Part 7 (2/2)

The ma.n.u.script is in small quarto, and exclusive of the t.i.tle (which, indeed, is the nub of the achievement) contains only nine pages, breaking off abruptly in the middle of a sentence. He criticises the editors of Hariot's Algebra, the executors Aylesbury and Protheroe, aided by Warner, who were all eminent mathematicians. He speaks of the administrators or editors as if more than one, and does not mention Warner, or lead us to believe that he was sole editor. Only a small portion of this projected criticism seems ever to have been written. It appears to have been begun in senile peevishness, containing only a few prefatory remarks and discussing some algebraical questions with the fancied errors of the editors. No mention is made of the'Atomic Theory,'as promised on the t.i.tle-page, which is here done into English, and is as follows:-

THE a.n.a.lYTICAL CORRECTOR of the posthumous scientific writings of THOMAS HARRIOT.

As an excellent Mathematician one who very seldom erred As a bold Philosopher one who occasionally erred, As a frail Man one who notably erred For the more trustworthy refutation of the pseudo-philosophic atomic theory, revived by him and, outside his other strange notions, deserving of reprehension and anathema.

A Compendious Warning with specimens by the aged and retired-from-active-life Na: Torporley.

So that The critic may know The buyer may beware.

It is not safe to trust to the bank, The bell-wether himself is drying his fleece.

The ' Corrector a.n.a.lyticus' may be found printed in full (but without the quaint t.i.tles) in 'The Historical Society of Science. A Collection of Letters ill.u.s.trative of Science, edited by J. O. Halliwell,' London, 1841, 8, Appendix, pages 109-116. ForTorporley's curious paper ent.i.tled ' A Synopsis of the Controversie of Atoms,' see Brit. Mus. Mss, Birch 4458, 2.

Mr Torporley informs us, and the papers appear to bear him out in the statement, that Hariot wrote memoranda, problems, etc. on loose pieces of paper, and then arranged them in sets fastened together according to the subjects treated of. He adds, ' First then let me speak of Hariot's method, of which frequent mention will have to be made in the following pages; so that the reader may understand why some things are stated and some pa.s.sed over: here I cannot but complain, that I find it a serious defect that his Commentators have so completely transformed it [the Praxis] that they not only do not retain his orderbut not evenhis language.' Again he writes, ' But not even those well-thought-out and necessary to be known matters, which have been delivered to us, have been handed down to posterity by his administrators with the fidelity and accuracy promised.' The suspicion is raised that Torporley's age and dilatoriness compelled the accomplished executors to take the editorial matter in hand themselves and hinc iliae lacrymae.

On the back of the above t.i.tle-page is another attempt of the same sort as follows, showing that this deed of pedantry was committed at Sion College:

CORRECTOR sive Notae in a.n.a.lyticam Novam, Novatam, Posthuma quatenus Fallacem, Defectivam, Extrariam c.u.m Apodictica refutatione Atomorum Somnij, prae caeteris Novatorum portentis corripiendi Ana- thematizandiq Ex Collegio Sion Londinenfi perfuncti Senis Artemq reponentis NT Extremu hoc munus morientis habetor : Σĸηρον προς κ 41;ντρονλ α κτρον λακτ 43;ζειν [Greek Text]

nee bene Ripae Creditur ipse Aries etia nunc Vellera ficcat.

There are one or two unimportant papers among the Torperley ma.n.u.scripts that bear marks of having belonged to the Hariot papers, and there is a ma.n.u.script by Warner, ent.i.tled, 'Certayne Definitions of the Planisphere.' Any one curious in the history of Torperley may find in the Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, 1636, page 364, how his property was purloined by Mr Spencer, the first Librarian of Sion College. He was sued by Mistress Payne the administratrix and was compelled to disgorge _4.0_ in money, eleven diamond rings, eight gold rings, two bracelets, etc. Then Archbishop Laud took away Spencer's librarians.h.i.+p, and let him drop.

Mr William Spence of Greenock published in Nov. 1814, a work ent.i.tled, '

Outlines of a Theory of Algebraical Equations deduced from the Principles of Harriott, and extended to the Fluxional or differential Calculus. By William Spence. London, for the Author, by Davis and d.i.c.kson, 1814, 8, _iv and 80 pages._ Privately printed, intended '

exclusively for the perusal of those gentlemen to whom it is addressed.'

He says in his prefatory note that-

' As the principles are drawn from that theory of equations, by which Harriott has so far advanced the science of algebra.'

The author says, page I,' Until the publication of Harriot's _Artis a.n.a.lytica Praxis,_ no extended theory of equations was given. Harriot considered algebraical equations merely as a.n.a.lytical expressions, detached wholly from the operations by which they might be individually produced ; and, carrying all the terms over to one side, he a.s.sumed the hypothesis, that, as in that state the equation was equal to nothing, it could always be reduced to as many simple factors as there were units in the index of its highest power.'

Between 1606 and 1609 a very interesting and historically instructive correspondence took place between Kepler and Hariot upon several important scientific subjects. Five of the letters are given in full in 'Joannis Keppleri Alio-rumque Epistolae Mutuae. [Frankfort] 1718,' folio, to which the reader is referred, but a brief abstract of them may not be out of place here. The letters are numbered from 222 to 226 and fill pages 373 to 382. The correspondence was begun by Kepler:

_Letter_ 122, _dated Prague,_ 11 _October,_ 1606, _from John Kepler_

_to Thomas Hariot,_

Kepler had heard of Hariot's acquirements in Natural Philosophy from his friend John Eriksen. Would be glad to know Hariot's views as to the origin and essential differences of colours; also on the question of refraction of rays of light; and the causes of the Rainbow; and of haloes round the sun.

_Letter_ 223, _dated London,_ 11 _December, 1606,from_

_Thomas Hariot to John Kepler,_

Had received with pleasure Kepler's letter; but should not be able to answer it at length, being in indifferent health, so that it was not easy to write or even carefully to reflect.

Sends a table of the results of experiments on equal bulks of various liquids and transparent solids (thirteen in number, including spring, rain, and salt water; Spanish and Rhenish wine; vinegar; spirits of wine; oils and gla.s.s). The angle of incidence is 30 in each case; also the specific gravity of each substance is given. Then he discusses the reason why refraction takes place. Promises to write on the Rainbow; but will merely say at present that it is to be explained by the reflection on the concave superficies and the refraction at the convex superficies of each separate drop.

_Letter_ 224 _is from John Kepler to Thomas Hariot, dated at Prague,_ 11 _August,_ 1607.

Thanks Hariot for his table, which supplies matter for serious consideration. Asks questions as to how he defines the angles of incidence and refraction; and goes on to discuss the reasons of refraction. Agrees with Hariot as to his views about the Rainbow; but will be very glad to receive his treatises on Colours and the Rainbow.

_Letter_ 225 _is from Thomas Hariot to John Kepler, dated at Syon,_

_near London,_ 13 _July_ (o.s.), 1608.

<script>