markings, and despite the exalted character and remarkable work of the
distinguished Italian in other lines of astronomic research, it was
feared that, in this instance, Schiaparelli had been the victim of an
hallucination. It is true that from the time of Huyghens, in 1659, a
few astronomers, such as Secchi, Schroeter, Kaiser, and Dawes, have
detected and drawn a few faint lines which seemed to be identical with
the _canali_ of Schiaparelli. It was not until 1886, however, that
Perrotin and Thollon with a twenty-nine inch refractor of the Nice
Observatory, first began to confirm the discoveries of Schiaparelli,
and since that time observers in various parts of the world have
detected and drawn these remarkable lines. The cumulative testimony of
these men as to the veritable existence of these markings cannot be set
aside.
It seems strange that nine years should elapse before an astronomer
with an interest in the subject, coupled with an acute vision and the
patience to observe assiduously, should arise to confirm the existence
of these markings, but in another chapter I have called attention to
the little interest astronomers have manifested in planetary markings
of any kind. It has been shown elsewhere that acute vision, with a
clear and, above all, a steady atmosphere, are the chief essentials
in making out the markings. It is curious to note the attitude of
some astronomers, who, having seen the canals and even drawn them,
denied their veritability. Their explanations cover "illusions due to
the property of light itself, the inability of the eye to maintain
its mechanism of accommodation, the behavior of air waves, temporary
alteration of the focus of the eye, undetected astigmatism," etc.,
etc. But, to return to the astronomers who have drawn them. On the
unfavorable opposition of 1888, Schiaparelli declares that "the
_canali_ had all the distinctness of an engraving on steel, with the
magical beauty of a colored engraving." He furthermore says: "As far as
we have been able to observe them hitherto, they are certainly fixed
configurations upon the planet, the Nilosyrtis has been seen in that
place for nearly one hundred years and some of the others for at least
thirty years."
In this connection it is interesting to quote from Schiaparelli who,
until many years after he discovered the canals of Mars, had no doubt
of their natural origin. As late as 1893, he still considered them
natural. In speaking of the canals, he says: "It is not necessary
to suppose here the work of intelligent beings; and in spite of the
almost geometric appearance of their whole system, for the present
we incline to believe that they are product of the evolution of a
planet, much as on the Earth is the English Channel, or the Channel
of Mozambique." This extract may be found in a memoir in "Natura ed
Arte," 1893, page 22. On page 24 of the same memoir Schiaparelli
illustrates the elasticity of his mind and a thoroughly unprejudiced
attitude by saying: "Their singular aspect, and the fact that they
are drawn with absolute geometric precision, as if they were the
product of rule and compass, have induced some people to see in them
the work of intelligent beings, inhabitants of the planet. _I should
be very careful not to combat this supposition, which involves no
impossibility._" (The italics are ours.) His comparison of the Martian
lines with the English Channel and the Channel of Mozambique, if he
means any resemblance in form and not in the manner of formation, is
most unfortunate, for on the whole face of the Earth he could not
have mentioned surface features more totally unlike any feature of the
Martian surface, as drawn by him, than these two channels: the English
Channel, 100 miles wide at its mouth and 200 miles long, tapering to
the Straits of Dover; the Mozambique Channel, hour-glass shaped, 1,100
miles long, and, at its narrowest part, 260 miles wide, and at either
end nearly 700 miles wide. Had he suggested the Red Sea, 1,200 miles
long, or the Straits of Malacca, 350 miles long, a nearer resemblance
to the canals of Mars might have been seen, though even here it would
be impossible to find their counterparts in Mars. These channels are
merging with the ocean, are nearly half the width of their length, and
enlarge at both ends, while the _canali_ of Mars run for hundreds of
miles as straight as ruled lines. How slight the resemblance is may be
appreciated by comparing the following figure of the Earth (Fig. 1),
upon which the Red Sea, the English and the Mozambique Channels and the
Straits of Malacca are indicated.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.]
In 1897 Schiaparelli becomes still more convinced of their
artificiality. In his Memoir XXV, in the Reale Academia del Lincei,
in speaking of the canals, he says: "This whole arrangement presents
an indescribable simplicity and symmetry which cannot possibly be the
work of chance." In a letter to Mr. Lowell, dated December 4, 1904, he
writes: "Your theory of vegetation becomes more and more probable." Mr.
A. Stanley Williams, in the "Observatory" for June, 1899, in a paper
entitled "Notes on Mars," described the appearance of certain canals,
regions, etc., in great detail. He notices that at the crossing of the
canals a little dark spot occurs, a feature, he says, which was first
elucidated by Professor Lowell in 1894. Mr. Williams also noticed the
black streak bordering the northern snow cap, which Mr. Lowell in his
book on Mars has interpreted as a body of water resulting from the
melting snow.
In the Quarterly Journal of the Astronomical Society of Wales, the Rev.
Theo. E. R. Phillips publishes an excellent drawing of Mars in color.
In this drawing he shows a large number of regions, a number of canals,
and other features which, he says, "came out with the clearness and
sharpness of an engraving, and bore no resemblance to the 'diffused
streaks' or amorphous smudges one sees for the canals in imperfect
seeing." In this drawing the polar snow caps show with remarkable
vividness.
Professor W. H. Pickering, in a continuous record of observations on
Mars, published in the "Annals of the Lowell Observatory," records
under August 20: "The dark north canals are also noticeable, and, had
they looked as they now do, could not possibly have been missed on the
16th."
Dr. Phil. Fauth has, with a seven inch objective, drawn and published
sixty-three drawings of Mars in which a great many canals are shown, a
list of which he presents in his memoir on the subject.
The lamented Perrotin, for some time Director of the Nice Observatory,
in company with M. Janssen, at Meudon, observed Mars through the great
equatorial (32-2/3 inch), and published the results in the "Comptes
Rendues" (Vol. CXXIV, No. 7). He describes the several zones, the
northern equatorial zone "being more particularly the zone of the
extraordinary canals, the discovery of which we owe to Schiaparelli,
and to which we ourselves, by our publication, in 1886, called the
attention of the astronomical world."
The London "Nature," March 17, 1904, in noting the death of M. Henry
Perrotin, speaks of him as one of the ablest advocates of astronomical
science. He devoted much time to Mars. "Aware that he was working
at the extreme limit of visibility, and knowing the tendency for
self-deception to creep in and impair the value of such delicate
observations, he sought opportunities of making similar measures and
records with different instruments, and under varied conditions, in
order to remove, so far as possible, the evils of bias and partiality
from the results of his researches."
Dr. Terby of Louvain, in a memoir entitled "Physical Observations
of Mars," a translation of which appeared in the "Astronomical and
Astrophysical Journal," No. 106, identifies many of Schiaparelli's
_canali_ and other details depicted in Schiaparelli's map of Mars. In
conclusion Dr. Terby says: "After what we have seen we dare affirm
that henceforth the progress of areography will be in the hands of
those alone who, freeing themselves from the shackles of doubt, will
resolutely engage in the way traced by the celebrated astronomer of
Milan. A new era has begun in the study of Mars by the discovery of
canals and their doubling, and by the micrometric determination of one
hundred and fourteen fundamental points on the map, an era succeeding
to that which was inaugurated a half century ago by the construction
of the first two hemispheres and by the approximate fixing of fourteen
points by Mäedler." Dr. Terby further says: "But these results have
an incontestable value in the presence of the incredulity with which
certain astronomers still consider the beautiful discoveries of Milan.
Who would believe it? In spite of the beautiful drawings of M. Perrotin
one reads still that the discoveries of M. Schiaparelli have not been
confirmed by the largest instruments."
In "Astronomy and Astrophysics," No. 108, is published a series
of contributions on Mars by Professors Edward C. Holden, William
H. Pickering, C. A. Young, Lewis Swift, George C. Comstock, E. E.
Barnard, and H. C. Wilson. All of these men are astronomers and all are
connected as directors or observers with various observatories in the
United States. Many sent sketches, most of them saw the canals, all saw
the polar snow caps and darker regions. To say that these astronomers
were sketching details which existed only in their imagination is
simply preposterous.
Professor Herbert A. Howe, Director of the Chamberlin Observatory,
at Denver, in his "Elements of Descriptive Astronomy" says: "If we
have simply to answer the question, 'Would a man, as constituted at
present, if transported to Mars find it possible to exist there?' The
most probable answer is, 'No.' While one must not be dogmatic, it may
be said, with some assurance, that the man would gasp a few times and
die. However, it is conceivable that manlike beings might find a home
there." Mr. Howe could have said without being dogmatic that a man thus
transported would die of what is known as Caisson disease.
Among those who assert that the canals are artificial we have Professor
Percival Lowell as pre-eminent. He has erected an observatory in the
region of one of the clearest atmospheres in the world, has furnished
it with the finest telescope that Clark ever made, and for the chief
purpose of studying the surface features of Mars. In his interesting
book on Mars he has presented the results of his observations in so
lucid and convincing a manner that a reviewer of the English edition
of the work, in an English astronomical journal, is led to write:
"We may say at once that we feel bound to accept these observations
as sufficient evidence of the real existence of the markings without
expressing an opinion as to what they may be." The reviewer ends by
saying: "Indeed, there is a subtle deftness in the way Mr. Lowell
deals with his observations which gives the impression that he has
been there and seen it all, and it is really hard to say why we cannot
accept his conclusions. It is probable, because we are shy to receive
new facts at a first statement. In time, no doubt, we shall be willing
to accept his deductions (or facts) as to the markings. We were about
to advance objections, but they seem poor, and really it is a case
where each person must read and form his own ideas--but by all means
read."
We have already presented a summary of his observations. We may add
here, however, an extract from his book on the solar system. In this
Mr. Lowell says of Mars: "What we see hints of the existence of beings
who are in advance of, not behind us in the journey of life," and
again: "Life on Mars must take on a very different guise from what
it wears on the Earth. It is certain there can be no man there--that
is as certain as anything can be. But this does not preclude a local
intelligence equal to, and perhaps easily superior to, our own. We
seem to have evidence that something of the sort does exist there at
the present moment and has made imprint of its existence far exceeding
anything we have left on Mother Earth."
George W. Morehouse, in his "Wilderness of Worlds," says: "Taken all
together we must regard Mars as probably an inhabited world and very
similar to the Earth."
Mr. Hector Macpherson, Jr., member of the Astronomical Society of
France, in his interesting book "Astronomers of To-day," says, in
regard to Mr. Lowell's book on Mars: "He does not ask us to believe
anything fantastical or extravagant. His hypothesis has been framed to
account for all the various Martian features. At present we can only
say that it is the most comprehensive and probable theory yet advanced
to explain the phenomena of the red planet."
Professor Todd, Director of the Astronomical Observatory at Amherst
College, in his book on Stars and Telescopes, in referring to drawings
of a region in the southern portion of Mars, known as the Solis Lacus,
and a complicated drawing of another region, says: "Whether one views
this marvellous and intricate system as a whole, or in some portion of
high detail, it is difficult to escape the conviction that the _canali_
have, at least in part, been designed and executed with a definite end
in view."
There are many who do not deny the existence of some forms of life on
the planet, but are not prepared to admit the existence of intelligent
creatures. Sir Robert Ball expresses himself as follows: "That there
may be types of life of some kind on Mars is, I should think, quite
likely."
The number of astronomers above quoted, who have seen and drawn the
canals, might be augmented, but a sufficient number have been cited to
show that the evidence of the presence of these markings does not rest
with a few, furthermore, some of these observers can only interpret
the markings as the result of intelligent action. It may be urged that
among those quoted are some whose opinion may not have great weight
since they are not professional astronomers. One must insist that the
study of planetary markings as well as the interpretation of their
meanings comes not only within the province of planetary astronomers,
but that any broad-minded man, with an acute eye and familiar with the
sciences connected with the surface features of the Earth, is quite
competent to make observations of his own and to judge of the merits of
the question.
VI
THE STUDY OF PLANETARY MARKINGS
_Their singular aspect, and the fact that they are drawn
with absolute geometric precision as if they were the
product of rule and compass, have induced some people to
see in them the work of intelligent beings, inhabitants
of the planet. I should be careful not to combat this
supposition which involves no impossibility._
SCHIAPARELLI.
It is a question whether, after all, the study of planetary markings
comes within the province of astronomers. Not more, perhaps, than the
study of physical geography and subjects connected with the surface
features of the Earth, comes under the cognizance of those whose
profession it is to determine the oscillation of the pole, the Earth's
movements due to the Moon, etc. Indeed, these lines of research are
strictly astronomical. With the study of the surface markings of
the Moon, or Mars, features of an entirely different kind are to be
interpreted, and quite a different equipment is necessary. It is no
wonder, then, that astronomers, the most conservative of all classes
of investigators, should view with suspicion the results of the work of
Schiaparelli, Lowell and others. Immersed in mathematics, trusting in
nothing that cannot be measured and reckoned, as a class holding their
imagination in abeyance, is it any surprise that they should present an
attitude of indifference and even hostility to the work of those who,
differently equipped mentally, have attempted a definition and solution
of the riddle of the Martian markings? To appreciate how foreign to the
studies of an astronomer is the interpretation of the canals of Mars,
one has simply to scan the index of any astronomical publication, or
the titles of papers in the transactions of astronomical societies.
For example, take volumes XX and XXI of the "Astronomical Journal" and
tabulate the papers, memoirs, etc., therein published, numbering two
hundred and thirty-eight, and we find of these, seventy-four on the
stars; sixty-two on the comets; nineteen on planets and satellites,
mostly mathematical; eighteen on the Sun; eighteen on the asteroids;
fifteen on Eros; ten on polar motion and latitude; four on Nova Persei;
and seventeen miscellaneous, consisting of logarithms, instruments,
Gegenschein, etc.; and only one on Mars, and this on the polar snow
caps!
As to the question whether it is more important to add another to the
thousands of variable stars and binaries, and hundreds of asteroids,
already determined, or to consider whether we are alone in the universe
and, if so, the significance of it, I think with the intelligent public
there can be no doubt.
A fair sample of the subjects which occupy the astronomers' mind, and
which are so remote from the study of planetary markings, and have so
little interest for the public, may be gathered from the following list
selected at random from an astronomical publication. Notes on variable
stars; Maxima and minima of long period variables; Micrometrical
measurements of the companion of Procyon; The problem of three bodies;
Ephemeris of Comet a, 1901; On the eruptive energy of the stars;
Eclipse cycles; Determinations of the aberration-constant from right
ascension; Theory of a resisting medium upon bodies moving in parabolic
orbits; Weights and systematic corrections of meridian observation in
right ascension and declination; and other titles equally profound.
Many of these memoirs consist of hundreds of pages of figures, and, as
a friend of mine observed, not a column footed up! Take for example
a title like the following: "Method of developing the perturbative
functions, also precepts for executing their development." This memoir
is accompanied by pages of algebraic formulæ which the layman turns
over in despair, the only illumination consisting of a few words in
English which render the gloom still more apparent,--such words as
"hence," "or," "we therefore have," "if we put." Of what we "have,"
and why we "put," we are left in profound ignorance. Now I venture to
believe that the great world of humanity takes but little interest
in such pages, or in the kinds of titles above given, though fully
realizing that they mean something and represent important steps
in astronomic research. It would add greatly to the value of these
contributions if a brief summary in plain English could be given at the
end of these papers, but it is the rarest event that these collectors
of data ever make any generalizations, or form any deductions.
My faith in the appalling character of algebraic formulæ[5] received
a rude shock when I learned of an experience of Louise Michel, the
anarchist, who was transported for life to New Caledonia (afterwards
pardoned). On arriving at the savage island, true to her humanitarian
instincts, "she immediately established a school for native children,
who by a curious freak of their minds, she noted with rejoicing, took
naturally to algebra before they learned arithmetic!"
Hovenden quotes Huxley as saying that mathematics "is that study
that knows nothing of observation, nothing of induction, nothing of
experiment, nothing of causation." He also quotes the words of Clerk
Maxwell, who said, in regard to mathematicians, that it was "doubtful
whether the ideas as expressed in symbols had ever quite found their
way out of the equations into their minds." They never seem to appeal
to the doctrine of probabilities nor do they in any way permit
imagination to act as a stimulus to suggestive thought.
Least of all would a layman ridicule or question the painstaking labor
involved in astronomic work, though he cannot see a glimmer of light or
intelligence in the enigmatical pages. A certain class of astronomers
might take a lesson from an intelligent public in ceasing to scoff
and ridicule what they are unable to see themselves in the Martian
markings. The chief work of these men indicates the cold precise
measuring of points of light in the heavens, the determination of
orbits, elements and ephemeris of heavenly bodies, the determination
of solar parallax, etc., most of the subjects strictly mathematical,
a question of careful measurements for which the necessary instruments
are at hand, or simply sweeping the heavens for a new variable, binary
or asteroid. Parallaxes and orbits are matters of measurement to be
reckoned by the figures of anybody else. It is obvious from all this
that little or no interest is manifested by astronomers in planetary
markings, least of all in those of Mars. The exasperating feature of
the matter is that they persistently repudiate the observation of
others equally well equipped, and endowed with the same enthusiasm and
devotion to their work.
The way in which the gatherers of the raw material arrogate to
themselves the science of astronomy, relegating the thinkers and
generalizers to the limbo of speculation, is as if the book-keepers of
a corporation should assume themselves to be the master-minds of the
concern and the banker, or financier, at the head of it, a dreamer not
worth regarding.
An illustration of the conservativeness of astronomers in regard to
planetary markings is shown in their cautious attitude concerning the
polar snow caps of Mars. Here are white polar caps on Mars, precisely
where they ought to be if they _are_ snow, they wax and wane at
the time they should and at no other time, a dark band appears at
their borders as the caps in turn diminish in size, which has been
interpreted as water due to the melting snow, and no other substance
known could possibly reproduce these varying conditions. Professor C.
A. Young, in describing these white areas, says: "The one which happens
to be turned toward the Sun continually diminishes in size, while
the other increases, the process being reversed with the seasons of
the planet." After these admissions Professor Young cautiously says:
"These are believed to be ice caps." Sir John Herschel says: "The
variety in the spots may arise from the planet not being destitute of
atmosphere and clouds, and what adds greatly to the probability of
this is the appearance of brilliant white spots at the poles--one of
which appears in our figure--which have been conjectured with some
probability to be snow, as they disappear when they have been long
exposed to the Sun, and are greatest when just emerging from the long
night of the polar winter." Had Michael Faraday been an astronomer,
how long would it have taken him to pronounce these white polar caps
snow and ice? De la Rive, in his memoir of Faraday, in speaking of his
marvellous accomplishments, says: "One may easily understand what must
be produced under such circumstances by a life thus wholly consecrated
to science, when to a strong and vigorous intellect is joined a most
brilliant imagination." Tyndall, in his discourse "On the Scientific
use of the Imagination," says: "Bounded and conditioned by co-operant
reason, imagination becomes the mightiest instrument of the physical
discoverer. Newton's passage from a falling apple to a falling Moon was
a leap of the imagination."