NEWTON AND THE LAW OF GRAVITATION
We left Newton at the age of twenty-three
on the verge of discovering the mechanism of the solar
system, deterred therefrom only by an error in the
then imagined size of the earth. He had proved
from Kepler’s laws that a centripetal force
directed to the sun, and varying as the inverse square
of the distance from that body, would account for the
observed planetary motions, and that a similar force
directed to the earth would account for the lunar
motion; and it had struck him that this force might
be the very same as the familiar force of gravitation
which gave to bodies their weight: but in attempting
a numerical verification of this idea in the case
of the moon he was led by the then received notion
that sixty miles made a degree on the earth’s
surface into an erroneous estimate of the size of
the moon’s orbit. Being thus baffled in
obtaining such verification, he laid the matter aside
for a time.
The anecdote of the apple we learn
from Voltaire, who had it from Newton’s favourite
niece, who with her husband lived and kept house for
him all his later life. It is very like one of
those anecdotes which are easily invented and believed
in, and very often turn out on scrutiny to have no
foundation. Fortunately this anecdote is well
authenticated, and moreover is intrinsically probable;
I say fortunately, because it is always painful to
have to give up these child-learnt anecdotes, like
Alfred and the cakes and so on. This anecdote
of the apple we need not resign. The tree was
blown down in 1820 and part of its wood is preserved.
I have mentioned Voltaire in connection
with Newton’s philosophy. This acute critic
at a later stage did a good deal to popularise it
throughout Europe and to overturn that of his own countryman
Descartes. Cambridge rapidly became Newtonian,
but Oxford remained Cartesian for fifty years or more.
It is curious what little hold science and mathematics
have ever secured in the older and more ecclesiastical
University. The pride of possessing Newton has
however no doubt been the main stimulus to the special
pursuits of Cambridge.
He now began to turn his attention
to optics, and, as was usual with him, his whole mind
became absorbed in this subject as if nothing else
had ever occupied him. His cash-book for this
time has been discovered, and the entries show that
he is buying prisms and lenses and polishing powder
at the beginning of 1667. He was anxious to improve
telescopes by making more perfect lenses than had
ever been used before. Accordingly he calculated
out their proper curves, just as Descartes had also
done, and then proceeded to grind them as near as
he could to those figures. But the images did
not please him; they were always blurred and rather
indistinct.
At length, it struck him that perhaps
it was not the lenses but the light which was at fault.
Perhaps light was so composed that it could
not be focused accurately to a sharp and definite point.
Perhaps the law of refraction was not quite accurate,
but only an approximation. So he bought a prism
to try the law. He let in sunlight through a small
round hole in a window shutter, inserted the prism
in the light, and received the deflected beam on a
white screen; turning the prism about till it was
deviated as little as possible. The patch on the
screen was not a round disk, as it would have been
without the prism, but was an elongated oval and was
coloured at its extremities. Evidently refraction
was not a simple geometrical deflection of a ray, there
was a spreading out as well.
Why did the image thus spread out?
If it were due to irregularities in the glass a second
prism should rather increase them, but a second prism
when held in appropriate position was able to neutralise
the dispersion and to reproduce the simple round white
spot without deviation. Evidently the spreading
out of the beam was connected in some definite way
with its refraction. Could it be that the light
particles after passing through the prism travelled
in variously curved lines, as spinning racquet balls
do? To examine this he measured the length of
the oval patch when the screen was at different distances
from the prism, and found that the two things were
directly proportional to each other. Doubling
the distance of the screen doubled the length of the
patch. Hence the rays travelled in straight lines
from the prism, and the spreading out was due to something
that occurred within its substance. Could it
be that white light was compound, was a mixture of
several constituents, and that its different constituents
were differently bent? No sooner thought than
tried. Pierce the screen to let one of the constituents
through and interpose a second prism in its path.
If the spreading out depended on the prism only it
should spread out just as much as before, but if it
depended on the complex character of white light,
this isolated simple constituent should be able to
spread out no more. It did not spread out any
more: a prism had no more dispersive power over
it; it was deflected by the appropriate amount, but
it was not analysed into constituents. It differed
from sunlight in being simple. With many ingenious
and beautifully simple experiments, which are quoted
in full in several books on optics, he clinched the
argument and established his discovery. White
light was not simple but compound. It could be
sorted out by a prism into an infinite number of constituent
parts which were differently refracted, and the most
striking of which Newton named violet, indigo, blue,
green, yellow, orange, and red.
At once the true nature of colour
became manifest. Colour resided not in the coloured
object as had till now been thought, but in the light
which illuminated it. Red glass for instance
adds nothing to sunlight. The light does not
get dyed red by passing through the glass; all that
the red glass does is to stop and absorb a large part
of the sunlight; it is opaque to the larger portion,
but it is transparent to that particular portion which
affects our eyes with the sensation of red. The
prism acts like a sieve sorting out the different
kinds of light. Coloured media act like filters,
stopping certain kinds but allowing the rest to go
through. Leonardo’s and all the ancient
doctrines of colour had been singularly wrong; colour
is not in the object but in the light.
Goethe, in his Farbenlehre,
endeavoured to controvert Newton, and to reinstate
something more like the old views; but his failure
was complete.
Refraction analysed out the various
constituents of white light and displayed them in
the form of a series of overlapping images of the
aperture, each of a different colour; this series of
images we call a spectrum, and the operation we now
call spectrum analysis. The reason of the defect
of lenses was now plain: it was not so much a
defect of the lens as a defect of light. A lens
acts by refraction and brings rays to a focus.
If light be simple it acts well, but if ordinary white
light fall upon a lens, its different constituents
have different foci; every bright object is fringed
with colour, and nothing like a clear image can be
obtained.
A parallel beam passing through a
lens becomes conical; but instead of a single cone
it is a sheaf or nest of cones, all having the edge
of the lens as base, but each having a different vertex.
The violet cone is innermost, near the lens, the red
cone outermost, while the others lie between.
Beyond the crossing point or focus the order of cones
is reversed, as the above figure shows. Only
the two marginal rays of the beam are depicted.
If a screen be held anywhere nearer
the lens than the place marked 1 there will be a whitish
centre to the patch of light and a red and orange
fringe or border. Held anywhere beyond the region
2, the border of the patch will be blue and violet.
Held about 3 the colour will be less marked than elsewhere,
but nowhere can it be got rid of. Each point
of an object will be represented in the image not by
a point but by a coloured patch: a fact which
amply explains the observed blurring and indistinctness.
Newton measured and calculated the
distance between the violet and red foci VR
in the diagram and showed that it was 1/50th
the diameter of the lens. To overcome this difficulty
(called chromatic aberration) telescope glasses were
made small and of very long focus: some of them
so long that they had no tube, all of them egregiously
cumbrous. Yet it was with such instruments that
all the early discoveries were made. With such
an instrument, for instance, Huyghens discovered the
real shape of Saturn’s ring.
The defects of refractors seemed
irremediable, being founded in the nature of light
itself. So he gave up his “glass works”;
and proceeded to think of reflexion from metal
specula. A concave mirror forms an image
just as a lens does, but since it does so without refraction
or transmission through any substance, there is no
accompanying dispersion or chromatic aberration.
The first reflecting telescope he
made was 1 in. diameter and 6 in. long, and magnified
forty times. It acted as well as a three or four
feet refractor of that day, and showed Jupiter’s
moons. So he made a larger one, now in the library
of the Royal Society, London, with an inscription:
“The first reflecting telescope,
invented by Sir Isaac Newton, and made with his own
hands.”
This has been the parent of most of
the gigantic telescopes of the present day. Fifty
years elapsed before it was much improved on, and
then, first by Hadley and afterwards by Herschel and
others, large and good reflectors were constructed.
The largest telescope ever made, that
of Lord Rosse, is a Newtonian reflector, fifty feet
long, six feet diameter, with a mirror weighing four
tons. The sextant, as used by navigators, was
also invented by Newton.
The year after the plague, in 1667,
Newton returned to Trinity College, and there continued
his experiments on optics. It is specially to
be noted that at this time, at the age of twenty-four,
Newton had laid the foundations of all his greatest
discoveries:
The Theory of Fluxions; or, the Differential
Calculus.
The Law of Gravitation; or, the complete theory of
astronomy.
The compound nature of white light; or, the beginning
of Spectrum
Analysis.
His later life was to be occupied
in working these incipient discoveries out. But
the most remarkable thing is that no one knew about
any one of them. However, he was known as an
accomplished young mathematician, and was made a fellow
of his college. You remember that he had a friend
there in the person of Dr. Isaac Barrow, first Lucasian
Professor of Mathematics in the University. It
happened, about 1669, that a mathematical discovery
of some interest was being much discussed, and Dr.
Barrow happened to mention it to Newton, who said yes,
he had worked out that and a few other similar things
some time ago. He accordingly went and fetched
some papers to Dr. Barrow, who forwarded them to other
distinguished mathematicians, and it thus appeared
that Newton had discovered theorems much more general
than this special case that was exciting so much interest.
Dr. Barrow, being anxious to devote his time more
particularly to theology, resigned his chair the same
year in favour of Newton, who was accordingly elected
to the Lucasian Professorship, which he held for thirty
years. This chair is now the most famous in the
University, and it is commonly referred to as the
chair of Newton.
Still, however, his method of fluxions
was unknown, and still he did not publish it.
He lectured first on optics, giving an account of his
experiments. His lectures were afterwards published
both in Latin and English, and are highly valued to
this day.
The fame of his mathematical genius
came to the ears of the Royal Society, and a motion
was made to get him elected a fellow of that body.
The Royal Society, the oldest and most famous of all
scientific societies with a continuous existence,
took its origin in some private meetings, got up in
London by the Hon. Robert Boyle and a few scientific
friends, during all the trouble of the Commonwealth.
After the restoration, Charles II.
in 1662 incorporated it under Royal Charter; among
the original members being Boyle, Hooke, Christopher
Wren, and other less famous names. Boyle was a
great experimenter, a worthy follower of Dr. Gilbert.
Hooke began as his assistant, but being of a most
extraordinary ingenuity he rapidly rose so as to exceed
his master in importance. Fate has been a little
unkind to Hooke in placing him so near to Newton;
had he lived in an ordinary age he would undoubtedly
have shone as a star of the first magnitude. With
great ingenuity, remarkable scientific insight, and
consummate experimental skill, he stands in many respects
almost on a level with Galileo. But it is difficult
to see stars even of the first magnitude when the sun
is up, and thus it happens that the name and fame
of this brilliant man are almost lost in the blaze
of Newton. Of Christopher Wren I need not say
much. He is well known as an architect, but he
was a most accomplished all-round man, and had a considerable
taste and faculty for science.
These then were the luminaries of
the Royal Society at the time we are speaking of,
and to them Newton’s first scientific publication
was submitted. He communicated to them an account
of his reflecting telescope, and presented them with
the instrument.
Their reception of it surprised him;
they were greatly delighted with it, and wrote specially
thanking him for the communication, and assuring him
that all right should be done him in the matter of
the invention. The Bishop of Salisbury (Bishop
Burnet) proposed him for election as a fellow, and
elected he was.
In reply, he expressed his surprise
at the value they set on the telescope, and offered,
if they cared for it, to send them an account of a
discovery which he doubts not will prove much more
grateful than the communication of that instrument,
“being in my judgment the oddest, if not the
most considerable detection that has recently been
made into the operations of Nature.”
So he tells them about his optical
researches and his discovery of the nature of white
light, writing them a series of papers which were long
afterwards incorporated and published as his Optics.
A magnificent work, which of itself suffices to place
its author in the first rank of the world’s
men of science.
The nature of white light, the true
doctrine of colour, and the differential calculus!
besides a good number of minor results binomial
theorem, reflecting telescope, sextant, and the like;
one would think it enough for one man’s life-work,
but the masterpiece remains still to be mentioned.
It is as when one is considering Shakspeare: King
Lear, Macbeth, Othello, surely
a sufficient achievement, but the masterpiece
remains.
Comparisons in different departments
are but little help perhaps, nevertheless it seems
to me that in his own department, and considered simply
as a man of science, Newton towers head and shoulders
over, not only his contemporaries that
is a small matter but over every other
scientific man who has ever lived, in a way that we
can find no parallel for in other departments.
Other nations admit his scientific pre-eminence with
as much alacrity as we do.
Well, we have arrived at the year
1672 and his election to the Royal Society. During
the first year of his membership there was read at
one of the meetings a paper giving an account of a
very careful determination of the length of a degree
(i.e. of the size of the earth), which had
been made by Picard near Paris. The length of
the degree turned out to be not sixty miles, but nearly
seventy miles. How soon Newton heard of this
we do not learn probably not for some years, Cambridge
was not so near London then as it is now, but ultimately
it was brought to his notice. Armed with this
new datum, his old speculation concerning gravity
occurred to him. He had worked out the mechanics
of the solar system on a certain hypothesis, but it
had remained a hypothesis somewhat out of harmony
with apparent fact. What if it should turn out
to be true after all!
He took out his old papers and began
again the calculation. If gravity were the force
keeping the moon in its orbit, it would fall toward
the earth sixteen feet every minute. How far
did it fall? The newly known size of the earth
would modify the figures: with intense excitement
he runs through the working, his mind leaps before
his hand, and as he perceives the answer to be coming
out right, all the infinite meaning and scope of his
mighty discovery flashes upon him, and he can no longer
see the paper. He throws down the pen; and the
secret of the universe is, to one man, known.
But of course it had to be worked
out. The meaning might flash upon him, but its
full detail required years of elaboration; and deeper
and deeper consequences revealed themselves to him
as he proceeded.
For two years he devoted himself solely
to this one object. During those years he lived
but to calculate and think, and the most ludicrous
stories are told concerning his entire absorption and
inattention to ordinary affairs of life. Thus,
for instance, when getting up in a morning he would
sit on the side of the bed half-dressed, and remain
like that till dinner time. Often he would stay
at home for days together, eating what was taken to
him, but without apparently noticing what he was doing.
One day an intimate friend, Dr. Stukely,
called on him and found on the table a cover laid
for his solitary dinner. After waiting a long
time, Dr. Stukely removed the cover and ate the chicken
underneath it, replacing and covering up the bones
again. At length Newton appeared, and after greeting
his friend, sat down to dinner, but on lifting the
cover he said in surprise, “Dear me, I thought
I had not dined, but I see I have.”
It was by this continuous application
that the Principia was accomplished. Probably
nothing of the first magnitude can be accomplished
without something of the same absorbed unconsciousness
and freedom from interruption. But though desirable
and essential for the work, it was a severe
tax upon the powers of the man. There is,
in fact, no doubt that Newton’s brain suffered
temporary aberration after this effort for a short
time. The attack was slight, and it has been
denied; but there are letters extant which are inexplicable
otherwise, and moreover after a year or two he writes
to his friends apologizing for strange and disjointed
epistles, which he believed he had written without
understanding clearly what he wrote. The derangement
was, however, both slight and temporary: and
it is only instructive to us as showing at what cost
such a work as the Principia must be produced,
even by so mighty a mind as that of Newton.
The first part of the work having
been done, any ordinary mortal would have proceeded
to publish it; but the fact is that after he had sent
to the Royal Society his papers on optics, there had
arisen controversies and objections; most of them
rather paltry, to which he felt compelled to find
answers. Many men would have enjoyed this part
of the work, and taken it as evidence of interest
and success. But to Newton’s shy and retiring
disposition these discussions were merely painful.
He writes, indeed, his answers with great patience
and ability, and ultimately converts the more reasonable
of his opponents, but he relieves his mind in the
following letter to the secretary of the Royal Society:
“I see I have made myself a slave to philosophy,
but if I get free of this present business I will
resolutely bid adieu to it eternally, except what
I do for my private satisfaction or leave to come out
after me; for I see a man must either resolve to put
out nothing new, or to become a slave to defend it.”
And again in a letter to Leibnitz: “I have
been so persecuted with discussions arising out of
my theory of light that I blamed my own imprudence
for parting with so substantial a blessing as my quiet
to run after a shadow.” This shows how much
he cared for contemporary fame.
So he locked up the first part of
the Principia in his desk, doubtless intending
it to be published after his death. But fortunately
this was not so to be.
In 1683, among the leading lights
of the Royal Society, the same sort of notions about
gravity and the solar system began independently to
be bruited. The theory of gravitation seemed
to be in the air, and Wren, Hooke, and Halley had
many a talk about it.
Hooke showed an experiment with a
pendulum, which he likened to a planet going round
the sun. The analogy is more superficial than
real. It does not obey Kepler’s laws; still
it was a striking experiment. They had guessed
at a law of inverse squares, and their difficulty was
to prove what curve a body subject to it would describe.
They knew it ought to be an ellipse if it was to serve
to explain the planetary motion, and Hooke said he
could prove that an ellipse it was; but he was nothing
of a mathematician, and the others scarcely believed
him. Undoubtedly he had shrewd inklings of the
truth, though his guesses were based on little else
than a most sagacious intuition. He surmised also
that gravity was the force concerned, and asserted
that the path of an ordinary projectile was an ellipse,
like the path of a planet which is quite
right. In fact the beginnings of the discovery
were beginning to dawn upon him in the well-known
way in which things do dawn upon ordinary men of genius:
and had Newton not lived we should doubtless, by the
labours of a long chain of distinguished men, beginning
with Hooke, Wren, and Halley, have been now in possession
of all the truths revealed by the Principia.
We should never have had them stated in the same form,
nor proved with the same marvellous lucidity and simplicity,
but the facts themselves we should by this time have
arrived at. Their developments and completions,
due to such men as Clairaut, Euler, D’Alembert,
Lagrange, Laplace, Airy, Leverrier, Adams, we should
of course not have had to the same extent; because
the lives and energies of these great men would have
been partially consumed in obtaining the main facts
themselves.
The youngest of the three questioners
at the time we are speaking of was Edmund Halley,
an able and remarkable man. He had been at Cambridge,
doubtless had heard Newton lecture, and had acquired
a great veneration for him.
In January, 1684, we find Wren offering
Hooke and Halley a prize, in the shape of a book worth
forty shillings, if they would either of them bring
him within two months a demonstration that the path
of a planet subject to an inverse square law would
be an ellipse. Not in two months, nor yet in
seven, was there any proof forthcoming. So at
last, in August, Halley went over to Cambridge to
speak to Newton about the difficult problem and secure
his aid. Arriving at his rooms he went straight
to the point. He said, “What path will a
body describe if it be attracted by a centre with
a force varying as the inverse square of the distance.”
To which Newton at once replied, “An ellipse.”
“How on earth do you know?” said Halley
in amazement. “Why, I have calculated it,”
and began hunting about for the paper. He actually
couldn’t find it just then, but sent it him
shortly by post, and with it much more in
fact, what appeared to be a complete treatise on motion
in general.
With his valuable burden Halley hastened
to the Royal Society and told them what he had discovered.
The Society at his representation wrote to Mr. Newton
asking leave that it might be printed. To this
he consented; but the Royal Society wisely appointed
Mr. Halley to see after him and jog his memory, in
case he forgot about it. However, he set to work
to polish it up and finish it, and added to it a great
number of later developments and embellishments, especially
the part concerning the lunar theory, which gave him
a deal of trouble and no wonder; for in
the way he has put it there never was a man yet living
who could have done the same thing. Mathematicians
regard the achievement now as men might stare at the
work of some demigod of a bygone age, wondering what
manner of man this was, able to wield such ponderous
implements with such apparent ease.
To Halley the world owes a great debt
of gratitude first, for discovering the
Principia; second, for seeing it through the
press; and third, for defraying the cost of its publication
out of his own scanty purse. For though he ultimately
suffered no pecuniary loss, rather the contrary, yet
there was considerable risk in bringing out a book
which not a dozen men living could at the time comprehend.
It is no small part of the merit of Halley that he
recognized the transcendent value of the yet unfinished
work, that he brought it to light, and assisted in
its becoming understood to the best of his ability.
Though Halley afterwards became Astronomer-Royal,
lived to the ripe old age of eighty-six, and made
many striking observations, yet he would be the first
to admit that nothing he ever did was at all comparable
in importance with his discovery of the Principia;
and he always used to regard his part in it with peculiar
pride and pleasure.
And how was the Principia received?
Considering the abstruse nature of its subject, it
was received with great interest and enthusiasm.
In less than twenty years the edition was sold out,
and copies fetched large sums. We hear of poor
students copying out the whole in manuscript in order
to possess a copy not by any means a bad
thing to do, however many copies one may possess.
The only useful way really to read a book like that
is to pore over every sentence: it is no book
to be skimmed.
While the Principia was preparing
for the press a curious incident of contact between
English history and the University occurred. It
seems that James II., in his policy of Catholicising
the country, ordered both Universities to elect certain
priests to degrees without the ordinary oaths.
Oxford had given way, and the Dean of Christ Church
was a creature of James’s choosing. Cambridge
rebelled, and sent eight of its members, among them
Mr. Newton, to plead their cause before the Court of
High Commission. Judge Jeffreys presided over
the Court, and threatened and bullied with his usual
insolence. The Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge was
deprived of office, the other deputies were silenced
and ordered away. From the precincts of this
court of justice Newton returned to Trinity College
to complete the Principia.
By this time Newton was only forty-five
years old, but his main work was done. His method
of fluxions was still unpublished; his optics
was published only imperfectly; a second edition of
the Principia, with additions and improvements,
had yet to appear; but fame had now come upon him,
and with fame worries of all kinds.
By some fatality, principally no doubt
because of the interest they excited, every discovery
he published was the signal for an outburst of criticism
and sometimes of attack. I shall not go into these
matters: they are now trivial enough, but it
is necessary to mention them, because to Newton they
evidently loomed large and terrible, and occasioned
him acute torment.
No sooner was the Principia
put than Hooke put in his claims for priority.
And indeed his claims were not altogether negligible;
for vague ideas of the same sort had been floating
in his comprehensive mind, and he doubtless felt indistinctly
conscious of a great deal more than he could really
state or prove.
By indiscreet friends these two great
men were set somewhat at loggerheads, and worse might
have happened had they not managed to come to close
quarters, and correspond privately in a quite friendly
manner, instead of acting through the mischievous
medium of third parties. In the next edition
Newton liberally recognizes the claims of both Hooke
and Wren. However, he takes warning betimes of
what he has to expect, and writes to Halley that he
will only publish the first two books, those containing
general theorems on motion. The third book concerning
the system of the world, i.e. the application
to the solar system he says “I now
design to suppress. Philosophy is such an impertinently
litigious lady that a man had as good be engaged in
law-suits as have to do with her. I found it
so formerly, and now I am no sooner come near her
again but she gives me warning. The two books
without the third will not so well bear the title
’Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy,’
and therefore I had altered it to this, ’On the
Free Motion of Two Bodies’; but on second thoughts
I retain the former title: ’twill help
the sale of the book which I ought not to
diminish now ’tis yours.”
However, fortunately, Halley was able
to prevail upon him to publish the third book also.
It is, indeed, the most interesting and popular of
the three, as it contains all the direct applications
to astronomy of the truths established in the other
two.
Some years later, when his method
of fluxions was published, another and a worse
controversy arose this time with Leibnitz,
who had also independently invented the differential
calculus. It was not so well recognized then
how frequently it happens that two men independently
and unknowingly work at the very same thing at the
same time. The history of science is now full
of such instances; but then the friends of each accused
the other of plagiarism.
I will not go into the controversy:
it is painful and useless. It only served to
embitter the later years of two great men, and it continued
long after Newton’s death long after
both their deaths. It can hardly be called ancient
history even now.
But fame brought other and less unpleasant
distractions than controversies. We are a curious,
practical, and rather stupid people, and our one idea
of honouring a man is to vote for him in some
way or other; so they sent Newton to Parliament.
He went, I believe, as a Whig, but it is not recorded
that he spoke. It is, in fact, recorded that he
was once expected to speak when on a Royal Commission
about some question of chronometers, but that he would
not. However, I dare say he made a good average
member.
Then a little later it was realized
that Newton was poor, that he still had to teach for
his livelihood, and that though the Crown had continued
his fellowship to him as Lucasian Professor without
the necessity of taking orders, yet it was rather
disgraceful that he should not be better off.
So an appeal was made to the Government on his behalf,
and Lord Halifax, who exerted himself strongly in
the matter, succeeding to office on the accession
of William III., was able to make him ultimately Master
of the Mint, with a salary of some L1,200 a year.
I believe he made rather a good Master, and turned
out excellent coins: certainly he devoted his
attention to his work there in a most exemplary manner.
But what a pitiful business it all
is! Here is a man sent by Heaven to do certain
things which no man else could do, and so long as he
is comparatively unknown he does them; but so soon
as he is found out, he is clapped into a routine office
with a big salary: and there is, comparatively
speaking, an end of him. It is not to be supposed
that he had lost his power, for he frequently solved
problems very quickly which had been given out by
great Continental mathematicians as a challenge to
the world.
We may ask why Newton allowed himself
to be thus bandied about instead of settling himself
down to the work in which he was so pre-eminently
great. Well, I expect your truly great man never
realizes how great he is, and seldom knows where his
real strength lies. Certainly Newton did not
know it. He several times talks of giving up philosophy
altogether; and though he never really does it, and
perhaps the feeling is one only born of some temporary
overwork, yet he does not sacrifice everything else
to it as he surely must had he been conscious of his
own greatness. No; self-consciousness was the
last thing that affected him. It is for a great
man’s contemporaries to discover him, to make
much of him, and to put him in surroundings where
he may flourish luxuriantly in his own heaven-intended
way.
However, it is difficult for us to
judge of these things. Perhaps if he had been
maintained at the national expense to do that for which
he was preternaturally fitted, he might have worn
himself out prematurely; whereas by giving him routine
work the scientific world got the benefit of his matured
wisdom and experience. It was no small matter
to the young Royal Society to be able to have him
as their President for twenty-four years. His
portrait has hung over the President’s chair
ever since, and there I suppose it will continue to
hang until the Royal Society becomes extinct.
The events of his later life I shall
pass over lightly. He lived a calm, benevolent
life, universally respected and beloved. His silver-white
hair when he removed his peruke was a venerable spectacle.
A lock of it is still preserved, with many other relics,
in the library of Trinity College. He died quietly,
after a painful illness, at the ripe age of eighty-five.
His body lay in state in the Jerusalem Chamber, and
he was buried in Westminster Abbey, six peers bearing
the pall. These things are to be mentioned to
the credit of the time and the country; for after
we have seen the calamitous spectacle of the way Tycho
and Kepler and Galileo were treated by their ungrateful
and unworthy countries, it is pleasant to reflect
that England, with all its mistakes, yet recognized
her great man when she received him, and honoured
him with the best she knew how to give.
Concerning his character, one need
only say that it was what one would expect and wish.
It was characterized by a modest, calm, dignified
simplicity. He lived frugally with his niece and
her husband, Mr. Conduit, who succeeded him as Master
of the Mint. He never married, nor apparently
did he ever think of so doing. The idea, perhaps,
did not naturally occur to him, any more than the
idea of publishing his work did.
He was always a deeply religious man
and a sincere Christian, though somewhat of the Arian
or Unitarian persuasion so, at least, it
is asserted by orthodox divines who understand these
matters. He studied theology more or less all
his life, and towards the end was greatly interested
in questions of Biblical criticism and chronology.
By some ancient eclipse or other he altered the recognized
system of dates a few hundred years; and his book
on the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation of
St. John, wherein he identifies the beast with the
Church of Rome in quite the orthodox way, is still
by some admired.
But in all these matters it is probable
that he was a merely ordinary man, with natural acumen
and ability doubtless, but nothing in the least superhuman.
In science, the impression he makes upon me is only
expressible by the words inspired, superhuman.
And yet if one realizes his method
of work, and the calm, uninterrupted flow of all his
earlier life, perhaps his achievements become more
intelligible. When asked how he made his discoveries,
he replied: “By always thinking unto them.
I keep the subject constantly before me, and wait
till the first dawnings open slowly by little and little
into a full and clear light.” That is the
way quiet, steady, continuous thinking,
uninterrupted and unharassed brooding. Much may
be done under those conditions. Much ought to
be sacrificed to obtain those conditions. All
the best thinking work of the world has been thus
done. Buffon said: “Genius is patience.”
So says Newton: “If I have done the public
any service this way, it is due to nothing but industry
and patient thought.” Genius patience?
No, it is not quite that, or, rather, it is much more
than that; but genius without patience is like fire
without fuel it will soon burn itself out.