective dates ; but looking to 
 the fact thus elicited of the gaseous nature of the coma, 
 and of the presumably deadly character of the gaseous 
 ingredients, and to all the circumstances previously 
 stated, each of which seems sufficient of itself to prove 
 fatal, we cannot but conclude that the romantic notions 
 once held by some regarding comets are to be altogether 
 put aside, and that these multitudinous bodies must be 
 declared uninhabitable. 2 
 
 1 Guillemin's Comets, p. 327. 
 
 2 Indeed there can be little fellowship between us and those light- 
 headed Arabs of desert space, who keep such irregular hours, wear such 
 disorderly garb, and employ themselves in rushing wildly out of their 
 dark retreats to terrify timid old maids. We can now see what praise 
 was due to that brave and pious pontiff, Calixtus, who so benevolently 
 exerted his vast power to excommunicate one of those audacious intruders. 
 But while engaged in a work so meritoriously useful, why, may we ask, 
 did he not proceed a step further, and lay the whole kingdom of comets 
 under the potent ban of a papal interdict ? What an unknown amount 
 of earthly disaster might he not then have averted ! 
 
VIII. 
 
 PASSING from the smallest or lightest of all the hodies 
 of our system, but bodies to be counted as we have seen 
 by millions or billions, we now arrive at length at an 
 examination of the four great outer planets, and it will 
 be found that the question under discussion falls to be 
 determined with regard to them by different classes of 
 facts from those which have decided the state or the 
 fate of the minor planets. The first and most important 
 is 
 
 JUPITER. 
 
 M. Flammarion describes the planet Jupiter as 
 
 'a charming one, so far at least as we are able to judge 
 from afar, and without going there. To begin with, a 
 continual spring rejoices its surface. If it is ornamented 
 with flowers, which we do not doubt, though we know 
 not of what these flowers consist, they do not only survive 
 " the span of a morning " as our roses do, but live much 
 longer. Scarcely have the oldest begun to dry up and 
 fade, but they are replaced by lovely buds opening before 
 the first have died away.' 1 
 
 This is very poetical, and may create a longing to reach 
 that favoured but distant land. Yet, as we shall see, 
 it is about as well founded as the views of Sir David 
 Brewster, who, in endeavouring to combat and remove 
 the ' objections,' or rather ' difficulties,' regarding this 
 planet, of ' persons who have only a superficial know- 
 
 1 Flammarion's Marvels, p. 174. 
 300 
 
JO VI AN INHABITANTS. 30 1 
 
 ledge of astronomy, though firmly believing in a 
 plurality of worlds/ 1 advances speculative hints which 
 do not argue that he had applied his great scientific 
 knowledge to good purpose, when his creed as a 
 philosopher and his hope as a Christian seemed to be 
 assailed and endangered. 
 
 We shall find as we proceed that extravagances 
 which have been broached by this and that person must 
 vanish before the light of day. Jovian giants of 
 fourteen feet high, alike with humbler pigmies of two ; 
 bat-winged creatures flapping about among the belted 
 clouds; bottomless waters filled with cartilaginous and 
 glutinous monsters boneless, watery, and pulpy ; 
 Polyphemuses with one eye-ball, or Arguses with a 
 hundred, stalking along upon a land of pumice-stone, 
 or tabasheer, or spongy platina ; or beings of another 
 mould, having their homes in subterranean cities warmed 
 by central fires, or in crystal caves cooled by ocean 
 tides, or floating with the Nereids upon the deep, or 
 mounting upon wings as eagles, or with the lighter 
 pinions of the dove, that they may flee away and be at 
 rest. Alas ! these whimsical fancies, how pleasing 
 soever they be in a picture, to the pluralist, can, in 
 the face of a perverse reality, find no place in serious 
 judgment. Jupiter is, even more hopelessly than Mars, 
 no dwelling-place for man or beast, or even, Sir David 
 notwithstanding, any ' faultless monster whom the world 
 ne'er saw.' 
 
 Putting aside the literature of Jovian monsters, and 
 without going minutely into the matter, these well- 
 known facts may be stated, keeping in mind that 
 figures differ considerably in different books, and that 
 precise exactitude in this respect is not here material. 
 
 1 More Worlds than One, p. 68. 
 
302 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 Jupiter, then, is by far the largest of all the planets. 
 Its diameter, variously estimated, may be stated to be 
 about 86,000 miles, or eleven times the diameter of 
 the Earth. In volume it is 1300 times or thereby, and 
 in mass 340 times the size of the Earth. In density it 
 is only about one-fourth of the density of the Earth, or 
 little more than the density of water. The force of 
 gravity at its surface is 2^ times that at the surface of 
 the Earth. Its axis is almost perpendicular to its orbit, 
 depriving it of change of seasons. It revolves on its 
 axis in its day of ten hours. Its distance from the Sun 
 is say 490 millions of mile, or five times that of the 
 Earth. The light and heat it receives from the Sun is 
 about 1/2 5th or 1/2 7th that received from the Sun 
 by the Earth, and it has four moons of differing size, 
 but from which the heat and light it receives may be 
 said to be next to nil. 
 
 Now these are facts which do not bear, in the 
 question of plurality, in the same direct way upon the 
 habitable capacity of Jupiter as we have seen they do 
 upon that of the planets already considered. People 
 have puzzled themselves as to the crushing effect of the 
 greater power of gravity on life and vegetation ; but, as 
 we shall see, neither life nor vegetation can exist on 
 Jupiter, and the puzzle may therefore be spared. The 
 planet is uninhabitable, but not because the Sun is 
 so distant as to deprive of heat sufficient to preserve 
 or sustain life. Therefore we need not torture our 
 imagination, as some have done, to find in cloud or 
 otherwise shelter and covering for ideal limbs. The 
 giant planet, as we shall see, wants not heat. It is not 
 like Mars, frost-bound at the poles either in winter 
 or at any other time. Nay, it has no winter. It has 
 
CONDITIONS IN. 303 
 
 no change of seasons. Spring perpetual reigns. But 
 neither is the absence of changing seasons the cause of 
 failure of either vegetable or animal life. In other 
 circumstances had the planet resembled in condition 
 those planets which lie within its orbit the facts 
 which have been stated would have sufficed of them- 
 selves to negative life. It is in the condition of Jupiter 
 a condition not peculiar to it alone, but held to a cer- 
 tain extent, if not altogether, in common with Saturn, 
 Uranus, and Neptune we have to seek the elements of 
 deduction. And the peculiarity so to be sought for is 
 to be found in the atmosphere in which it is enwrapt, 
 or of which it consists the belting of cloud by which 
 it is surrounded. 
 
 We are indebted to Mr. Proctor for the views which 
 have been suggested, and now, I believe, are generally 
 admitted, by which Jupiter must be untenanted even of 
 cartilaginous monsters. They amount to this, that the 
 giant planet is glowing still with nebulous heat. 
 
 Mr. Proctor tells us in one of his papers on the 
 subject, that he had been led in 1869 1 to present a 
 new theory respecting Jupiter's condition when he was 
 visiting ' other worlds than ours.' Subsequently ' obser- 
 vations had been made which placed the new theory on 
 a somewhat firm basis.' His views are scattered through 
 several of his works ; I have extracted them from six, 
 and as he is a most voluminous writer, there may 
 possibly be others dealing with the subject which I 
 have not seen. Necessarily there is a little reiteration, 
 and sometimes expansion and variation. Eeferring to 
 Mr. Proctor's works themselves for fuller statement, I 
 shall endeavour to combine and reduce his observations 
 
 1 Flowers of the Sky, p. 191. 
 
3 o 4 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 to orderly statement, arid in this view the first point 
 which arises is to ascertain the appearance of the cloud 
 belts, and any phenomena connected therewith. They 
 are thus described in Other Worlds than Ours : 
 
 ' The belts of Jupiter are commonly arranged with a 
 certain symmetry on either side of the great equatorial 
 bright belt, but sometimes there is a rather marked 
 contrast between the northern and the southern halves 
 of the planet. In colour the dark belts are usually, when 
 seen with suitable telescopic power, of a coppery, ruddy, 
 or even purplish tint, while the intermediate light bands 
 vary from a pearly white in the equatorial belt, through 
 yellowish white in the middle latitudes of both hemi- 
 spheres*, to a greyish or even bluish tint at the poles.' l 
 
 The arrangement of the belts is thus described : 
 
 ' There is commonly a bright belt across the middle of 
 the disc, which goes by the name of the equatorial belt.' 
 ' On either side of this belt there are commonly two dark 
 belts.' ' Then usually follow several alternate light and 
 dark streaks up to the polar regions.' 2 
 
 But the belts do not maintain by any means a uni- 
 form appearance. For they 
 
 'vary greatly in form, extent, and general appearance. 
 At one time the dusky belts cover a large proportion of 
 the planet's disc, at another they are singularly narrow. 
 Now they are very regularly disposed, now they seem in 
 some way under the action of disturbing forces of great 
 intensity, causing them to assume the most irregular 
 figure.' 'The number of belts is singularly variable. 
 Sometimes only one has been seen, at others there have 
 been as many as five or six on each side of the planet's 
 equator. In the course of a single hour Cassini saw a 
 complete new belt form on the planet ; and on 13th 
 December 1690, two well-marked belts vanished com- 
 
 1 P. 129. See also Orbs around us, pp. 138, 139. 
 
 2 Orbs around us, p. 128. 
 
THE BELTS. 305 
 
 pletely, while a third had almost disappeared in the same 
 short interval of time.' 1 
 
 Elsewhere Mr. Proctor says : 
 
 'Mighty masses of cloud, such as would suffice to 
 enwrap the entire globe on which we live, form over 
 large regions of Jupiter or Saturn, change rapidly in 
 shape, and vanish in the course of a few minutes.' 2 
 
 Equally changeful are the colours of the belts. The 
 equatorial belt 
 
 ' is usually of a pearly white tint, and has long been 
 recognised as one of the most constant features of the 
 planet's aspect. As the mean surface of this belt cannot 
 be less than a fifth of the whole surface of the planet, it 
 is clear that any changes which may take place in its 
 general aspect cannot but be of the utmost significance. 
 Now, during the autumn of 1869 and the spring of 1870, 
 this belt has been more strongly coloured than any part 
 of the planet. Mr. Browning observing Jupiter in the 
 earlier part of the above-named interval, found the 
 equatorial belt of a greenish yellow colour, which 
 deepened in October 1869 to a full ochreish yellow, and 
 in January of the present year had assumed an even 
 darker tint, resembling yellow ochre. On one occasion, 
 and on one only, he detected this tint in the first bright 
 belt north of the equator. While thus exhibiting strongly 
 marked and changing colours, the equatorial belt has 
 lost its right to be called par excellence the bright belt of 
 the planet, being considerably inferior in brilliancy to the 
 narrow bright belts north and south of it.' 8 
 
 It appears, however, from a paper by Mr. Proctor in 
 1873, that the planet had 
 
 ' gradually resumed its normal aspect after four or five 
 years.' 'The zone is now of a creamy white colour, its 
 ordinary hue.' 4 
 
 1 Other Worlds, p. 132. 2 Familiar Science Studies, p. GO. 
 
 3 Other Worlds, p. 135. 4 Our Place among Infinities, p. 109. 
 
 U 
 
306 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 But there are some phenomena important to be 
 noticed, and the first of these is the existence of spots 
 resembling those upon the Sun : 
 
 ' These spots,' Mr. Proctor says, ' have been described 
 as black, though surely their appearing of that hue must 
 be ascribed to the effect of contrast. Now these dark 
 spots which have been seen by Cassini, Madler, Schwabe, 
 Airy, and others, may be regarded as the real surface of 
 the planet (unless they belong to a yet deeper cloud 
 layer), seen for a while through openings in the cloud 
 bed to which the dusky belts belong/ 1 
 
 A conjecture which apparently was afterwards aban- 
 doned by Mr. Proctor, for in 1882 he wrote ' that if 
 Jupiter has any nucleus at all, it is not visible to us.' 2 
 
 The spots would appear, like those of the Sun, to be 
 subject to rapid change. We are told of one witnessed 
 by South on 3d June 1839, which he estimated at 
 20,000 miles in diameter, but which thirty-four minutes 
 after observation commenced had only left three miser- 
 able scraps. 3 
 
 Another curious phenomenon is that of the appear- 
 ance of ' white spots some small, some large which 
 are seen to form from time to time along the chief belts 
 in certain cases with singular regularity,' ' set side by 
 side like rows of eggs upon a string.' 4 Mr. Brett, 
 describing these ' egg-shaped clouds,' tells us 
 
 ' that they cast shadows ; that is to say, the light patches 
 are bounded on the side farthest from the Sun by a dark 
 border, shaded off softly towards the light, and showing 
 
 1 Other Worlds, p. 131. 
 
 2 Familiar Science Studies, p. 69. See also Flowers of the Sky, p. 204. 
 
 3 Flowers of the Sky, p. 204. * Familiar Science Studies, pp. 65, 66. 
 
SPOTS AND STXEAKS. 307 
 
 in a distinct manner that the patches are projected or 
 relieved from the body of the planet.' l 
 
 The larger white globular spots, it seems, represent 
 masses of cloud 50.00 or 6000 miles in diameter.. 
 
 But still another noticeable fact is to be found' in the 
 streaks which cross the belts. 
 
 One of the most remarkable of these streaks was 
 observed by Mr: Long of Manchester on 29th February 
 1860. Its length was 
 
 ' about 10,000 miles, and its width at the least 500 miles,, 
 so that its superficial extent was much greater than the 
 whole area of Europe. But wonderful as this rift appears 
 when thus regarded, its mere dimensions and its singular 
 position were by no means the most remarkable- features. 
 it presented. First of all, it remained as a rift certainly 
 until April 10, or for six weeks, and probably much 
 longer. It passed away to the dark side of Jupiter, to- 
 return again after the Jovian night to the illuminated 
 hemisphere, during at least a hundred Jovian days ; and 
 assuredly nothing in the behaviour of terrestrial clouds 
 affords any analogue of the remarkable fact. The 
 arrangement of our clouds depends far more directly on 
 the succession of day and night than that of the Jovian 
 clouds would, appear to do. But this is far from being 
 all. This great rift grew lengthening out, until it stretched 
 across the whole face of the planet, and it grew in a very 
 strange way; for its two ends remained at unchanged 
 distances from the planet's equator, but the one nearest to 
 the equator travelled forwards (speaking with reference to 
 the way in which the planet turns on its axis), the rift 
 thus approaching more and more nearly to an east and 
 west direction.' ' As pictured on April 9, the dark rift 
 cannot be estimated at less than a hundred thousand 
 
 1 Familiar Science Stiidies, p. 68. 
 
3o8 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 miles in length, or long enough to extend four times 
 round the Earth's equator.' 1 
 
 It will thus be seen that the cloud covering of 
 Jupiter travels round its axis at different rates of speed 
 faster at the equator, slower as it nears the poles. 
 The fact has, as we shall afterwards see, a most im- 
 portant bearing on the nature of the planet. 
 
 Mr. Proctor observes upon the very obvious circum- 
 stance that these belts of Jupiter indicate a condition 
 totally different from the cloud system of Earth : 
 
 4 We have been so long accustomed to look upon the 
 belts of Jupiter as due to clouds resembling terrestrial 
 clouds in origin and behaviour, that it may seem sur- 
 prising to the reader to be told that if the belts really 
 consist of clouds, these must be wholly unlike any with 
 which our meteorologists are acquainted.' 2 
 
 The opinion he had then formed was that the belts 
 indicated 
 
 'the existence of a very extensive vapour-laden atmo- 
 sphere. The dark belts must not be considered as the 
 true cloud belts, because it must be remembered that we 
 look upon the reverse side of the skyscape presented 
 during the day to the Jovials, so that when they see 
 densely compacted dark clouds, we see the light which 
 these -clouds have intercepted ; and, on the other hand, 
 where they see clear spaces, the light which reaches 
 them is not reflected to us without a considerable loss of 
 brilliancy. Thus the dark belts of Jupiter are those 
 regions where, it' at all, we see the true surface of the 
 planet.' 3 
 
 The views thus expressed, however, seem not alto- 
 
 1 Orbs around us, p. 131. See also Familiar Science Studies, p. 62.. 
 
 2 Orbs around us, p. 129. 3 Other Worlds, p. 130. 
 
CL UD LA YERS. 309 
 
 gether in harmony with those which further reflection 
 suggested to Mr. Proctor. 
 
 oo 
 
 These cloud layers, which cover the whole surface of 
 Jupiter, are of enormous depth. Mr. Proctor says it 
 would be difficult to express an opinion as to the actual 
 depth, but would assign a minimum of 6000 miles, 
 although strongly of opinion that in reality it is still 
 greater. 1 The mere fact that an atmosphere is recog- 
 nisable from our distant station is remarkable. ' It is 
 certain that, except by the effects produced when clouds 
 form and dissipate, our terrestrial atmosphere could not 
 be recognised at Jupiter's distance with any telescopic 
 power yet applied.' 2 The atmospheric cloud, or all 
 that we see of Jupiter, consists ' of semi-transparent 
 materials,' 3 and the darker bands may be due to the 
 cloud layers which lie beneath, but ' neither the dark 
 belts nor the bright ones are opaque.' 4 
 
 The spectroscope has afforded some information re- 
 garding the composition of this atmosphere. Eoscoe 
 says : 
 
 'In the spectrum of Jupiter lines are seen which 
 indicate the existence of an absorptive atmosphere about 
 this planet. These lines plainly appeared when viewed 
 simultaneously with the spectrum of the sky, which at 
 the time of observation reflected the light of the setting 
 sun. One strong band corresponds with some terrestrial 
 atmospheric lines, and probably indicates the presence of 
 vapours similar to those which float about the Earth. 
 Another band has no counterpart amongst the lines of 
 
 1 Familiar Science Studies, pp. 71, 76. 
 
 J Our Place among the Infinities, p. 110. 
 
 3 Familiar Sconce Studies, p. 68. 4 Ibid. p. 69. 
 
3 10 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 absorption of our atmosphere, and tells us of some gas or 
 vapour which does not exist in the Earth's atmosphere.' 1 
 
 Schellen's account is a little more ample, but to 
 similar affect : 
 
 'As early as 1864, Huggins discovered some dark lines 
 in the red portion of Jupiter's spectrum which were not 
 coincident with any of the Fraunhofer lines of the solar 
 spectrum, and among them is one that does not occur 
 among the telluric lines/ 2 
 
 (In a footnote it is mentioned thatt Mr. Le Sueur in 
 1869 saw the absorptive lines as they are described by 
 Huggins.) Schellen adds : 
 
 ' Browning distinctly recognised these lines early in 
 1870, and thinks that in the green part of the spectrum 
 near the yellow several fine dark lines occur, which are 
 coincident with those occasioned by the vapours of the 
 Earth's atmosphere, and which are generally visible in 
 the corresponding portion of the solar spectrum when 
 the Sun is near the horizon. If it be supposed that 
 Jupiter is in any way self-luminous, these lines may be 
 occasioned by such elements in the planet as are not to 
 be found in the Sun, or if present in the Sun, have not 
 been revealed to us by any effect of absorption.' 
 
 And dealing with Saturn, Schellen says : 
 
 'The observations of Janssen, which have been sup- 
 ported by Secchi, have since shown that aqueous vapour 
 is probably present both in Jupiter and Saturn.' 3 
 
 Thus while ' the telescope when applied to Jupiter 
 shows us nothing which can be compared with any 
 known features of our own Earth,' 4 we find from the 
 spectroscope that the atmosphere with which it is 
 surrounded is partly akin to that of the Earth, and it 
 
 1 Koscoe's Lectures, p. 230. 2 Schellen, Spectrum Analysis, p. 482. 
 3 Ibid. p. 483. * Orbs around us, p. 126. 
 
CONDITION NOT DUE TO SUN. 311 
 
 contains aqueous vapour ; but it contains also unknown 
 elements which do not occur in our atmosphere, 
 whether injurious to life or not cannot be said, nor in 
 the view to be expressed does it signify. 
 
 Now arises the question to what must we attribute 
 this peculiar atmosphere with its attendant phenomena. 
 
 And, in the first place, it is not due to or produced 
 by the present action of the Sun. At the immense 
 distance which separates the two great bodies of our 
 system, the light and heat received by the planet from 
 the Sun is only at most 1/2 5th of that received by the 
 Earth. It is obvious that any influence arising out of 
 the Sun's heat and light must therefore be weak and 
 imperceptible. 
 
 ' Let it be remembered,' says Mr. Proctor, ' that 
 supposing Jupiter's globe even to be wholly covered 
 with water, yet a sun twenty-five times farther off than 
 ours could not by any possibility load his atmosphere 
 with the enormous masses of vapour actually present in 
 it. Let it be remembered, further, that the relatively 
 sluggish action of the Sun upon Jupiter could not by 
 any possibility give rise to atmospheric disturbances so 
 tremendous as those which are evidenced by the rapid 
 changes of figure of his cloud bands. When to this we 
 add the relative minuteness of the seasonal changes on 
 Jupiter, we see at once that unless some other cause 
 than solar action were at work, the condition of Jupiter's 
 atmosphere ought to be very much calmer than that of 
 the Earth's.' l 
 
 ' The seasonal changes on Jupiter correspond to no 
 greater relative change than occurs in our daily supply 
 of solar heat from about eight days before to about 
 eight days after the spring or autumn equinox. It is 
 incredible that so slight an effect as this should produce 
 
 1 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 139. 
 
312 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 those amazing changes 'in the condition of the Jovian 
 atmosphere, which have unquestionably been indicated 
 by the varying aspect of the equatorial zone. It is mani- 
 fest that, on the one hand, the seasonal changes should 
 be slow and slight so far as they depend on the Sun ; and 
 that, on the other, the Sun does not rule so absolutely 
 over the Jovian atmosphere as to cause any particular 
 atmospheric condition to prevail unchanged for years.' l 
 
 Mr. Proctor recurs to the subject in dealing with the 
 cloud rifts. Apart from the evidence afforded 
 
 ' of the swift motions of the cloud masses enwrapping 
 Jupiter from a velocity of 151 per hour, exceeding that 
 of the most tremendous hurricanes upon Earth, it has 
 always seemed to me/ he says, ' that this one series of 
 observations should suffice of itself to show that the 
 phenomena of Jupiter's cloud-laden atmosphere are not 
 due to solar action. For the rift itself continued, and 
 the changes affecting it continued whether Jovian day 
 was in progress or Jovian night. For one hundred 
 Jovian days or more, and for one hundred Jovian nights, 
 the great cloud masses on either side of the rift remained 
 in position opposite each other, slowly wheeling, but still 
 continuing face to face as their equatorial ends rushed 
 onwards at a rate fourfold that of a swift train, even 
 measuring their velocity only by reference to the ends 
 remote from the equator, and regarding these as fixed. 
 Probably the cloud masses were moving still more 
 swiftly with respect to the surface of the planet below.' 2 * 
 
 The belts formerly were associated in our minds 
 with trade winds, and apparently were supposed to 
 spring from similar causes. 3 But Mr. Proctor 4 shows 
 
 1 Our Place among Infinities, p. 122. 2 Familiar Science Studies, p. 63. 
 
 3 Laplace (System of World, i. p. 80) says : ' They appear to be clouds 
 which the winds transport with various velocities in an extremely agitated 
 atmosphere. ' 
 
 4 Orbs around us, p. 133, also p. 142. 
 
NOT DUE TO WINDS. 313 
 
 that Jupiter's clouds and the movements in them are 
 not clue to winds. The motion of the great rift already 
 referred to was ' the direct reverse ' of the motion of 
 air currents producing the trade winds, while the rate 
 of motion in Jupiter vastly ' exceeded anything we 
 recognise in the trades or counter trades ; ' a velocity 
 far exceeding that of such a hurricane upon Earth as 
 would here produce universal -desolation, and approach- 
 ing ' those solar cyclones- of which the spectroscope has 
 given us such startling intelligence/ l 
 
 And with reference to- the astounding rapidity of 
 dispersion of the spot observed by South, already 
 mentioned, Mr. Proctor says that to suppose winds had 
 carried cloud masses athwart the opening would imply 
 a rush at the incredible rate of 20,000 or of 40,000 
 miles per hour, which would exceed more than a hundred 
 times (taking the least number) the velocity of our most 
 tremendous hurricanes. 2 
 
 But it is in the appearances indicating the real con- 
 dition of Jupiter we must look for explanation. 
 
 Mr, Proctor has, in a chapter of Owr Place among* 
 Infinities? very satisfactorily shown what that must be. 
 Starting with the fact that the atmosphere of Jupiter is 
 necessarily attracted by the mass of the planet, and that 
 owing to its greater mass the power of gravitation is 
 more than twice what it is rapon Earth, he calculates 
 that, assuming the cloud layers are at least 100 miles- 
 in depth, the pressure would exceed that at our sea 
 level so many times that the numbers representing the 
 proportion contain twenty-one figures. This would be 
 infinitely beyond the limit at which atmospheric pressure 
 cannot be increased without changing the compressed 
 
 1 Orbs, p. 134. 2 Flowers of the Sky, p. 205. 3 P. 112 et seq. 
 
314 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 air into liquid form, and he enters into illustrations to 
 show that the pressure would produce a density incon- 
 sistent with its actual density were the atmosphere of 
 Jupiter existing at a temperature not greatly differing 
 from that of our own. The only way by which the 
 difficulty can be avoided is by assuming an exceedingly 
 high temperature. Assume this, and ' we no longer 
 find any circumstances which are self-contradictory or 
 incredible.' l A parallel is found in the case of the Sun, 
 where the enormous pressure is counterbalanced by the 
 enormous heat, whence ' we may safely adopt the con- 
 clusion that Jupiter is intensely heated, though not nearly 
 to the same degree as 'the Sun! 
 Mr. -Proctor observing that 
 
 ' many lines of evidence, and some of them absolutely 
 demonstrative, in my opinion point to the conclusion 
 that Jupiter is an orb instinct with fiery energy, aglow, it 
 may well be, with an intense light, which is only prevented 
 from manifesting itself by the cloudy envelope enshroud- 
 ing the planet ' finds in this hypothesis * the means of 
 readily interpreting what otherwise would appear most 
 .perplexing.' 2 
 
 Thus he is inclined to regard the ruddy glow of 
 Jupiter's equatorial zone, during the period of dis- 
 turbance already -mentioned,' 3 as ' due to the inherent 
 light of glowing matter underneath his deep and cloud- 
 laden atmosphere.' 4 
 
 In the same paper 5 he points to the circumstance 
 that the -fourth and 'Outermost satellite of Jupiter in 
 crossing his disc looks perfectly black, though doubtless 
 possessed of reflective power equal to that of our own 
 Moon, as evidencing the greater luminosity of Jupiter, 
 
 1 Proctor's Infinities, p. 119. 2 P. 121. 3 P. 123. 
 
 4 See also Newcomb, p. 334. '" P. 120. 
 
PLANET'S TRUE CONDITION. 315 
 
 and consequently that Jupiter sheds a light stronger than 
 what would arise from reflection merely. Elsewhere 
 Mr. Proctor has referred to the estimates of Zollner, 
 the eminent photometrician, as showing that he sends 
 
 ' much more light to us than a planet of equal size, and 
 constituted like Mars, the Moon, or the Earth, could 
 possibly reflect to us if placed where Jupiter is. Whereas 
 Mars reflects but one-fourth of the light he receives, 
 Jupiter reflects more than three-fifths. The Moon sends 
 less than a fifth ; Saturn, Jupiter's brother giant, more 
 than a half.' ' 
 
 And with this the calculations -of others ag*ee. 
 
 ' Indeed, if Jupiter do not shine in part by native light, 
 his surface must possess reflective powers nearly equal to 
 those of white paper,' which cannot be, as a large pro- 
 portion of his surface is of a dull coppery hue. ' It 
 follows as at least highly probable that Jupiter shines in 
 part by his own light ; and this being admitted, we 
 cannot but regard it as highly probable that the mass of 
 the planet must be intensely hot! 2 
 
 Another concurring fact is, that whereas were 
 Jupiter's atmosphere of the same temperature as our 
 Earth's it would be excessively compressed, ' the observed 
 mobility of Jupiter's cloud envelope and other circum- 
 stances indicate that this enormous compression does 
 not exist.' 
 
 Indeed, the most striking -proofs of Jupiter being in 
 a condition analogous to that of the Sun lie in its 
 resemblance to the Sun. In -density -it nearly coincides, 
 the difference being only fractional. In the formation 
 and closing up of spots it is not unlike. In the more 
 rapid movement of the atmosphere or cloud surface at 
 the equator than at parts nearer the poles, it evidences 
 
 1 Other Worlds than Ours, p. 143. 2 Ibid. p. 144. 
 
3i 6 PLURALITY JUPITER. 
 
 a most striking likeness in condition to the Sun. 
 Indeed it admits of no doubt that Jupiter is in a sense 
 a minor sun, although his clouds are not, from defect of 
 sufficient heat in the planet, in themselves luminous, or 
 they are only faintly so. 
 
 Nor is this surprising when we consider the origin 
 of the planetary system as disclosed by the Nebular 
 Hypothesis, which demonstrates that ' every planet must 
 once in its life pass through the fiery stage of planetary 
 existence,' * and it is obvious that a planet so much 
 larger than our Earth must require vastly longer time 
 to cool down from its nebulous heat. Mr. Proctor 
 calculates that if Bischoff be right in assigning 
 340,000,000 years to the era of the Earth's past since 
 it was a molten globe, it would require that Jupiter 
 should take about seven times as long, or about 
 2,380,000,000 years to arrive at the present condition 
 of the Earth ; or supposing BischofTs calculation to be 
 overrated, and taking it at a tenth, it would leave 
 238,000,000 years in either ease it would be ' behind 
 the Earth as respects this stage of development' 2 But this 
 era was preceded by others which are usually considered 
 to have lasted much longer. 
 
 ' The Earth was once a mighty ring surrounding the 
 Sun, and had to contract into globe form, a process 
 requiring many millions of years. When first formed 
 into a globe she was vapourous, and had to contract 
 i'orming the Moon in so doing until she became a mass, 
 first of liquid, then of plastic half-solid matter, glowing 
 with fire, and covered with tracts of fluent heat. Here 
 was another stage of her past existence, requiring 
 probably many hundreds of millions of years. Jupiter 
 and Saturn had to pass through similar stages of develop- 
 ment, and required many times as many years for each 
 
 1 Flowers of the Sky, p. 195. 2 P. 196. 
 
FUNCTION OF BEL TS. 317 
 
 of them. Is it then reasonable to suppose that they 
 have arrived at the same stage of development as our 
 Earth, or indeed as each other ? ' l 
 
 This being so, we cannot be surprised to find that the 
 cloud masses of Jupiter are subject to great disturbance, 
 and sometimes the disturbance has been in apparent 
 sympathy with disturbance in the Sun f or, as it may 
 be put, ' whenever Jupiter is so situated as to be at 
 work most effectively in disturbing the SUIL, then he is 
 himself most disturbed.' 3 
 
 Mr. Proctor 4 has accounted for the formation of the 
 belts of Jupiter by violent up-rushes of vapour from 
 vast depths below his visible surface ; and similarly he 
 accounts for the white, egg-shaped clouds which have 
 been mentioned 'by supposing them due to explosive 
 action casting up enormous masses of vapour into the 
 higher regions of Jupiter's atmosphere/ He has entered 
 most fully into the question in the chapter on Jupiter 
 in his Familiar Science Sfadi&f,* in the course of which 
 he attributes the belts to vertical iip-nushes and down- 
 rushes ; which indeed would, to a certain extent, offer 
 another analogy to the condition of the Sun, according 
 to Mr. Lockyer's theory, although the analogy does not 
 in all respects strictly hold. Let me add, that as the 
 disturbances seem to be principally at the equator of 
 Jupiter, it may be that at one time there surrounded the 
 planet a ring or rings like those of Saturn, which, having 
 collapsed and fallen into the planet, excited it to more 
 violent action in that quarter, and produced in the 
 equatorial belt that pearly whiteness by which it is 
 distinguished beyond the others. 
 
 1 Flowers of the Sky, p. ]97. 2 Orbs around us, p. 137. 3 P. 141. 
 4 Orbs around us, p. 143. 5 Familiar Science Studies, p. 
 
3 1 8 PL URALITY JUPITER. 
 
 It is, however, not necessary to discuss these matters. 
 It is sufficient that we are ' led to the conclusion that 
 Jupiter is still a glowing mass, fluid probably through- 
 out, still bubbling and seething with the intensity of the 
 primeval fires, sending up continually enormous masses 
 of cloud to be gathered into bands under the influence 
 of the swift rotation, of the giant planet.' 1 
 
 The. foregoing observations have been rested on Mr. 
 Proctor's views and statements. Mr. Matthieu Williams, 
 who published his Fuel of the Sun in 1870, or about 
 simultaneously with Mr. Proctor's Other Worlds than 
 Ours, expressed (and it may therefore be supposed inde- 
 pendently) opinions regarding Jupiter- somewhat akin, 
 though not in every respect coinciding. 
 
 ' I have little doubt,' he says, 2 as the result of his 
 speculations, ' that Jupiter is still red hot, or rather 
 white hot ; that a vast depth of aqueous and other 
 vapour surrounds it ; and that these, together with the 
 free oxygen and free nitrogen, form a very much greater 
 atmosphere than that which I have calculated. I think 
 it extremely probable that the temperature of dissociation 
 of water has been reached by the original atmospheric 
 compression of Jupiter; that he must have manifested 
 some degree of general solar phenomena ; and that, if we 
 could see him shaded from the solar rays, he would 
 appear like a phosphorescent, or rather a fluorescent ball, 
 by the illumination of his vapourous envelope, due to the 
 light it absorbs from the glowing world within.' 
 
 Such being the fiery condition of Jupiter, we are led 
 necessarily to the further conclusion (and this is all we 
 are concerned with here), that, using the words in which 
 Mr. Proctor expresses his own opinion, ' we must of 
 
 J Proctor's Other Worlds, p. 140. 2 Fuel of Sun, 286, p. 189. 
 
THE MOONS. 319 
 
 course dismiss the idea that the giant planet is at present 
 a fit abode for living creatures! 
 
 Formerly the moons of Jupiter were looked upon 
 as affording ' perpetual moonlight ' to his cartilaginous 
 inhabitants; but Jupiter being found in no condition to 
 accommodate inhabitants of any kind, it was perhaps 
 not unnatural for those wedded to plurality to transfer 
 these inhabitants to his satellites, and find room and 
 comfortable quarters for them there. 
 
 1 If Jupiter be still in a sense a sun, not, indeed, 
 resplendent like the great centre of the- planetary scheme, 
 but still a source of heat, is there not excellent reason 
 for believing that the system which circles around him 
 consists of four worlds where life, even such forms of 
 life as we are familiar with, may still exist ? Those four 
 orbs, which our telescopes reveal to us as tiny points of 
 light, are in reality globes which may be compared with 
 the four worlds that circle- nearest the- Sun.' * 
 
 Mr. Proctor repeats this view in a chapter of The 
 Expanse of Heaven, p. 8 5-. 
 
 It appears sufficient answer to say that ' these moons 
 seem to fee made of even lighter material than the 
 planet itself, for the densest would be much mo*e than 
 outweighed by half its bulk of water.' 2 
 
 Another alternative has been to- suppose that at some 
 future day Jupiter may be fitted for life. c The processes 
 we see at work out yonder may be fitting him for the 
 support of myriads of races of living creatures. For 
 anything we know to the contrary, he may be passing 
 through stages which our own Earth has long since 
 passed through.' 3 But whether before our Sun has 
 1 Other Worlds, p. 141. 2 Orbs around us, p. 126. 3 P. 145. 
 
3 20 PL URALITY- -JUPITER. 
 
 cooled down and become a black orb, sending out 
 neither heat nor light to any of his planets, Jupiter 
 shall have cooled down to the condition of the Earth, 
 we cannot tell, and Mr. Matthieu Williams is of 
 opinion that he has probably reached his permanent 
 'temperature, but this we know (and it may perhaps 
 be considered very cruel and hard-hearted to crush out 
 even this hope), that the facts which have been stated, 
 and more especially his great distance from the Sun, 
 and the inconceivable cold in which he would be 
 wrapped, are quite sufficient to destroy the thought that 
 Jupiter in that condition could become habitable. 
 
SATURN. 
 
 DR. DiCK, 1 iii conformity with his plurality views, thus 
 observes upon Saturn : 
 
 ' This globe, which appears only like a dim speck on 
 our nocturnal sky, may be considered as equal to six 
 thousand worlds like ours ; and since siich a noble 
 apparatus of rings and moons is provided for the accom- 
 modation and contemplation of intelligent beings, we 
 cannot doubt that it is replenished with ten thousand 
 times ten thousand of sensitive and rational inhabitants, 
 and that the scenes and transactions connected with that 
 distant world may far surpass in grandeur whatever has 
 occurred on the theatre of our "lobe.' 
 
 Little help to the present question is indeed to be 
 found in the notions which, till ten or twelve years 
 ago, prevailed regarding these outer planets. Even Mr. 
 Proctor, who published his book on Saturn in 1865, or 
 four years before the ideas occurred to him which, with 
 reference to Jupiter, have been explained, adopted in that 
 work those older conceptions, although his views regard- 
 ing Saturn subsequently experienced the same change. 
 But before stating those his older opinions, it will be 
 well to note one or two facts relative to the planet now 
 to be considered. 
 
 Saturn is nearly twice as distant from the Sun as 
 Jupiter is, or about ten times as far off as the Earth is, 
 
 1 Celestial Scenery, p. 166. 
 X 
 
322 PLURALITY SATURN. 
 
 and consequently the light and heat it receives from 
 the Sun are greatly less ; for while the heat and light 
 received by Jupiter are about 1/2 oth, the heat and light 
 received by Saturn are only 1/9 Oth of that received by 
 the Earth. The eccentricity of its orbit is more than 
 twice that of the orbit of Jupiter, the difference between 
 its aphelion and its perihelion being nearly 100 millions 
 of miles ; so that the difference between the light and 
 heat at the one position is very greatly less than it is 
 at the other. Its year extends to 29^ of our years, but 
 its rotation on its axis approximates in rate to that of 
 Jupiter, its day being only half an hour longer. The 
 inclination of its axis does not largely differ from that 
 of the Earth; so that there would, if climate permitted, 
 be a possibility of the four seasons, but they would be 
 each thirty times as long as the seasons of the Earth, 
 and they would be subject to such disturbance by the 
 eclipsing caused by the rings as practically to be 
 neutralized or rendered unserviceable. 
 
 The equatorial diameter of Saturn is about 75,000 
 miles, its polar diameter about 7000 miles less, so that 
 the planet is greatly flattened at the poles. In volume, 
 while Jupiter is 1300 times larger than the Earth, 
 Saturn is only 700 times larger. But the density of 
 Saturn is greatly less than that of Jupiter ; for while 
 the mass of Jupiter is equal to nearly 340 times that of 
 the Earth, the mass of Saturn is only above 90 times. 
 Its specific density is about 1/Sth (Lardner has it 
 .1/1 Oth) that of the Earth. It is indeed the lightest of 
 all the planets ; and one result is, that notwithstanding 
 its vastly greater bulk, gravity upon Saturn is nearly 
 equal to gravity upon the Earth, although gravity is 
 said to be 1/oth greater at his poles than at his equator. 
 
SURFACE. ,3.2.3 
 
 Saturn resembles Jupiter in being marked with belts ; 
 but it differs from its big brother and from all the other 
 planets in the great rings which encircle it. Besides 
 these rings, it is attended by seven satellites. I shall 
 afterwards have to refer more particularly to these 
 circumstances. 
 
 These are all facts which have long been well known, 
 and in the light of them Mr. Proctor thus wrote in 
 1865: 
 
 ' It has been considered probable that the appearance 
 of Saturn's surface differs greatly from that of our Earth. 
 And this for two reasons : In the first place, it is urged 
 that his density being so small, he must be composed of 
 materials very much lighter than, and therefore very 
 different from, those composing our Earth ; and, in the 
 .second place, that fluids upon his surface must either be 
 of less density than the planet, and therefore very dif- 
 ferent from our oceans, or if of greater density, must all 
 be collected in one hemisphere. Saturn's globe, however, 
 may be hollow, and the mean density of the materials 
 of this hollow globe not very different from the mean 
 density of the materials composing our Earth. And 
 again, it has not been established by rigid mathematical 
 inquiry that oceans upon a planet of Saturn's figure 
 would necessarily be collected wholly, or almost wholly, 
 in one hemisphere if their density exceeded that of the 
 planet. On the contrary, it appears probable that fluid 
 masses on the surface of such a planet would tend to 
 form two vast polar oceans, since gravity is so much 
 greater at Saturn's poles than at his equator. But even 
 if it were proved that the former arrangement must 
 inevitably subsist, what, after all, is such an arrangement 
 but an almost exact counterpart of what is observed in 
 our own Earth. It is true that tidal waves could not 
 sweep round such an ocean as round the oceans that 
 surround the Earth ; but an ocean whose tides are 
 -fH?e- ruled by eight satellites and restrained by the attrac- 
 
324 PL URALITY-SA TURN. 
 
 ,* 
 
 tions of a stupendous ring may require arrangements 
 altogether different in this respect from those prevailing 
 on our Earth. The appearance of Saturn, however, is not 
 favourable to the supposition that the ocean masses on 
 his surface are confined to a single hemisphere, for the 
 bright bands on Saturn's disc, which are probably vast 
 belts of clouds drawn from oceans upon his surface, are 
 found equally in the northern and southern hemispheres, 
 and extend completely round Saturn's globe. 
 
 ' The climatic conditions on the surface of Saturn un- 
 doubtedly differ in the most striking manner from those 
 which prevail on the Earth.' l 
 
 Mr. Proctor then proceeds at considerable length to 
 consider them, and thus closes the chapter on the 
 'Habitability of Saturn,' in which the above remarks 
 occur : 
 
 ' The result of the examination of the probable physical 
 conditions and phenomena subsisting in Saturn does not 
 appear to favour the supposition that the planet is a suit- 
 able habitation for beings constituted like the inhabitants 
 of our globe. The variation of gravity, the length of the 
 Saturnian year, and the long protracted eclipses caused 
 by the ring, are the circumstances that seem to militate 
 most strongly against such a supposition. Over a zone 
 near the Saturnian equator these circumstances have less 
 effect, however ; and it is not impossible that arrange- 
 ments unknown to us prevail in Saturn which may 
 render other parts of his surface habitable as we should 
 understand the term: "The very combinations whicli 
 convey to our minds only images of horror may be 
 in reality theatres of the most striking and glorious 
 displays of beneficent contrivance." 
 
 ' On the general question of the habitability of the 
 system that circles about Saturn we have no means of 
 forming an opinion. From the analogy of our Moon it 
 appears highly probable that no part of the system is 
 habitable by such creatures as inhabit our Earth/ 2 
 
 1 Saturn, by R. A. Proctor, p. 158. 2 Ibid. p. 185. 
 
RESEMBLES JUPITER. 325 
 
 There has been discussion about the duration of the 
 eclipses on the face of Saturn caused by the rings, and 
 the consequent effect upon the planet ; but, indeed, it is 
 unnecessary to enter upon this or any kindred question 
 involving the supposition of a physical condition of the 
 planet analogous to that of the Earth, because the views 
 now entertained, and pretty fully stated, in dealing with 
 Jupiter are as applicable to Saturn, manifesting it to 
 be in a like predicament ; or in Mr. Proctor's own words, 
 'that an intense heat must in all probability prevail 
 on the great globe of Saturn,' 1 rendering it entirely 
 unsuitable as an abode for living creatures. 
 
 I will just shortly notice- the different facts- which 
 converge to- this conclusion. 
 
 1. There is the small density of the planet combined 
 with its magnitude. This cannot be due to solar action, 
 for the planet is still farther removed from the Sun than 
 Jupiter is, and the Sun has, by so much, less power upon 
 it. But we have seen in the case of Jupiter that the 
 enormous pressure is inconsistent with the small density, 
 except upon the footing of assuming an exceedingly 
 high temperature to exist in the body or interior of 
 the planet. The bulk of Saturn is little more- than half 
 that of Jupiter, but the same principle applies, and it 
 applies the more seeing the density is so much less, 
 being about the half. Perhaps I might venture to say 
 that some explanation of the smaller density may be 
 found in the counter attraction of the rings, or it may 
 be in the greater heat which the rings serve to enclose, 
 causing a more considerable distension. Whether this 
 be so or not the fact remains, proving a state of intense 
 heat. 
 
 ] Other Worlds than Ours, p. 160. 
 
326 PLURALITY SATURN. 
 
 t* 
 
 Mr Matthieu "Williams 1 holds the temperature assign- 
 able to the compression to be 590 Fahr. ; and, accord- 
 ing to Dalton, it should be 625 Fahr. He says: 
 
 ' The specific gravity of Saturn being still lower than 
 that of Jupiter, I am irresistibly led to deny its solidity, 
 and even to go further, and maintain that we are justified 
 in believing that it is still hotter than Jupiter, and that 
 the proportion of its gaseous constituents must also be 
 greater.' And he goes on to say that ' if Saturn and the 
 other light planets are thus mainly composed of gaseous 
 matter, the mechanical work of gravitation exerted in their 
 aggregation and compression must have produced a vastly 
 greater evolution of heat than I have calculated as due 
 to the compression of merely that portion of the general 
 atmospheric medium constituting their supplementary 
 envelope, and this high temperature, after being reduced 
 to a certain point, would be maintained by the gravita- 
 tion of their satellites.' ' Saturn must be even more 
 completely than Jupiter a miniature or model sun.' 
 
 2. It is, like Jupiter, girded with belts. 
 
 ' In November 1793, Herschel obtained a favourable 
 view of the Saturnian belts with his 40 feet reflector. He 
 observed a broad and brilliant white belt of nearly uniform 
 width, covering the equatorial regions ; next to it he 
 observed a broad dark belt of a yellowish colour ' (Mr. 
 Proctor, in a footnote, says modern telescopes exhibit the 
 dark belts as of a faint greenish colour), ' divided into 
 three unequal bands by two narrow and somewhat 
 irregular white streaks less brilliant than the equatorial 
 belt/ 2 
 
 In this description there will not fail to be noticed 
 the resemblance to Jupiter in the bright equatorial belt, 
 pointing to a common condition. Indeed the belts 
 
 'resemble those of Jupiter in their general shape, and 
 
 1 Fuel of Sun, P. 196 " Proctor's Saturn, p. 60. 
 
LIGHTSPOTS. 327 
 
 also in their colour. The dark belts near the equator 
 are of a faint brown or ruddy tinge, those near the pole 
 bluish or greenish grey, while the bright belts are 
 yellowish the equatorial belt being the brightest of all, 
 and almost white. The poles are commonly dusky and 
 even sombre in hue.' l 
 
 The resemblance does not stop there, for it appears 
 ' the belts change in aspect much as those of Jupiter 
 have been observed to do.' 
 
 These facts reveal an analogous condition underlying 
 the belts. 
 
 3. Saturn evidently emits inherent light over and 
 above the light it reflects. 
 
 ' The light sent to us from Saturn bears a much greater 
 proportion to the amount of solar light actually received 
 by the planet than is observed in the case of Mars or 
 the Moon, and so nearly approaches the proportion 
 noticed in the case of Jupiter as to lead to the same 
 inference/ 2 
 
 As already stated, according to Zollner, while the 
 Moon reflects less than a fifth of the light she receives, 
 Saturn reflects more than a half, or more than double 
 the Moon's reflection. 
 
 4. There are spots on Saturn, and it was by watching 
 them that Herschel 3 found the period of its revolution 
 on its axis. But probably owing to the great distance 
 and consequent difficulty of observation there is no- 
 where, so far as I have seen, any minute description of 
 their appearance and changes. 
 
 5. But a fact quite as cogent, if not more so, is 
 that Saturn occasionally appears distorted. This was 
 observed by Sir William Herschel for the first time in 
 
 1 Other Worlds, p. 155. 2 Ibid. 3 Saturn, p. 57. 
 
328 PL URALITYSA TURN. 
 
 <* 
 
 1805. For 1 its shape suffers alteration, the parts 
 midway between the pole and the equator of the planet 
 bulging out and becoming ' square-shouldered.' This 
 remarkable appearance has since been noticed by several 
 astronomers, and it practically amounts to this, that its 
 figure is susceptible of terrible variation, so that we 
 must ' accept the astounding conclusion that the giant 
 bulk of Saturn is subject of throes of so tremendous a 
 nature as to upheave whole zones of his surface five or 
 six hundred miles above their ordinary level.' 2 Some- 
 what of the same appearance has been noticed in 
 Jupiter, but apparently not so well marked. It indicates 
 the forces of heat moving within with appalling power. 
 
 6. Spectrum Analysis has shown that there is a 
 resemblance between Jupiter and Saturn. 
 
 ' The comparatively faint spectrum of Saturn has been 
 examined by Huggins, who observed in it some of the 
 lines characteristic of Jupiter's spectrum. These lines 
 are less clearly seen in the light of the ring than in that 
 of the ball, whence it may be concluded that the light 
 from the ring suffers less absorption than does the light 
 from the planet itself. The observations of Janssen, which 
 have been supported by Secchi, have since shown that 
 aqueous vapour is probably present both in Jupiter and 
 Saturn. Secchi has further discovered some lines in the 
 spectrum of Saturn which are not coincident with any of 
 the telluric lines, nor with any of the lines of the solar 
 spectrum produced by the aqueous vapour of the Earth's 
 atmosphere. It is not improbable, therefore, that the 
 atmosphere of Saturn may contain gases or vapours which 
 do not exist in that of our Earth.' 3 
 
 All these circumstances combine to show that Saturn 
 is, like Jupiter, a planet differing from this Earth, and 
 
 1 Flowers of the Sky, p. 222. * Other Worlds, p. 157. 
 
 3 Schellen, p. 483. 
 
SUN 2V SATELLITES. 329 
 
 is still burning with nebulous heat, altogether incon- 
 sistent with the idea of being habitable. 
 
 This being so, the resort is to suppose it to be a sun 
 to the eight satellites which surround it. 
 
 Mr. Proctor thus expresses his views on this 
 subject : 
 
 ' It seems to me that, apart from the reasoning already 
 adduced, we have to choose between two views of the 
 Saturnian system. Either the scheme of satellites and 
 the system of rings are intended to subserve some useful 
 purpose with respect to Saturn, or Saturn subserves some 
 useful purpose with respect to these systems. Now 
 the satellites can supply very little light to Saturn. All 
 together (if they could be all full together) they would 
 supply but a sixteenth part of the light which we receive 
 from our Moon when she is full. How so insignificant a 
 supply of reflected light can make up to Saturnians for 
 the fact that the direct supply of solar heat is but one 
 ninetieth of that which we receive, I leave the believers in 
 Saturn's habitability to explain. But the ring system, 
 which also has been spoken of as supplementing the 
 deficiency of solar light, does just the reverse. It 
 deprives the Saturnians fo* long periods together, in 
 some regions for several successive years, of the light 
 they would otherwise receive. And this it does in the 
 winter of those places. At this time also it reflects no 
 light to them during the night. In summer the rings do 
 not cut off any of the Sun's light, and they shine at 
 night with a considerable degree of brightness, marred 
 only by the circumstance that at midnight the great 
 shadow of the planet falls on nearly the whole of the 
 visible part of the ring. But no supply of reflected light 
 during the summer nights can compensate for the depriva- 
 tion of the whole of the Sun's direct light in winter for 
 several of our years together. 
 
 'We seem compelled, then, to adopt the view that 
 Saturn subserves useful purposes to the worlds which 
 
330 PL URALITl SA TCRN: 
 
 circle round him. To these lie certainly supplies much 
 reflected light, and possibly a considerable proportion of 
 inherent light. He probably warms them in a much 
 greater degree. And it seems no unworthy thought 
 respecting him, that even as he sways them by his 
 attractive energy, so he nourishes them as a subordinate 
 Sun by the heat with which his great mass is instinct. 
 If our Sun, so far surpassing all his dependent worlds in 
 mass, yet acts as their servant in such respects, we may 
 reasonably believe that Saturn and Jupiter act a similar 
 part towards the orbs which circle round them. 1 
 
 This theory, it will be seen, is built upon the idea 
 that the planets and other heavenly bodies must 
 necessarily subserve a useful purpose, or rather such a 
 useful purpose as we can conceive ; a view which has 
 been previously disposed of in dealing with the general 
 question. 
 
 With regard to the satellites themselves, we know 
 too little to say much about them. They would seem 
 to resemble our Moon in presenting the same face to 
 the planet throughout their revolutions (and indeed this 
 is an observation which is thought to apply to the 
 satellites of all the planets), and they may resemble the 
 Moon, therefore, in condition. But if they possess an 
 atmosphere, it may resemble that of their parent orb, 
 which, according to Spectrum Analysis, differs from the 
 life-sustaining atmosphere of Earth, which would of 
 itself, apart from all other circumstances, render 
 them uninhabitable ; a conclusion, however, which is 
 sufficiently forced upon us by the fact of the enormous 
 distance separating them from the Sun depriving them 
 of the heat necessary for life a reason which would be 
 equally applicable to the moons of all the exterior planets. 
 
 1 Expanse of Heaven, p. 102. 
 
THE RINGS. 331 
 
 I have not considered the case of the rings, because 
 they are apparently either a vast heap of small meteoric 
 bodies, or if not so, are probably composed of gases. In 
 either case they cannot be deemed habitable. The 
 widening of the rings seems to indicate a possibility of 
 their descending to the planet, and thus maintaining its 
 heat and agitation indefinitely. 
 
URANUS. 
 
 TILL a century ago, Saturn had been regarded as the 
 outermost planet of the solar system. It was little 
 thought that far beyond it another was ploughing its 
 lonely way in the darkness and depths of space, 
 freighted, according to Dr. Dick, with a constant cargo 
 of 1,077,568,000,000, or more than a. billion of souls. 
 Perhaps the reader, after all that has been advanced, 
 may be inclined to' discount a little from this precise 
 estimate ; but it will be my business to help him to 
 decision. 
 
 On 13th March 1781 this planet was discovered by 
 Sir William Herschel, and at once the industrious 
 ardent amateur leapt from obscurity to fame. The 
 discovery, his biographer says, ' was the most striking 
 since the invention of the telescope. It had absolutely 
 no parallel, for every other major planet had been 
 known from time immemorial.' 1 Herschel named it in 
 honour of George in. the Ge&rgium Sidus. Others 
 honoured it more appropriately with his own name. 
 Ultimately it was called Uranus, the most ancient of 
 the gods, whose so>n Saturn, and grandson Jupiter, had 
 already obtained a lasting establishment in the starry 
 firmament. 
 
 This planet rolls in its distant course more than 
 1800 millions of miles from the Sun, being nearly 
 
 1 See the all too scanty Life of Iferschd, by Holden, p. 48 et seq. 
 
 332 
 
URANUS PHYSICAL FACTS. 333 
 
 twenty times as far removed from it as is the Earth. 
 In size it is not so large as Saturn ; its diameter of 
 about 35,000 miles being nearly half that of the other, 
 the polar being l/9th less than the equatorial diameter, 
 but in density it is slightly greater, or as 167 is to 131. 
 In mass it is nearly fifteen times greater than the 
 Earth. Its gravity is about 3/4ths that of the Earth, 
 or '76 the Earth being = 1. The light and heat 
 received by Uranus from the Sun are 1/3 9 Oth of that 
 received by the Earth, and therefore must be faint 
 indeed. Did it resemble the Earth, it has been cal- 
 culated that the cold at its surface would be 122 Fahr. 
 below freezing. 1 Its year consists of eighty-four of our 
 years, but it has not been possible to observe the length 
 of its day. It has been thought by Sir William 
 Herschel and other astronomers, but not by all, that 
 it is flattened at the poles, Ma'dler calculating the 
 flattening to amount to I/ 10th, which, if correct, would 
 be suggestive of a rapid rotation. 2 It is attended by 
 six moons. 
 
 It will at once be apparent that if Jupiter and Saturn 
 be uninhabitable in respect of distance from the Sun, so 
 multo majus must Uranus be. 
 
 There is a striking peculiarity in the inclination of 
 the plane of Uranus' equator to the path in which he 
 travels, upon which Mr. Proctor in More Worlds than 
 One 3 dwells to show the effect upon its seasons or 
 climatic condition, rendering life upon it all the more 
 impossible. But in the face of the more serious objec- 
 tion that it is in pari casu with Jupiter and Saturn as 
 
 1 Dick's Celestial Scenery, p. 194. 
 
 2 Guillemin's Heavens, p. 228. 
 * P. 167. 
 
334 L URALITY URANUS. 
 
 
 
 regards its fiery constitution, it is superfluous to enter 
 upon matters of this kind. 
 
 . The same reason which has been urged in the cases 
 of Jupiter and Saturn applies to Uranus, that the amount 
 of its density, combined with its bulk, prove it to be still 
 in a state of nebulous heat. 
 
 ' The density of this planet,' says Mr. Williams, 1 ' is 
 intermediate between that of Jupiter and Saturn, and if 
 my views of the constitution of these two planets are 
 sound, Uranus should, like them, be mainly composed of 
 gaseous matter, and must have the general constitution 
 of a minor sun. Much of the heat evolved by the com- 
 pression of its gaseous constituents (I refer now to 
 planetary, not to atmospheric gases) must be still main- 
 tained, and the source of this high permanent temperature 
 ought to be traceable to the amount of disturbing reaction 
 of its satellites.' 
 
 Uranus is far too distant to admit of observation of 
 its surface. Whether it has belts, or spots, or streaks, 
 however probable, seems to be unknown. But it has 
 been examined by the spectroscope, and the results of 
 that examination are most important. 
 
 1 The spectrum of Uranus,' says Schellen, 2 ' which has 
 been investigated by Secchi, appears to be of a very 
 remarkable character. It consists mainly of two broad 
 black bands one, in, the greenish- blue, but not coincident 
 with the F line ; and the other, n, in the green, near the 
 line E. A little beyond the band n, the spectrum dis- 
 appears altogether, and shows a blank space, q, p, extend- 
 ing entirely over the yellow to the red, where there is 
 again a faint reappearance of light. The spectrum is 
 therefore such a one as would be produced were all the 
 yellow rays extinguished from the light of the Sun. The 
 dark sodium line, D, occurs, as is well known, in the 
 1 Fuel of Sun, 315. 2 Schellen, p. 484. 
 
ITS SPECTRUM. 335 
 
 part of the spectrum occupied by this broad non-luminous 
 space. Is this extraordinary phenomenon, therefore, to 
 be ascribed to the influence of this metal ? or is the planet 
 Uranus, which has a spectrum differing so greatly from 
 that of the Sun, self-luminous ? Has the planet not yet 
 attained that degree of consistency possessed by the 
 nearer planets, which shine only by the Sun's light, and, 
 as the photometric observations of Zb'llner lead us to 
 suppose is possible, is still in that process of condensation 
 and subsequent development through which the Earth 
 has already passed ? These are questions to which at 
 present we can furnish no reply, and the problem can 
 only be solved by additional observations of the strange 
 characteristics exhibited by this spectrum.' 
 
 Dr. Hoggins, 1 by means of a more powerful telescope, 
 subsequently examined the planet, and found the spec- 
 trum to be complete, no part being wanting, so far as 
 the feebleness of its light permitted it to be traced. 
 
 ' But,' observes Mr. Proctor, 2 'there are six dark bands 
 or strong lines indicating the absorptive action of the 
 planet's atmosphere. One of these strong lines corre- 
 sponds in position with one of the lines of hydrogen. 
 Now it may seem at a first view that since the light of 
 Uranus is reflected solar light, we might expect to find 
 in the spectrum of Uranus the solar lines of hydrogen. 
 But the line in question is too strong to be regarded as 
 merely representing the corresponding line in the solar 
 spectrum. Indeed, Dr. Huggins distinctly mentions that 
 the bands produced by planetary absorption are broad 
 and strong in comparison with the solar lines. We must 
 conclude, therefore, that there exists in the atmosphere of 
 Uranus the gas hydrogen, sufficiently familiar to us as an 
 element which appears in combination with others, but 
 which we by no means recognise as a suitable constituent 
 (at least to any great extent) of an atmosphere, which 
 
 1 Schellen, p. 485. 
 
 a Light Science for Leisure Hours, 2d series, p. 144. 
 
336 PL URALITY URANUS. 
 
 a 
 
 living creatures are to breathe. And not only must 
 hydrogen be present in the atmosphere of Uranus, but 
 in such enormous quantities as to be one of the chief 
 atmospheric constituents.' 
 
 After adverting to the apparent absence of carbonic 
 acid, and to the small amount, if any, of aqueous vapour, 
 Mr. Proctor proceeds : 
 
 ' We certainly have a strange discovery to deal with. 
 If it be remembered that oxygen, the main supporter of 
 such life as we are familiar with, cannot be mixed with 
 hydrogen without the certainty that the first spark will 
 cause an explosion (in which the whole or one or other of 
 the gases will combine with a due portion of the other to 
 produce water), it is difficult to resist the conclusion that 
 oxygen must be absent from the atmosphere of Uranus. 
 If hydrogen could be added in such quantities to our 
 atmosphere as to be recognisable from a distant planet 
 by spectroscopic analysis, then no terrestrial fires could 
 be lighted, for a spark would produce a catastrophe in 
 which all living things upon the Earth, if not the solid 
 earth itself, would be destroyed. A single flash of light- 
 ning would be competent to leave the Earth but a huge 
 cinder, even if its whole frame were not rent into a 
 million fragments by the explosion which would ensue.' l 
 
 It occurs to me that the presence of such overpower- 
 ing quantities of hydrogen indicate of themselves a 
 condition in Uranus very closely analogous to the Sun, 
 whose atmosphere consists of hundreds of thousands of 
 miles of hydrogen, in one portion incandescent, in another 
 cool. 
 
 Mr. Proctor adds : 
 
 ' Under what strange conditions, then, must life exist 
 in Uranus, if there be indeed life upon that distant orb. 
 Either our life-sustaining element, oxygen, is wanting, or if 
 
 1 Light Science, p. 146. 
 
ITS MOONS. 337 
 
 it exists in sufficient quantities (according to our notions) 
 for the support of life, then there can be no fire, natural 
 or artificial, in that giant planet. It seems more reason- 
 able to conclude that, as had been suspected for other 
 reasons, the planet is not at present in a condition which 
 renders it a suitable abode for living creatures' l 
 
 Nor can it be a bit more possible in the future, that 
 is, if cooled down to solidity. 
 
 With regard to the moons of Uranus little is known 
 beyond a peculiarity in their motion round the- planet, 
 explained by Mr. Proctor, 2 which causes them to differ 
 considerably in orbit from that of all the other planetary 
 satellites, and a variation of brightness which has been 
 thought to arise either from the existence of dark tracts 
 on their surface, or from spots or rents in their atmo- 
 sphere. 3 Possibly they are deadly cold ; and if they 
 have an atmosphere, it may partake of that of their 
 death-dealing primary. 
 
 1 Light Science, p. 147. 2 Ibid. p. 140. 
 
 3 Grant's History, p. 284. 
 

 NEPTUNE. 
 
 STILL another outside wanderer remains. The extra- 
 ordinary perturbations of Uranus awoke astronomers to 
 the thought that these must be attributable to the influ- 
 ence of another and unknown planet, and sixty-five 
 years after the discovery of Uranus, Neptune was found. 
 It was the result of high scientific calculation, and the 
 honour of the discovery was divided between Adams, a 
 young English mathematician, and Leverrier, the French 
 astronomer. Adams first in time ; Leverrier first in 
 publication. The subject is fully discussed in Professor 
 Nichol's work, The Planet Neptune : an Exposition and 
 History. His verdict is, the two stand forth indepen- 
 dent they are PEERS. 1 
 
 With this question of disputed honour we are not 
 concerned here. We have only to dispose of the habit- 
 ability of the planet, and after what has been said 
 regarding the others, it falls to be dismissed with still 
 less notice. 
 
 Neptune is somewhat larger than Uranus, being 
 (according to Mr. Proctor, other writers estimating 
 differently) 37,250 miles in diameter. Its volume is 
 80 times (more or less) that of the Earth, and its mass 
 16 or 18 times. Its density is about one-third of that 
 of the Earth, or not quite double that of water, and it 
 
 1 See also Proctor's Expanse of Heaven, p. 120, where the matter is 
 briefly mentioned. 
 
 338. 
 
NEPTUNE UNINHABITABLE. 339' 
 
 is also nearly double that of Uranus, so that perhaps 
 it may be condensing. Its distance from the Sun is 
 2,800,000,000 miles, or 30 times that of the Earth, 
 and the light and heat it receives are the 1/9 00th part 
 of that received by the Earth. The inclination of its 
 axis to the orbit is great. It takes 164 years 266 days 
 to perform its long circuit round the Sun. The length 
 of its day cannot be discovered, because it is impossible 
 to note and watch the features of its surface. 
 
 In these circumstances there could be no room left 
 for doubt that Neptune cannot possibly be habitable. 
 Mr. Williams l observes regarding it that ' considering 
 the pressure of the planetary mass upon itself (eighteen 
 times that of the Earth) the superficial portion of its 
 planetary matter must still be gaseous, and its solid 
 nucleus far below.' 
 
 But it is sufficient for present purposes to refer to 
 the revelations of the spectroscope regarding it or its 
 atmosphere. It is thus stated by Schellen : 
 
 'The spectrum of Neptune, which has also been 
 examined by Secchi, bears a great resemblance to that of 
 Uranus. It is characterized by three principal bands. 
 The first, which is the faintest, is situated between the 
 green and the yellow, nearly in the centre between 
 D and b ; it is of considerable breadth, but very ill 
 defined at the edges. Between this and the red there is 
 a tolerably bright band, with which the spectrum seems 
 suddenly to terminate, and the red is entirely wanting. 
 Secchi is of opinion that the absence of the red is not 
 occasioned by the faintness of this planet, for other stars 
 no brighter than Neptune show the red clearly in the 
 spectrum. The absence of this colour in the spectrum 
 of Neptune must therefore be ascribed to absorption. 
 
 ' The second absorption band occurs at the line b ; it 
 
 1 Fuel of Sun, p. 209. 
 
340 PL URALITY NEPTUNE. 
 
 is tolerably well defined at the edges, but much fainter 
 and more difficult of observation than the first band. 
 The third band is in the blue, and is even fainter than 
 the second. 
 
 ' This spectrum is in agreement with the colour of the 
 planet, which resembles the beautiful tint of the sea. A 
 peculiar interest attaches to this spectrum from the 
 coincidence of the dark bands with the bright bands of 
 certain comets, and with the dark bands of stars of the 
 fourth type. These bands may possibly be due to carbon ; 
 but accurate measurements are exceedingly difficult, and 
 can only be attempted on the finest evenings, and with 
 the use of the most powerful instruments.' : 
 
 The statement of coincidence with the bands of 
 comets, and that they may possibly be due to carbon, 
 may be important, but the most material observation 
 arising from this analysis is in showing that the 
 spectrum of Neptune bears a great resemblance to that 
 of Uranus, so that we may fairly assume that hydrogen 
 predominates in Neptune also; and therefore, in addition 
 to being in a gaseous hot state, it possesses an atmo- 
 sphere in which life is impossible. 
 
 Of its two moons little or nothing is known. An 
 additional one has within the last few months been dis- 
 covered by Lassell. 2 But both in their case and in that of 
 the satellites of Uranus, it may be observed that the light 
 which is shed upon them must be far too feeble to induce 
 vegetation, even were there heat enough thrown upon 
 them from Uranus, which there is nothing to warrant in 
 supposing. Doubtless, if solid, these frigid globes, shiver- 
 ing with inconceivable cold, wander about the planet by 
 which they are swayed, which gladly binds them to her- 
 self as it pursues its lonely way around the far-distant 
 and just-discernible Sun, the great parent of them all. 
 
 1 Pp. 485, 483. 2 Knowledge, i. p. 124. 
 
IX. 
 
 WE have now, after disposing of the Sun and stars, 
 carefully, and with as much completeness as possible, 
 considered the condition of the whole planetary and 
 other bodies of the solar system, commencing with our 
 Moon and ending -with Neptune, the most distant 
 known ; and if others lie beyond Neptune yet to be 
 discovered and one has been suspected, and is the 
 subject of diligent watch, but has not yet been appre- 
 hended and brought to give account of his errant life 
 their condition must be still more hopelessly inhospitable 
 than that of any of the planets and their satellites 
 whose case has been discussed. But it will be seen 
 that, for reasons which seem to be unanswerable, each 
 and every one of the planets which (if the asteroids 
 be reckoned, as there is no reason why they should not 
 be) amount in number to thousands, to say nothing of 
 the comets computed by millions has been demon- 
 strated to be in a state which, having regard to all 
 the analogies of Earth, would render life upon them 
 impossible ; and this was the great problem which had 
 to be solved. 
 
 341 
 
342 CONCLUSION. 
 
 It devolves on us, therefore, in closing, to review the 
 results of inquiry, and form a conclusion. In doing so, 
 it will be kept in recollection that after disposing of 
 all the arguments which have been commonly used in 
 support of the contention for ' plurality of worlds,' 
 such as the very familiar one, that the orbs around us 
 would be useless unless inhabited, certain positions 
 were postulated as necessary to the just determination of 
 the question in dealing with the several celestial bodies : 
 because it would not do, for example, to say that as all 
 things are possible with God, so God could give life to 
 each orb in the Universe, no matter in what unfavour- 
 able circumstances it is placed. The results of investi- 
 gation then are these: 
 
 1. That life of any kind cannot be in the Sun and 
 fixed stars. 
 
 2. That we cannot assume that all, or indeed any of 
 the stars, as suns, have planetary systems, or that where 
 such systems exist the planets constituting them are so 
 constituted as to support vegetable and animal life. 
 
 3. That the Moon and all the planets other than the 
 Earth, and all the other bodies of the solar system, are 
 in conditions antagonistic to life. 
 
 4. That seeing the Earth is only one out of thousands 
 regarding which we have means of forming an opinion, 
 and that these thousands, we have good reason to hold, 
 are uninhabitable ; and also seeing that life has only 
 
CONCLUSION. 343 
 
 recently, by creative miracle, been bestowed upon Earth, 
 a world specially suited and prepared, if not specially 
 made, for life, we cannot reason because of life on 
 Earth to life existing in any presumable stellar system. 
 
 The irresistible conclusion therefore is, that we can 
 hold life to exist only upon the Earth. It may appear 
 to be a strange and bold conclusion, but it is fairly 
 rested on analogical deduction. 
 
 And with such a conclusion all the ideas drawn from 
 the supposition of a plurality of worlds pleasantly 
 beguiling though they be vanish and come to nought. 
 All the fervent fascinating words, in which the inspiring 
 glow of fancy has sometimes found utterance, and borne 
 both speaker and hearer alike entranced away, are, like 
 the sleeper's dream, rudely broken by the call to awake, 
 stripped of power as the light of inquiry bursts in and 
 dispels the delusion. 
 
 But have we no bright and noble thought to take 
 their place ? Nay, is it not rather in the contemplation 
 to which this important deduction this true ' creed of 
 the philosopher ' leads, that there is found the more 
 assuringly ' the hope of the Christian.' 
 
 We know that to the Omniscient Eye every celestial 
 body, however large or however small, throughout the 
 Universe, with all that passes on each, is as present as 
 if one only of all were the subject of undivided over- 
 
344 CONCLUSION. 
 
 sight. We know, too, that the Arm of Omnipotence is, 
 with unwearied effort, stretched over each to direct it 
 and tend it with a solicitude as great and as unceasing 
 as if each were the sole object of Divine regard. But 
 when we find that this world alone, of all the worlds in 
 space, is fitted for life, and has been prepared for the 
 rational and immortal Being MAN, are we not justly led 
 to take another and higher view of a planet, which has 
 by some of its own denizens been slightingly designated 
 ' insignificant/ and of the beings for whom it has pre- 
 sumably been called into existence, and harmoniously 
 planned, and exactly arranged ; and to feel all the more 
 (at least in the weakness of our power to comprehend 
 the Almighty) that there must be drawn to it and to 
 them, in a manner peculiar and paternal, the never-ending 
 
 r 
 
 concern and the boundless love of our heavenly Father. 
 Can we then wonder that, conscious of His high designs, 
 when He laid the foundations of the Earth, 'the 
 morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God 
 shouted for joy ; ' and when, after long ages of minister- 
 ing preparation, the Earth was adjusted and furnished 
 to receive a Being unlike, and so infinitely higher than, 
 any which had previously subsisted on its face, nay, 
 as it seems,- unique in the whole Universe; and God, 
 seeing all was ready, had issued His gracious decree : 
 1 Let Us make Man in Our Image/ and had ' breathed 
 into his nostrils the breath of life ; ' and, having planted 
 
CONCLUSION. 345 
 
 a garden, had put therein the man whom He had 
 formed, endued, though in a finite manner, with attri- 
 butes resembling His own : can we longer wonder that 
 He, thus regarding Man as His peculiar offspring, 
 watched him with an anxious eye, and that His radiant 
 messengers ever and anon sped their joyous way to 
 reveal to this favoured being His beneficent will, His 
 sovereign plans. Can we longer wonder that for 
 his good there was bestowed on some a special 
 power, and ' holy men of God ' * spake as they were 
 moved by the Holy Ghost,' and gave to him an in- 
 spired Eecord to be the guide of his life, and to offer 
 a hope for life to come. Or when this being, Man, the 
 only rational, embodied, created spirit inhabiting the 
 Universe, had sinned, fallen from his allegiance, rebelled, 
 and forfeited his claim to all for which he was destined, 
 can we not the better see why it was that the Eternal 
 Son, filled with compassion, divinely infinite, for His 
 fallen creature, withdrew for a time from the Majestic 
 Glory in which He dwelt invisible and unapproachable, 
 and, veiling that benign but dread face, upon which no 
 mortal eye could gaze and live, He humbled Himself to 
 take upon Him our nature, to put His foot upon our 
 World, and for a time to associate in familiar intercourse 
 with us, His erring children ; and, having made known 
 His mission of love and grace, submitted to taste of 
 death that Man might, by that astounding sacrifice, be 
 
346 CONCLUSION. 
 
 restored to the privileges he had lost ; and then returning 
 to His resplendent heavenly abode, to welcome there 
 His redeemed people, He still retains for them a fellow- 
 feeling still watches over them with a jealous care- 
 still listens to their every supplication ; so that Heaven 
 is, as it were, brought nigh to Earth ; and, ever since 
 the creation, our World, deemed to be so little among 
 the thousands, has been sweeping on and on by the 
 jasper walls, and almost grazing the jewelled sides ; 
 and ever as we passed the gates of pearl, which are 
 never closed, we might imagine we heard the rustle of 
 angelic wings, and that our eyes were opened, as were 
 the eyes of the prophet's servant of old to see the horses 
 of fire and the chariots of fire, and we beheld legions of 
 bright shining ones, streaming out and flying quickly 
 on errands of love and mercy to men, while ' the Ran- 
 somed of the Lord, with songs and everlasting joy upon 
 their heads,' were as eagerly pressing in to march in 
 triumph through the golden streets, lighted by the glory 
 of God, and through the pure river of the water of life 
 to join the innumerable throng which surrounds the 
 Great White Throne. And if we can imagine Earth so 
 linked to Heaven, and think of its inhabitants as so 
 highly favoured and so highly prized, we are enabled 
 the better to comprehend our lofty position, and we can 
 proudly rejoice to think that though our world, amidst 
 the millions of celestial bodies vastly larger, is looked 
 
CONCLUSION. 347 
 
 upon with a material eye but an insignificant and 
 indiscernible speck, yet, as not merely the sole dwelling- 
 place of rational life, but the seat of the most amazing 
 of all wonders, a being destined to a glorious immor- 
 tality clothed for the present in a mortal frame, but 
 conscious of his high prerogative ; and therefore, and 
 by reason of all that, because of its inhabitant Man, 
 has supervened, it is a greater and grander globe than 
 the largest and brightest orb which gleams upon the 
 midnight sky. 
 
 MORRISON AND GIBB, EDINBURGH, 
 PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE. 
 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 In One Volume, post 8vo, pp. 490, with Twelve Lithographic Illustrations, 
 Second Edition, Price 7s. 6d. Cloth. 
 
 WINTERING IN THE RIVIERA; 
 
 W1TII 
 
 NOTES OF TRAVEL IN ITALY AND FRANCE, 
 
 AND 
 
 PRACTICAL HINTS TO TRAVELLERS. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 1. Continental Travelling II. Hotel and Pension Life III. Local Means 
 of Conveyance IV. Postal Arrangements V. Sunday Abroad. 
 
 First Winter in the Riviera. 
 VI. London to South of France VII. Cannes VIII. Nice IX. Mentone. 
 
 Italy. 
 
 X. San Kemo and Genoa XL Spezia, Pisa, Sienna XII. Rome XIII. 
 Naples, Pompeii, Sorrento XIV. Florence and Bologna XV. Venice and 
 Verona XVI. Milan and the Italian Lakes. 
 
 Switzerland ; France. 
 
 XVII. The Splugen Pass; Switzerland XVIII. Biarritz XIX. Pau 
 XX. Second Winter in the Riviera. 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 1. View from Foot-bridge up the Carrei to North Mountain Range, Mentone 
 2. The Estrelles from St. Honorat, Cannes 3. Oil-Mills, Carrei 
 Valley, Mentone 4. Promenade du Midi, Mentone 5. Corsica, as 
 occasionally seen before sunrise, Mentone 6. A City set upon a Hill, 
 on road to Lucca 7. Sorrento from the West 8. Ponte Vecchio, 
 Florence 9. Tomb of Juliet, Verona 10. Bellaggio, Lake Como 
 11. Port Vieux Bathing Establishment, Biarritz 12. Biarritz Bather*. 
 
 LONDON: LONGMANS & CO. 
 
Wintering in the Riiiera. 
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. 
 
 ' Even to those who have not been, and do not intend to go, to the Riviera, 
 the book will prove very interesting, for it is written in graceful English, and, 
 where circumstances permit it, with no small descriptive power.' Bristol 
 Times. 
 
 ' Mr. MILLER has fortunately remembered that there are still a few men and 
 women left who have not been all over Europe, and he has not disdained to 
 give particulars which some less considerate writers pretend to think unneces- 
 sary.' Manchester Guardian. 
 
 ' The Author of this record of an eighteen months' sojourn in the Riviera 
 possesses the two prime qualifications requisite for the production of such 
 record. He is a careful observer, and has descriptive powers of more than 
 ordinary merit. . . . "We think the present publication opportune, and certain 
 to meet with acceptance.' Yorkshire Post. 
 
 ' Will prove eminently useful. ... It contains a large amount of valuable 
 information, and is written throughout with good taste and feeling.' Hull 
 Packet. 
 
 ' There are some good sketches in the volume, and it is altogether one of 
 the most interesting books of Continental travel that we have seen for some 
 time ' Aberdeen Journal. 
 
 4 The pleasantly told experience of visits made to such places in the south 
 of France, Italy, and Switzerland as are often resorted to by English travel- 
 lers in search of health or pleasure. 'Ayr Advertiser. 
 
 'For really valuable information, pointed and practical just such as 
 travellers, whether in quest of health or pleasure, desire to have before leaving 
 home nothing could surpass the volume under notice. . . . Will be widely- 
 read and enjoyed, not only by those about to travel on the Continent, but by 
 stay-at-home travellers.' Daily Review (Edinburgh}. 
 
 ' There is thus freshness and variety in the description of objects with 
 which we are more or less familiar, and Mr. MILLER, who seems to have 
 observed very closely the scenes through which he passed, is a very readable 
 guide to the most entertaining portions of Southern Europe." Newcastle 
 Courant. 
 
 ' This book gives an excellent description of some of the favourite health 
 resorts of the south of Europe, and is one highly to be recommended to 
 intending travellers. . . . The various good illustrations give great additional 
 interest to the volume.' The Ladies' Edinburgh Magazine. 
 
 ' There is much in it to instruct and amuse both those who have visited 
 the same scenes as Mr. MILLER and those who hope to do so.' Scotsman. 
 
Wintering in the JRiviera. 
 
 ' Lastly, Mr. MILLER has the pen of a ready writer, and his style is easy 
 and unpretentious. Thus his work is to be commended from all points of 
 view, and we trust will meet with that degree of appreciation to which it is 
 certainly entitled.' Land and Water. 
 
 4 At this season of the year, when many are contemplating leaving England 
 for summer climates, "Wintering in the Riviera" will command attention, 
 and doubtless suggest much that is of value to intending sojourners in the 
 pleasant places it describes.' Morning Post. 
 
 ' Headers will be hard to please if they do not find such amusement and 
 information as the prefatory pages modestly promise. . . . His observations 
 of French, Swiss, and Italian scenes are all full of interest; and the faculty 
 of accurate draughtsmanship and delicate sketching helps the Author to 
 illustrate his descriptions, while it may not unreasonably be supposed to 
 have reacted on his literary style, making it more concise, vivid, and exact.' 
 Daily Telegraph. 
 
 'Persons who contemplate to journey in that delightful locality cannot 
 have a better guide and companion than the volume which Mr. MILLER has 
 written for their benefit.' Newcastle Chronicle. 
 
 ' The Author of this work, writing in the interests of those who may wish 
 to do as he has done, has hit the nail upon the head. ... It says much for 
 his work that we have read it all, and, though tolerably familiar with some 
 of his scenery, with great satisfaction ' Glasgow Herald. 
 
 * Is a work to be classed with that recently published from the pen of Mrs. 
 BRASSEY. . . . The volume is illustrated with several Lithographs, chiefly 
 from sketches by the Author, and, as the views are very tastefully chosen 
 and neatly finished, they add materially to the interest which every lover of 
 travel must feel in the work.' Western Daily Press (Bristol). 
 
 ' Of everyday life at the hotels usually frequented by English visitors, the 
 book conveys a good idea; some of the descriptions of scenery almost rise 
 into eloquence ; and although the Author cannot be implicitly trusted as a 
 guide in matters of art, his remarks on the sights of Italian cities will be read 
 with interest by those who purpose to spend a winter in the sunny South.' 
 Academy. 
 
 1 The chief recommendations of the book are its impartiality and the 
 opportunity it affords for a comparison of health resorts without studying 
 a library of separate volumes. Mr. MILLEK gives many facts which may be 
 useful as to situation and tcenery, exposure, climate, temperature, etc.' The 
 Times. 
 
 1 To those who know Mr. MILLER as a man of culture and character we 
 need say no more to indicate the sort of diary he has kept. For travellers of 
 his own type thoughtful, observant, and though not strongly prejudiced, yet 
 thoroughly Scotch he has written an excellent book. ... It is pre-eminently 
 a family book on winter resorts abroad. In that respect it is complete, 
 reliable, and written with such good taste as to be agreeable and instructive 
 reading.' Edinburgh Courant. 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO 5O CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 LD 21-10(hn-7,'33