as _Volta-electric_, he concluded before long that magnetism
in motion ought to produce an electric current just as electricity
was made to imitate all the effects of magnetism. He carried on many
experiments, and after the announcements made by Arago to the French
Academy, November 22, 1824, he endeavoured to make the conducting
wire of the voltaic circuit excite electricity in a neighbouring wire
by induction, just as the conductor charged with common electricity
would have done, but he obtained no satisfactory results until August
29, 1831 (_Annales de Chimie_, Vol. XLVIII. p. 402). He remarks:
“Certain effects of the induction of electrical currents have already
been recognized and described; as those of magnetism; Ampère’s
experiments of bringing a copper disc near to a flat spiral; his
repetition, with electro-magnets, of Arago’s extraordinary experiments,
and perhaps a few others. Still it appeared unlikely that these could
be all the effects which induction by currents could produce....
These considerations, with their consequence, the hope of obtaining
electricity from ordinary magnetism, have stimulated me at various
times to investigate experimentally the inductive effects of electric
currents. I lately arrived at positive results, and not only had my
hopes fulfilled, but obtained a theory which appeared to me to open out
a full explanation of Arago’s magnetic phenomena, and also to discover
a new state which may probably have great influence in some of the most
important effects of electric currents.” His very important conclusion
was finally verified, October 1–17, in the following manner. He had
taken a helix, or spool of copper wire, which latter, Prof. Brande
tells us, was covered with silk as in his former experiments and which
was connected by its extremities with a galvanometer, the deflection of
which would of course announce a current of electricity in the spiral
and wires connected with it, and he found that while in the act of
introducing the pole of a powerful bar-magnet within the coils of the
spiral, a deflection of the galvanometer took place in one direction,
and that when in the act of withdrawing, it took place in the opposite
direction; so that each time the conducting wire cut the magnetic
curves, a current of electricity was, for the moment, produced in it.
Dr. Whewell’s account of the discovery is so well interspersed with
references that it deserves repetition here:
“In 1831, Faraday again sought for electro-dynamical induction,
and, after some futile trials, at last found it in a form different
from that in which he had looked for it. It was then seen, that at
the precise time of making or breaking the contact which closed the
galvanic circuit, a momentary effect was induced in a neighbouring
wire, but disappeared instantly (_Phil Trans._, 1832, p. 127,
1st ser., Art. 10). Once in possession of this fact, Mr. Faraday ran
rapidly up the ladder of discovery, to the general point of view.
Instead of suddenly making or breaking the contact of the inducing
circuit, a similar effect was produced by removing the inducible wire
nearer to or further from the circuit (Art. 18)--the effects were
increased by the proximity of soft iron (Art. 28)--when the soft iron
was affected by an ordinary magnet, instead of the voltaic wire, the
same effect still recurred (Art. 37)--and thus it appeared, that by
making and breaking magnetic contact, a momentary electric current was
produced. It was produced also by moving the magnet (Art. 39)--or by
moving the wire with reference to the magnet (Art. 53). Finally, it
was found that the earth might supply the place of a magnet in this as
in other experiments (2nd ser., _Phil. Trans._, p. 163) and the
mere motion of a wire, under proper circumstances, produced in it, it
appeared, a momentary electric current (Art. 141). These facts were
curiously confirmed by the results in special cases. They explained
Arago’s experiments: for the momentary effect became permanent by the
revolution of the plate. And without using the magnet, a revolving
plate became an electrical machine (Art. 150), a revolving globe
exhibited electro-magnetic action (Art. 164), the circuit being
complete in the globe itself without the addition of any wire; and a
mere motion of the wire of a galvanometer produced an electro-dynamic
effect upon its needle (Art. 171).... And thus he was enabled, at the
end of his second series of ‘Researches’ (December 1831), to give,
in general terms, the law of nature to which may be referred the
extraordinary number of new and curious experiments which he has stated
(Arts. 256–264), namely, that if a wire move so as to cut a magnetic
curve, a power is called into action which tends to urge a magnetic
current through the wire; and that if a mass move so that its parts do
not move in the same direction across the magnetic curves, and with the
same angular velocity, electrical currents are called into play in the
mass. And here might properly be added the experimental distinction
between a helix and a magnet, which Faraday subsequently pointed out
(‘Exper. Res.,’ Art. 3273): ‘Whereas an unchangeable magnet can never
raise up a piece of soft iron to a state more than equal to its own, as
measured by the moving wire, a helix carrying a current can develop in
an iron core magnetic lines of force of a hundred or more times as much
power as that possessed by itself when measured by the same means.’”
An article on the reduction of Mr. Faraday’s discoveries in
magneto-electric induction to a general law appeared in the
“Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society” Vol. III. p. 37, and
at Vol. IV. p. 11, new series, of the _Philosophical Magazine_ (see
Faraday’s first two Memoirs in the _Phil. Trans._, Book XIII. chaps. v
and viii; letter to Gay-Lussac in _Annales de Chimie_, Vol. LI. 1832,
pp. 404–434; _Phil. Mag._, Vol. XVII. pp. 281, 356); while, in the
_Phil. Trans._ for 1832, p. 132, is the Report of his production of the
electric spark through a modified arrangement in which the electric
current was induced by an electro-magnet, as shown in his subsequent
work published in London during 1834. This is alluded to in Vol. V.
pp. 349–354 of the _Phil. Mag._ for latter year, and in Poggendorff’s
_Annalen_, Vol. XXXIV. pp. 292–301 for 1835. (See also Bakewell,
“Elect. Science,” pp. 39, 140, 144.)
“Around the magnet, Faraday
Is sure that Volta’s lightnings play;
But how to draw them from the wire?
He took a lesson from the heart
’Tis when we meet--’tis when we part,
Breaks forth the electric fire.”
HERBERT MAYO, in _Blackwood_.
In Prof. Alfred M. Mayer’s address, delivered before the American
Association at Boston, August 26, 1880, we read: “It is not generally
known or appreciated that Henry and Faraday independently discovered
the means of producing the electric current and the electric spark from
a magnet. Tyndall, in speaking of this great discovery of Faraday,
says: ‘I cannot help thinking while I dwell upon them, that this
discovery of magneto-electricity is the greatest experimental result
ever obtained by an investigator. It is the Mont Blanc of Faraday’s own
achievements. He always worked at great elevations, but higher than
this he never subsequently attained.’ And it is this same physicist who
further remarks (‘Johnson’s Cycl.,’ Vol. II. pp. 26–27) that all our
induction coils, our medical machines, and the electric light so far as
it has been applied to lighthouses, are the direct progeny of Faraday’s
discovery. In the paper here referred to (Nov. 24, 1831) he for the
first time calls the ‘magnetic curves,’ formed when iron-filings are
strewn around a magnet, ‘lines of magnetic force.’ All his subsequent
researches upon magnetism were made with reference to those lines. They
enabled him to play like a magician with the magnetic force, guiding
him securely through mazes of phenomena which would have been perfectly
bewildering without their aid. The spark of the _extra current_, which
I believe was noticed for the first time by Prof. Joseph Henry, had
been noticed independently by Mr. William Jenkin. Faraday at once
brought this observation under the yoke of his discovery, proving that
the augmented spark was the product of a secondary current evoked by
the reaction of the primary upon its own wire.” The phenomenon of the
spark from the _extra current_ here alluded to was first announced by
Henry in July 1832. He had observed that when the poles of a battery
are united by means of a short wire of low resistance, no spark or at
least a very faint one is produced, but when the poles of the battery
are connected by a long copper wire and mercury cups, a brilliant
spark is obtained at the moment the circuit is broken by raising one
end of the wire out of its cup of mercury and also that the longer the
wire and the greater the number of its helical convolutions, the more
powerful would be the effect (Silliman, “Am. Jour. of Sc.,” Vol. XXII).
The results of Faraday’s investigation of the _extra current_ first
appeared in the _Phil. Mag._ for November 1834.
The references already named give an account of many other important
results attained by Faraday during 1831 and up to the date of the
publication of the third series of his “Experimental Researches” (p.
76), wherein he recognizes the “Identity of Electricities derived from
different sources”[60] (Vol. I. par. 265 and 360), after investigating
the electricities of the machine, the pile, and of the electrical
fishes, and after employing as conductors the entire plant of the
metallic gas pipes and water pipes of the city of London (_Phil.
Trans._ for 1833, p. 23; Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vol. XXIX,
1833, pp. 274, 365).
In the fourth series, relating to “A New law of electric conduction”
(Vol. I. par. 380, 381, 394, 410), he demonstrates the influence of
what is called “the state of aggregation” upon the transmission of
the current. He found that although the latter was conveyed through
water it did not pass through ice. This he subsequently explained by
saying that the liquid condition enables the molecule of water to turn
round so as to place itself in the proper line of polarization, which
the rigidity of ice prevents. This polar arrangement must precede
decomposition, and decomposition is an accompaniment of conduction
(_Phil. Trans._ for 1833, p. 507; Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vol. XXXI,
1834, p. 225; also _Phil. Mag._, Vol. X. p. 98; “Royal Inst. Proc.,”
Vol. II. p. 123; Silliman’s _Journal_, Vol. XXI. p. 368).
Other series (pars. 309, 450, 453–454, 472, 477, 661–662, 669, etc.)
treat of “Electro-chemical or electrolytic decomposition.” The
experiments of Wollaston in this line have been given under the A.D.
1801 date, where Prof. Faraday’s opinion of them is also expressed.
Faraday was successful in the employment of Wollaston’s apparatus for
the decomposition of water, and he afterwards devised an arrangement
enabling him to effect true electro-chemical decompositions by common
electricity as well as by the voltaic pile. For this, it is said, he
used an electric battery consisting of fifteen jars and a plate machine
having two sets of rubbers and a glass disc fifty inches in diameter,
the whole presenting a surface of 1422 inches. One revolution of
the plate could be made to give ten or twelve sparks, each one inch
long, while the conductors afforded sparks ten to fourteen inches in
length. He also devised a _discharging train_, to instantaneously
carry off electricity of the feeblest tension by connecting a thick
wire as he had previously done with the London gas and water pipes. A
good description of the methods by which he succeeded with the latter
apparatus in establishing the analogy between ordinary and voltaic
electricity is given in the eighth “Britannica,” Vol. VIII. pp.
596–597. He had shown, at paragraph 371 and p. 105 of his “Researches,”
that as a measure of quantity, a voltaic group of two small wires of
platinum and zinc, placed near each other, and immersed in dilute
acid for three seconds, yields as much electricity as the electrical
battery, charged by thirty turns of a large machine; a fact that was
established both by its momentary electro-magnetic effect, and by the
amount of its chemical action, but, in order to enable him to establish
a principle of definite measurement, he devised a _voltameter_ or
_volta-electrometer_ as mentioned at paragraph No. 739 (Noad, “Manual,”
p. 365). By means of this apparatus he calculated that a single grain
of water in a voltaic cell will require for its decomposition a
quantity of electricity equal to that liberated in 800,000 discharges
of the great Leyden battery of the Royal Institution (“Researches,”
par. 861). Also, that the decomposition of a single grain of water by
four grains of zinc in the active cell of the voltaic circle, produces
as great an amount of polarization and decomposition in the cell
of decomposition, as 950,000 charges of a large Leyden battery, of
several square feet of coated surface; an enormous quantity of power,
equal to a most destructive thunderstorm. Tyndall remarks (“Notes on
Electricity,” No. 118, also “Faraday as a Discoverer,” 1868, p. 44)
that Weber and Kohlrausch ascertained that the quantity of electricity
associated with one milligramme of hydrogen in water, if diffused
over a cloud 1000 metres above the earth, would exert, upon an equal
quantity of the opposite electricity at the earth’s surface, an
attractive force of 2,268,000 kilogrammes.[61]
Faraday introduced new terms to express more specifically the
circumstances attending electro-chemical decomposition. Objections
had long been made to the designation _poles_--one _positive_, the
other _negative_--on the ground that such did not convey a correct
idea of the effects produced. These designations had been given
under erroneous supposition that the poles exerted an attractive and
repulsive energy towards the elements of the decomposing liquid, much
as the poles of the magnet act towards iron. When connecting the
extremities of a battery, the electricity simply makes a circuit;
the current passes _through_ the substance to be decomposed and the
elements remain in operation until the connection is broken. Since the
poles merely act as a path to the current he calls them electrodes
(_electron_, electricity, _odos_, a way); that part of the surface of
the decomposing matter which the current enters--immediately touching
the positive pole--he designates as _anode_ (_ana_, upward) and the
part of the matter which the current leaves--next to the negative
pole--_cathode_ (_kata_, downward). He names _electrolyte_ (_luo_, to
set free) the fluid decomposed directly by electricity passing through
it; the term _electrolyzed_ meaning electro-chemically decomposed.
The elements of an _electrolyte_ are named _ions_ (_ion_, going), the
_anion_ being the body (in sulphate of copper solution, the acid) which
_goes up_ to the positive pole, to the _anode_ of the decomposing
body, whilst the _cation_ is that (in sulphate of copper solution, the
metal) which _goes down_ to the negative pole, to the _cathode_ of the
decomposing body.
The many tests which he made with his voltameter led him to
the conclusion “that under every variety of circumstance, the
decompositions of the voltaic current are as definite in their
character as those chemical combinations which gave birth to the
atomic theory” (_Phil. Trans._ for 1833, p. 675; for 1834, p. 77;
Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vols. XXXII. p. 401; XXXIII. pp. 301, 433,
481; Bakewell, “Electric Science,” p. 124; “Brit. Assoc. Report” for
1833, p. 393; Henry’s “Memoirs of Dalton,” p. 106).
The eighth series of his “Researches” (Vol. I. pars. 875, etc.) treats
of the “electricity of the voltaic pile,” a further investigation
of which is shown through the papers constituting his sixteenth and
seventeenth series as per Index of Vol. II. p. 302. Faraday establishes
by very simple experiments the most powerful known refutation of
Volta’s contact theory and shows conclusively that the current in the
pile results from the mutual chemical action of its elements, just
as Fabbroni and Wollaston had stated before him. An extract from the
conclusion of his very elaborate defence of the chemical theory reads
as follows: “... the contact theory assumes, that a force which is
able to overcome powerful resistance ... can arise out of nothing:
that, without any change in the acting matter, or the consumption of
any generating force, a current can be produced, which shall go on
for ever against a constant resistance, or only be stopped as in the
voltaic trough, by the ruins which its exertion has heaped upon its own
course.... The chemical theory sets out with a power, the existence of
which is pre-proved, and then follows its variations, rarely assuming
anything which is not supported by some corresponding simple chemical
fact. The contact theory sets out with an assumption to which it adds
others, as the cases require, until at last the contact force, instead
of being the firm unchangeable thing at first supposed by Volta, is as
variable as chemical force itself. Were it otherwise than it is, and
were the contact theory true, the equality of cause and effect must
be denied. Then would perpetual motion also be true; and it would not
be at all difficult, upon the first given case of an electric current
by contact alone, to produce an electro-magnetic arrangement, which,
as to its principle, would go on producing mechanical effects for
ever” (“Exp. Res.,” pars. 2071–2073, Vol. II. pp. 103–104; _Phil.
Trans._ for 1834, p. 425; for 1840, pp. 61, 93; Poggendorff,
_Annalen_, Vols. XXXV. pp. 1, 222; LII. pp. 149, 547; LIII. pp.
316, 479, 548. Auguste Arthur De la Rive, “Archives de l’Elect.,”
Genève, 1841–1845, Vol. I. pp. 93, 342; Graham, “Elem. of Chem.,”
London, 1850, Vol. I. pp. 242, etc.; Faraday and Sturgeon, “Ann. of
Elec.,” Vol. IV. pp. 229, 231; Daniell, “Intro. to Study of Chem.
Phil.”; Liebig, _Annal._, Vol. XXXVI. p. 137; Figuier, “Expos. et
Hist.,” 1857, Vol. IV. p. 434. Also De la Rive’s “Treatise,” Vol. I.
pp. 393–402; “Exper. Researches,” Vol. I. pp. 322–323--induction of
galvanic current upon itself).
Faraday’s theory of induction offers nothing new as to the nature
of the electric forces--it simply indicates the manner of their
distribution and the laws by which they are affected. His experiments
show that electrization by influence is possible only by means
of continuous particles of air or other non-conducting medium
(dielectric), that no electric action occurs at a distance greater than
the interval existing between two adjacent molecules of such medium, in
which latter a true polarization of the particles takes place, and that
it is by means of this polarization that electric force is transferred
to a distance. Induction only takes place through insulators: induction
is insulation, it being the action of a charged body upon insulating
matter, of which latter the particles communicate to each other in a
very minute degree the electric forces whereby they become polarized
and are enabled to transmit an equal amount of the opposite force to
a distance. The latter property is termed _inductive force_ or
_specific inductive capacity_, and Faraday discovered that the
intensity of electric induction varies in different insulating media;
for instance, the induction through shell-lac (the first substance he
experimented with) being twice as great as through a like thickness of
air. It was while experimenting with shell-lac that he first observed
the singular phenomenon of the _return_ or _residual charge_,
i. e. the charge which would of itself gradually reappear in the
apparatus after the latter had been suddenly and perfectly discharged.
This, he considered due to the penetration, into the substance of the
dielectric, of a portion of the charge by conduction. The inductive
capacity of all gases he found to be the same as that of air, and this
property does not alter with variations in their density.
His discovery of the specific inductive capacity of various substances
has been already alluded to (A.D. 1772, Cavendish). Faraday’s
biographer in the ninth “Britannica” says: “It appears, from hitherto
unpublished papers, that Henry Cavendish had, before 1773, not only
discovered that glass, wax, rosin and shell-lac have higher specific
inductive capacities than air but had actually determined the numerical
ratios of these capacities. This, of course, was not known to Faraday
or other electricians of his time.” It was on the 30th of November,
1837, Faraday communicated to the Royal Society the paper on Induction
wherein he announces the re-discovery of _specific inductive capacity_.
One of its most important results to-day, remarks John Tyndall, “is
the establishment of the specific inductive capacity of insulators--a
subject of supreme importance in connection with submarine cables.
As a striking illustration of Faraday’s insight, it may be mentioned
that as early as 1838 he had virtually foreseen and predicted the
retardation produced by the inductive action between the wires of
submarine cables and the surrounding sea-water” (Tyndall’s “Notes on
Electricity,” 1871, pp. 160–161; “Exper. Researches,” Index Vol. I.;
“Faraday as a Discoverer,” new edition, p. 89). Consult, also, the
references entered at Cavendish, A.D. 1772; J. E. H. Gordon, “Phys.
Treatise on Elect. ...” London, 1883, Vol. I. chap. xi. par. 81–83,
which alludes to “Exper. Researches,” 1161, Vol. I. p. 360 as well
as to the investigations of specific inductive capacities made by
Boltzmann, Romich and Fajdiga, Romich and Nomak, Schiller, Silow,
Wüllner, Dr. Hopkinson, J. E. H. Gordon, Ayrton and Perry, and gives
the “General Table of Specific Inductive Capacities,” detailing the
observations of Cavendish, Faraday and all the others named above. See,
besides, “Reprint of Papers ...” Sir Wm. Thomson, 1872 to 1884, 2nd
ed., paragraphs 36, 46, 50; _Phil. Trans._, 1838, pp. 1, 79, 83, 125;
1842, p. 170; Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vols. XLVI. pp. 1, 537; XLVII.
pp. 33, 271, 529; XLVIII. pp. 269, 424, 513; XCVI. p. 488; XCVII. p.
415; _Phil. Mag._, Vols. IX. p. 61; XI. p. 10; XIII. pp. 281, 355, 412;
“Bibl. Univ.,” Vol. XVII. p. 178 and “Archives des Sc. Phys.,” Vol.
XXXI. p. 48; “Journal de Pharm.,” Vol. XXVII. p. 60; W. S. Harris,
“Specific Inductive Capacities ...” (_Phil. Trans._, 1842).
In the fifteenth series of his “Exper. Researches” (Vol. II. pars.
1749–1795), Faraday gives the results of his experiments proving the
identity of the power of the _gymnotus_ or the _torpedo_ with common
electricity. He concludes that “a single medium discharge of the fish
is at least equal to the electricity of a Leyden battery of fifteen
jars, containing 3500 square inches of glass coated on both sides,
charged to its highest degree” (p. 8); “all the water and all the
conducting matter around the fish, through which a discharge circuit
can in any way be completed, is filled at the moment with circulating
electric power and this state might be easily represented generally
in a diagram by drawing the lines of inductive action upon it. In the
case of a _gymnotus_ surrounded equally in all directions by water,
these would resemble generally in disposition the magnetic curves of
a magnet having the same straight or curved shape as the animal, that
is, provided he in such cases employed, as may be expected, his four
electric organs at once” (p. 12) (C. Matteucci, “Traité des phénom.
...” Paris, 1844, pp. 188–192).
Then follow in due course, Faraday’s remarkable papers relating to
the magnetization of light and the illumination of magnetic lines of
force, the polar and other condition of diamagnetic bodies, etc. These
communications, which he made to the Royal Society in November and
December 1845, contain the particulars of what many consider to be his
most brilliant discoveries. He first shows that when a ray of polarized
light passes through a piece of silicated borate of lead glass placed
between the poles of a natural (or preferably an electro-) magnet, so
that the line of magnetic force shall pass through its length, the
polarized ray will experience a rotation. The law is thus expressed:
“If a magnetic line of force be _going_ from a North pole or coming
from a South pole, along the path of a polarized ray, _coming_ to the
observer, it will rotate that ray to the right hand, or if such a line
of force be coming from a North pole or going from a South pole it
will rotate such a ray to the left hand” (_Phil. Trans._ for 1846 and
1856; Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vol. C. pp. 111, 439; Noad, “Manual,”
pp. 804–805; Harris, “Rud. Mag.,” Parts I and II. p. 71; Whewell,
“Hist. of the Inductive Sciences,” Vol. II. pp. III, 133; Gmelin’s
“Chemistry,” Vol. I. pp. 168–169). At the Faraday Centenary Celebration
held in London, June 18, 1891, Lord Rayleigh observed that “the full
significance of the last-named discovery was not yet realized. A large
step towards realizing it, however, was contained in the observation
of Sir William Thomson, that the rotation of the plane of polarization
proved that something in the nature of rotation must be going on within
the medium when subjected to the magnetizing force, but the precise
nature of the rotation was a matter for further speculation, and
perhaps might not be known for some time to come.”
Through Faraday’s other communication, is made known the discovery
of _diamagnetism_. Therein he shows, as the result of his customary
careful experimental explorations that the magnetism of every known
substance (even tissues of the human frame) is manifested in one of
two ways. Either the body is, like iron, attracted by the magnet,
taking a position coincident with the magnetic forces which he calls
_paramagnetic_ (_para_ beside or near, _magnetes_, _magnes_, magnet)
or bodies--like bismuth, for instance--are repelled by the poles
and should therefore be called _diamagnetic_ (_dia_, across) for
they set themselves across, equatorially, or at right angles to the
magnetic lines. As far back as 1788, the repulsion by bismuth was
first observed by Brugmans, while M. Becquerel, during 1827, confirmed
the observation, said to have been made by Coulomb, that a needle of
wood could be made to point across the magnetic curves, and stated
that he had found such a needle place itself parallel to the wires
of a galvanometer. Yet, neither M. Becquerel nor M. Lebaillif, who
(after Saigy and Seebeck) had called attention to the repulsion of
both bismuth and antimony by the magnet, made a distinction of the
diamagnetic force from the paramagnetic as Faraday did. Amongst other
results, this English scientist found that phosphorus is at the head
of all diamagnetic substances, bismuth taking the lead amongst the
metals, whilst, of many gases and vapours, oxygen proved to be the
least diamagnetic, in fact, the only one which is paramagnetic (“Lond.,
Edin., and Dub. Phil. Mag.” for December 1850). All the facts set
forth in Mr. Faraday’s paper are, according to Brande, resolvable
by induction into the general law; that while every particle of a
magnetic body is attracted, every particle of a diamagnetic body is
repelled by either pole of a magnet: these forces continue as long as
the magnetic power is sustained, and cease on the cessation of that
power, standing therefore in the same general antithetical relation to
each other as the positive and negative conditions of electricity, the
northern and southern polarities of ordinary magnetism, or the lines
of electric and magnetic force in magneto-electricity. (_Phil. Trans._
for 1846–1851; _Phil. Mag._, Vols. XXVIII. pp. 294, 396, 455; XXIX.
pp. 153, 249; XXXVI. p. 88; _Annales de Chimie_, Vol. XVII. p. 359;
Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vols. LXVIII. p. 105; LXX. p. 283; LXXXII. pp.
75, 232; “Bibl. Univ. Archives,” Vols. I. p. 385; III. p. 338; XVI. p.
89; Ludwig F. von Froriep, “Notizen,” Vols. XXXVII. cols. 6–8; XXXIX.
col. 257; Erdmann, “Jour. Prak. Chem.,” Vol. XXXVIII. p. 256; Liebig,
_Annal._, Vol. LVII. p. 261; Napoli, “Rendiconto,” Vol. VI. p. 227;
Silliman’s “Journal,” Vols. II. p. 233; X. p. 188; Walker, “Elect.
Mag.,” Vol. II. p. 259; John Tyndall, “Researches on Diamagnetism
and Magne-crystallic Action,” London, 1870, pp. 1, 38, 89, 90, 137;
Whewell, “Hist. of Ind. Sc.,” 1859, Vol. II. p. 620; “Athenæum” for
January 31, 1846; Plücker’s paper “On the relation of Magnetism and
Diamagnetism,” dated September 8, 1847, in Poggendorff’s _Annalen_
and in Taylor’s “Scientific Memoirs,” Vol. V. part ix. p. 376; Edmond
Becquerel’s “Memoir on Diamagnetism” in _An. de Ch. et de Ph._, Vol.
XXXII. p. 112; “Practical Mech. and Engin. Mag.,” 1846, p. 117; for
“Coexistence of Paramagnetism and Diamagnetism in same Crystal,” _see_
“Jour. of Chem. Soc.,” London, February 1906, p. 69, taken from _Les
Comptes Rendus_).
During the course of Faraday’s experiments to ascertain the effects
of magnetism on crystals some very curious results were obtained
with bismuth. Having suspended four bars of the metal horizontally
between the poles of the electro-magnet, the first pointed _axially_;
the second _equatorially_; another _equatorial_ in one position,
and _obliquely equatorial_ if turned round on its axis fifty or
sixty degrees; the fourth _equatorially and axially_ under the same
treatment; whilst all of them were repelled by a single magnetic pole,
thus showing their strong and well-marked diamagnetic character. These
variations were attributed to the regularly crystalline condition
of the bars. He then chose carefully selected crystals and, after
describing their peculiar action between the poles, he says that
“the results are altogether very different from those produced by
diamagnetic action. They are equally distinct from those dependent on
ordinary magnetic action. They are also distinct from those discovered
and described by Plücker, in his beautiful researches into the
relation of the optic axis to magnetic action; for there the force is
equatorial, whereas here it is axial. So they appear to present to us
a new force, or a new form of force in the molecules of matter, which,
for convenience’ sake, I will conventionally designate by a new word,
as the _magne-crystallic force_.” Prof. A. M. Mayer justly observes
(“Johnson’s Cycl.,” I. 1342) that the above-named facts “received their
full explanation at the hands of Tyndall, whose subtile examination or
lucid explanation of these phenomena--though not popularly known--we
think form his greatest claim to illustrious distinction as a man
of science.” For an extract from the last-named work relative to M.
Poisson’s remarkable theoretic prediction of magne-crystallic action,
see the article concerning that scientist at A.D. 1811. (Consult
_Phil. Trans._ for 1849, pp. 4, 22; _Phil. Mag._, Vol. XXIV. p. 77 and
s. 4, Vol. II. p. 178; De la Rive, “Treatise,” Vol. I. pp. 482–497;
“Athenæum,” No. 1103, p. 1266; Gmelin’s “Chemistry,” Vol. I. pp.
514–519.)
The remarkable discoveries we have named were succeeded by many
others of a very high order, the references to which occupy as many
as 158 separate entries through pp. 555–560, Vol. II. of the “Catal.
of Sci. Papers of the Royal Society.” Among those may be singled out
his additional investigations regarding the magnetism of gases and
the magnetic relations of flames and gases, the lines of magnetic
force, subterraneous electro-telegraphic wires (_Phil. Mag._ s. 4,
Vol. VII. 1854), the relation of gravity to electricity, atmospheric
magnetism, likewise his recorded observations on hydro-electricity,
magneto-electric light for lighthouses, pyro-electricity, the
electrophorus, Wheatstone’s telegraph, etc. (“Roy. Inst. Proc.” for
1854–1858, pp. 555–560). It was in 1848 he wrote of the powerful
insulating properties of gutta-percha (Gmelin’s “Chemistry,” Vol. I. p.
313; “Lond. and Edin. Phil. Mag.,” Vol. XXXII. p. 165), and he not long
after constructed a very singular apparatus to a Leyden jar consisting
of a wire 140 miles long, perfectly insulated with gutta-percha, one
end of which communicated with an insulated pile of 360 elements of
zinc and copper charged with acidulated water, as described in the
“Britannica.” The results of his inquiries concerning the Leyden
jar charge of buried electric conducting wires were, according to
Whitehouse’s pamphlet on the Atl. Tel. (p. 5) communicated to the Roy.
Inst. during the year 1854.
The life of Michael Faraday is an admirable example of extraordinary
successes achieved through patient endeavour and constancy of purpose
over unusual obstacles of birth and education. M. Dumas, in the
sixteenth volume of the London “Chemical News,” tells us he was the
only man in England who raised himself to the first rank in science,
whose every attribute can be fearlessly held up as a model. He had
none of the “ambition, eternal pining after rank or hauteur” of
Davy, nor “the secretiveness and coldness” of Wollaston. “Faraday’s
intellect, while it burnt as brightly as Davy’s, was as deep searching
as Wollaston’s, and as reverent as Newton’s, yet it had nothing in
it which could repel us, chill us, or forbid our affection.” The son
of a blacksmith, he was first placed in a bookseller’s shop, then
apprenticed to a bookbinder, but his tastes were averse to the trade
and he was led to seek instruction in another line, more particularly
after attending the evening lectures of Mr. Tatum, yet, as already
stated (see Dr. George Gregory, A.D. 1796), it was while in
M. Riebau’s (the bookbinder’s) employ that chance threw in his way the
works which led him to enter the channels in which he subsequently
became so distinguished. To a friend, he writes:
“Your subject interested me deeply every way; for Mrs. Marcet was a
good friend to me, as she must have been to many of the human race. I
entered the shop of a bookseller and bookbinder at the age of thirteen,
in the year 1804, remaining there eight years, and during the chief
part of the time bound books. Now it was in those books, in the hours
after work, that I found the beginning of my philosophy. There were
two that especially helped me, the ‘Encyclopædia Britannica,’ from
which I gained my first notions of electricity, and Mrs. Marcet’s
‘Conversations on Chemistry,’ which gave me my foundation in that
science. Do not suppose that I was a very deep thinker, or was marked
as a precocious person ... but facts were important to me and saved
me. I could trust a fact and always cross-examined an assertion. So
when I questioned Mrs. Marcet’s book by such little experiments as I
could find means to perform, and found it true to the facts as I could
understand them, I felt that I had got hold of an anchor in chemical
knowledge, and clung fast to it....” (“Faraday as a Discoverer,” by
John Tyndall, 1868, pp. 6–7).
Think of the startling, not to say marvellous, achievements growing out
of Faraday’s subsequent first experiments with an electrical machine
made out of an old bottle and by the aid of a Leyden jar constructed
with a medicine phial!
In 1812, he was taken by Mr. Dance to the lectures of Sir Humphry
Davy, whose chemical assistant he became the following year and in
whose company, as we have already seen (A.D. 1801), he travelled on
the Continent until 1815. Mr. Davies Gilbert, to whom is due Davy’s
introduction to the Royal Institution, has said of the last-named
illustrious philosopher that the greatest of all his discoveries was
the discovery of Faraday. In 1816, Michael Faraday was placed by Mr.
Brande in charge of the “Quarterly Journal of Science,” and, during
1823, he was elected corresponding Member of the French Academy,
becoming F.R.S. the ensuing year through the influence of his friend
Richard Phillips. It was during 1825–1826 he published in the _Phil.
Trans._ the chemical papers wherein he announces the discovery of
benzole (called by him bicarburet of hydrogen) to which, says Hoffmann,
“we virtually owe our supply of aniline, with all its magnificent
progeny of colours.” In 1827, Faraday succeeded Davy as lecturer at
the Royal Institution, and, from 1829 to 1842, he occupied the post
of chemical lecturer at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. The
“Experimental Researches,” to which we have so often alluded, first
appeared in the 1831 _Phil. Trans._, and were afterwards collected
in three volumes, which were published respectively during 1839, 1844,
1855. Faraday was made D.C.L. in 1832 by Oxford University, and, one
year later, he received the Fullerian professorship of chemistry in the
Royal Institution, which he held till his death. A pension was given
him by the English Government in 1835, and he also received the Royal
Medal, which latter was again conferred upon him, together with the
Rumford Medal, during 1846. Ten years before (1836) he had become a
member of the Senate of the London University, and during the year 1858
the Queen allotted him the residence in Hampton Court where he died in
1867. “Taking him for all in all,” says Tyndall, “it will, I think,
be conceded that Faraday was the greatest experimental philosopher
that the world has ever seen; and I would hazard the opinion that the
progress of future research will tend not to diminish but to enhance
the labours of this mighty explorer.”
REFERENCES.--“Life of Faraday,” by Dr. H. Bence Jones (Sec.
R.I.); “Michael Faraday,” by Dr. J. H. Gladstone, 1872; “Faraday
as a Discoverer,” by John Tyndall; the biographical sketch by
Prof. Joseph Lovering; “Michael Faraday, his Life and Work,”
by Silv. P. Thompson, New York, 1898; “The Chemical News” (Am.
Rep.), Vol. I. pp. 246, 250, 276, and Vol. II. pp. 98, 202;
Report of the Faraday Centenary celebration at the London
Roy. Inst., June 17, 1891; Poggendorff, Vol. I. pp. 719–722;
Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” 1872, Vol. VIII. p. 99; “Biog. Gén.,”
Vol. XVII. pp. 90–93; “Men of the Time,” London, 1856; Reports
on Faraday’s Lectures delivered before the Roy. Inst. (taken
from the “London Mining Journal,” Nos. 714, 717–722), at pp.
319–324, 387–393; Vol. XVIII for 1849 of “Jour. of Frankl.
Inst.”; Gmelin’s “Chemistry,” Vol. I. pp. 424, etc., 435–436,
514–519; Poggendorff, _Annalen_, Vols. LXXXVIII. p. 557;
Ergänz, Vol. I. pp. 1, 28, 64, 73, 108, 187, 481–545; Gustav
Wiedemann, “Die Lehre von Galv.,” 1863 and “Die Lehre von der
Elektricität,” 1883; W. H. Uhland, “Die Elektrische Licht,”
1884, p. 62; An. Sc. Dis. for 1850, pp. 129, 131, 132; for 1851,
p. 133, and for 1852, p. 110 on “Atmospheric Magnetism,” taken
from “Jameson’s Journal,” July 1851; for 1853, p. 132; for
1856, p. 161; for 1858, p. 177, Faraday, “On the Conservatism
of Force”; for 1860, p. 125, Faraday on “Static Induction”; for
1863, p. 108, “Elec. Lamp in Lighthouses”; for 1868, p. 169;
for 1870, p. 10; for 1874, p. 174, on “Dielectric Absorption”;
Robison, “Mechan. Phil.”; Leslie, “Geomet. Anal.”; “Jour. Roy.
Inst.” for February 1831, Vol. I. p. 311 (Electrif. of ray of
light); eighth “Britannica,” Vols. I, sixth dissertation; VIII.
pp. 532–533, 539, 542, 544, 552, 601, 607, 617; XIV. pp. 68,
663; XXI. pp. 612, 622, 628, 630; ninth “Britannica,” Vol. IX.
pp. 29–31; Brockhaus, “Conversations-Lexikon,” Vol. VI. pp.
565–566; “Lond. and Edin. Ph. Mag.,” Vol. I. p. 161 for letter
of Faraday of July 27, 1832, enclosing one signed P. M., “in
which _chemical decomposition is for the first time obtained by
the induced magnetic current_”; Faraday and Schönbein (“London
and Edin. Mag.,” July-August 1836; “Roy. Instit. Proc.,” III.
70–71); Faraday and Riess, “On the action of non-conducting
bodies in electric induction,” 1856; Sturgeon, “Sc. Res.,” 1850,
pp. 20, 475; “Practical Mechanic,” Vols. II. pp. 318, 408; III.
p. 197; “Libr. of Useful Knowledge” (Elec. Mag.), pp. 18, 99;
Humboldt, “Cosmos,” Vol. I. pp. 182, 188; Harris, “Rud. Magn.,”
1852, I and II, pp. 61–69, etc., 199; III. 122–128 and “Rud.
Elec.,” 1st ed., pp. 33–34; “Edin. Jour. Sc.,” 1826, Vol. III.
p. 373; “Edin. new Ph. Jour.,” Vol. LI. p. 61; Golding Bird’s
“Nat. Phil.,” p. 227; James Johnstone, “The Ether Theory of
1839,” pp. 26, 37; Noad, “Manual,” pp. 59, 236, 692, 805, 866;
“Am. Jour. Sc.” for April 1871, relative to lines of magnetic
force; “Ann. of Phil.” for 1832; “Bibl. Univ. Archives,” Vol.
XVI. p. 129; “Roy. Instit. Proc.,” Vol. I, 1851–1854, pp. 56,
105, 216, 229; _Phil. Trans._, 1832, p. 163; 1851, pp. 29, 85;
1852, pp. 25, 137; _Phil. Mag._, Vol. III, 1852, p. 401; Dredge,
“Elect. Illum.,” Vol. I. pp. 46, 91, 95; “New Eng. Mag.” for
March 1891; Silliman’s _Journal_, Vol. XII. p. 69; “Sc. Am.
Suppl.,” Nos. 198, p. 3148; 206, p. 3284; 526, p. 8404; 547, p.
8733; 652, p. 10416; _La Lum. Electrique_ for October 31, 1891,
pp. 202–203; Marcel Joubert, “Leçons,” 1882, Vol. I. pp. 495,
559; 576; Th. du Moncel, “Exposé des App. de l’Elec.,” 1872,
Vols. I and II; G. B. Prescott, “Electricity,” 1885, Vol. I. pp.
105–112; “Reports of the Smithsonian Institution” for 1857, pp.
372–380; for 1862, p. 204; for 1889, p. 444; Richard Mansill,
“New Syst. of Univ. Nat. Science,” 1887, pp. 180–185; “Faraday’s
Researches on Electrostatical Induction,” also “Faraday’s Law
of Attractions and Repulsions,” at pp. 26–30, and 647–664 of
“Reprint of Papers on Electro-statics and Magnetism,” by Sir Wm.
Thomson, London, 1884; “Essays in Historical Chemistry,” T. E.
Thorpe, London, 1894, p. 142; “Life and Letters of Thomas Henry
Huxley,” by Leonard Huxley, New York, 1901, as per Index at pp.
513–514; “Fragments of Science,” by John Tyndall, New York,
1901, Vol. I. pp. 420–443; “Jnl. of Psychological Medicine,” by
Dr. William A. Hammond, New York, 1870, pp. 555–569; “Cat. Sc.
Papers ... Roy. Soc.,” Vol. II. pp. 555–561; Vol. VI. p. 653;
Vol. VII. p. 638; “Bibl. Britan.,” Vol. XVIII, N.S. for 1821,
p. 269; “Phil. Mag. and Jour. of Science,” 1833, Vol. III. pp.
18, 37, 38, 161, 253, 353, 460, 469, and Vol. XI, 1838, pp. 206,
358, 426, 430, 538.
APPENDIX I
ACCOUNTS OF EARLY WRITERS, NAVIGATORS AND OTHERS
ALLUDED TO BY GILBERT AND NOT ALREADY DISPOSED
OF THROUGHOUT THIS “BIBLIOGRAPHICAL HISTORY”
=Abano=, Pietro di--Petrus Aponus, Apponensis or Apianus--called
“the Reconciler” (1250–1316), was Professor of Medicine at Padua and
wrote several works of importance on different subjects. The best known
is “Conciliator differentiarum philosophorum ac Medicorum,” which is
devoted to the reconciliation of the various medical and philosophical
schools, and in which reference is made to the loadstone, as is also
the case in his “Tractatus de Venenis,” published during 1490.
REFERENCES.--Larousse (Pierre), “Dict. Universel,” Vol. I. p.
11; “Biographie Générale,” Vol. I. pp. 29–31; G. A. Pritzel,
“Thesaurus Literaturæ Botanicæ,” Lipsiæ, 1851, p. 226; N. F. J.
Eloy, “Dict. hist. de la médecine,” Mons, 1778, Art. _Apono_;
Ludovico Hain, “Repertorium Bibliographicorum,” Art. _Abano_;
Mazzuchelli (Frederigo), “Raccolta d’Opuscoli ...” Venetia,
1741; Pellechet (Marie), “Catalogue général des incunables,”
1897, pp. 1–4; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.
=Agricola=, Georgius--Bauer--Landmann--(1494–1555), is called by
Dr. Thomas Thomson one of the most extraordinary men as well as one
of the greatest promoters of chemistry that have ever existed, and he
pronounces Agricola’s “De Re Metallica,” which was published in 1546,
1556, 1558, 1561, as, beyond comparison, the most valuable chemical
work produced in the sixteenth century. Agricola is also the author of
“De Natura eorum,” of “De Natura fossilium” and of “De veteribus et
novis metallis,” all published at Basle in 1657.
Gilbert mentions Agricola in his _De Magnete_ (Book I. chaps, i. ii.
vii. viii.; Book II. chap. xxxviii.) and, in connection with him,
alludes more particularly to Gilgil, the Mauretanian, and also to
Christoph--Entzelt--Encelius, author of a book bearing the same name
as Agricola’s chief work, “De Re Metallica,” published at Frankfort,
1551. Attention may as well be called here to additional authors, whose
works, in the same line, are of great variety and but little known:
(1) Cæsalpinus (Andreas) (1519–1603), “De Metallicis,” Romæ, 1596; (2)
Morieni (Romani), who, in his “De Re Metallica,” Parisiis, 1559, treats
(as does also John Joachim Beccher, 1635–1682: “Hutton’s Abridgments”
Vol. I. p. 620) of the transmutation of metals and of the occult, much
in same manner as Robertus Vallensis in his “De veritate et antiquitate
artis chemicæ ...” 1593, 1612; (3) Bernardo Pèrez de Vargas, who, in
his “De Re Metallica, en el qual se tratan de muchos diversos secretos
...” Madrid, 1569, tells how to find different kinds of minerals
and metals and how to treat them to the best advantage in various
industries; (4) J. Charles Faniani, “De Arte Metallicæ” 1576.
Cuvier says of Agricola: “He was the first mineralogist who appeared
after the _renaissance_ of the sciences in Europe: he was to mineralogy
what Conrad Gesner was to zoology.”
REFERENCES.--“Biog. Générale,” Vol. I. pp. 410–411; Larousse
(Pierre), “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. I. p. 141; “Dict. hist. de la
médecine” (N. F. J. Eloy), Mons, 1778, Vol. I. pp. 50–52.
=Agrippa=, Heinricus Cornelius--ab Netiesheyem,
Nettesheim--(1486–1535), German Doctor of Medicine, also a Doctor
of Divinity, a soldier--knighted for valour on the battle-field of
Ravenna--a diplomatist, an astrologer, etc. He was in turns, ambassador
at Paris and London, historiographer to Emperor Charles V, professor
at the university of Pavia, town physician in Friburg, private
practitioner at Geneva, court physician to Louise of Savoy, chief
magistrate of Metz, theological delegate to the schismatic council of
Pisa, etc., and for three years was engaged in a military expedition
to Catalonia. He is the author of several important works, the full
collection of which was published at Lyons in 1550. The one by which
he is best known is “De occulta philosophia,” which was translated in
French by Levasseur.
REFERENCES.--Morley (Henry), “The Life of H. Corn. Agrippa,”
London, 1856; Bayle (Pierre), “Dict. Hist.”; Jos. Ennemoser,
“History of Magic,” London, 1854, Vol. II. pp. 253–256; G.
Naudé, “Apologie”; Larousse (Pierre), “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. I. pp.
143–144; Bolton (H. C.), “Chr. Hist. of Chem.,” p. 946; Gilbert,
_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.
=Albategnius=--Machometes Aractensis, Muhammad Ibn
Jabir--Al-Battani--(_d._ A.D. 929), is considered by
Lalande one of the twenty greatest known astronomers. His principal
work, “De scientia stellarum,” was published in 1537.
REFERENCES.--Delambre (J. B), “Hist. de l’astron. moderne,” pp.
10–62; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Générale,” Vol. I. part. i.
p. 467; Vol. II. p. 71; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book VI. chap.
ix.; “Engl. Cycl.” Vol. I. p. 84.
=Alexander Aphrodisæus=--Aphrodisiensis--a celebrated Greek scientist
and the oldest commentator on Aristotle, who lived at about the close
of the second century after Christ, and whose works were so highly
esteemed by the Arabs that they translated most of them (Casiri, “Bibl.
Arab. Hisp. Escur.,” Vol. I). The list of all of his publications
appears in “Biog. Générale,” Vol. I. pp. 911–914.
REFERENCES.--Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Bibliotheca Græca,”
Vol. V. p. 650; Ritter (Dr. Heinrich), “Geschichte der
Philosophie,” Vol. IV. p. 24; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I.
chap. i. and Book II. chaps. ii. xxv.
=Amatus Lusitanus.= _See_ Lusitanus Amatus.
=Anaxagoras=, born at Clazomenæ, one of the Greek towns of Ionia,
in 500 B.C., three years before the death of Pythagoras, was
a very eminent philosopher of the Ionic school, wherein he succeeded
Anaximenes as a leader, and numbered among his many hearers and pupils
Diogenes of Apollonia, Pericles, Euripides, Socrates and Archelaus. A
very good analysis of Anaxagoras’ philosophical opinions is to be found
in the “Biographical Dictionary of the Society of Useful Knowledge.”
Gilbert alludes to him (_De Magnete_, Book II. chap. iii. and Book
V. chap. xiii.) as believing that the loadstone was endowed with a sort
of life, because it possessed the power of moving and attracting iron,
and as declaring in fact that the entire world is endowed with a soul.
Anaxagoras is accused, by Pliny and other early writers, of having
predicted the fall of aerolites from the sun, and of regarding all
bodies in the universe “as fragments of rocks, which the fiery ether,
in the force of its gyratory motion, has torn from the earth and
converted into stars” (Humboldt, “Cosmos” 1859–1860, Vol. I. pp.
133–135, note; Vol. II. p. 309; Vol. III. pp. 11–12; Vol. IV. pp.
206–207).
Aristotle also attacks Anaxagoras for not properly etymologizing the
word _aether_, from αιθεἲν, to burn, and on this account using it for
fire. He shows that _aether_, which signifies to run perpetually,
implies that a perpetual motion and perpetuity of subsistence belongs
to the heavenly bodies (“Treatises of Aristotle,” by Thos. Taylor,
London, 1807, p. 43, note).
According to Anaximenes, named above (born at Miletus about 528
B.C.), the primal principle was Aer, of which all things are
formed and into which all things are resolved. He belonged to the
branch called the dynamical, whose doctrines as to the heavenly bodies
were opposed to those of mechanical philosophers such as Anaxagoras,
Empedocles and Anaximander of Miletus (“Engl. Cycl.,” Biography, 1866,
Vol. I, p. 201).
REFERENCES.--Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. I. part
i. pp. 401–402, and Vol. II. p. 74; “Plato,” by George Grote,
London, 1865, Vol. I. pp. 49–62; “Essai théorique et pratique
sur la génération des connaissances humaines,” par Guillaume
Tiberghien, Bruxelles, 1844, Vol. I. pp. 181–182; Dr. Heinrich
Ritter, “History of Ancient Philosophy,” London, 1846, Vol. I.
pp. 281–318; Chas. Rollin, “Ancient History,” London, 1845,
Vol. I. p. 376; Paul Tannery, “Pour l’histoire de la Science
Hellène,” Paris, 1887, Chap. XII; Theod. Gomperz, “Greek
Thinkers,” transl. of L. Magnus, London, 1901, Chap. IV. pp.
556–558, 597; Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philosophy,” transl. of Geo.
S. Morris, New York, 1885, Vol. I. pp. 63–67; Alf. Weber, “Hist.
of Phil.,” transl. of Frank Thilly, New York, 1896, pp. 48–53.
=Aquinas=--St. Thomas--also called Doctor Angelicus (born at Aquino
in Naples, A.D. 1225)--“the most successful organizer of knowledge
the world has known since Aristotle”--was a famous schoolman and is
considered by many the greatest of Christian philosophers. He is
well worthy the profound respect and high admiration in which he is
held always by Gilbert, who alludes to him in Book I. chap. i. and
in Book II. chap. iii. of his _De Magnete_. The chief work of St.
Thomas Aquinas is the “Summa Theologiæ,” to which he devoted the last
nine years of his life and which by many has been called the supreme
monument of the thirteenth century. The first part of the “Summa
Theologiæ” is said to have been originally published in 1465 and the
second part in 1471, the completed work first appearing during the year
1485.[62]
One of his critics remarks that those wishing to thoroughly comprehend
the peculiar character of metaphysical thought in the Middle Ages
should study Aquinas, in whose writings it is seen with the greatest
consistency. He is thus spoken of in Dr. Wm. Turner’s “History of
Philosophy,” published by Ginn & Co., 1903: “He had a comprehensiveness
of purpose which, in these modern times, seems nothing short of
stupendous. It is only when, as we study the history of later
scholasticism and the history of the philosophy of modern times, we
shall look back to the thirteenth century through the perspective of
ages of less successful attempts at philosophical synthesis, that we
shall begin to realize the true grandeur of the most commanding figure
in the history of mediæval thought.”
Aquinas died at the Cistercian Monastery in 1274, and was canonized
forty-nine years later by Pope John XXII.
REFERENCES.--Carle (P. J.), “Hist. de la vie ... de Th. d’Aq.,”
1846; Maffei (Francesco Scipione), “Vita ...” 1842; B. Hauréau,
“De la Phil. Schol.,” Paris, 1850, Vol. II. pp. 104, 213; G.
Tiberghien, “Essai historique ... des con. hum.,” Bruxelles,
1844, Vol. I. pp. 374–378; Dr. Fried. Ueberweg, “Hist. of
Phil.,” transl. of Geo. S. Morris, New York, 1885, Vol. I. pp.
440–452; “Thomæ Aquinatis Opera Theologica,” Venice, 1745–1760,
28 vols. quarto, edited by Bernardo M. de Rossi-Rubeis; “Petri
de Bergamo, Super Omnia Opera D. Thomæ Aquinatis,” Bononiæ,
1473; “Biogr. Gén.,” Vol. XLV. pp. 208–218; “Siger de Brabant
et l’Averroïsme au 13^e siècle,” par Pierre Maudonnet, Friburg,
1899, Chap. IV _passim_; “Albert the Great,” by Dr. Joachim
Sighart, transl. of Rev. Fr. T. A. Dixon, London, 1876, Chap.
VI. p. 63; “The Great Schoolmen of the Middle Ages,” by W. J.
Townsend, London, 1881, pp. 199–241; Alfred Weber, “Hist. of
Phil.,” transl. of Frank Thilly, New York, 1896, pp. 241–246;
Dr. W. Windelband, “Hist. of Phil.,” authorized transl. by
Jas. H. Tufts, New York, 1893, pp. 313–314; Paola Antonia
(Novelli), “De D. Th. Aquin.”; A. Hunaci, “Oratio,” Venice,
1507; likewise Veen (Otto van), Etiro (Partenio), Rodericus de
Arriaga, Frigerio (Paolo) and Thouron (V. C.) in their works
on Aquinas, 1610, 1630, 1648, 1688 and 1737–1740; Henry Hart
Milman, “History of Latin Christianity,” London, 1857, Vol.
VI. pp. 273–278, 281–286; Pellechet (Marie), “Catal. Gén. des
Incunables,” 1897, pp. 210–249; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl.
Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 264; “Le Journal des Savants” for May 1851,
pp. 278, 281–298 _passim_, and also in the issue of December
1905.
=Aristarchus of Samos=, one of the earliest astronomers of the
Alexandrian School, who lived in the third century B.C., is referred to
in Gilbert’s _De Magnete_, at Chaps. III and IX of book vi. Vitruvius
ascribes to him the invention of a concave sundial which he calls
_scaphe_ and which is described by Martianus Mineus Capella (cited by
Weidler); and Censorinus says that Aristarchus was the author of an
extensive work called “Annus Magnus,” covering a period of 2484 years.
REFERENCES.--Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. I. p. 623; Montucla
(J. F.), “Hist. des Math.,” Vol. I. p. 721; Houzeau et
Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 77; “Engl. Cycl.,” Vol. I.
p. 314.
=Arnaldus de Villa Nova=--Arnaldus Novicomensis--Arnaud de Villeneuve,
dit de Bachuone (1235–1312), who assumed the name of Magrinus when on
his way from France to Sicily, was an eminent physician, the master of
Raymond Lully, who taught medicine as well as alchemy at Barcelona and
whose numerous treatises upon the virtues of plants, etc., are analyzed
in M. F. Hœfer’s “Histoire de la Chimie,” Vol. I. p. 385. The first
edition of his works appeared at Lyons in 1504.
REFERENCES.----Campegius (Laurentius), “Arnaldi Vita”; “Nouvelle
Biographie Générale” (Hœfer), Vol. III. pp. 279–282; Boulay
(H. de), “Hist. de l’Univ. de Padoue,” Vol. IV; Freind (John),
“Hist. de la Médecine,” Vol. III; N. F. J. Eloy, “Dict. Hist.
de la Médecine,” Mons, 1778, Tome III. p. 131; Astruc (Jean),
“Hist, de la fac. de méd. de Montpellier”; “Journal des Savants”
for June 1896, p. 342, “Testaments d’Amand de Villeneuve et
de Raimond Lulle,” “L’Alchimie et les Alchimistes”; Figuier
(Louis), Paris, 1860, p. 172; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I.
chap. i.
=Barbarus=, Hermolaus--Barbaro Ermoleo--(1454–1495)--(Barbari Hermolai,
Aquileiensis Pontificis), whose name alone Gilbert mentions, was
a well-known Italian savant, Professor of Philosophy at the Padua
University, and the author of many works, of which the most popular
are: (1) “Castigationes Plinianæ,” Rome, 1492, wherein he boasts of
having made more than five thousand corrections in Pliny’s “Natural
History”; (2) “Castigationes Secundæ,” Venice, 1480; (3) “Castigationes
in Pomponium Melam,” Antwerp, 1582; (4) “Compendium scientiæ naturalis
ex Aristotele,” Venice, 1545.
REFERENCES.--Paul Jove, “Elogia”; Boissardus (Joannes Jacobus),
“Icones ... virorum illustrium”; “Giornale de’ letterati d’
Italia,” Vol. XXXVIII; “Theosaurus Litteraturæ Botanicæ,”
Lipsiæ, 1851, p. 333; “Biogr. Générale,” Vol. IV. pp. 418–419.
=Becanus.= _See_ Goropius.
=Benedictus=--Benedetti--Joannes Baptista (1530–1590), Italian
mathematician, who was considered a prodigy at the age of eighteen,
and who, five years later, published in Venice a remarkable work on
the solution of most of Euclid’s problems. He is also the author of
treatises on navigation, astronomy, music, etc., and can justly be
placed in the first rank of savants of the sixteenth century.
REFERENCES.--“La Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. VI. pp. 132–133;
“Biog. Générale,” Vol. V. pp. 340–342; Libri (Guillaume), “Hist.
des Sciences Mathém.,” Vol. III. pp. 121–133; Montucla (J. F.),
“Hist. des Mathém.,” Vol. I. pp. 572, 693, 729; Marie (J. F.),
“Hist. des Sc. Math.,” Vol. II. p. 307; Houzeau et Lancaster,
“Bibliographie Générale,” Vol. II. p. 83; Gilbert, _De Magnete_,
Chap. IX of book iv.
=Brasavolus=, Antonius Musæ (1500–1570), alluded to by Gilbert in
Book I. chap. i., was a very eminent Italian physician and the author
of “Examen omnium simplicium medicamentorum,” Rome, 1536, as well as of
“In octo libros Aphorism. Hippocratis Comment. et Annot.,” Basle, 1541,
and of several other works, including a very complete index of all the
notable features of the works of Galen.
REFERENCES.--Ginguené (Pierre Louis), “Histoire Litéraire
d’Italie”; Baruffaldi (Girolamo), “Commentario istorico all’
inserizione ...,” Ferrara, 1704; “Biog. Générale,” Vol. VII. p.
269; “Storia della Medicina in Italia” (Salvatore de Renzi),
Napoli, 1848, in Vol. III _passim_ as per Index, Vol. V. p. 987;
Pritzel (G. A.), “Thesaur. Lit. Botan.,” 1851, p. 31.
=Calaber=, Hannibal Rosetius. Of all the authors cited by Gilbert, this
is the only one, who, thus far, cannot satisfactorily be identified,
although exhaustive efforts to this end have been made by the authors
of both the English translations of _De Magnete_. One interpretation
(Hannibal, of Roseto in Calabria, shown on map at end of Vol. I. of
“Briefe uber Kalabrien und Sizilien,” Göttingen, 1791), has as yet
found no endorsement.
=Calcagninus=, Cælius, Italian philosopher and astronomer (1479–1541)
is the author of “Quomodo Cœlum stet, terra moveatur ...” wherein he
asserts that the earth turns around the sun, also of “De Re Nautica,”
containing a good account of ancient ceremonies and observations, as
well as of a Commentary on Aristotle, and of many creditable poetical
effusions published 1533. His complete works appeared at Basle during
the year 1544, and a list of them, fifty-six in all, is given by Jean
Pierre Nicéron in his “Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire des hommes
illustres,” Paris, 1727–1745.
REFERENCES.--Calcagnini (T. G.), “Della vita ... C. Calcag”;
Ginguené (Pierre Louis), “Histoire Litéraire d’Italie,” Vols.
IV, VI and VII; Paul Jove--Jovius--Giovio (_b._ 1483, d. 1552),
“Eloges”; Borsetti, Ferranti Bolani (Ferrante Giovanni),
“Historia almi Ferrariæ Gymnasii,” 1735; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol.
VIII. pp. 159–161; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. III. p. 109;
Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 98; Gilbert, _De
Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.
=Cardanus=, Hieronymus (1501–1576), who is so very frequently
mentioned by Gilbert, throughout Books I, II, III and IV, was an
Italian physicist whose writings are extremely numerous and are well
reviewed in the best edition of his works published at Lyons during
1663. Those by which he is best known are the “Ars Magna,” “De Rerum
Varietate, Libri XVII,” and the “De Subtilitate, Libri XXI,” which
may be considered the exponent of all his scientific knowledge and a
notably good translation of which, in French, by Richard Leblanc was
published in Paris, 1556.
REFERENCES.--Morley (H.), “Life of Cardan,” 1854, wherein, Vol.
II. pp. 56–70, will be found a long account more particularly
of the contents of “De Subtilitate”; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,”
Vol. III. pp. 376–377; Dr. Fr. Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philosophy,”
tr. of Geo. S. Morris, 1885, Vol. II. p. 25; Walton and Cotton,
“Complete Angler,” New York and London, 1847, Part I. p. 142;
Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 101.
=Copernicus=, Nicolaus--Koppernik--Zepernic--celebrated astronomer,
native of Poland (1472–1543), whose studies led him to reject the
Ptolemaic system of the universe, and who proposed the one now bearing
his name, is the author of “De revolutionibus orbium cœlestium,” which
was published May 24, 1543, a few days before his death. He is alluded
to by Gilbert (_De Magnete_, Chaps. II, III, VI, IX, of book vi.),
who calls him “the restorer of astronomy” and “a man most worthy of
the praise of scholarship.” The life and labours of Copernicus are
fully detailed, in chapter treating of “Discoveries in the celestial
spaces” of the “Cosmos” by Von Humboldt, who, in relation to a passage
in “De Revolutionibus,” makes the following very curious note: “It very
singularly happens that in an otherwise instructive memoir” (Czynski,
“Kopernik et ses travaux,” 1847, p. 102), “the _Electra_ of Sophocles
is confounded with electric currents. The passage of Copernicus (quoted
in Latin) is thus rendered: ‘If we take the sun for the torch of the
universe, for its spirit and its guide--if Trismegistes call it a God,
and if Sophocles consider it to be an electrical power which animates
and contemplates all that is contained in creation....’
“Four men, Gutenberg, Columbus, Luther and Copernicus, stand at
the dividing line of the Middle Ages, and serve as boundary stones
marking the entrance of mankind into a higher and finer epoch of its
development” (Kapp (Friedrich), _Geschichte_, etc., I).
REFERENCES.--Westphal (E. J.), “Nikolaus Kopernikus”
(“Biographie des Copernicus”); Delambre (J. B. J.), “Histoire
de l’astronomie Moderne”; “Journal des Savants” for February
1864 and for December 1895; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. V.
pp. 66–67; Edw. S. Holden in “Pop. Sc. Monthly” for June 1904,
pp. 109–131; _Phil. Magazine_, Vol. XIX. p. 302; Gassendi
(Pierre), in “Nicolai Copernici Vita,” appended to his biography
of Tycho (“Tychonis Brahei Vita,” 1655, Hagæ Comitum, p.
320); W. Whewell, “Hist. of the Ind. Sciences,” New York,
1858, Vol. I. pp. 257–290; the article at pp. 378–382, “Engl.
Cycl.,” which abounds in references; Rheticus, “Narrat. prima”;
Kepler (Johann), “De Temporis”; Horrebow (at A.D. 1725--the
luminous process of the sun, a perpetual northern light);
Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. pp. 109–113,
for an extended list of authorities, and also pp. 1571–1572;
Joachimus (Georgius) surnamed Rhecticus, who quotes many works
on Copernicus.
=Cordus=, Valerius--Eberwein--celebrated German botanist (1515–1544),
who is alluded to by Gilbert, Book I. chap ii. wrote a Commentary on
Dioscorides, published by Egénolphe in 1549, as well as an extensive
history of plants, which is to be found in the Strasburg editions of
his works, issued during 1562 and 1569.
REFERENCES.--“Biog. Générale” (Hœfer), Vol. XI. pp. 804–807;
Larousse (Pierre), “Grand Dictionnaire Universel,” Vol.
V. p. 133; Adam (Melchior), “Vitæ med. Germ.”; “Lindenius
renovatus”--“Thesaur. Lit. Botan.,” 1851, pp. 52, 334;
Camerarius, “Vita Melanchthon”; Linden (Joannes Antonides
van der), “De Scriptis Medicis,” 1651, pp. 572–573; “Dict.
Historique de la Médecine,” par N. F. J. Eloy, Mons, 1778, pp.
705–707, Vol. I.
=Cortesius=, Martinus, celebrated Spanish geographer who died about
1580, is the author of the well-known and extremely scarce work, “Breve
compendio de la esfera, y de la arte de navegar,” Cadiz, 1546 1551,
and Seville, 1556, which was translated by Richard Eden, 1561, 1589,
1609. Of the 1556 issue, Salva remarks (II, 3763): “2e édition aussi
rare que la première. C’est cet ouvrage qui a revolutionné la science
nautique et qui fut le premier à indiquer la déclinaison de l’aiguille.
Les instructions pour construire des mappemondes ne sont la partie
la moins intéressante du texte et pourraient être utiles à tous ceux
qui sont incapables de comprendre le principe des roses de vents et
des loxodromes, qui couvrent la surface des cartes hydrographiques
anciennes. Mais c’est justement ici que l’intelligence pénétrante de
Cortez a indiqué les défauts de la projection longtemps avant Mercator.”
For a reproduction of the title page and of the twelve-page text of
Martin Cortez’s “Breve Compendio,” see G. Hellmann, “Neudrucke,” 1898,
No. 10.
REFERENCES.--Fernandez de Navarrete, “Disertacion sobre la
historia de la nautica y de las mathematicas,” Madrid, 1846; “La
Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XII. p. 1114; “Biographie Générale,”
Vol. XI. p. 964; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.; Book
III. chap. i. and Book IV. chap. i.
=Costæus=, Joannes--Giovanni Costeo--of Lodi, who died at Bologna
in 1603, was an Italian physician teaching medicine at the Universities
of Turin and of Bologna and the author of several valuable works,
notably the “Tractatus de universali stirpium natura,” Turin, 1578;
the “Disquisitionum physiol. ... Avicennæ sectionem,” Bologna, 1589;
the “Annot. in Avicennæ canonem ...” Venetia, 1595; and the “De igneis
medicinæ ...” published also at Venice in the last-named year.
Gilbert, who speaks of him (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.; Book
II. chap. iii.; Book VI. chap. v.) gives this as the theory propounded
by Costæus regarding the powers of amber and loadstone: “There is
work on both sides, result on both sides, and therefore the motion
is produced in part by the loadstone’s attraction and in part by the
iron’s spontaneous movement; for, as we say that the vapours given out
by the loadstone do by their own nature haste to attract the iron, so,
too, do we say that the air impelled by the vapours, while seeking
a place for itself, is turned back, and when turned back impels and
transfers the iron, which is picked up, as it were, by it, and which,
besides, is exerted on its own account. In this way, there is found
a certain composite movement, resulting from the attraction, the
spontaneous motion and the impulsion; which composite motion, however,
is rightly to be referred to attraction, because the beginning of this
motion is invariably from one term, and its end is there too; and that
is precisely the distinguishing character of attraction.”
REFERENCES.--Eloy (N. F. J.), “Dict. historique de la Médecine”;
Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. V. p. 245.
=Cusanus=--Nicolas Khrypffs or Krebs, Cardinal de Cusa (1401–1464), an
eminent German scholar, who, abandoning the study of law, entered the
Church, became Archdeacon of Liége, member of the Council of Basle, and
was raised, in 1448, to the dignity of Cardinal. His biographer in the
ninth “Encycl. Britan.” (Vol. VI. pp. 728–729) says: “As in religion he
is entitled to be called one of the _Reformers before the Reformation_,
so, in philosophy, he was one of those who broke with scholasticism
while it was still the orthodox system.” His works were published in
complete form by H. Petri, 1565.
REFERENCES.--Hartzheim (Josephus), “Vita N. de C.,” Trèves,
1730; Deux (M.), “Life of C. Cusa,” 1847; Scharpff (Franz
Anton), “Der Cardinal und Bischof Nic. von Cusa ...” Tübingen,
1871; Dr. W. Windelband, “History of Philosophy,” auth. tr. by
Jas. H. Tufts, New York, 1893, pp. 345–347; Humboldt, “Cosmos,”
1860, Vol. II; Libri (G.), “Hist. des Sciences Mathém.,” Vol.
III. p. 99; Dr. F. Ueberweg, “History of Philosophy,” tr. by
Geo. S. Morris, 1885, Vol. II. pp. 23–24; Ritter (Dr. Heinrich),
“Geschichte der Phil.,” Vol. IX. p. 142; Gilbert, _De Magnete_,
Book I. chap. i. and Book II. chaps, iii. xxxvi.; “Journal des
Savants” for January 1894; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,”
Vol. II. p. 115; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. V. p. 687;
“Biogr. Gén.,” Vol. XII. pp. 651–657.
=Dominicus=, Maria Ferrariensis--“Novara”--Italian savant (1464–1514),
taught astronomy at Bologna, Rome and elsewhere, and had for one of his
pupils the celebrated Copernicus, who, later on, became an associate in
his investigations. None of his writings have reached us.
Gilbert thus alludes to Dominicus as well as to Stadius at Chap.
II. book vi. of his _De Magnete_: “According to Dominicus Maria’s
observations, the north pole is raised higher and the latitudes of
places are greater now than in the past: from this he infers a change
of latitudes. But Stadius, holding the directly opposite opinion,
proves by observations, that the latitudes have grown less. ‘The
latitude of Rome,’ says he, ‘is given in the _Geographia_ of Ptolemy
as 41⅔°; and lest any one should say that some error has crept into
the text of Ptolemy, Pliny relates, and Vitruvius in his ninth book
testifies, that at Rome on the day of the equinox the ninth part of
the gnomon’s shadow is lacking. But recent observation (as Erasmus
Rheinhold states) gives the latitude of Rome in our age as 41⅙°; so
that you are in doubt whether one-half of a degree has been lost
(_decrevisse_) in the centre of the world, or whether it is the result
of an obliquation of the earth.’”
REFERENCES.--Borsetti (Ferrante Giovanni), “Hist. Gymn.
Ferrar.,” Vol. II. p. 50; Tiraboschi (Girolamo), “Storia della
Letteratura Italiana,” Vol. XIV. p. 296; Montucla (J. F.),
“Hist. des Math.,” Vol. I. p. 549; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl.
Gén.,” Vol. II. pp. 215–216; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XXXVIII. p. 336.
=Dupuis.= _See_ Putaneus.
=Empedocles=, whom Gilbert merely names in Book V. chap. xii.
of _De Magnete_, was a native of Sicily, distinguished as a
philosopher as well as for his knowledge of medicine and of natural
history.
Empedocles flourished about the year 442 or 460 B.C., and was pupil
of Pythagoras or Anaxagoras, and, as others say, of Parmenides (“The
Metaphysics of Aristotle” by the Rev. John H. McMahon, London, 1857,
pp. 19–20, 34, 118).
“Rien n’est engendré, disait Empédocle, rien ne périt de la mort
funeste. Il n’y a que mélange ou séparation de parties.... L’éclair,
c’est le feu s’échappant du nuage où le soleil l’avait lancé. La foudre
n’est qu’une plus grande quantité de feu. Le tonnerre, c’est ce même
feu qui s’éteint dans le nuage humide.... Les phénomènes magnétiques
viennent de la convenance parfaite des pores et des effluves de
l’aimant et du fer. Dès que les effluves de l’aimant out chassé l’air
que contenaient les pores du fer, le courant des effluves de fer
devient si fort que la masse entière est entrainée” (“Dict. des Sc.
Philos.,” Paris, 1852, Vol. II. pp. 206–214).
REFERENCES.--Karsten, “Emped. Agrig. Carmin. Reliq.” in Vol. II
of “Phil. Graec. vet. relig.,” Amst., 1838; and the extensive
list of authorities cited in Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VII.
pp. 457–458; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. I. part i.
p. 401; Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philos.” (Morris), 1885, Vol. I. pp.
60–63; “The Works of George Berkeley,” by A. C. Fraser, Oxford,
1901, Vol. III. pp. 205, 247, 254, 290; Paul Tannery, “Pour
l’histoire de la Science Hellène,” Paris, 1887, Chap. XIII. pp.
304–339; “Greek Thinkers,” by Theodor Gomperz, tr. of L. Magnus,
London, 1901, Chap. V. pp. 558–562, 601; “A History of Classical
Greek Literature,” by Rev. John P. Mahaffy, New York, 1880, Vol.
I. pp. 123–128; Vol. II. pp. 48, 73, 77; “Essai Théorique et
Historique sur la génération des connaissances humaines,” par
Guillaume Tiberghien, Bruxelles, 1844, Vol. I. pp. 185–187.
We are told by Alex. Aphr. (Quæst. Nat., II. 23, p. 137, Speng) that,
like Empedocles, Democritus sought to explain the attractive power of
the magnet, upon which the latter wrote a treatise (according to Diog.
IX. 47).
Democritus was born at Abdera in Thrace about 470 or 460 B.C., and,
according to Thrasyllus, the grammarian, he died 357 B.C.--the same
year as Hippocrates. He was considered, by far, the most learned
thinker of his age, and, according to Carl Snyder, who dedicates “The
World Machine,” 1907, to Democritus, he was justly esteemed by Bacon as
the mightiest of the ancients, for he wrote illuminatively upon almost
every branch of natural knowledge.
The following note to “The Atomistic Philosophy” appears at p. 230,
Vol. II of Dr. E. Zeller’s “History of Greek Philosophy,” translation
of S. F. Alleyne, London, 1881:
“Leucippus and Democritus derive all action and suffering from contact.
One thing suffers from another, if parts of the latter penetrate the
empty interspaces of the former.... Democritus thought that the magnet
and the iron consist of atoms of similar nature but which are less
closely packed together in the magnet. As, on the one hand, like draws
like, and, on the other, all moves in the Void, the emanations of the
magnet penetrate the iron, and pass out a part of its atoms, which,
on their side, strain towards the magnet, and penetrate its empty
interspaces. The iron itself follows this movement, while the magnet
does not move towards the iron, because the iron has fewer spaces for
receiving the effluences.”
The attraction of the magnet, as explained by Diogenes of Appollonia,
is thus given by Alex. Aphr. (Quæst. Nat., II. 23, p. 138, Speng):
“Empedocles supposed that, after the emanations of the magnet have
penetrated into the pores of the iron, and the air which choked them
has been expelled, powerful emanations from the iron pass into the
symmetrical pores of the magnet, which draw the iron to itself and hold
it fast.”
It may be added that the Atomic Doctrine of Leucippus and Democritus
was opposed to the Homoiomeria of Anaxagoras of Clazomenæ--the last
great philosopher of the Ionian School.
REFERENCES.--Ueberweg (Fr.), “History of Philosophy,” trans.
of G. S. Morris, New York, 1885, Vol. I. pp. 67–71; Larousse
(Pierre), “Dict. Univ. du XIX^e siècle,” Paris, 1870, Tome VI.
pp. 409–410; “La Grande Encyclopédie,” Paris, Tome XIV. pp.
66–69; “Nouvelle Biographie Générale” (Hœfer), Paris, 1855, Vol.
XIII. pp. 566–574; Franck (Ad.), “Fragments qui subsistent de
Démocrite,” in the “Mém. de la Société Royale de Nancy,” 1836;
Beazley (C. Raymond), “The Dawn of Modem Geography,” Oxford,
1906, Vol. I. p. 254 (the use by Democritus of magnetic stones,
mentioned by Solinus); Snyder (Carl), “The World Machine,” 1907,
p. 133 (work on the magnet); Zeller (Eduard), “Philosophie der
Griechen”; Ritter and Preller, “Historia Philosophiæ Græcæ”
(7th ed., Gotha, 1888); Mulloch (F. G. A.), “Democriti Abderitæ
operum fragmenta,” Berlin, 1843.
=Erasmus=, Reinholdus (1511–1553), a German savant, who taught
astronomy and mathematics at Wittemberg, has left us “Commentarius
Theoricæ Novæ Planetarum,” 1542, 1558, a work which, Delambre says,
supplies the omissions of Purbacchius and must have cleared many of
the passages of Ptolemy’s syntax. He also wrote “Almageste,” 1549;[63]
made up the Prutenic (Prussian) astronomical tables (“Prutenicæ
tabulæ cœlestium motuum,” 1551), from the observations of Copernicus,
Hipparchus and Ptolemy, and he is believed to be the author of the
anonymous work entitled “Hypotyposes orbium cœlestium ...” which
appeared during the year 1568.
Gilbert’s reference to Erasmus has already been given in connection
with Dominicus.
REFERENCES.--Vossius (G.), “De Scientiis Mathem.,” Chap. XXXVI.
p. 14; Delambre (J. B. J.), “Hist. de l’astronomie moderne,”
Vol. I. pp. 142, 146, 164; Zedler (Johann Hch.); Mädler--Mædler
(Johann Henrich von), Vol. I. p. 168; Bailly (Jean Sylvain),
“Histoire de l’astronomie moderne ...” Vol. I. p. 366 and Vol.
II. p. 71; Jöcher (Johann Friedrich), “Bibliogr. Astronom.”;
Weidler (Christian Gottlieb), p. 353; “Biogr. Générale,” Vol.
XLI. pp. 928–929.
=Erastus=, Thomas--Thomas Lieber--(1524–1583) was a native of
Switzerland, notable in medicine and famous in ecclesiastical polemics,
who furiously combated the medical views of Paracelsus, notably in his
“Disputationum de Medicina,” Basileæ, 1572–1573. Gilbert mentions him
(_De Magnete_, Book I. chaps. i. and vii.), merely saying that,
knowing naught of the nature of the loadstone, Erastus draws from it
weak arguments against Paracelsus.
His numerous works are detailed in the “Biographisches Lexikon,” Vienna
und Leipzig, 1885, Vol. II. pp. 292, etc., and a very complete account
thereof is to be found at pp. 561–564 of “De Scriptis Medicis,” by
Joannes Antonides Van Der Linden, Amstel., 1651.
REFERENCES.--Pluquet (François André Adrien), “Diction. des
Hérésies”; Moreri (Louis), “Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique”;
Wordsworth (Christopher), “Ecclesiastical Biography”; “New Int.
Encycl.,” New York, 1903, Vol. VI. p. 828; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol.
XXXI. pp. 174–175; “La Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XVI. p. 163;
Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VII. p. 788; Adam (Melchior),
“Vitæ Germanorum Medicorum,” pp. 107–109; Bolton, H. C., “Ch.
Hist. of Chem.,” p. 981.
=Evax=--Euace--a Latin naturalist who lived in the time of Tiberius
and said to have been King of the Arabs, is the supposed author of
“De nominibus et virtutis lapidum qui in artem medicinæ recipiuntur,”
treating of gems, of which the MS.--now in the Oxford Library--was used
by Marbodeus to make up his own work on precious stones.
Salmasius delivers it as his opinion that, by an error of transcribers,
from Cratevas, who in some copies is also named Cratevas, this Evax
has arisen. (“Gen. Biog. Dict.” of Alex. Chalmers, London, 1814, Vol.
XIII. p. 411.)
REFERENCES.--“Journal des Savants” for June 1891 (“Traditions
... chez les Alchimistes du Moyen Age,” par Marcellin Pierre
Eugène Berthelot); Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VII. p. 1153;
Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book II. chap. xxxviii.
=Fallopius=, Gabriellus (1523–1562), was a famous Italian anatomist and
one of the three who, according to Cuvier, restored or rather created
anatomy during the sixteenth century. The other two were Vassalli and
Eustachi. His principal work is “Observationes Anatomicæ,” Venice,
1561; a list of the others--named in “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XVII. pp.
66–69--embracing “De medicatis ... de metallis sev fossilibus ...”
Venice, 1564; “De Simplicibus Medicamentis purgantibus tractatus,”
1566; “De Compositione Medicamentorum,” 1570; “Opera Genuina Omnia,”
1584, 1596, 1606. The collected edition of his complete works was
published in Venice, 1584, and at Frankfort, 1600.
REFERENCES.--Tiraboschi (Girolamo), “Biblioteca Modenese,”
Vol. II. p. 236; Nicéron (J. P.), “Mémoires,” Vol. IV. p. 396;
Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I. chaps. i. and xv. also Book II.
chap. xxxviii.; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VIII. p. 67.
=Fernelius=, Joannes Franciscus (1497–1558), celebrated French
physician, called the modern Galen, is the author of many works which
are cited at pp. 477–483, Vol. XVII of the “Biographie Générale,” the
principal ones being “De naturali parte medicinæ,” 1542, “De vacuandi
ratione liber,” 1545, and “De Abditis Rerum Causis,” 1548. Gilbert
alludes to the last named (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.),
saying that Fernel believes there is in the loadstone a hidden and
abstruse cause: elsewhere he says this cause is celestial; and he does
but explain the unknown by the more unknown. This search after hidden
causes, he adds, is something ignorant, beggarly and resultless.
REFERENCES.--Thou (François Auguste de), “Historiarum sui
temporis”; Sc. de Sainte Marthe, “Elogia Doct. Gallorum”; Eloy,
“Dict. Hist. de la Médecine,” Mons, 1778, Vol. II. pp. 208–221;
Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VIII. p. 259.
=Ficino=, Marsilia (1433–1499), was the son of Ficino, the physician
of Cosmo de Medici, and was one of the leading scholars of the
Renaissance. He was celebrated as the most distinguished translator of
Plato and as the reviver of Platonic philosophy in Italy. One of his
biographers has said that the most important feature of his philosophy
is his claim to harmonizing Platonic idealism with Christian doctrine.
Gilbert says that “Ficinus chews the cud of ancient opinions, and
to give the reason of the magnetic direction seeks its cause in the
constellation Ursa. Ficinus writes, and Merula copies, that in the
loadstone the potency of Ursa prevails, and hence it is transferred
into the iron” (_De Magnete_, Book. I. chap. i.; Book III., chap.
i.; Book IV. chap. i.).
His complete works (published in two volumes, Venice, 1516, Basle,
1561, 1576, Paris, 1641), embrace “Theologiæ Platonicæ,” 1488; “De Vita
libri tres,” 1489; “Iamblichus, de mysteriis ...” 1497; “Apologiæ in
qua medicina, astrologia ...” 1498.
REFERENCES.--Corsi (Raimondo Maria), “M. Ficini Vita,” Pisa,
1772; Symonds (John Addington), “Remains in Italy,” London,
1875, and “Renaissance in Italy,” New York, 1888, pp. 324–328;
“English Cyclop.” (Biography), Vol. II. p. 908; “The Rise of
Intellectual Liberty from Thales to Copernicus,” by Frederic May
Holland, New York, 1885, pp. 279–280; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,”
Vol. VIII. pp. 331–332; “Journal des Savants” for May 1894;
Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 131; “Biog.
Générale,” Vol. XVII. pp. 634–638; “The Works of Geo. Berkeley,”
by A. C. Fraser, Oxford, 1901, Vols. II. p. 268; III. pp.
216–217, 221–223, 260, 296–297; “Dict. of Philos. and Psych.,”
by J. M. Baldwin, New York, 1901, Vol. I. p. 381.
=Fracastorio=, Hieronymo (1483–1553), Italian physician and one of
the most learned men of his day, is said to have been made Professor
of Logic at the University of Padua when but nineteen years of age. J.
B. Ramusio admitted that he owed to Fracastorio the idea and much of
the material for his great work “Rac. di Navigazioni e Viaggi,” first
published in 1550.
Fracastorio made many important astronomical observations, and it was
he and Peter Apian who first made known in Europe the fact that comets’
tails are always turned away from the sun, so that their line of
prolongation passes through its centre.
Gilbert alludes to Fracastorio (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.;
Book II. chaps. ii. iv. xxiv. xxxviii. xxxix.; Book IV. chap. i.),
and to his “De Sympathia,” of which the first edition is Venet.,
1546. This, says Libri, is “an important work in which universal
attraction, as well as electric and magnetic motion, is attributed to
an _imponderable_ principle.”
REFERENCES.--Baillet (Adrien), “Jugement des Savants,” Vol. II;
Menken (F. O.), “De Vita,” Leipzig, 1731; Teissier (H. A.),
“Eloges des hommes illustres,” tirés de M. De Thou; Libri,
“Hist. des. Sc. Mathém.,” Paris, 1838, Vol. III. p. 100; “Biog.
Gén.,” Vol. XVIII. pp. 418–420; Humboldt, “Cosmos,” 1849, Vol.
I. p. 86; Vol. II. p. 697; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VIII.
pp. 692–693; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 135.
=Garcia d’Orta=--Garzia ab Horto--Garcia del Huerto--Garcie du
Jardin--a Portuguese physician and the author of “Coloquios dos
simples ... pello douctor Garcia Dorta,” 1563, which was translated
into French and united to the works of C. d’Acosta and Nic. Monardes
(Christophile de la Coste et M. Nicholas Monard) in 1567, 1574 and
1579. The passage which Gilbert alludes to (in _De Magnete_, Book
I. chap. xiv.), is to be found in the abridged Latin translation of
Garcia’s work made by Charles de l’Ecluse, Antwerp, 1593, lib. i. cap.
56, pp. 178–179. Hakewill observes (“Apologie,” 1635, lib. ii. p. 165):
“Remarkable indeed, that is which Garzias ab Horto writes concerning
the loadstone in _Simpl. Indiæ_, lib. i. cap. 47.”
REFERENCES.--“Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XXXVIII. p. 887; Machado
(Barb.), “Bibliotheca Lusitana”; Denis (Ferdinand), “Bulletin
du Bibliographe”; Pincio (Léon), “Biblioteca Oriental y
Occidental”; “Histoire des Drogues par Antoine Collin,” Lyon,
1619; “Thesaur. Lit. Bot.,” 1851, p. 127.
=Gauricus=, Lucas (1476–1558), Italian mathematician and astronomer,
one of whose pupils was César Scaliger, is the author of twenty-one
different works (“Opera Omnia,” Basle, 1575), of which the best known
are “Rerum naturalium et divinarum ...” 1540; “Isagogicus ... in tot
am astrologiam prædictivam ...” 1546; “Tractatus Astrologicus,” 1552;
“Tabulæ de primo mobili,” 1560.
Gilbert says (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.) the astrologer Lucas
Gauricus held that beneath the tail of Ursa Major is a loadstone, and
that he assigns the loadstone (as well as the sardonyx and the onyx)
not only to the planet Saturn, but also to Mars (with the diamond,
jasper, and ruby), so that the loadstone, according to him, is ruled by
two planets. Further, Lucas says that the loadstone belongs to the sign
Virgo--and with a veil of mathematical erudition he covers many similar
disgraceful stupidities.
REFERENCES.--Ughelli (Ferdinando), “Italia Sacra,” Venetiis
1717–1722; Nicodemo (Francesco), “Biblioteca Napoletana”;
“Chronicum Mathematicorum,” which prefaces the Almagest of
Riccioli; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XIX. pp. 681–683; “La Grande
Encycl.,” Vol. XVIII. p. 617; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol.
VIII. p. 1087.
=Geber=--Yeber--Djaber--Abū-Mūsa-Jābir--Ibn Haiyān--Al-Tarsūsi--who,
according to Aboulwefa (Michaud, “Dict.,” Vol. XVI. p. 100) lived in
the eighth century A.D., is the earliest of the Great Arabian chemists
or alchemists. Rhazès and Avicenna call him “the master of masters,”
and, by the author of “The Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers,” he is
designated as “the prince of those alchemical adepts who have appeared
during the Christian Era.” As many as five hundred different alchemical
works have been attributed to him, and a complete list of the most
important will be found in M. F. Hœfer, “Histoire de la Chimie,” Paris,
1842.
REFERENCES.--“Journal des Savants,” for May 1851, February 1892,
pp. 118–128 _passim_, and for May 1892 (“Geber et ses œuvres
alchimiques”), pp. 318–329; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. VIII.
pp. 1114–1115; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p.
147; Bolton (H. C.), “Chron. Hist. of Chem.,” pp. 985–986; “La
Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XVIII. pp. 680–682; Gilbert, _De
Magnete_, Book I. chap. vii.
=Gemma=, D. Cornelius, a well-known physician of Louvain (1535–1597)
and son of the celebrated mathematician Gemma Frisius, is the author
of the several works named at p. 854, Vol. XIX of the “Biographie
Générale.” Of these, the most important is the “Cosmocritice, seu de
naturæ divinis ... proprietatibus rerum” published at Antwerp in 1575.
REFERENCES.--Foppens, “Bibliotheca Belgica”--“Biog. Médicale”;
Linden (Joannes Antonides van der), “De scriptis medicis,”
Amst., 1651, pp. 147–148; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book II. chap.
iii.
=Gemma=, Frisius--Rainer--(1508–1555), above alluded to, besides
being a mathematician was a medical practitioner. He wrote “De
Principiis Astronomiæ et Cosmographiæ ...” Antwerp, 1530 (now of
excessive scarcity and Chapters XXX-XXXI of which deal with America),
as well as several other similar works published notably in 1539, 1545,
1548. These are standards of the Netherlands geographical schools,
whose most brilliant representative was the well-known geographer,
Gerard Mercator (1512–1594).
REFERENCES.--“Biog. Générale,” Vol. XIX. p. 854; “La Grande
Encycl.,” Vol. XVIII. p. 702; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl.
Gén.,” Vol. L. part i. p. 1405 and Vol. II. p. 148.
=Goropius=, Henricus Becanus--Jean Bécan--Jean Van Gorp (1518–1572), a
Belgian savant who practised medicine at Antwerp and who attempted to
prove, in his “Indo-Scythica,” that Adam’s language was the German or
Teutonic. We are told by Gilbert, in the first book of _De Magnete_,
that Goropius ascribes the invention of the compass to the Cimbri or
Teutons, on the ground that the thirty-two names of the winds thereon
inscribed are pronounced in German by all mariners, whether they be
British or Spaniards, or Frenchmen.
REFERENCES.--“Opera Joannis Goropii Becani,” Antwerp, 1570;
Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. II. p. 457; “Biog. Générale,” Vol.
V. pp. 70–71; and, for additional citations, as well as for
mention of all his works, the “Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XIX.
=Grotius=, Hugo, the latinized form of the Dutch _De Groot_--a great
theologian and jurist (1583–1645). His singular precocity attracted
Joseph J. Scaliger, who undertook to direct his studies at the Leyden
University, where it is said he achieved brilliant success in all
studies.
One of his biographers remarks that, in the annals of precocious
genius, there is no greater prodigy on record than Hugo Grotius, who
was able to write good Latin verses at nine (1592), was ripe for
the University at twelve (1595), and at the age of fifteen (1598),
edited the Encyclopædic work of Martianus Capella--a writer of the
fifth century--with the aid of his father, Jan de Groot, the Delft
burgomaster. It might be added that, in 1597, he had delivered public
discourses on mathematics, philosophy and jurisprudence; in 1598, he
was so highly sought for everywhere, that he was asked to, and did,
accompany Count Justin of Nassau and Olden Barneveldt on their special
embassy to the French Court, and that, in 1599, he not only took his
degree of doctor of law and pleaded his first cases before the Hague
Courts, but was able, through his superior knowledge of mathematics, to
translate into Latin Simon Stevin’s work on navigation. Later on, 1603,
he was appointed historiographer of the United Provinces, becoming
fiscal general in 1607 (also Council Pensionary at Rotterdam six years
later), and during 1609, he published his first work “De Mare Liberum,”
which was a treatise against the claims of the English to exclusive
right over certain seas. This was followed in 1610 by “De Antiq.
Reipub. Batavæ,” and some years afterwards by his chief work, “De Jure
Belli et Pacis,” considered the basis of international law and freely
translated into all the principal languages. Grotius is twice mentioned
in Book IV. chap. ix. of _De Magnete_.
REFERENCES.--Brandt et Cattenbuch, “Histoire de Hugo de Groot,”
1727; Burigny (J. Levêque de), “Vie de Grotius,” 1752; Cras
(Hendrik Constantijn), “Laudatio Hugonis Grotii,” 1796; Dr.
Fried. Ueberweg, “Hist. of Phil.,” (Morris tr., 1885, Vol. II.
p. 31); Rogge (H. C.), “Bibliotheca Grotiana,” 1883; Kœnen
(Hendrik Jakob), “Hugo Grotius,” 1837; “Chambers’s Encycl.,”
Vol. V. pp. 431–432; “La Grande Encycl.,” Vol. XIX. pp. 451–452;
“Biographisch Woordenbock,” J. G. Frederiko en F. J. Van den
Branden, Amsterdam, pp. 301–302; Larousse (Pierre), “Dict.
Univ.,” Vol. VIII. p. 1556, giving list of his many works;
Butler (C.), “Life of Grotius,” London, 1826; Creuzer (Georg
Friedrich), “Luther und Grotius,” Heidelberg, 1846; “Biog.
Générale,” Vol. XXII. pp. 197–216 for a complete record of all
his works.
=Hali Abas=--‘Ali Ibn Al-‘Abbás--Al Majusí--celebrated Arabian
physician, whose death occurred about A.D. 995, is author of
“Ketab-el-Maleki,” _i.e._ the “Royal Book”--_Liber Regius_--in which
he pretends to give all that was then known concerning medicine. Mr.
Adams explains (Appendix, “Barker’s Lemprière,” London, 1838), that he
considers the “Royal Book” as the most complete ancient treatise that
has reached us on medicine, and the sciences generally, with exception
of the _Synopsis_ of Paulus Ægenita. The Latin translation of this
work, given in 1127 by Stephanus Antiochenus, was first printed in
Venice, 1492, then at Lyons in 1523.
REFERENCES.--Casiri (Michael), “Bibliotheca Arabico-hispana
Escur.,” Vol. I. pp. 260, 273; Hœfer, “Nouv. Biogr. Univ.,” Vol.
II. pp. 96–97; Michaud, “Biog. Univ.,” Paris, 1843, Vol. I. p.
468; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.; Freind (John),
“History of Physick”; Choulant (Johann Ludwig), “Handbuch der
Bücherkunde ...”; Wüstenfeld (H. F.), “Geschichte d’ Arab.
Ærzte,” p. 59; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. II. pp. 96–97.
=Harriot=, Thomas (1560–1621), one of the learned Englishmen alluded to
by Gilbert, at the end of the first chapter, Book I of _De Magnete_,
as having on long sea voyages observed the differences of magnetic
variation, was a mathematician and astronomer, whose miscellaneous
works, noted at pp. 437–439, Vol. XXIV of the “Dict. of Nat. Biog.,”
embrace treatises on magnetism, mechanics, etc. The account he has
given of his voyage to Virginia was printed in Hakluyt’s “Principal
Navigations,” Vol. III and is pronounced “one of the earliest and best
examples of a statistical survey made upon a large scale,” at p. 11,
Vol. LXXI of the “Edinburgh Review.”
=Heraclides= of Pontus and Ecphantus, was a Greek historian and
philosopher who died about 330 B.C. Diogenes Laertius attributes to him
many works that have not reached us, and we have nothing of him but
fragments of his treatise on the constitutions of the different States
which have been printed with the works of Elien. Gilbert commences the
third chapter of his sixth book by saying that Heraclides, as well as
the Pythagoreans Nicetas of Syracuse and Aristarchus of Samos, and, as
it seems, many others, held that the earth moves, that the stars set
through the interposition of the earth, and that they rise through the
earth’s giving way: they do give the earth motion, and the earth being,
like a wheel, supported on its axis, rotates upon it from west to east.
REFERENCES.--Rowles (S.), “De Vita et Scriptis,” 1824, Vol.
VIII; Deswert (Eugenius), “Dissert de Heraclide Pontico,” 1830;
Krische (August Bernhard), “Forschungen ...” p. 325; “La Grande
Encyclopédie,” Vol. XIX. p. 1131; Dr. F. Ueberweg, “History of
Philosophy,” tr. by Geo. S. Morris, New York, 1885, Vol. I.
pp. 38–42; Humboldt, “Cosmos,” 1860, Vol. II. p. 309; “Essai
théorique ... des connaissances humaines,” par G. Tiberghien,
Bruxelles, 1844, Vol. I. pp. 182–185; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,”
Vol. IX. p. 200.
=Hermes Trismegistus= (or “thrice great”) is the supposed author
of many Greek works that have reached us and which constitute an
encyclopædia of Egyptian wisdom in that they treat of astronomy,
medicine, and other sciences. As one of his biographers has it, the
principal tenets of the Hermetic Books are that the Creator made the
Cosmos by his word out of fluid ... that death and life are only
changes and that nothing is destructible ... that passion or suffering
is the result of motion.... Gilbert only refers to him in Book V. chap.
xii. by saying that Hermes, Zoroaster and Orpheus recognize a universal
soul. Clemens Alexandrinus, who has given an account and catalogue
of his writings, makes him the author of six books of physic and of
thirty-six books of divinity and philosophy.
REFERENCES.--“The Works of George Berkeley,” by A. C. Fraser,
Oxford, 1901, Vol. III. pp. 209, 253–255, 261, 267, 280;
Baumgarten--Crusius (Ludwig Friedrich Otto), “... de librorum
Hermeticorum ...” 1827; “Dict. of Philos. and Psychol.,”
by J. M. Baldwin, New York, 1901, Vol. I. p. 475; “Hermes
Trismegistus,” by Scheible (J.), 1855; Alex. Chalmers, “Gen.
Biog. Dict.,” London, 1814, Vol. XVII. p. 396; “Hermes
Trismegistus,” by Parthey (Gustav Friedrich Constantin), 1854;
Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. I. part i. pp. 427–428,
691–694; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. IX. p. 228; and the long
list of citations in “Biog. Générale,” Vol. XXIV. pp. 377–382.
=Hero=--Heron--of Alexandria, a Greek mathematician, pupil of the
celebrated Ctesibius who flourished in the third century before Christ
and to whom have been attributed many ancient writings upon different
technical subjects. Allusion is made by Gilbert (_De Magnete_, Book II.
chap. ii.), to Hero’s “Spiritualia,” which is his most valuable known
work and which has been often translated, notably into Latin, 1575,
1680, 1683, into Italian, 1547, 1589, 1592, 1605; and into German,
1687, 1688.
REFERENCES.--Hultsch (Friedrich), “Heronis Alex.,” 1864–1874;
Montucla (J. F.), “Hist. des Mathém.,” Vol. I. p. 267;
“Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Mathematik,” Vol. VIII.
pp. 175–214; Martin, “Sur la vie et les ouvrages d’Héron
d’Alexandrie”--Mém. de l’Acad. des Ins. B. L., Paris, 1854, ss.
438–439; Arago (François), “Eloge de Watt” (_Œuvres_, Vol. I);
Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Bibliotheca Græca,” Vol. IV. p. 234;
Figuier (Louis), “Hist. des principales découvertes,” Vol. I. p.
42; “A short history of Greek Mathematics,” Jas. Gow, Cambridge,
1884, pp. 276–286; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. IX. p. 241;
“Chambers’s Encyclopædia,” Vol. V. p. 689; ninth “Encycl.
Britan.,” Vol. XI. p. 760; “La Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XIX.
p. 1200; “Journal des Savants” for March 1903, p. 147, and for
April 1903, p. 203; “Biogr. Générale,” Vol. XXIV. pp. 447–449;
Th. Martin (“Mém. Ac. des Inscr.,” 1854); also two papers by
Boncompagni and Vincent in “Bulletino di Bibliog.,” Vol. IV.
=Hipparchus= the Rhodian, “le plus grand astronome de
l’antiquité”--born, according to Strabo, at Nicæa in Bithynia, 160–145
B.C.--is the inventor of the astrolabe[64] and discoverer of “the
precession of the equinoxes.” He is mentioned by Gilbert five times
in Book VI. chaps, ii. viii. ix. of _De Magnete_, and is extensively
treated of in the “Journal des Savants” for November 1828, January
1829, August and September 1831, October 1843, August and September
1848, July 1859; also by the Rev. H. M. Close, in “Proc. of Roy. Irish
Acad.,” Series III. vol. vi. No. 3, in Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol.
IX. p. 286, in the “Historical Account of Astronomy,” by John Narrien,
London, 1833, pp. 219–244, and in the “Astronomy” article of the
“Encyclopædia Britannica.”
By Humboldt, Hipparchus is called the founder of scientific astronomy
and the greatest astronomical observer of antiquity. He was the
actual originator of astronomical tables amongst the Greeks and, in
the new map of the world which he constructed and founded upon that
of Eratosthenes, the geographical degrees of latitude and longitude
were based on lunar observations, and on the measurement of shadows,
wherever such an application of astronomy was admissible (“Cosmos,”
London, 1849, Vol. II. p. 545; Ideler, “Handbuch der Chronologie,” Vol.
I. ss. 212, 329).
The mathematician Eratosthenes, alluded to above, was a native
of Cyrene, and pronounced the most celebrated of the Alexandrian
librarians. He is reported to have made the earliest attempt at
measurement of an arc of the meridian. The next measurement of record
is that of the astronomers of Almamon in the plains of Mesopotamia
(“Encycl. Brit.,” ninth edition, Edinburgh, 1876, Vol. X. p. 177). The
first arc of the meridian measured in modern times with an accuracy any
way corresponding to the difficulty of the problem was by Snellius,
who has given an account of it in his most remarkable work called
“Eratosthenes Batavus,” published at Leyden in 1617 (“Ency. Brit.,”
ninth edition, Vol. VII. pp. 597, 606, also eighth edition, Vol. I.
pp. 617–618; “Cosmos,” London, 1849, Vol. II. p. 544, and Chasles,
“Recherches sur l’astronomie ...” in the _Comptes Rendus_, Vol.
XXIII, 1846, p. 851). The biographers of Snellius--Snell van Roijen
(Willebrood)--state that he was a very celebrated Dutch astronomer
(1591–1626), the discoverer of the law of refraction generally
attributed to Descartes (Humboldt, “Cosmos,” 1849, Vol. II. p. 699),
the author of a treatise on navigation (“Tiphys Batavus,” Leyde, 1624)
after the plan of Edward Wright, and that the method he employed (with
imperfect instruments), for measuring an arc of the meridian has since
been followed by all scientists (“La Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XXX. p.
115; “Nouv. Biog. Gén.,” de Hœfer, Vol. XLIV. p. 83; Montucla, “Hist.
des Mathém.,” Vol. II; Larousse, “Dist. Univ.,” Vol. XVI. p. 795;
Delambre, “Hist. de l’astronomie moderne,” Vol. II. pp. 92–119; “Ency.
Brit.,” Akron, Ohio, 1905, Vol. XXII. p. 211).
REFERENCES.--Theodor Gomperz, “Greek Thinkers,” translation of L.
Magnus, London, 1901, p. 544; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol.
I. part i. pp. 413–414, and Vol. II. p. 164; “Geographical Journal”
for October 1904, p. 411; Wm. Whewell, “Hist. of the Ind. Sc.,” New
York, 1858, Vol. I. pp. 145–156; “Journal des Savants” for 1828, 1831,
1843; Alex. Chalmers, “Gen. Biog. Dict.,” London, 1814, Vol. XVII. pp.
505–506.
=Hues=--Hood--Robert (1553(?)-1632), another of the English sea
voyagers named by Gilbert at the end of his first book, was a
mathematician and geographer who sailed around the world with Thomas
Cavendish and is the author of “Tractatus de Globis ... et eorum usu,”
1593, 1594, 1627, which was written for the especial purpose of being
used in connection with a set of globes by Emery Molyneux. This work
was shortly afterwards followed by another in the same line entitled
“Breviarum totius orbis”--“Breviarum orbis terrarum” (“Dict. of Nat.
Biog.,” Vol. XXVIII. p. 156).
=Kendall=--Kendel--Abram, who has already been mentioned (Gama, A.D.
1497; Norman, A.D. 1576), is called by Gilbert “the expert English
navigator.” He was sailing master of the “Bear,” a ship belonging to
Sir Robert Dudley (1573–1649), on the voyage which is referred to in
Vol. IV of Hakluyt’s “Collection of the early voyages, travels and
discoveries,” London, 1811. Therein, at pp. 57 and 58, mention is made
of Kendall, who is also favourably alluded to in the very attractive
and justly prominent work of Sir Robt. Dudley, published in three
volumes at Florence, 1646–1647, 1661, and entitled “Dell Arcano del
Mare di Roberto Dudleio, Duca di Nortumbria e Conte di Warwick.”
REFERENCES.--“Dict. of Nat. Biogr.,” Vol. XVI. p. 125; also
Libri’s “Catalogues,” 1859, Vol. I. p. 160, and 1861, Vol. I.
p. 268; Vol. II. p. 573, wherein it is said that amongst the
_Portulani_ are those of Abraham Kendall and John Diez for the
coasts of America and the West Indies.
Kendall is said to have joined, during the year 1595, the last
expedition of Francis Drake and to have died the year following. Drake
is alluded to in the address by Edward Wright in connection with Thomas
Candish (Cavendish), and they are both also mentioned together (_De
Magnete_, Book III. chap. i.), where Gilbert calls Drake “our most
illustrious Neptune,” and Cavendish “that other world-explorer.”
REFERENCES.--David Hume, “History of England,” London, 1822,
Vol. V; “Lives of Drake, Candish and Dampier,” Edin., 1831;
“Collection of Voyages and Discoveries,” Glasgow, 1792; “English
Seamen of the Sixteenth Century,” by James Anthony Froude, New
York, 1896, pp. 75–103, detailing Drake’s voyage around the
world; “Life of Sir Francis Drake and Account of his Family,”
reprinted from the “Biog. Britannica,” 1828; “The Works of John
Locke,” London, 1812, Vol. X. pp. 359–512, for the “History of
Navigation from its Origin to this Time” (1704), prefixed to
“Churchill’s Collection of Voyages,” and embracing the voyages
of Stephen Burrough, Sebastian Cabot, Sir Thos. Candish,
Christopher Columbus, Sir Francis Drake and Vasco da Gama,
as well as the discoveries attributed to Gioia and others;
making, for the polarity of needle, special mention of Bochart’s
“Geog. Sacra,” p. 716, Purchas’ “Pilgrims,” p. 26 and Fuller’s
“Miscellanies,” lib. iv. cap. 19; Franciscus Drakus, 1581, is
Epig. 39, Liber Secundus, p. 28 of 1747, Amsterodami ed. of
“Epigrammatum Ioan Oweni” (John Owen, 1560–1622, “Dict. of Nat.
Biog.,” Vol. XLII. pp. 420–421). At pp. 437 and 444, Vol. I. of
“The History of No’ America,” by Alfred Brittain, Philadelphia,
1903, will be found a plate portrait of Sir Francis Drake and
the reproduction of a page from “Sir Francis Drake Revived,”
originally published in 1626. The latter is “a true relation of
foure severall voyages ... collected out of the notes of Sir
Francis Drake, Philip Nichols and Francis Fletcher ...”; “The
Voyages of the Cabots,” in “Narrative and Critical History of
America,” by Justin Winsor, Boston, 1889, Vol. III. pp. 1–59–84
for Drake, Hawkins and Cavendish. “Life of Sir Rob. Dudley ...”
by John Temple Leader, Florence, 1895. For Sir Francis Drake
and Thos. Candish, consult also Vols. XV and XVI, as per Index,
p. 412 of Richard Hakluyt, “The Principal Navigations ...”
Edinburgh, 1889; “General Biog. Dict.,” Alex. Chalmers, London,
1813, Vol. XII. p. 305 for Sir Francis Drake and pp. 414–418 for
Sir Rob. Dudley.
=Lactantius=--Lucius Cœlius Firmianus--celebrated orator of Italian
descent, called “the Christian Cicero,” died about 325–326 A.D. He
was a teacher of rhetoric in Nicomedia, Bithynia, was entrusted by
Constantine the Great with the education of his son Crispus Cæsar
(“History of Christianity,” Rev. Hy. Hart Milman, London, 1840, Vol.
II. p. 384), and became a very extensive writer. Dufresnoy enumerates
as many as eighty-six editions of his entire works, besides separate
publications of his different treatises, appearing between the years
1461–1465 and 1739; the best editions being given in Vols. X-XI of
the “Bibliotheca Patrum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum ...” by Gersdorf
(Ephraim Gotthelf), Leipzig, 1842–1844 and in Migne (Jacques Paul)
“Patrologiæ,” Vols. VI-VII, 1844. His principal work is the “Divinarum
Institutionum,” the third book of which (“De falsa sapientia”) is
referred to by Gilbert (_De Magnete_, Chap. III), when he says
that Lactantius, like the most unlearned of the vulgar, or like an
uncultured bumpkin, treats with ridicule the mention of antipodes and
of a round globe of earth.
Geo. Hakewill, who has already appeared in this “Bibliographical
History,” at A.D. 1627, alludes to the above (“Apologie,” Oxford,
1635, lib. iii. p. 281), in manner following: “Yet that which to me
seemeth more strange is that those two learned Clearkes, Lactantius
(_Divin. Inst._, lib. iii. cap. 24), and Augustine (_De Civitate Dei_,
I. lib. xvi. cap. 9), should with that earnestnesse deny the being
of any antipodes.... Zachary, Bishop of Rome, and Boniface, Bishop
of Mentz, led (as it seems), by the authority of these Fathers, went
farther herein, condemning one Vergilius, a Bishop of Saltzburg, as
an heretique, only for holding that there were antipodes.” Madame
Blavatsky (“Isis Unveiled,” Vol. I. p. 526) says: “In 317 A.D. we find
Lactantius teaching his pupil Crispus Cæsar, that the earth is a plane
surrounded by the sky, which is composed of fire and water, and warning
him against the heretical doctrine of the earth’s globular form!”
The following notes concerning the antipodes are likely to prove
interesting:
“Pythagoras left no writings--Aristotle speaks only of his school--but
Diogenes Laertius in one passage (‘Vitæ,’ VIII. I. Pythag. 25), quotes
an authority to the effect that Pythagoras asserted the earth to be
spherical and inhabited all over, so that there were antipodes, to whom
that is _over_ which to us is _under_.... Plato makes Socrates say that
he took up the work of Anaxagoras, hoping to learn whether the earth
was round or flat (‘Phædo,’ 46, Stallb. I, 176).” In Plutarch’s essay,
“On the face appearing in the orb of the moon,” one of the characters
is lavish in his ridicule of the sphericity of the earth and of the
theory of antipodes. (Justin Winsor, “Narrative and Critical History,”
Boston, 1889, Vol. I. pp. 3–5, notes; Lucretius, “De Rerum,” V. pp.
1052, etc., and vi. p. 630; Virgil (Publius V. Maro), “Georgics,” I. p.
247; Tacitus (Publius Cornelius), “Germania,” p. 45.)
Speaking of the lower hemisphere or antipodes, as well as of islands
of magnetic power drawing vessels on their rocks, Albertus Magnus
says, in the book “De Natura Locorum,” contained in his “Philosophus
Philosophorum Princeps”: “Perhaps also some magnetic power in that
region draws human stones, even as the magnet draws iron.” See the
Legends, in Reisch’s--Reysch’s--“Map of the World,” Rome, 1508
(“Christ. Colombus,” by J. B. Thatcher, New York, 1903, Vol. I. pp.
165–166).
At the beginning of the fourteenth century, the roundness of the earth
and the antipodes were generally recognized. Mention thereof is to be
found in the “Trésor” of Brunetto Latini, in the “Divina Commedia,” in
the “Convito” (Dante, Opere Minori, Vol. I. p. 93), and in the “Acerba”
of Francesco degli Stabili (Cecco d’Ascoli), at ff. 8–11, lib. i.
cap. 3; as well as in most cosmographical treatises of the fourteenth
century (Libri, Vol. II. p. 197, note).
[Illustration: Cecco D’Ascoli. Last page of the earliest
known edition of his “Acerba” Venetia 1476. Printed nineteen
times up to and including the edition of 1546. Now in the
Bibliothèque Sainte Geneviève, Paris.]
[Illustration: Lactantius. “De Divinis Institutionibus.”
Page taken from the 1465 edition. In the Bibliothèque Ste.
Geneviève, Paris.]
The passage in Lactantius (lib. iii. cap. 24), begins _Ineptum
credere_. In the 1570 edition, it commences at Chap. XXIII, “_Aut
est_ ...” p. 178. In the “Works of Lactantius,” Edinburgh, 1871,
Vol. I. chap. xxiv. pp. 196–197, the translator, Wm. Fletcher, says
that he thus ridicules the antipodes and the roundness of the earth:
“... the rotundity of the earth leads, in addition, to the invention of
those suspended antipodes,” whilst, at Vol. II. chap. xxxix. p. 122,
Lactantius says again that “about the antipodes, also, one can neither
hear nor speak without laughter.”
In “Christian Schools and Scholars,” Augusta Th. Drane, London, 1867,
p. 70, Albertus describes the antipodes and the countries they embrace.
Robert Steele, in his “Mediæval Lore,” London, 1893, p. 75, has it:
“And fables tell, that there, beyond the antipodes be men that have
their feet against our feet.”
At p. 200 of André Pezzani’s “La Pluralité des Existences de l’Ame,”
Paris, 1866, he mentions that Cardinal Nicolas De Cusa admits the
roundness of the earth, the plurality of worlds, etc.
For antipodes and roundness of the earth see, likewise: Libri, “Hist.
des Sc. Mathém.,” Vol. II. pp. 178, 182, note; Ch. W. Shields, “The
Final Philosophy,” New York, 1877, p. 46; “Le Journal des Sçavans,”
Vol. XXXVI for 1707, p. 510, wherein it is said that Plutarch denied
the antipodes, as did both Lactantius and Saint Augustine. Consult,
also, the volumes of “Le Journal des Sçavans” for the years 1710 and
1721.
REFERENCES.--Dupin (André M. J. J.), “Biblioth. des Auteurs
Eccles.,” Vol. I. p. 295; Celier (Léonce), “Hist. des Auteurs
Sacrés,” Vol. III. p. 387; Schöll (Carl), “Hist. de la Lit.
Romaine,” Vol. IV. p. 26; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XXVIII. pp.
611–620; ninth “Encycl. Brit.,” Vol. XIV. pp. 195–196; Lenain de
Tillemont, “Hist. Eccles.,” Vol. VI; Fleury (Claude), “Historia
Ecclesiastica” (“The Eccles. History from A.D. 400 to A.D.
456”), Vol. I; “History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire,” by Edward Gibbon (Milman), Philad. 1880, Vol. II.
p. 248 note; “Anti-Nicene Christian Library,” edited by Drs.
Roberts and Donaldson.
=Lusitanus=, Amatus--Joan Rodrigo Amato--Portuguese physician
(1511–1568), is author of several medical essays wherein he advocates
the views of Galen and of the Arabian School. His most important work
is “Curationum medicinalium centuriæ septem,” and is so named because
it is divided into seven parts, each containing a hundred different
observations and reports on medical cures, etc. In _De Magnete_,
Book I. chap. i., Gilbert names him amongst authors, like Antonius
Musae Brasavolus and Joannes Baptista Montanus, who tell of the
efficacy of the loadstone in medicine.
REFERENCES.--“Thesaurus Literaturæ Botanicæ,” Lipsiæ, 1851, pp.
334–335; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. X. p. 796; “Dict. Hist.
de la Médecine,” par N. F. J. Eloy, Mons, 1778, Vol. I. pp.
106–107.
=Lynschoten=--Linschooten--Jan Huygan van--who, with Richard Hakluyt,
we find mentioned by Edward Wright in his Address “to the most learned
Mr. William Gilbert,” was a celebrated Dutch navigator (1563–1611) who
accompanied Vicente Fonseca, Archbishop of Goa, upon his Eastern trip
and first published a relation thereof during the year 1601. He is the
author, also, of “Itinerario Voyage ofte Schipvært,” Amsterdam, 1596,
1604, 1605, 1623, and “Itinerarium, ofte Schipvært,” Amsterdam, 1614.
REFERENCES.--Lautz (G.), “Biog. de J. H. Van L.,” Amst., 1845;
Du Boys (Pierre), “Vies des Gouverneurs,” p. 4; “La Grande
Encycl.,” Vol. XXII. p. 299; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. X. p.
542; “Biog. Générale,” Vol. XXXI. p. 303.
=Machometes Aractensis.= _See_ Albategnius.
=Marbodeus Gallus=, surnamed Pelliciarius, who is briefly mentioned
twice by Gilbert in _De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i., was a French
writer, son of a merchant (Marbode, Marbœuf) who finally became Bishop
of Rennes in 1081, and died at Angers in 1123–1125. He is best known
by his poetical works, which were first published in 1524. As has
already been said, Marbodeus is supposed to have used the manuscript
of Evax-Euace--to make up his own book on precious stones. The latter
work is alluded to by J. B. Hauréau in the second of his articles
on the Latin MSS. of the Palatine--“Codices Palatini Bibliothecæ
Vaticanæ”--wherein the first line is quoted:
“_Evax, rex Arabum, fertur scripisse Neroni_”
(“Journal des Savants,” Sept. 1887, p. 565, June 1891, p. 372; “Hildeb.
et Marbod. Opera,” Col. 1637).
Bertelli quotes, at p. 96 of his “Pietro Peregrino” Memoir, four of the
Latin lines, as well as those of Hildeberti, which can be translated as
follows:
“The magnet stone is found amongst the Troglodites,
The same stone which India, its mother, sends;
This one is known to be of ferruginous colour
And its nature is to draw iron when near it.”
REFERENCES.--“The Lapidarium of Marbodus” (with translation of
the sixty-one chapters) at pp. 389–417 of “Antique Gems,” by
Rev. C. W. King, London, 1866; “Gallia Christiana,” XIV. col.
746; “Hist. Lit. de la France,” Vol. X. p. 343; “La Grande
Encycl.,” Vol. XXIII. p. 15; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. X^2.
p. 1126; “Biographie Générale,” Vol. XXXIII. pp. 366–367.
=Marco Polo.= _See_ A.D. 1271–1295, p. 55.
=Matthæus= Silvaticus. _See_ Silvaticus.
=Matthiolus=, Petrus Andreas--Pierre André Mattiole--(1500–1577),
Italian naturalist and physician, is best known by his Commentary
originally published at Venice under the title “Il Dioscoride con
gli suoi discorsi” and translated into Latin, 1554, which is said to
contain all that was known of medicine and botany up to that time
(Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. X. p. 1349; Eloy, “Dict. Hist. de
Médecine,” Mons, 1778, Vol. III. pp. 190–193.)
Gilbert tells, in Book I. chap. i. of _De Magnete_, that
Matthiolus, the translator of Dioscorides, “furbishes again the
garlic and diamond story, in connection with the loadstone, that he
also brings in the fable of Mahomet’s shrine having an arched roof
of magnets so that the people might be fooled by the trick of the
coffin suspended in air, as though ’twere some divine miracle, and,
furthermore, that he compares the attractive virtues of the loadstone,
which pass through iron, to the mischief of the _torpedo_, whose
poison passes through bodies and spreads in an occult way.”
=Maurolycus=--Marulle--Franciscus (1494–1575) was Abbot of Messina
and a celebrated geometer. His well-known “Opuscula Mathematica,”
Venice, 1575, containing treatises on the sphere, astronomical
instruments, etc., was preceded by his great book on Cosmography
published during 1543, and he also wrote many other works which will
be found enumerated in the Catalogue so ably made up by the Abbé Scina
(Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. X. p. 1365; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl.
Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 201).
Gilbert mentions Franciscus Maurolycus (_De Magnete_, Book I.
chaps. i. and xvii., also Book IV. chaps. i. and xviii.), regarding
the variation in the Mediterranean Sea and says that he discusses a
few problems regarding the loadstone, adopting the current opinion
of others, and that he believes the variation is caused by a certain
magnetic island mentioned by Olaus Magnus.
REFERENCES.--Libri, “Hist. des Sc. Mathém.,” Paris, 1838, Vol
III. p. 102; “Nouv. Biog. Gén.” (Hœfer), Vol. XXXIV. p. 428;
“Vita del Abate. Maurolico,” Messine, 1613; Nicéron, “Mémoires,”
Vol. XXXVII; “Biog. Univ.” (Michaud), Vol. XXVII. p. 352;
Tessier (H. A.), “Eloges des hommes Illustres”; “Dict. Univ. du
XIX^e siècle” (Larousse), Vol. X. p. 1365.
=Menelaus= (called also Mileus, Milieus, by Apian and by
Mersenne), was a celebrated Alexandrian, living end of first century
A.D., who, in his brilliant treatment especially of spherical
geometry, went considerably beyond all his predecessors. The only
work of his, however, that has reached us is a treatise on the sphere
in three books, of which the translation was made by Maurolycus and
inserted by P. Mersenne in his “Univ. Geometriæ Synopsis,” 1644.
Menelaus is mentioned by Gilbert (_De Magnete_, Book VI. chaps.
viii. and ix.) together with Ptolemy and Machometes Aractensis, who,
says he, have held in their writings that the fixed stars and the whole
firmament have a forward movement, for they contemplated the heavens
and not the earth and knew nothing of magnetic inclination.
REFERENCES.--Montucla, J. F., “Hist. des Mathém.,” Vol. I. p.
291; Delambre, J. B. J., “Hist. de l’Astron. Moderne,” Vol. II.
p. 243.
=Merula=, Gaudentius, was an Italian savant living early in the
sixteenth century, author of “De Gallorum ... antiquitate,” 1536,
1538, 1592, of “Memorabilium” 1546, 1550, 1551, 1556, and of several
general histories, etc. Gilbert says (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap.
i.) Merula advises that on a loadstone be graven the image of a bear,
when the moon looks to the north, so that, being suspended by an iron
thread, it may win the virtue of the celestial Bear.
REFERENCES.--Cotta (Lazaro Agostino), “Musæo Novarese,” p. 133;
Philippo Argellati, “Bibliotheca ... Mediol. ...” Vol. II. pp.
2131–2134; “La Grande Encycl.” Vol. XXIII. p. 732; “Biog. Gén.,”
Vol. XXXV. p. 127.
=Montagnana=, Bartholommeo, who is briefly alluded to at the end
of Book I. chap. xv. of _De Magnete_, was the head of a well-known
family of Italian physicians. He was born about 1400, practised
medicine at Bologna and Padua, and wrote “Consilia Medica, edita
Paduæ anno 1436,” also “De Balneis Patav.; de compositione et dosi
medicamentorum,” the latter appearing at Padua in 1556.
REFERENCES.--Papadopoli (Nicolaus Comnenus), “Historia
Gymnasii Patavavini,” I; Manget (Jean Jacques), “Bibliotheca
Scriptorum Medicorum”; “Biog. Générale,” Vol. XXXVI. p. 34.
=Montanus=, Arias--Benedictus (1527–1598), eminent Spanish
Catholic divine and orientalist, member of the Council of Trent, is
best known by his Polyglott Bible--_Biblia Regia_ or _Biblia
Plantiniana_--though he is the author of many works, mostly
religious, published during the years 1569, 1571, 1572, 1574 and
1593. Upon completing the last of the eight folio volumes of the
_Biblia_, he was offered, but declined, a bishopric by King Philip
II, at whose request he had undertaken the work and who, later on,
rewarded him with a liberal pension and other emoluments.
He is but briefly referred to by Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I.
chap. i.
REFERENCES.--Antonio (Nicolas), “Bibl. Hisp. Nova”; D. Nicol. M.
Serrano, “Appendice al Dicc. Univ.,” Madrid, 1881, Vol. XIV. p.
407; “Diccionario Enciclopedico Hispano-Americano,” Barcelona,
1887, Vol. II. p. 596; Loumyer (C.), “Vie de B. A. Montano,”
1842; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. III. pp. 145–146; Rosenmüeller (Ernst
Friedrich Carl), “Handbuch für die Literatur,” Vol. III. p. 296;
Colomiès (Paul), “Italia et Hispania Orientalis,” p. 241.
=Montanus=--Da Monte--Joannes Baptista (1488–1551), already
mentioned in connection with Lusitanus, was a Professor of
Medicine at the Padua University and regarded as one of the most
celebrated physicians of his day. He is the author of many valuable
works, including “Metaphrasis Summaria,” 1551, “De Differentiis
Medicamentorum,” 1551; “In Nonum librum; Rhazès ad Almansorem
Expositio,” 1554, 1562.
REFERENCES.--Tiraboschi (Girolamo), “Storia della Letteratura
Italiana”; Facciolati (Jacopo), “Fasti Gymnasii Patavini,” par.
III; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.; “Biog. Générale,”
Vol. XXXVI. pp. 108–109.
=Myrepsus=--Myrepsius--Nicolaus, Greek physician, living in the
thirteenth century, became very prominent in Rome as a great student of
the Arabic writers. He is the author, more particularly, of a medical
treatise, divided into forty-eight sections containing as many as two
thousand six hundred and fifty-six formulæ, which was translated by
Leonard Fuchs under the title “Nic. Myr. Alex. medicamentorum opus,”
Basle, 1549, and frequently reprinted, whilst another translation
was made by Nicolas de Reggio, who, like Matthæus Silvaticus, was
a physician at Salerno and who called it “Nic. Alex. liber de
compositione medicamentorum,” Ingoldstadt, 1541. The last-named work
has, by some, been confounded with the “Antidotarium” of Nicolas
Præpositas.
Myrepsus is spoken of by Gilbert, Book I, at end of chap. xiv. _De
Magnete_ treating of the medicinal virtue of the loadstone.
Nicolaus, says he, puts into his “divine plaster” a good deal of
loadstone, as do the Augsburg doctors in their “black plaster” for
fresh wounds and stabs; because of the exsiccating effect of the
loadstone without corrosion, it becomes an efficacious and useful
remedy. Paracelsus, in like manner, and for the same end, makes
loadstone an ingredient of his plaster for stab wounds.
REFERENCES.--Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Bibliotheca Græca,”
Vol. X. p. 292; Vol. XII. pp. 4, 346; Kastner (Christian
Wilhelm), “Medicin. Gelehrten-Lexikon,” p. 577; Freind (John),
“Hist. of Physic,” Vol. I. p. 464; Hœfer (M. F.), “Hist. de la
Chimie,” Vol. I; Sprengel (Kurt Polycarp Joachim), “Geschichte
der Arzneikunde,” Vol. II. p. 334; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol.
XI. p. 744; “Biog. Générale,” Vol. XXXVII. p. 92.
=Nicander of Colophon=, whom Gilbert mentions twice in his first
book, chapter ii., “On the loadstone, what it is: its discovery”--was
a Greek poet and physician who lived second century B.C. and
of whom comparatively little is known. Only two of his many reported
works remain: these are treated of at pp. 917–920, Vol. XXXVII of the
“Biographie Générale,” where can likewise be found the titles of all
the others according to Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Bibliotheca Græca,”
Harles edition, Vol. IV. p. 345).
REFERENCES.--Haller (Albrecht von), “Bibliotheca Botanica”;
Charlant (Johann Ludwig), “Handb. ... die Æltere Medicin”; G. A.
Pritzel, “Thesaur. Lit. Bot.,” 1851, pp. 210–211.
=Nicetas=--Hicetas--of Syracuse, a Pythagorician of the fourth
century B.C., native of Chonæ in Phrygia (the old Colossæ
of St. Paul) alluded to by Gilbert in conjunction with Heraclides of
Pontus, was doubtless the first, according to Diog. Laert (VIII, 85),
to teach the earth’s rotation. Humboldt remarks (“Cosmos,” 1860, Vol.
II. p. 109) that Nicetas, Theophrastus and Heraclides Ponticus appear
to have had a knowledge of the rotation of the earth upon its axis; but
Aristarchus of Samos, and more particularly Seleucus of Babylon, who
lived one hundred and fifty years after Alexander, first arrived at the
knowledge that the earth not only rotated on its axis, but also moved
around the Sun as the centre of the whole planetary system. Cicero,
“Academica,” lib. iv. cap. 39: “Nicetas of Syracuse,” as Theophrastus
says, “believed that the heavens, the sun, the moon, the stars--in
brief, all things above--stand still; alone, the earth, of all things
in the world, moves. Because it is rapidly turning and twisting upon
its axis, it gives the effect of the whole sky moving, and that the
earth stands.”
REFERENCES.--Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Biblioth. Græca,” Vol.
I. p. 847; “Biog. Générale,” Vol. XXIV. p. 642; “La Grande
Encycl.,” Vol. XX. p. 63; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,”
Vol. II. p. 214; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book VI. chap. iii.
[Illustration: Pedro Nuñez, “Traitte ... de la Navigation.”
Page 9 _verso_ of Ms. Fr. No. 1338, now in the
Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris.]
=Nuñez=, PEDRO--Nonius, Petrus--was a celebrated Portuguese
mathematician (1492–1577) who, after his voyage to the East Indies,
became chief cosmographer of the kingdom, and made a great many
improvements in astronomical instruments, the merits of which were
recognized notably by Tycho Brahé and by Dr. Halley. Of all his books,
the most important are the “Tratado da sphera ...” 1537; “De arte atque
ratione navigandi,” 1546; “Opera Mathematica,” 1566 (containing many
treatises on navigation, instruments, sailing cards, etc.); “Annotaçoes
à Sphera de Sacro Bosco,” 1567[65]; “Instrumenta Artis Navigandi,”
1592. Stockler observes that the last-named treatise, which is an
amplification of the 1537 “Tratatos das cartas de marear,” would alone
justify placing Nonius among the most distinguished geometricians of
his time.
REFERENCES.--Fernandez de Navarette, “Recherches ... sciences
nautiques” (tr. M. D. de Mofras), Paris, 1839; Varnhagen
(Francisco Adolfo de), “Historia geral do Brazil”; Machado
(Barb.), “Biblioth. Lusitana”; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl.
Générale,” 1887, Vol. I. part i. pp. 216, 574–575, and part ii.
p. 1222; Gilbert, _De Magnete_, Book IV. chap. viii.; “La Grande
Encycl.,” Vol. XXV. p. 140; “Biographie Générale,” Vol. XXXVIII.
pp. 361–363; “Estromento de Sombras” of Pedro Nuñez, copied in
Dr. G. Hellmann’s “Neudrucke,” 1898, No. 10; J. F. Montucla,
“Hist. des Mathém. ...” (Supplément), Vol. II. pp. 656–659,
for names of many other authors of treatises on navigation.
For Sacro Bosco: “Dict. of National Biography,” edited by
Sidney Lee, London, 1891, Vol. XXVII. p. 217; Larousse, “Dict.
Univ.,” Vol. IX. pp. 934–935; Græsse (J. G. T.), “Trésor des
livres rares,” Vol. VI. pp. 209–211; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XXVI.
p. 555; Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Bibliotheca Latina Mediæ
... Ætatis”; Delambre (J. B. J.), “Astron. du Moyen-Age,” Vol.
II; “Hist. Litter. de la France,” Vol. XIX. p. 1; “Ency. Brit.”
ninth edition, Vol. XXI. pp. 140, 543.
=Oribasius=, SARDIANUS, was an eminent Greek physician, born about
A.D. 325 at Sardes, the capital of Lydia. Gilbert (_De Magnete_, Book
I. chap. i.) alludes to Chapter XIII of Oribasius’ “De Facultate
Metallicorum,” which is embraced in one of the only three authentic
treatises of his that have reached us, the first being part of a
compilation relative to seventy medical books, whilst the second is
a Synopsis, or rather an abridgment, of the first, and the third is
called _Euporistes_, or manual of practical medicine.
REFERENCES.--“Dict. Hist. de la Médecine,” par N. F. J.
Eloy, Mons, 1778, Vol. III. 419–422; Eunapius, “Vitæ Philos.
et Soph.”; Sprengel (Kurt Polycarp Joachim), “Hist. de la
Médecine”; “La Grande Encycl.,” Vol. XXV. p. 561; “Biog.
Gén.,” Vol. XXXVIII. pp. 786–789; Fabricius (Johann Albert),
“Bibliotheca Græca,” Vols. IX. p. 451; XII. p. 640, and XIII.
p. 353; Linden (Joannes Antonides van der) “... de scriptis
medicis,” Amst., 1651, pp. 476–477.
=Orpheus=, to whom Gilbert alludes (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. ii.;
Book II. chap. iii. and Book V. chap. xii.) is supposed to be the
Vedic Ribhu. Orpheus is a very important figure in Greek legend, whose
existence is denied by Aristotle, but to whom are attributed many
writings such as the _Argonautica_, _Lithica_, _Bacchica_, _Orphica_,
etc.
REFERENCES.--“La Grande Encyclopédie,” Vol. XXV. pp. 607–608;
“Biog. Générale,” Vol. XXXVIII. pp. 868–877; “English
Cyclopædia,” Vol. IV. pp. 592–593.
=Oviedus=, GONZALUS--Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y Valdès--was one
of the earliest historiographers of the New World (1478–1557), whose
principal work--“Summario de las Indias Occidentales,” printed
1525--Gilbert says (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap. i.) contains earliest
mention of the fact that in the meridian of the Azores there is no
variation.
REFERENCES.--The complete edition of Oviedus’s writings which
appeared in 1850; “Thesaurus Liter. Botanicæ,” 1851, p. 218;
Ticknor (George), “Hist. of Span. Lit.,” 1849.
=Parmenides=, an ancient philosopher, native of Southern Italy,
living in fifth century A.D., and the most prominent of the
followers of the Eleatic School (founded by him and Xenophanes), has
embodied a brief summary of his tenets in a work called “Nature,”
of which an able analyzation is to be found in the ninth “Encycl.
Brit.,” Vol. XVIII. pp. 315–317. Gilbert’s only allusion to him is
at Book V. chap. xii. of _De Magnete_, where he says that the
ancient philosophers, as Thales, Heraclides, Anaxagoras, Archelaus,
Pythagoras, Empedocles, Parmenides, Plato and the Platonists--nor Greek
philosophers alone, but also the Egyptian and the Chaldean--all seek in
the world a certain universal soul, and declare the whole world to be
endowed with a soul.
Parmenides has also left fragments of a poem on astronomy which was
published by Scaliger.
REFERENCES.--Ritter (Dr. Heinrich), “Hist. de la Philos.” (tr.
M. Tissot), Vol. I; Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Biblioth.
Græca,” Vol. I. p. 798; “Diog. Lært.,” IX. 23; Houzeau et
Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 220; Larousse, “Dict.
Univ.,” Vol. XII. p. 307; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XXXIX. pp. 227–230;
Dr. Friedrich Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philosophy,” New York, 1885,
Vol. I. pp. 54–57; Paul Tannery, “Pour l’Histoire de la Science
Hellène,” Paris, 1887, Chap. IX. pp. 218–246.
=Paulum Venetum.= _See_ Marco Polo, at A.D. 1271–1295.
=Paulus Venetus.= _See_ Sarpi, Pietro at A.D. 1623.
=Philolaus=, the Pythagorean, was born at Crotona and flourished
about 374 B.C. He was a disciple of Archytas, was the first
known writer on the subject of physics, and it is said his writings
were so highly esteemed that Plato employed three books of Philolaus
for the composition of his “Timæus.” Gilbert says (_De Magnete_,
Book VI. chap. iii.) that Philolaus, whom he calls an illustrious
mathematician and a very experienced investigator of nature, would
have the earth to be one of the stars and to turn in an oblique circle
around the fire, just as the sun and moon have their paths.
In the “Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Mathematik,” Leipzig, 1899,
Vol. IX. pp. 275–292, will be found “Note sur le charactère de
l’astronomie Ancienne,” by Paul Mansion, explaining the seven systems
of Ancient Astronomy and showing the centre of the world to be,
according to Philolaus, a central fire, or vital flame of the entire
planetary system; whilst Eudoxus,[66] Ptolemæus and Tycho Brahé
believed it to be the earth immovable; Heraclides of Pontus asserted
that it was the earth rotating from West to East; and both Aristarchus
and Copernicus maintained that it was the Sun.
REFERENCES.--Fabricius (Johann Albert), “Bibliotheca Græca”;
Rose’s “New Gen. Biog. Dict.,” London, 1850, Vol. XI. p.
102; Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. II. p. 224;
Chaignet (Antelme Edouard), “Pythagore et la Philosophie
Pythagoricienne,” 1873; Humboldt, “Cosmos,” 1859, Vol. I. p. 65;
Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. XII. p. 823.
=Philostratus=, FLAVIUS, to whom Gilbert alludes briefly at Chap.
XXXVIII. book ii. of his _De Magnete_ as affirming that the stone
_pantarbes_ attracts to itself other stones, was an eminent Greek
sophist, born at Lemnos between 170 and 180 A.D., whose only writings
known to us are accounts of the lives of Apollonius of Tyana[67] and
of the Sophists. These were first published, Paris, 1608, and a part
thereof have found a good translator in M. A. Chassang, who entitled
his book “Le Merveilleux dans l’Antiquité,” Paris, 1862.
REFERENCES.--Letronne (Jean Antoine), “Mém. de l’Acad. des
Inscrip.,” N. S., Vol. X. p. 296; Gibbon (Edward), “Roman
Empire,” Vol. III. p. 241; Ritter (Dr. Heinrich), “Hist. de
la Philos. Ancienne,” Vol. XII. chap. vii.; Fabricius (Johann
Albert), “Bibliotheca Græca,” Vol. V. p. 540; Miller, in the
“Journal des Savants,” 1849; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XL. pp. 3–5;
ninth “Encycl. Britan.,” Vol. XVIII. pp. 796–797.
=Plancius=, PETER, who is alluded to in Edward Wright’s address
to Gilbert, was a Dutch theologian and astronomer--“a most
diligent student, not so much of geography as of magnetic
observations”--(1552–1622), the first to recommend the Dutch
expeditions to the Indies and who prepared the necessary instructions
and maps to ensure their success. His universal map has been alluded
to at the Blundeville entry, A.D. 1602. In the article on Dr. Kohl’s
Collection of Early Maps (“Harv. Univ. Bull.,” Vol. III. p. 305)
allusion is made to a map of America by Peter Plancius, 1594, which is
spoken of by Blundeville in his “Exercises” as “lately put forth in the
yeere of our Lord 1592.”
REFERENCES.--Wagenaar (Jan), “Histoire de la Hollande,” Vol.
IX. p. 140, and also “Histoire d’Amsterdam,” Vol. I. p. 407,
and Vol. III. p. 219; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XL. p. 403; Larousse,
“Dict. Univ.,” Vol. XII. p. 1129.
=Plotinus of Alexandria=, the father of Neoplatonism, lived 205–270
A.D. His writings were left to the editorial care of Porphyry, who
arranged them in six divisions, each of which was subdivided into nine
books, or Enneads. Plotinus maintains that men belong to two worlds,
that of the senses and that of pure intelligence, and it depends upon
ourselves as to which one we will direct most our thoughts and finally
belong. The fire-firmament of Plotinus is alone referred to by Gilbert
in the third chapter of the last book of _De Magnete_.
REFERENCES.--“Neoplatonism,” and works cited in the
Encyclopædias, also the works on Plotinus, especially by
Kirchner (Carl), 1854, by Brenning (Emil), “Die Lehre ...
Plotin ...” (1864), and by Kleist (E. C. von) (1884); Plotini,
“Operum Philosophicorum Omnium,” Basilæ, 1580, Liber III, Ennead
II, p. 115; Kingsley (Charles), “Alexandria and her Schools,”
Camb., 1854; Grucker (Emile), “De Plotinianis,” Paris, 1866;
Lewes (George Henry), “History of Philosophy from Thales to
Comte,”[68] London, 1867; Larousse, “Dict. Univ.,” Vol. XII. p.
1198; “Biog. Gén.,” Vol. XL. pp. 487–494; Dr. Fried. Ueberweg,
“Hist. of Philos.,” tr. of Geo. S. Morris, 1885, Vol. I. pp.
240–252; Bouillet (Marie Nicolas), “Les Ennéades de Plotin,”
1857.
=Ptolemæus=, CLAUDIUS, the great Egyptian mathematician, geographer and
astronomer who flourished in middle of the second century after Christ,
is frequently alluded to throughout four of the books of _De Magnete_,
and Gilbert makes direct reference to the “Opus Quadripartitum,”
“Cosmographia” and “Geographia.” The last is, however, the work with
which Ptolemy’s name is most prominently connected. It was the standard
up to the time of the marine discoveries of the fifteenth century, and
has been translated and published into editions too numerous to mention
here.
It may be added that the “Geographia Universalis” issue of 1540 is the
first to embrace a proper map bearing the name “America,” and that,
to the identical account of Columbus which originally appeared in
the 1522 and 1525 editions, Servetus appended a few words concerning
the absurdity of putting the claims of Americus Vespuccius before
those of the real discoverer.[69] The first book in which the name
America was formally given to the new Continent is entitled “Globus
Mundi,” published 1507–1510, and attributed to Henricus Loritus--de
Glaris--Glareanus. The suggestion of the name had, indeed, been made by
the geographer Waldseemüller (Martinus Hylacomylus) of Freiburg, in his
“Cosmographiæ Introductio,” published at St. Dié, in Lorraine, April
25, 1507, but the “Globus Mundi” was first to put it into effect.
The Waldseemüller suggestion above alluded to is thus translated: “And
the fourth part of the world, having been discovered by Americus, it
may be called Amerige; that is, the land of Americus, or America.” In
1901, Prof. Jos. Fischer, of Beldkirch, discovered, at Wolfegg Castle
in Würtemberg, two huge maps, measuring together eight feet by four
and a half feet, which proved to be those of Waldseemüller, of which
all trace had been lost for centuries. They were reproduced in London,
during the year 1903, and were thus alluded to by one of the writers at
the time:
“Ever since Humboldt first called attention to the ‘Cosmographiæ
Introductio’ no lost maps have ever been sought for so diligently as
those of Waldseemüller. It is not too much to say that the honour of
being their lucky discoverer has long been considered as the highest
possible prize to be obtained amongst students in the field of ancient
cartography. But until the summer of 1901, although many copies of the
book are known in various editions, no specimen of either the globe or
map has ever been seen or heard of in modern times. Some historians
and geographers have even gone so far as to state definitely that they
were never issued at all, and the book published alone. Others have
held that they never got beyond their manuscript form, while some
have contended that they were actually issued with the book, but,
being separate, had become lost in the course of time. The writers
holding this last view have been brought to their belief by tracing the
supposed influence of the St. Dié cartography in later maps, and these
authorities have been proved to be right by Prof. Fischer’s discovery.
The expectation that the missing map would be found to bear the name
of AMERICA on the newly discovered Western Lands has also been duly
realized.”
REFERENCES.--“Le nom d’Amérique et les grandes mappemondes
... de 1507 et 1516,” in “Annales de Géographie,” 15 Janvier
1904, pp. 29–36; “History of North America,” by Alfred Brittin,
Philadelphia, 1903, at p. 293, Vol. I of which is a fine
reproduction of a sheet from Waldseemüller’s “Cosmographiæ
Introductio” published in May 1507, showing the passage that
first suggested calling the new world by the name of America;
“Martinus Hylacomylus Waltzemüller, ses ouvrages et ses
collaborateurs, par un géographe bibliophile” (M. d’Avezac),
Paris, 1867; “Geographical Journal,” Vol. XIX. pp. 201–209,
389; Humboldt, “Examen Critique,” Paris, 1836, Vol. I. p. 22;
also Vol. IV and Vol. V _passim_; “Amerigo Vespucci,” Vol. II.
pp. 129–179 of Justin Winsor’s “Narrative and Critical History
of America,” Boston, 1889. See also the geography and maps of
Loritus (Henricus), _Glareanus_, in the “Geographical Journal”
for June 1905; “Le Journal des Savants” for December 1830; April
and May 1831; August 1840; October and December 1843; July 1847;
Houzeau et Lancaster, “Bibl. Gén.,” Vol. I. part i. pp. 420–424,
684–688, and part. ii. p. 1390; also Vol. II. p. 231.
=Puteanus=, GUILIELMUS--Dupuis, and not Dupuy--French physician of the
sixteenth century, professor at the University of Grenoble, is the
author of “De Medicamentorum,” Lyons, 1552, which was reproduced with
a treatise of Cousinot under the title “De Occultis Pharmacorum” two
years later. To Puteanus, Gilbert alludes (_De Magnete_, Book I. chap.
i. and Book II. chap. iii.) saying that he discusses the loadstone
briefly and crudely and deduces its power, not from a property of its
whole substance unknown to any one and incapable of demonstration
(as Galen held and, after him, nearly all physicians), but from “its
substantial form as from a prime motor and self-motor, and as from its
own most potent nature and its natural temperament, as the instrument
which the efficient form of its substance, or the second cause, which
is without a medium, employs in its operations. So the loadstone
attracts iron not without a physical cause, and for the sake of some
good.” But nothing like this, adds Gilbert, is done in other bodies by
any substantial form unless it be the primary one, and this Puteanus
does not recognize.
REFERENCES.--“Biographie Générale,” Vol. XV. p. 367; Larousse,
“Dict. Universel,” Vol. VI. p. 1420.