John Herschel's Cape Voyage: Private Science, Public Imagination and the Ambitions of Empire 0754635589, 9780754635581, 9781315251479

Citation preview

In 1833 John Herschel sailed from London to Cape Town, southern Africa, to undertake (at his own expense) an astronomical exploration of the southern heavens, as well as a terrestrial exploration of the area around Cape Town. After his return to England in 1838, and as a result of his voyage, he was highly esteemed and became Britain's most recognized man of science. In 1847 his southern hemisphere astronomical observations were published as the Cape Results. The main argument of Ruskin's book is that Herschel's voyage and the publication of the Cape Results, in addition to their contemporary scientific importance, were also significant for nineteenth-century culture and politics. In this book it is demonstrated that the reason for Herschel's widespread cultural renown was the popular notion that his voyage to the Cape was a project aligned with the imperial ambitions of the British government. By leaving England for one of its colonies, and pursuing there a significant scientific project, Herschel was seen in the same light as other British men of science (like James Cook and Richard Lander) who had also undertaken voyages of exploration and discovery at the behest of their nation. It is then demonstrated that the production of the Cape Results, in part because of Herschel's status as Britain's scientific figurehead, was a significant political event. Herschel's decision to journey to the Cape for the purpose of surveying the southern heavens was of great significance to almost all of Britain and much of the continent. It is the purpose of this book to make a case for the scientific, cultural, and political significance of Herschel's Cape voyage and astronomical observations, as a means of demonstrating the relationship of scientific practice to broader aspects of imperial culture and politics in the nineteenth century. Steven Ruskin is an independent scholar.

Science, Technology and Culture,

1700-1945 Series Editors

David M. Knight University of Durham and Trevor H. Levere University of Toronto

This new series focuses on the social, cultural, industrial and economic contexts of science and technology from the 'scientific revolution' up to the Second World WaT. Economic historians now cover the relations of science to technology and industrial application, while social and cultural historians have similarly recognized the realms of science and technology and, indeed, that these have helped to define culture and society. Through the agricultural and industrial revolutions of the eighteenth century, the coffee-house culture of the Enlightenment, the spread of museums, botanic gardens and expositions in the nineteenth century, to the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, seen as a victory for German science, this process has gathered momentum; while in the twentieth century the dependence of society, in both war and peace alike, on science and technology is evident. This series will provide an outlet for studies that address issues of the interaction of science, technology and culture in the period from 1700 to 1945, at the same time as including new research within the field of the history of science itself that embraces these perspectives. Also in this series Chemical Structure, Spatial Arrangement The Early History of Stereochemistry, 1874-1914 Peter J. Ramberg Hewett Cottrell Watson Victorian Plant Ecologist and Evolutionist Frank N. Egerton

Science, Technology and Culture, 1700-1945

JOHN HERSCHEL'S CAPE VOYAGE

For Michael 1. Crowe, mentor and friend.

John Herschel's Cape Voyage Private Science, Public Imagination and the Ambitions of Empire

STEVEN RUSKIN Colorado Technical University

First published 2004 by Ashgate Publishing Published 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright © Steven Ruskin, 2004 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Ruskin, Steven John Herschel ' s Cape Voyage: Private Science, Public Imagination and the Ambitions of Empire. - (Science, Technology and Culture, 1700-1945). 1. Herschel, Sir John, 1792-1871- Journeys. 2. Herschel, Sir John, 17921871. Cape results. 3.Scientific expeditions - Great Britain - History19th century. 4. Astronomy - Observations - History - 19th century. 5. Discoveries in science - Great Britain - History - 19th century. I. Title 520.9'2

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Ruskin, Steven John Herschel's Cape Voyage: Private Science, Public Imagination and the Ambitions of Empire / Steven Ruskin. p. cm. - (Science, Technology and Culture, 1700-1945) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Herschel, John F. W. (John Frederick William), Sir, 1792-1871. 2. Astronomers - South Africa - Cape of Good Hope. I. Herschel, John F. W. (John Frederick William), Sir, 1792-1871. II. Title. III. Series. QB36.H59R87 2003 520' .92-dc22 [B) 2003056076

ISBN 13: 978-0-7546-3558-1 (hbk)

Contents List of Figures Acknowledgements Introduction

vi vii ix

PART I: HERSCHEL'S CAPE VOYAGE

3

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage: Filial Duty vs. Humboldtian Traveling

3

2

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

37

3

Appropriating Astronomy: Herschel's Cape Observations, Real and Imagined

75

PART II: THE PRODUCTION OF THE CAPE RESULTS 4

The Cape Results: Preparation and Publication

105

5

The Cape Results: Distribution and Reception

155

PART III: CONCLUSION

6

Herschel, Icon

Appendix 1: Herschel, Poetry, and Science Appendix 2 Bibliography Index

191 205 211

213 227

List of Figures John Herschel from the Illustrated London News (June, 1845)

XIII

1.1

Sir William Herschel

10

1.2

Alexander von Humboldt

17

1.3

Herschel's 20-ft. Telescope at the Cape

30

3.1

Herschel's Memorial Obelisk at the Cape

93

4.1

Title Page of the Cape Results

III

4.2

Halley's Comet as drawn by Herschel

129

4.3

The Orion Nebula as drawn by Herschel

139

5.1

Cape Results Presentation Page

159

5.2

Cape Results Distribution List (sample)

163

5.3

Solar Spots as drawn by Herschel

184

6.1

Engraving of John Herschel

198

Acknowledgments Many individuals, institutions, and organizations enabled the production of this book. First and foremost, thanks go to Michael J. Crowe, who was a source of support, advice, and encouragement as this book was written. I would also like to thank my many other colleagues in the Program in History and Philosophy of Science and the History department at the University of Notre Dame. Kathy Biddick, Chris Hamlin, and Phil Sloan were careful, attentive readers and offered important suggestions. Others were helpful in ways too numerous to mention, including Marv Bolt, Laura Crago, Matt Dowd, Darin Hayton, Don Howard, Sofie Lachapelle, Ernan McMullin, Kathleen Pyne, and James Turner. Academic colleagues around the world, both within the field of Science and Technology Studies and beyond, have been generous with advice, suggestions, and general hospitality. They include Bill Astore, Doug Dertinger, Michael Hoskin, Frank James, David Knight, Thomas Knight, Bernard Lightman, Helen McDonald, Elizabeth Green Musselman, Simon Schaffer, Anne Secord, James Secord, Sujit Sivasundaram, Kemal de Soysa, Brian Warner, Patrick Woudt, and Richard Yeo. Because listing everyone who contributed in some way would be impossible, I'd like to thank all those involved with the following institutions during the period in which I worked on this book, at which I found an extensive network of welcoming, supportive, and critical scholars: the faculty, students, and staff of the History and Philosophy of Science department at Cambridge University; the faculty, students, and staff of the Astronomy department at the University of Cape Town, South Africa; and the faculty, students, and staff of the History of Science Department at the University of Oklahoma. Staff at the following libraries, archives, and institutions were also invaluable to the production of this book: the University of Notre Dame, the University of Colorado at Boulder, the University of Chicago, the Cambridge University Library; the Cambridge college libraries of St John's, Trinity, and Newnham, the Cambridge History and Philosophy of Science department, the Cambridge Scot Polar Research Institute, the Royal Astronomical Society in London (in particular Peter Hingley), the University of St Andrews, and the National Library of South Africa (in particular Najwa Hendrickse). John and Esther Herschel-Shorland graciously opened their private family archives, permitting republication and enabling research not possible elsewhere. Figures 1.1, 1.2, and 6.1 are from my personal collection. Figures 5.1 and 5.2 are reproduced with permission from the collections of the Royal Astronomical Society, London. The remaining figures are reproduced with permission from the collections of the University Libraries of Notre Dame.

viii

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

The editors of the Journal of the British Astronomical Association, Endeavour, and the Journal for the History of Astronomy have permitted me to reprint material that appeared previously in the pages of their publications. Research for this book was made possible by grants and fellowships provided by the National Science Foundation of the United States (under Grant No. 0080570), the Andrew W. Mellon Travel Fellowship Program of the History of Science Program at the University of Oklahoma, the University of Notre Dame Zahm Research Travel Fund, and the Notre Dame Program in History and Philosophy of Science. Everyone mentioned above (and many not mentioned) gave me and this book their best efforts, for which I am truly grateful. Any shortcomings or errors this book contains are therefore entirely my own. Finally, for all of their support, I would like to thank William, Brigette, Stacey, Shane, Kepler, and Andrea. Steven Ruskin Colorado Springs, Colorado October 2003

Introduction

Herschel's Cape Voyage and the Cape Results: History and Historiography

Introduction In early January of 1831 , John Herschel penned a letter to his friend and former Cambridge classmate Fearon Fallows. At the time Fallows was serving as His Majesty's Astronomer at the Royal Observatory in Cape Town, southern Africa. The letter was typical of the missives exchanged between like-minded friends: Herschel sent the usual greetings and pleasantries and informed Fallows of the recent astronomical news in England. Then at the end of the letter Herschel mentioned something more personal-an itch, a desire. He wrote: " . . . Ihave a great notion of packing up my 20 feet reflector & coming & passing a year or two at the Cape, to pick up some nebulae in the South & for a peep at the Magellanic Clouds."] Sadly, however, John never received a reply. On 25 July, soon after he received Herschel ' s letter, Fallows died of complications from a long-suffered illness. Fallow's wife, Mary Ann, buried her husband on the grounds of the Cape Observatory and returned to England. Later, on 8 December of the same year, she wrote to Herschel to say that she had read, in his final letter to her husband, of his intention to go to the Cape. "My Dear Sir if there is any information I can give you respecting the Cape, I shall have much pleasure in doing so either by personal communication or letter .. . ,,2 A few days later Herschel sent his condolences to Mrs Fallows on the loss of her husband, adding that he was now unsure of the possibility of a journey to Cape Town. While the hoped-for voyage was "a long cherished one," he felt that it was one "which circumstances may very probably defer til its execution becomes impossible ... ,,3 In fact, John was at that time so unsure of the possibility of the trip that he asked her not to mention his consideration of it to anyone: "it is too uncertain whether I shall ever be able to realize it .. . for me to wish it to become a

] John Herschel to Fearon Fallows, 9 January 1831 (RS:HS 25.1.17/CCJH 2277). Footnote abbreviations are explained at the end of this introduction. 2 Mary Ann Fallows to John Herschel, 8 December 1831 (RS:HS 7. I62/CCJH 2472). 3 John Herschel to Mary Ann Fallows, 11 December 1831 (WT A-298/CCJH 2475).

x

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

matter of conversation."4 He had made a similar request to his friend Wilhelm Struve, the German astronomer, to whom he had also revealed his dream of going to the southern hemisphere. He asked Struve to say nothing of the matter until that time when the dream might become reality: I have a project in view which I have in fact never lost sight of though circumstances have never permitted me to indulge in anything more than a contemplation of the possibility of one day being able to execute it-that of packing up my telescopes & settling for 3 or 4 years in the Southern Hemisphere, to work through the Nebulae and double stars [in] that half of the heavens ... As I have yet many ties which will not suffer me to form any plans for the future which may not be visionary, I do not like to talk much about it here; and I beg you to use some reserve in mentioning it. 5

Herschel's correspondence with the Fallows and Struve was not the first indication that he would like to travel to the southern hemisphere. While this correspondence does indicate that he narrowed his choice of location to the Cape colony, there are many other indications from earlier letters that he had been considering such a voyage.6 Soon, however, the veil of secrecy was pulled aside. Sometime during the following year Herschel wrote back to Mrs Fallows informing her of his decision to travel to the Cape after all, and taking her up on her generous offer of advice. 7 Though this small episode may on the surface seem trivial, it was actually the beginning of one of the most culturally and politically significant scientific events of the 1830s and beyond. Herschel's decision to journey to the Cape for the purpose of surveying the southern heavens would come to be of great interest and importance, not only to him and his family but to almost all of Britain and much of the continent. It is the purpose of this book to make a case for the scientific, cultural, and political significance of Herschel's Cape voyage and astronomical observations. His voyage to the Cape captured the imagination of all levels of British society. He had already demonstrated superior scientific abilities and had Ibid. John Herschel to Wilhelm Struve, 17 May 1831 (RS:HS 25.2.7/CCJH 2348). 6 For example, in a 28 December 1827 letter to the Rev . Arthur Judd Carrigham, Herschel explains that his nebular survey might "lead me farther than I at first foresaw .. . " (Sarah Moore, "A Newly-Discovered Letter of J. F. W. Herschel Concerning the Plumian Professorship," Journal for the History of Astronomy 25 (1994),143 .) But in December of 1827 the idea of a voyage to the southern hemisphere was still a dream and he could not yet commit himself to a specific destination. 7 John Herschel to Mary Ann Fallows, 1832 (day and month unknown). In this letter Herschel inquires after all sorts of domestic concerns: what furniture and other necessities it would be advisable to bring from England, what medical assistance could be expected at the Cape, the prospect of growing a garden, the availability of servants, and other such queries (RS :HS 7. 164/CCJH 2495). 4

5

Introduction

xi

communicated his work to both scientific and lay audiences. By the end of 1833 Herschel had close to 100 scientific or mathematical publications to his name. These included numerous papers in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society and other scientific journals, a number of articles in popular journals and encyclopedias, three lengthy articles for the Encyclopaedia Metropolitana ("Light," "Sound," and "Physical Astronomy"), and his popular Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy (1830) and A Treatise on Astronomy (1833). Prior to the Cape voyage, Herschel's scientific achievements won him the Copley Medal of the Royal Society, and the Gold Medal of the (later Royal) Astronomical Society, among others. For all of these efforts he was knighted in 1831, but that act was not so much a celebration of British science as it was a politically prudent concession to frustrated scientific reformers. 8 Herschel was not yet, by 1833, a nationally recognized figure beyond British scientific circles. He was, however, the son of Sir William Herschel, one of the most renowned observational astronomers in the period after Newton. And John therefore had both the pedigree and the accomplishments to enable him to become him the living embodiment of British science. His voyage to the Cape was thus the catalyst that brought this transformation about. When he finally did leave for the Cape on 13 November 1833, he left behind him an ordinary lifetime's worth of superb scientific work (although his own life was but half over) and, in the words of Walter F. Cannon, "sailed into apotheosis.,,9 If Cannon's claim-that Herschel was elevated to a position of near deification by his British contemporaries after sailing for the Cape-is correct, it would seem that this episode in Herschel's life is worth investigating not only for what it tells us of Herschel himself, but also of the intellectual and cultural climate of Britain just prior to the ascension of Queen Victoria. What was the significance of this voyage for John, for the public, and for the empire? And why was it not until his departure that he was raised so high in the public eye, when he had already done

This knighthood was intended to indicate to all of Britain, and especially scientific refonners, that the Royals appreciated their scientific subjects. This had been a point of tension for many young men of science in the first part of the nineteenth century, like Charles Babbage, who believed scientific progress in England was in fact hindered by the country's premiere scientific organ, the Royal Society of London. This body was dominated (in the eyes of Babbage and other refonners) not so much by eager men of science but by complacent Royals and uninspired gentlemen, and by the heavy hand of Sir Joseph Banks. Thus Herschel's knighthood can be seen as a concession to these refonners (and also for his narrow loss in an election to become the Royal Society's president); but for Babbage at least, this was not nearly enough. For discussion see Martin J. S. Rudwick, The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985), chapter 2, "Arenas of Gentlemanly Debate." 9 Walter F. Cannon, "John Herschel and the Idea of Science," Journal of the History of Ideas 22 (1961), 217. Note: Walter F. Cannon would later change his name to Susan Faye Cannon.

8

XII

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

much to earn him praise? Cannon's claim is accepted in this book as valid, if slightly overstated. And though accepted as valid, it requires explanation. Those entering a pantheon never do so on the basis of minor deeds. Yet prior to sailing for the Cape Herschel was already a giant in British scientific circles. He had led the charge to revamp the Cambridge mathematics curriculum;IO he was involved-though moderately-in the initial discussions on the founding of the British Association for the Advancement of Science;11 and he had a key role in the establishment of the Royal Astronomical Society.12 He had also made significant and recognized contributions to mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, and optics. Furthermore, so closely had Sir William linked the name "Herschel" to the science of astronomy 13 that John could have certainly guaranteed his scientific prominence with his telescopic work alone, simply by being the son of his father. But he had already proven himself to be more than that, and his polymathic abilities were evident to all. His Cambridge career, early election to the Royal Society, and knighthood confirmed this. So why then did his voyage to the Cape-a period of time when he would actually be absent from life in Britain-seem to be regarded as the most significant event in a much celebrated life, both during and long after its undertaking? It is argued here that much of the reason why Herschel was suddenly raised to the position of living legend was because of the popular notion that, whether he meant to or not, his voyage to the Cape was seen by many as a project aligned with and beneficial to the colonialist and expansionist ambitions of the British empire. By leaving the metropolis for the periphery, in the public mind Herschel was seen in the same light as other British men of science who undertook voyages of exploration and discovery. After the voyages of Captain James Cook and Sir Joseph Banks, science and imperial exploration were inexorably linked in the British imagination. 14

IO This reform was undertaken by John while he was still an undergraduate at St John's College, Cambridge; it was done through the "Analytical Society," which he formed along with Charles Babbage and George Peacock. II See Susan Faye Cannon, Science in Culture: The Early Victorian Period (New York: Dawson and Science History Publications, 1978), chapter 6, "Professionalization and the BMS," 181-7.

12 See G. 1. Whitrow, "Some Prominent Personalities and Events in the Early History of the Royal Astronomical Society," Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society II (1970),89-104. 13 The name Herschel was so closely linked to astronomy in the public mind that it was found even in contemporary nursery rhymes: "Oh Herschel! oh Herschel! where do you fly? To sweep the cobwebs out of the sky." As quoted in Cannon, "John Herschel and the Idea of Science," 217. 14 It is noteworthy that at the same time Herschel was at the Cape, Charles Darwin was on board the Beagle during its now famous voyage. It is also interesting that when the Beagle landed at the Cape in 1836 Darwin made a point of visiting Herschel.

Introduction

John Herschel from the Illustrated London News (June, 1845)

xiii

XIV

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

It was these scientific explorers who went into the wide world and brought its splendors home to London. The metropolitan displays of foreign treasures, flora and fauna, and other exotic natural and cultural objects all contributed to the public myth of these bold adventurers. Reciprocally, these adventurers contributed to--in fact, strongly informed-the public understanding of what it was to be imperial. In other words, voyages of exploration and their results provided key elements of British imperial culture. 15 Such was also the case with Herschel's Cape voyage. Though he intended his voyage to be a "private adventure," it in fact became a national event. What was conceived of by Herschel as a personal excursion became for the British public an "adventurous romance .. . regarded as a matter of national pride.,,16

Historiographic Location This book considers Herschel's life roughly from the years 1833 (the year he sailed for the Cape of Good Hope) to just after 1847, the year of the publication of his Cape astronomical observations (the Cape Results I7 ) . In addition to the area of Herschel scholarship, this book touches on other areas of research in the history of science as well: science and culture, science and empire, science and politics, and what has been called the "new" history of scientific books. Cannon has gone a significant distance toward locating Herschel in the context of nineteenth-century science, culture, and politics. In Science in Culture, she has argued for Herschel's central and often key role in the English sciences in the first

15 For a few of many examples of studies of the interrelationship of science, exploration, empire, and popular culture, see Janet Browne, "Biogeography and Empire," and Gillian Beer, "Travelling the Other Way," both in Cultures of Natural History, N. Jardine, 1. A. Secord, and E. C. Spary, eds, (Cambridge University Press, 1996),305-21 and 322-37; John Gascoigne, "The Ordering of Nature and the Ordering of Empire: A Commentary," and David Mackay, "Agents of Empire: the Banksian Collectors and Evaluation of New Lands," both in David Philip Miller and Peter Hanns Reill, eds, Visions of Empire: Voyages, Botany, and Representations of Nature (Cambridge University Press, 1996), \07-\3 and 38-57; John M. MacKenzie, ed., Imperialism and the Natural World (Manchester University Press, 1990); Suzanne Zeller, Inventing Canada: Early Victorian Science and the Idea of a Transcontinental Nation (University of Toronto Press, 1987); David Mackay, In the Wake of Cook: Exploration, Science and Empire, /780- 1801 (New York: St Martin ' s Press, 1985). 16 Agnes Clerke, A Popular History of Astronomy During the Nineteenth Century (Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black, 1885),64. 17 Throughout this book, the term Cape Results is used as the shortened form of John Herschel's published southern hemisphere astronomical observations. The full title of that publication is Results of Astronomical Observations Made During the Years 1834, 5, 6, 7,8, At the Cape of Good Hope; Being the Completion of a Telescopic Survey of the Whole Surface ofthe Visible Heavens, Commenced in 1825 (London: Smith, Elder and Co., 1847).

Introduction

xv

and middle parts of the nineteenth century. IS Cannon attributes Herschel's scientific centrality in British culture to a variety of factors: his pedigree, his involvement with "Humboldtian science," his affiliation with Cambridge and the scientific network of which that university was the nexus, his role in the formation and reformation of British scientific societies (such as the British Association for the Advancement of Science), and Herschel's influential scientific work, especially his Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Phiiosophy.19 In Science in Culture, however, Cannon does not treat Herschel's Cape voyage in significant depth. Similarly, Marvin Bolt's recent Ph.D. dissertation, John Herschel's Natural Philosophy: On the Knowing of Nature and the Nature of Knowing,20 while providing the only thorough epistemological contextualization of Herschel and his scientific contemporaries, does not treat the Cape voyage in detail. Other Herschel scholars have made much of the Cape voyage. Brian Warner, in particular, and David Evans, have both published a number of works on Herschel's time in southern Africa. Warner's recent Flora Herscheliana: Sir John and Lady Herschel at the Cape 1834-1838 describes, with beautiful illustrations, the Herschels' life and botanical interests in and around Cape Town. Foremost in the relevant primary sources on Herschel's Cape voyage is Herschel at the Cape: Diaries and Correspondence of Sir John Herschel, 1834-1838, edited by David S. Evans, Terence J. Deeming, Betty Hall Evans, and Stephen Goldfarb.21 This volume is a record of Herschel's diary entries from early 1833 until a short while after his return from the Cape. Complimenting this volume chronologically is Lady Herschel: Letters from the Cape 1834-1838, edited by Warner.22 This short collection of letters provides the perspective of Herschel's devoted and intelligent wife, who was as much a companion and friend to John during their time at the Cape as she was a household manager and a mother of their many children. Of further significance as a primary source is Brian and Nancy Warner's Mac/ear & Herschel: Letters and Diaries at the Cape of Good Hope 1834-1838.23 Similar in structure to the preceding two works, this volume provides access to the correspondence between Herschel and Thomas Maclear, who had arrived at the Cape a few days before Herschel to take up the same post that Fallows had held, that of His Majesty's Astronomer at the Cape of Good Hope. Maclear and 18 In Cannon's words, "My defense is that [John] Herschel was at the center of English science ... " Susan Faye Cannon, Science in Culture. 217. 19 Ibid.; see in particular chapters 2 ( "The Cambridge Network" ), 3 ( "Humboldtian Science"), and 7 ( "The Founding of the BAAS"). 20 Marvin Bolt, John Herschel's Natural Philosophy: On the Knowing of Nature and the Nature of Knowing, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1998. 21 David S. Evans, et ai, Herschel at the Cape: Diaries and Correspondence of Sir John Herschel, 1834- 1838 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969). 22 Brian Warner, Lady Herschel: Lettersfrom the Cape 1834-1838 (Cape Town: Friends of the South African Library, 1991). 23 Brian and Nancy Warner, Mac/ear & Herschel: Letters & Diaries at the Cape of Good Hope 1834- 1838 (Cape Town: A. A. Balkema, 1984).

xvi

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

Herschel, though acquaintances in England, quickly became good friends after their arrivals in southern Africa. In what could be read as a companion article, Evans published "Dashing and Dutiful: Herschel and Maclear Made a Strange If Effective Team in Their Astronomical Work at the Cape of Good Hope,,,24 in Science in 1958. This is a good account of the association of these two men, detailing in particular their scientific collaboration. The secondary sources that pertain to Herschel's astronomical labors at the Cape are limited in number, and are the work of but a few scholars. Brian Warner, as is hinted above, is chief among them. Perhaps the best account of Herschel's time at the Cape is Warner' s "Sir John Herschel at the Cape of Good Hope," in John Herschel 1792-1992: Bicentennial Symposium, also edited by Warner.25This article provides a chronological account of Herschel's voyage, extending the story well past the date of his return to include the publication of his observations (the Cape Results) in 1847. Warner also provides brief summaries of John's involvement with the South African Literary and Scientific Institution, his work as a naturalist and collector, and his and Lady Herschel's involvement with Cape society and politics. Another important account of the Cape voyage can be found in GUnther Buttmann's The Shadow of the Telescope : A Biography of John Herschel. Chapter 4, "At the Cape of Good Hope," focuses primarily on Herschel's astronomical work at the Cape. As it provides little that is not covered in Warner's more recent (and similarly-titled) article, Buttmann ' s work is merely complimentary to, ifnot superseded by, that of Warner. There are other works that cover Herschel ' s Cape voyage and deserve to be mentioned here. Allan Chapman's "An Occupation for an Independent Gentleman: Astronomy in the Life of John Herschel," briefly covers the Cape voyage in section 6, "At the Cape of Good Hope." Chapman discusses how the survey of the southern heavens enabled Herschel to advance his cosmological theories. Chapman also advances his thesis that Herschel represents the transition from "independent gentleman" to "professional scientist" in nineteenth-century Britain. Herschel was indeed an "independent gentleman of science,,,26 as his self-funded Cape voyage demonstrates. But afterwards he was often considered the inspiration for the new "professional" generation of Victorian scientists.

24 David S. Evans, "Dashing and Dutiful: Herschel and Maclear Made a Strange If Effective Team in Their Astronomical Work at the Cape of Good Hope," Science 127 (25 April 1958),935-48. 25 Brian Warner, " Sir John Herschel at the Cape of Good Hope," in John Herschel 1792-1992: Bicentennial Symposium (Cape Town: Royal Society of South Africa, 1992), 19-55. 26 Allan Chapman, "An Occupation for an Independent Gentleman: Astronomy in the Life of John Herschel," adapted from Vistas in Astronomy, 36 (1993), 16.

Introduction

xvii

This brief survey of some of the key works of Herschel scholarship27 that touch upon the Cape voyage is important to this book for one key reason: to suggest that they go little distance toward putting Herschel's voyage to the Cape in its larger cultural and political context. Similarly, this survey shows as well that Herschel scholarship has provided little more than a preliminary sketch of John's task of reducing his southern hemisphere astronomical observations into publishable form. From previous Herschel scholarship we do have a sense of the astronomical surveying project that Herschel was involved in-one that began in the previous century with William Herschel, and ended in 1847 with the publication of the Cape Results. But what we lack is the fundamental context of the empire and its metropolis-the role of London with its scientific circles and imperial expectations in the production of Herschel's scientific labors. It is Herschel's entire project, from the inception ofthe idea of the Cape voyage to the publication of the Cape Results, that is of present concern. It is not, however, the intention of this book to criticize the work of previous Herschel scholars for not doing something that they never intended to do in the first place. Herschel's Cape voyage, and the production of his Cape observations, as it is presented in this book was a process that took decades to complete, and that sort of story could not possibly be the subject of an article or one lone chapter. Though perhaps obvious, it would be remiss not to mention that this book builds upon the work of these previous scholars, especially that of Brian Warner and David Evans; this present work does not aim to replace theirs. The scholarship of Warner and Evans was crucial for an understanding of the astronomical significance of Herschel's Cape voyage. This book attempts to put that voyage and its astronomical results in a broader context. One scholar has made such an effort to place Herschel's Cape voyage in a broader, specifically imperial context. This is Elizabeth Green Musselman, in her recent article "Swords into Ploughshares: John Herschel's Progressive View of Astronomical and Imperial Governance.,,28 In this article Green Musselman suggests that Herschel's project of astronomical observation at the Cape was altered conceptually by his colonial experience. Her thesis will be discussed later in this book; it is here relevant to mention that, with Green Musselman's work, the imperial significance of Herschel's Cape voyage has not been ignored. But whereas Green Musselman is concerned to show the effects of imperialism on Herschel's voyage and his astronomical observations, this present work approaches

A nearly complete list of secondary works of scholarship on John Herschel can be found in Michael J. Crowe (ed.), David R. Dyck and James R. Kevin (associate eds,), A Calendar 0/ the Correspondence 0/ Sir John Herschel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998),716-24. 28 Elizabeth Green Musselman, "Swords into Ploughshares: John Herschel's Progressive View of Astronomical and Imperial Governance," British Journal/or the History o/Science 31 (1998), 419-36. 27

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

xviii

the same theme from the opposite direction-to show the effects of Herschel's voyage and astronomical observations on British imperial politics and culture. It is thus the object of this book to bring the background to the fore, and to let Herschel engage and be engaged by the political context of the British empire (both in England and in southern Africa), and also by the popular culture of early nineteenth-century Britain, Europe, and America that readily absorbed Herschel and his voyage into its collective imagination. Against both of these will be contrasted Herschel's private intentions, both scientific and personal, for his voyage. In short, the three elements of private science, public imagination, and the ambitions of empire will be used to paint a picture of the doing and making of science in the first half of the nineteenth century.

Outline This book has two parts. The first part is entitled "Herschel ' s Cape Voyage," and the second part "The Production of the Cape Results." The first part of this book is composed of three chapters: Chapter I: Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage: Filial Duty vs. Humboldtian Traveling Chapter 2: The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage Chapter 3: Appropriating Astronomy: Herschel's Cape Observations, Real and Imagined The second part of the book also has three chapters: Chapter 4: The Cape Results: Preparation and Publication Chapter 5: The Cape Results: Distribution and Reception Chapter 6: Herschel, Icon The fundamental argument of this book is that John Herschel's voyage to Cape Town, and the subsequent publication of the Cape Results, were of significance not only to nineteenth-century astronomy, or nineteenth-century science more generally, but that Herschel's voyage and observations were significant for nineteenth-century politics and culture as well-in particular for the British, but also for continental Europe, the Cape colony, and the United States. Therefore, the goal ofthis book is to raise and address the following two questions: •

First, what can an historical analysis of the private, public, and political interpretations of John Herschel's Cape voyage reveal about the interrelationships among science, British (and European, American, and Cape

Introduction

•

xix

colonial) culture, and the British empire in the first half of the nineteenth century? Second, what does an historical analysis of the preparation, publication, distribution, and reception of the Cape Results further reveal about the same interrelationships-among science, British and European politics and culture, and the British empire? Specifically, how was the Cape Results used and interpreted by its author, its patron, its publisher, and scientists, politicians, and reviewers, particularly in Britain but also abroad?

By answering these two questions, we are also led to a new understanding of Herschel's own intentions for his voyage. Behind the various interpretations about what the voyage meant in contemporary popular and political contexts is the private story of what the voyage meant to Herschel himself. In writing this history, a number of prior, salient historical studies provided useful models to follow. Martin J. S. Rudwick's The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists is a study of nineteenth-century scientific practice-specifically, controversies over the formulation and resolution of problems in geological knowledge, and the subsequent acceptance of their resolution as standard scientific knowledge. This work is conceptually helpful for this investigation of Herschel's Cape voyage for three reasons. First, just as the body of geological knowledge resolved in the "Great Devonian Controversy" has long since been forgotten ever to have been controversial, so also with Herschel's Cape voyage. As a scientific expedition, Herschel's voyage came to be known as a voyage aligned with British imperial aims, and as the result of his commitment to his father's astronomical goals. In fact, for John, neither of these contemporary or historical interpretations fully describe his own intentions for his voyage: a "private adventure" from start to finish. As will be demonstrated in the first part of this book, John's was never an official voyage, nor was it intended strictly as an extension of William Herschel's astronomical surveys. Though the private voyage of one man of science may initially seem like an insignificant issue, the appropriation and interpretation of Herschel's voyage by his contemporaries speaks volumes about Victorian imperial culture, as well as the social role of science and scientists in the middle of the nineteenth century. At the heart of this historical episode-Herschel's Cape voyage-lies a key to the notion of what it meant to be scientific in Britain at this time, and why Herschel himself came to be seen as the scientific role model for much of the rest of the nineteenth century.29 Like the "great Devonian controversy," the reasons for Herschel's

29 As Cannon has proposed, "One answer to the question of how to be scientific [in early nineteenth-century Britain], then, might be, 'Be as much like Herschel as possible. ", Walter F. Cannon, "John Herschel and the Idea of Science," Journal of the History of Ideas 22 (1961),219.

xx

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

"apotheosis" (Cannon's term) and idealization were long ago accepted on the basis of cultural and political expectations. His original private intentions have been forgotten. Thus, following Rudwick, the first part of this book aims to recreate the past to see it in its original, and hopefully much clearer, light: Herschel's private intentions for his voyage as opposed to the historically victorious interpretations of the public imagination and the British empire. Second, and as a corollary to the last point, Rudwick emphasizes the importance of recreating the past with the aid of narrative: "It is high time for a genuine revival of narrative[,] .. . but it must be narrative with a purpose[.] ... If scientific knowledge is to be studied in the making, the closest attention must be paid to strict chronology, not only in description but also in analysis.,,30 As Rudwick's sentiment pertains to this book, a narrative account of Herschel's Cape voyage, as well as the production of the Cape Results, provides the method for addressing the two questions (above) that are the focus of this book. If we are to answer those questions properly, the historical context of Herschel ' s Cape voyage, and especially the production of his Cape Results, must be recreated. Narrative provides the best method for this (though undoubtedly Rudwick ' s narrative is far lengthier and more involved than the one found here). Third, the time period and dramatis personae Rudwick describes overlaps with the time period and cast of characters considered in this book. Rudwick ' s description of his own study accurately describes this study of Herschel as well : "It is an attempt to convey what it was like to do science of a certain kind in the early nineteenth century. This was a time when much of the best research, especially but not only in England, was in the hands of a gentlemanly social group, intensely concerned with building careers and enhancing their social status through their practice of specialist science, but not yet primarily dependent on that science for their livelihood.,,3) Additional inspiration for much of the second part of this book has come from recent work on the history of the production of scientific texts. In particular, lonathan Topham ' s "Beyond the 'Common Context:' The Production and Reading of the Bridgewater Treatises,'>32 has provided an excellent methodology for the historical analysis of the context of production of scientific texts, in this case Herschel' s Cape Results. The significance of Topham's work will be discussed later in this introduction, and in significant depth in the beginning of chapter 4. (Also useful in this regard was lames Secord's recent Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation.)

30Martin J. S.Rudwick, The Great Devonian Controversy, I\, Ibid., xxii. Jonathan R. Topham, "Beyond the ' Common Context:' The Production and Reading of the Bridgewater Treatises," Isis 89 (1998), 233-62. 3)

32

Introduction

xxi

One final work of recent scholarship worth mentioning is Alex Soojung-Kim Pang's Empire and the Sun: Victorian Solar Eclipse Expeditions. In the introduction to this work, Pang suggests that while the field of history of science has, over the past few decades, made significant progress in constructing the links between science and society, politics, and culture, it has downplayed psychological and emotional considerations. In other words, we have neglected somewhat the excitements, frustrations, passions, and motivations that men and women of science experience in their pursuit of natural knowledge. Thus, recommends Pang, "it is time to bring back into our accounts the feeling and flavor of doing science. The excitement, passion, and worry that scientists feel about their work should also be taken seriously, because they offer clues about the organization of work and the relationship between identity and scientific practice. By replacing ' actants' with living and feeling people, we can discover links between social life, culture, and work that otherwise go unrecorded, and build a richer and more complete picture of scientific practice.,,33 Pang is, quite simply, right. And such an approach is taken here with Herschel and his intentions for his voyage to the Cape. If we want to understand the historical and scientific significance of Herschel's Cape voyage, it is useful and perhaps only fair to recreate as best as possible his own intentions for making the trip. The first chapter of this book does just that: a case is made for the private motivation for Herschel's voyage in order to demonstrate that an historical account of the practice of science is incomplete without an understanding of the personal reasons that motivated scientific practice in the first place.

Summary of Part I The first half of the book is essentially a narrative social history of Herschel's scientific voyage. It explores three interwoven themes: first, Herschel's private scientific intentions for the Cape voyage and his astronomical activities while there; second, the politics of Herschel's voyage, with particular attention paid to the British government's desire to obtain imperial benefit from Herschel's voyage and astronomical results; and third, the public (British, Cape colonial, European, and American) interpretation of Herschel's voyage. Each of the first three chapters of this book deal with all three themes together, although each chapter emphasizes one of the themes over the others. The first chapter argues that the usual reason proposed for John Herschel ' s Cape voyage, both in his own day and by historians, is incomplete. The reason usually given is "filial duty"-the notion that his Cape voyage was undertaken only to complete his father William ' s survey of the heavens for nebulae, star clusters, and double stars. Although John of course went to the Cape to complete 33 Alex Soojung-Kim Pang, Empire and the Sun: Victorian Solar Eclipse Expeditions (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2002), 6.

XXII

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

this survey, in this chapter it is shown that he also went to satisfy his own scientific and adventurous inclinations. His refusal of aid from the British government for his voyage (discussed at length in chapter 2) is thereby partially explained. Herschel was greatly influenced by Alexander von Humboldt, and the "Humboldtian" spirit of scientific traveling made popular by Humboldt's many writings. Thus, in addition to his telescopic survey, his desire for a scientific adventure made the voyage something more than filial duty. This compels us to expand our understanding of Herschel's voyage, by adding the context of his other scientific influences and intentions. Like Humboldt, Herschel's private vision of natural philosophy (or science) was one of individuals investigating the natural world in a particular way, and combining their knowledge with others into a unified and general description of natural phenomena for the scientific benefit of all. It is demonstrated that his time at the Cape, in addition to his astronomical observations, was dedicated to pursuing and promoting this Humboldtian scientific program. In the second chapter it is argued that Herschel's voyage to the Cape was seen by many as a project aligned with and beneficial to the colonialist and expansionist ambitions of the British empire. Although he intended his voyage to be a "private adventure" from departure to return, in the public imagination Herschel was considered a man of science engaged in an imperial voyage of scientific discovery. Precedents for such a view of Herschel existed in other, overtly imperial, scientific explorers: James Cook, Joseph Banks, Mungo Park, and Richard Lander, among others. Although Herschel refused to be officially tied to his government in order to avoid any unwanted impositions, many members of the government and ruling class (along with popular publications), nevertheless publicly presented Herschel's voyage as if it was executed under national auspices. The public interpretation inevitably followed this official propaganda; regardless of Herschel's private intentions for his voyage, it was interpreted as a national event of international and imperial significance. To put the argument of the second chapter another way, in a private conversation, the historian of science Simon Schaffer said to the author of this book "I have yet to hear a satisfactory explanation as to why Herschel was the Boyle of the nineteenth century." Without intending to put words into Schaffer's mouth, it is assumed that by invoking Robert Boyle in this way, Schaffer had in mind a sort of scientific figurehead, a representative ideal of the natural philosopher for the British at a particular time. In the post-Cromwellian seventeenth-century, Boyle "saved" scientific knowledge from dogmatism by making such knowledge probabilistic and able to be confirmed only by collective "moral certainty;" Boyle thereby made natural knowledge safe for Restoration. 34 "Robert Boyle sought to secure assent by way of the experimentally generated matter of fact. Facts were certain; other items of knowledge much less so. Boyle was therefore one of the most important actors in the seventeenth-century English movement towards a 34

Introduction

xxiii

Thus, it is here proposed that Herschel's own role as a scientific figurehead two centuries after Boyle was a result of his having allied, in some highly significant way, science to the contemporary pulse of British politics and culture: in this case, his voyage to the Cape of Good Hope, with all of its apparent imperial trappings. If the later seventeenth-century milieu in England was one of restoration, the early nineteenth-century milieu was one of expansion and empire. Herschel's pedigree and his scientific accomplishments made his scientific reputation, but his voyage made him a national scientific figurehead. The third chapter considers the cultural appropriation of Herschel's voyage to, and astronomical observations at, the Cape. His voyage, and his astronomy, meant different things in different cultural contexts. "Cultural contexts" in this chapter is limited to the public interest in Herschel's Cape voyage as determined by its coverage in popular periodicals. These contexts, driven as they were by their own intrinsic concerns and values, each appropriated Herschel's voyage in a way commensurate with those concerns and values. The cultural contexts considered here are public ones: they are the British (and to some extent European) public, the Cape colony public, and the American public. Initially, however, Herschel's private life and practice of astronomy at the Cape is discussed in order to provide background and contrast to the public interest in his voyage and observations. It will be suggested that the privacy with which Herschel surrounded his voyage and his observations largely enabled the different cultural appropriations of them. In other words, had his voyage and observations been official-and therefore more transparent-there would have been less likelihood of the cultural proprietorship and unwarranted speculation that did in fact occur.

Summary of Part II The second part of this book first considers, in chapter 4, the mathematical reduction and publication of Herschel's Cape Results. This involves a short discussion of Herschel's labors to perform the necessary calculations of his mass of observations and to organize them into tables. Then the process of publication is considered-the matters of funding, format, publisher, and printing. Here the work of Jonathan Topham, along with the work of other scholars on what has been called the "new history of the book," informs this discussion methodologically. Chapter 4 also details the roles of the patrons and the publisher in the production of Herschel's book, and how the influence of the patrons and publisher materially affected the final appearance of the Cape Results. This in turn affected the book's distribution, and to a certain degree its reception. Following Topham, this chapter demonstrates that the publication of a scientific book-the material embodiment of

probabilistic and fallibilistic conception of man's natural knowledge." Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1985),23.

xxiv

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

natural knowledge-is not a unidirectional process leading from author directly to reader. Instead, many others involved in the process of publication have a hand in the final product. It is demonstrated, however, that Herschel's influence was in fact the strongest one in the publication of the Cape Results, and that his willingness to give up some control of the observations to his patron and printer came primarily from his desire to distribute his observations as widely as possible, and for free, among the world-wide scientific community, The fifth chapter considers the distribution and reception of the 500 copies of the Cape Results. The distribution of the work was selective: it was given gratis to 350 different individuals, institutions, and governments. An additional 150 copies were made available for public sale. Who received copies will indicate something of the private, scientific, and political intentions of the givers: John Herschel and his second patron, Algernon Percy. Thirteen beautifully bound and gilt copies were given to monarchs and heads of state throughout Europe when the book was printed in 1847. This was a political move on the part of Herschel's royal patron and his government. It served both subtly to give Herschel's private voyage the appearance of buttressing the British government's imperial aims, as well as providing that government with an opportunity to further strengthen or limit political ties with other European states. A discussion of the network of distribution of the Cape Results, along with the scientific reception of the book, indicates how Herschel's reputation (in many ways the results of his post-voyage image) facilitated not only the speedy transfer of the book, but also ensured its highly positive reception. In the conclusion to this book, chapter 6, the main arguments of the rest of the book are summarized and reiterated. Then there is discussion of the latter part of Herschel's life and the period after his death, in which it is further demonstrated that, for British culture, the Cape voyage was remembered as perhaps the most significant event in Herschel's life. Upon his death, Herschel was buried in Westminster Abbey following a petition for such a burial by his scientific contemporaries. Herschel was interred next to Newton, signifying that during his own life he had indeed become a scientific icon-both representative and venerated.

Introduction

xxv

List of Footnote Conventions and Abbreviations

Anonymous

The first reference to an anonymous work indicates that the author of that work is 'Anonymous.' Subsequent references will refer to the work by the work' s title only.

CCJH

Refers to the given number of a specific item of correspondence to or from John Herschel as listed in Michael J. Crowe (ed.), David R. Dyck and James R. Kevin (associate eds), A Calendar of the Correspondence of Sir John Herschel.

JHS

John Herschel-Shorland (family archives of the descendents of John Herschel).

RAS:JH

Royal Astronomical Society Herschel Archive, John Herschel Section, London, England (microfilm).

RGO

Archives of the Royal Greenwich Observatory (at the University Library, Cambridge, England).

RS:HS

Herschel Papers, Royal Society, London, England (microfilm).

SAULS

St Andrews University Library, Scotland.

SRC

Refers to the corresponding number of a particular item from the library of John and William Herschel as listed in The Catalogue of the Herschel Library Compiled by Isabella Herschel: Being a Catalogue of the Books owned by Sir William Herschel, Kt. and by his son Sir John F. W. Herschel, Bart., Sydney Ross (ed.).

Trinity

Wren Library, Trinity College, Cambridge, England.

TxU

University of Texas, Austin (microfilm).

WT

Library of Wellcome Trust, London, England

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

xxvi

Timeline of Selected Events in John Herschel's Life Relevant to the Period Covered in this Book 7 March 1792

John Frederick William Herschel born at Slough, near Windsor

1806

(British empire in control of the Cape colony)

October 1809

enters Cambridge

January 1813

classed "Senior Wrangler" in Cambridge tripos

27 May 1813

elected Fellow of the Royal Society of London

24 January 1814

begins brief career of law studies at Lincoln's Inn

October 1816

returns to Slough to aid his father William in his astronomical observations

1820

helps found Astronomical Society (later Royal Astronomical Society)

9

August

1820

(approval given for building Observatory, Cape of Good Hope)

Royal

July-October 1821

first "grand tour" of Europe; meets Alexander von Humboldt for the first time

25 August 1822

William Herschel dies at Slough, while John is on second "grand tour" of Europe

April-October 1824

third extended "grand tour" of Europe, during which time he meets Alexander von Humboldt again, and makes a number of scientific expeditions in the Alps

November 1824

elected Secretary of the Royal Society

1825-1833

resurveys entire northern heavens for nebulae, star clusters, and double stars; masters use of his father's telescopes

Introduction

3 March

1829

xxvii

marries Margaret Brodie Stewart in St Marylebone Church, London

1830-31

publication of Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy; made Knight of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order

June 1831

(Richard Lander returns from successful expedition to headwaters of Niger river)

4 January 1832

Mary Pitt Herschel (mother) dies at Slough

24 April 1832

receives first offer of government aid for proposed Cape voyage

13 November 1833

departs Portsmouth with family onboard Mountstuart Elphinstone

16 January 1834

arrives in Cape Town, southern Africa

22 February 1834

20-foot telescope erected and in use

23 April 1834

moves into Feldhausen with family

21 January 1835

Hugh Percy offers Herschel £ 1000 to aid observations

12 June 1835

proposes to Percy that £ 1000 be used for publishing Cape observations

25 August 1835

New York Sun begins series of satirical articles claiming Herschel has discovered life on the moon

28 October 1835

first observation of Hal\ey's comet

15 January 1836

leaves Cape Town for four days with Thomas Maclear to avoid appearance of support for Governor D'Urban

5 March 1836

begins work with astrometer

5 May 1836

last sight of Hal\ey's comet

10

xxviii

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

3 June 1836

HMS Beagle anchored in Table Bay; Charles Darwin and Robert Fitzroy visit Herschel at Feldhausen

16 June 1836

writes to Peter Stewart to ask advice on publishing Cape observations

11 March 1838

departs Cape Town with family onboard Windsor Castle

15 May 1838

arrives in England

15 June 1838

honorary dinner held at Freemason's Tavern

28 June 1838

made baronet at coronation of Queen Victoria in Westminster Abbey

1838-1843

membership Standards

12 June 1839

made D. C. L. at Oxford University

3 April 1840

moves with family from Slough to new house in Kent, "Collingwood"

12 February 1847

Hugh Percy dies

7 March 1847

completes reduction and preparation of Cape observations for publication

June 1847

Cape Results printed; first copies published

6-7 July 1847

presents copies of Cape Results to Queen Victoria and Prince Albert in Cambridge

21 August 1847

first published review of the Cape Results appears

1847-1848

Peter Stewart's embezzlement scandal revealed

January 1848

(popular revolutions begin in Europe)

with

Royal

Commission

on

Introduction

xxix

1850-1855

serves as Master of the Mint

1859

(Charles Darwin publishes Origin o/Species)

II May 1871

John Herschel dies

1882

(Thomas Hardy publishes Two on a Tower)

PART I

HERSCHEL'S CAPE VOYAGE The view I entertain of the project .. . is that of an entirely irresponsible private adventure. -John Herschel, 24 April 1832

Chapter 1

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage: Filial Duty vs. Humboldtian Traveling

Whence the Cape Voyage? John Herschel's plan to survey the southern heavens arose in part from his desire to complete the astronomical work begun by his father. The elder Herschel, Sir William, had been the brightest star in the astronomical sky during the final decades of the eighteenth century. Although Pierre Simon Laplace (1749-1827) was usually considered the most important astronomer at that time, William Herschel was perhaps the most recognized. His discovery of Uranus in 1781 (and subsequent patronage by King George III), sensational telescopes, unique observational interests, and ingenious cosmological and extra-terrestrial speculations brought him notoriety (and considerable wealth) in England and abroad. In his self-described role as a "natural historian'" of the heavens, William had been responsible for compiling the most complete catalogs of celestial objects beyond the solar system that the world had yet seen; he also developed a taxonomic system of classification for celestial objects, and a unique theory of stellar cosmogony.2 But it was his giant telescopes and his discovery of the planet Uranus that made the name of Herschel a household one. His astronomical work was aided by the telescopes he made, which were the largest ever built and which set new standards for optical quality. William's telescopes enabled him to see further into space than anyone before him, and he was able to undertake astronomical research unimaginable by previous astronomers. One area in which he was a pioneer was the study of nebulae. Few of , As quoted in Simon Schaffer, "Herschel in Bedlam: Natural History and Stellar Astronomy," The British Journal for the History of Science 13 (1980), 211. 2 For a discussion of the development of William Herschel's cosmological theories, see Michael J. Crowe, "Sir William Herschel: Celestial Naturalist," chapter three in Michael J. Crowe, Modern Theories of the Universe from Herschel to Hubble (New York: Dover, 1994), 71-145 . For William Herschel's taxonomic system, see ibid., 137-44. See also Simon Schaffer, '''The Great Laboratories of the Universe': William Herschel on Matter Theory and Planetary Life," Journal for the History of Astronomy 11 (1980), 81-111; Simon Schaffer, "Herschel in Bedlam: Natural History and Stellar Astronomy," British Journal for the History of Science 13 (1980), 211-39; and Michael A. Hoskin, William Herschel and the Construction ofthe Heavens (London: Oldboume, 1963).

4

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

his contemporaries were interested in these objects, in part because without the light-gathering power of his giant telescopes, the nebulae could barely be differentiated from stars. When William began observing nebulae in the 1780s, only about 100 of the objects had ever been seen in the heavens. 3 In 1783, now living in Slough, near Windsor, he had built a 20-foot reflecting telescope of 18.7inch aperture, and was soon discovering hundreds of new nebulae. He began publishing papers on the structure of these objects, and catalogs of their locations, and by 1802 had discovered 2,500 of them. He was also interested in double stars, and swept the skies of the northern hemisphere for these objects as well. In 1788 he built his most famous telescope to aid in his astronomical pursuits. This was his monstrous 40-foot instrument of 48-inch aperture-the largest telescope ever built, until it was surpassed in the 1840s. Having grown up in "the shadow of the telescope,"4 John Herschel was of course unable to escape the influence of astronomy in his early life. As a young boy he played quietly by himself during the daytime, while his father rested after his long nights of observation. As a youth he occasionally found himself acting as tour guide for the guests of George Ill, who came down from Windsor to see the legendary 40-foot telescope. But John himself was more interested in nonastronomical scientific pursuits. He took up astronomy only at the end of 1816, when he was already 24 years old, following a superb career as a Cambridge undergraduate, a short period of legal studies, and a time as a Cambridge tutor. He began to work with his father in the family business (for William, it was certainly an obsession) of astronomy, receiving further instruction in the art of telescope making and sky surveying. Thus the Herschelian tradition of astronomical prominence continued after William died in 1822. William's death was lamented throughout the scientific world. John was especially sad, yet grateful for all his father had done for him as well as for the science of astronomy. William's astronomical survey was unfinished, however, and it was up to John to complete it. So in 1825 John set about resurveying the northern heavens, looking in particular for additional nebulae, star clusters, and double stars (these had all been his father's special interest), and refining some of William's measurements. 5 He found 525 new nebulae and star clusters, and he published the combined work (totaling some 2,306 objects) in 1833. For this he received the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society and the Royal Medal of the Royal Society. Crowe, Modern Theories of the Universe from Herschel to Hubble, 74. This phrase comes from the title of GUnther Buttmann's book, The Shadow of the Telescope: A Biography ofJohn Herschel (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1970). 5 John had begun observing nebulae and star clusters earlier than this, in 1821 with Sir James South. But in 1825 he began resurveying the sky of the northern hemisphere with the specific goal of refining his father's surveys. This also gave him the opportunity to practice using the 20-foot telescope his father had built, and which John would make extensive use of both in the northern and southern hemispheres. 3

4

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

5

With this done he then turned his attention to the night sky of the southern hemisphere. 6 This region of the heavens was still awaiting thorough and systematic astronomical investigation. Although parts of the southern heavens had already been sporadically surveyed by Edmond Halley and the Abbe de Lacaille, these surveys were relatively superficial and were primarily concerned with charting a few key star positions. Edmond Halley had lived on the island of St Helena from 1676-1678. He had a few telescopes (the largest a 24-inch refractor) and a 5.5-foot diameter sextant. Most nights on the island were too cloudy to do significant astronomical work, but eventually he catalogued over 300 stars. Upon his return he published his work as the Catalogus Stellarum Australium, or Catalogue of the Southern Stars, which he called a "supplement to the Catalogue of Tycho." The French astronomer Nicolas Louis de Lacaille went to the Cape of Good Hope from 1749-1751. While there he determined the geographical coordinates of Cape Town and did other geodetic work. Upon observing an opposition of Mars (which was a cooperative effort with other astronomers doing the same observations in Europe), he was able to determine a value for solar parallax of 10.2 seconds of arc. His measurements of southern hemisphere star positions were numerous and thorough, and his method allowed for stellar light-refraction by the earth's atmosphere, something Tycho Brahe had not done. Lacaille defined 14 new constellations in the southern hemisphere. 7 10hn Herschel's goal was of course quite different: to catalog the nebulae, star clusters and double stars of the southern hemisphere. His would be a much larger task than what had been accomplished previously, one that needed to be carried out over a greater length of time and with considerably better telescopes-both of which he had. Thus, as a strong desire at least, the plan for a voyage to the southern hemisphere was in his mind by the late 1820s. What had stood in the way of fulfilling this plan, as was alluded to by John in his letter to Mrs Fallows in 1831? There were a number of impediments, each of which played a part in stalling the realization of the dream . Two, however, were primary. One of these was John's mother, Mary Pitt Herschel, then of failing health. John was reluctant to take extended leave from England because he was sure that he would not see her alive again. But on 4 1anuary 1832, not two months

6 The Herschels observed at about 51· North Latitude, so they would have been able to see about 39· below the equator. The heavens below that, however, remained hidden from their view. 7 For more on Edmond Halley see Colin A. Ronan, Edmond Halley: Genius in Eclipse (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, 1969); Angus Armitage, Edmond Halley (London : Nelson, 1966); and Alan Cook, Edmond Halley: Charting the Heavens and the Seas (Oxford University Press, 1998). For more on Lacaille, see David Evans, Lacaille: Astronomer. Traveler: With a New Translation of his Journal (Tucson, AZ: Pachart Publishing House, 1992). For a general study of southern hemisphere astronomy see David Evans, Under Capricorn: A History of Southern Hemisphere Astronomy (Philadelphia: Adam Hilger, 1988).

6

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

after John had written Mrs Fallows of the improbability of his voyage ever occurring, Mary Herschel died. Although it was a sad event for John it was not unexpected, and it did free him to go to the Cape with a clear conscience. Furthermore, the inheritance he received from his mother partially provided the funds that enabled John to undertake the voyage in the way he did-at his own expense, "responsible to no one."s The second circumstance that hindered Herschel was his commitment to certain scientific societies and movements in Britain. By the time he left for the Cape he had already served as President of the Royal Astronomical Society and Secretary of the Royal Society. But he and other men of science had grown increasingly dismayed with the state of the Royal Society, because English science under the auspices of the Royal Society was falling significantly behind science on the continent. As a result, among Britain's younger men of science, like Herschel, Charles Babbage, and William Whewell, reform was in the air. In 1830 John was set against Augustus Frederick, the Duke of Sussex and brother of the King, in the election for the Presidency of the Royal Society. The Duke narrowly won the election 119 votes to 111 , and the reformers felt they had been dealt a severe blow. Herschel, however, had not been interested in holding the office for himself, a prospect he considered a "grievous evil." Rather, his standing for election was in support of the movement for scientific reform in Britain, in which he was a major player. To this end he was also on the periphery of the movement that founded the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1831. 9 In these events Herschel's hope was that British science would become more active and catch up with the rest of Europe. Additionally he hoped that they would also be able to access a network of their like-minded fellows without the excessive hindrance of staid institutional bureaucracies like that of the Royal Society. \0 But after losing the vote for the Presidency of the Royal Society, and subsequently distancing himself from other organizational commitments, Herschel was free to set about his own private scientific endeavors, fulfilling for himself at least his vision of the proper pursuit of science.

8 .. ,

responsible to no one" is the phrase Herschel used in a letter to John William Lubbock on 16 May 1833 (RS:HS 21.136/CCJH 2794). 9 The "manifesto" of this movement was written by Charles Babbage: "Reflexions on the Decline of Science in England, and on some of its Causes," Quarterly Review 43 (1830), 305-42. See also Timothy Alborn, "The Business of Induction: Industry and Genius in the Language of British Scientific Reform, 1820-1840," History o/Science 34 (1996), 91-121; and Susan Cannon, "Professionalization and the BAAS," and "The Founding of the BAAS" (chapters six and seven, respectively) in Science in Culture: The Early Victorian Period (New York: Dawson and Science History Publications, 1978). \0 Roy M. MacLeod, "Whigs and Savants: Reflections of the Reform Movement in the Royal Society, 1830-48," in Ian Inkster and Jack Morrell, eds, Metropolis and Province: Science in British Culture. /780-1850 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983).

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

7

If the dissolution of these circumstances freed Herschel to go to the southern hemisphere, one might ask why he chose the Cape colony. He had considered a number of possible southern hemisphere locations at which he might undertake his survey.11 The first was the observatory in Paramatta, Australia, but this location was discarded as being too distant, of poor climate, and ill-equipped to sustain Herschel's proposed project. The island of St Helena (where Edmond Halley had executed his own short survey of the southern heavens) was also rejected due to reports of its unfavorable climate. This left the Cape colony. The Cape had a number of advantages, not the least of which was its shared longitude with Western Europe. This would enable observations made at the Cape to be correlated with observations made back home by the community of European astronomers. The climate was also reported to be quite favorable to observing. Furthermore, the Cape colony had been under continuous British possession since 1806 (it was first officially recognized as a British possession at the Congress of Vienna in 1815), and it was a relatively stable outpost of the British empire. Finally, it had its own Royal Observatory. Although Herschel did not want to be officially tied to the Royal Observatory at the Cape, his proposed project would certainly benefit from its presence. And, as will be shown in chapter two, there were those in London who were certain that the work of the Royal Observatory at the Cape-and the empire itself-would benefit from Herschel's presence in the Cape colony. In sum, then, we have a sketch of the origins of Herschel's Cape voyage. It is not a complete sketch, however, because it is missing one key element. This missing element is Herschel's private motivation for the voyage, which his contemporaries, and historians since then, have given simply as John's desire to complete his father's survey of the entire heavens: in a phrase, "filial duty." This assumption maintains that John was completing the project of mapping the nebulae, double stars, and star clusters of the entire night sky begun by his father William. But, as wiJI be seen, this is not the whole story. By going to Cape Town for over four years he was not simply doing the duty of a devoted son (although he was indeed devoted to his and his fathers' astronomical projects). In fact, John was actively pursuing goals of his own; among these a desire for adventure and a chance to investigate new natural surroundings. In this he was influenced by current conventions of scientific traveling, in particular, that of Alexander von Humboldt. John's desire to discover in the southern hemisphere what William had done in the northern was not the sole motivating factor in his decision to go to the Cape. John's contemporaries and later historians, however, have not considered this. As a result, the Cape voyage is usually seen as a project undertaken only out of "filial duty."

II

Buttmann, The Shadow o/the Telescope, 71.

8

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

The Weight of Filial Duty The usual reason given for John Herschel's trip to Cape Town then and now was that it was a duty owed to his father, William Herschel (figure 1.1). In John's own day, this was a common conception. The Duke of Sussex, Augustus Frederick, who remained as President of the Royal Society while Herschel was at the Cape, may have first linked his Cape voyage with the phrase "filial duty ." Perhaps because the Duke was the son of George III, William Herschel's patron, he saw in the younger Herschel's voyage "that sense of filial duty which prompted him to follow the example of his distinguished relative-a relative who was protected, and honoured, and favoured by my illustrious father ... [John Herschel] abandoned his country and his countrymen, left friends behind ... He did all this, I say, for the purpose of establishing his father's fame, and recording to posterity the merit of a man whose name, I trust, never will, and never can, be forgotten.,,12 These comments were made at the honorary dinner given to John Herschel on 15 June 1838, following his return from the Cape, and were put into public circulation the next day in the Athenaeum. The same sentiment appeared in the London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, in which it was reported that Herschel's "astronomical survey of the Southern Hemisphere" was executed "in accordance with the intention and in furtherance of the design of his illustrious father.")) James Forbes, in his review of Herschel's Cape Results in 1849, wrote of the Cape voyage: "To finish so great a monument to his own, but more especially to his father's, fame, Sir John did not hesitate to quit in 1833 his home ... and undertake a voyage to another hemisphere ... ,,14 Interestingly, however, in another review of the Cape Results (this one in the Athenaeum in 1847), we read a comment that seems to have been ignored, both by Herschel's contemporaries and his historians: "It is generally understood that the selection of astronomy as the main object of [John Herschel's] scientific labours has been dictated by filial feeling-by the desire to extend his father's researches-and, if not to establish and extend, yet, as the French say, arrondir, his father'S fame .. . This, however, is report. Sir John Herschel does not put forward the reason above given, nor any other, for his astronomical career:-and assuredly, to those who hold that a good thing is reason enough for its own existence, none can be wanting."ls According to this Athenaeum article, it was "generally understood" that John 's astronomical pursuits, including his Cape voyage, were simply means of fulfilling William Herschel's astronomical legacy. But there was no warrant for this, the

As quoted in "The Herschel Dinner," Anonymous, Athenaeum (16 June 1838),424. )) As quoted in "The Herschel Dinner," Anonymous, London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journal ofScience 13 (1838),75. 14 James Forbes, review of Cape Results, Quarterly Review 85 (June 1849),3 . IS Anonymous, review of Cape Results, Athenaeum \034 (21 August 1847), 885. 12

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

9

Athenaeum pointed out. In other words, that assumption was mere convention. This was certainly not unfounded convention, however, given that John was consciously and publicly completing his father's astronomical survey by going to the Cape. A somewhat ambivalent recognition of this is found in the Marquis of Northhampton's Presidential Address to the 18 th Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science: "[John Herschel] was influenced alone by his own love of science and by the desire to complete the labour of his illustrious father; and I believe that in truth the son had more to do with it than the philosopher,-and science will be proud that it was SO.,,16 As well as can be determined John never indicated filial duty as the primary motivation for his voyage to the Cape. Yet historians who have considered the Cape voyage have stuck with the conventional explanation. There are two ways to account for this. First, many historians who have studied Herschel's Cape voyage have been historians of astronomy. As such it was natural for them to conclude that the Cape voyage was undertaken solely out of a sense of filial duty, because John's astronomical survey of the southern hemisphere completed his and William's survey of the northern. Second, all historians who have studied John Herschel have had the comments of his contemporaries, like Augustus Frederick, to support the assumption that the Cape voyage, and all of John's astronomical work, was a product of filial duty. For both these reasons, there was no need to look beyond this conventional explanation for the Cape voyage. Thus we find in the only full-length biography of John Herschel (tellingly titled The Shadow of the Telescope) the following observation: "After careful consideration, [John] Herschel decided that the best way for him to preserve the intellectual inheritance would be to carry on his father's work ... William Herschel had surveyed the northern celestial hemisphere ... John Herschel therefore determined to sweep the southern celestial hemisphere ... to ensure the permanent association of the name Herschel with a complete survey of the heavens.,,17 Michael Hoskin concluded that all of John's work in astronomy, including (by implication) the Cape voyage, was done out of a "profound sense of filial duty.,,18 And Susan Cannon simply kept to the status quo, writing that John's interest in astronomy "can always be explained away as 'filial' piety.,,19

16 Report 0/ the

p848), xxxvi. 7

11jh Meeting

0/ the British Association lor the Advancement 0/ Science

Buttmann, The Shadow o/the Telescope, 70-1.

18 Michael Hoskin, "John Herschel's Cosmology," Journal/or the History (1987),3. 19 Susan Faye Cannon, Science in Culture, 81.

0/ Astronomy

28

18

10

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Figure 1.1 Sir William Herschel

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

II

Yet perhaps it was the Encyclopaedia Britannica, due to its wide readership, that truly perpetuated the conventional explanation, especially when it came to the Cape voyage: "[John] Herschel had become an astronomer from a sense of duty ... hence it was by filial loyalty to his father's memory that he was ... impelled to undertake the completion of that work which at Slough had been so grandly commenced. William Herschel had explored the northern heavens: John Herschel determined to explore the heavens of the south .. .',20 Have so many been wrong in assuming that John Herschel's voyage to Cape Town was undertaken only as a matter of "filial duty?" No?1 The argument being made here is not that Herschel's contemporaries, and later historians, have been wrong. Only that they have been incomplete. There is no doubt that John went to the Cape in the capacity of a dutiful son and diligent astronomer. His years of seemingly interminable nightly observations and mathematical reductions, culminating in the Cape Results, confirm this. And yes, John first became an astronomer out of a sense of duty. In 1816, William Herschel persuaded John to leave his position as a Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge, to work with him at astronomy. It was a difficult decision for John, and upon leaving the University he wrote, "my heart dies within me. I am going, under my father's directions, to take up his series of observations .. . and continuing his scrutiny of the heavens with powerful telescopes ... ,,22 But his voyage to the Cape, while certainly a voyage for astronomical observation, was not undertaken with the same sense of duty he felt he owed his father's astronomical work. For John, the Cape voyage was something more than duty, and something more than astronomy. The one element that historians of John Herschel have largely neglected has been the side of him that longed for travel and adventure and that complimented his scientific side by urging him to seek out new vistas on the natural world. With so much of the historical record weighing in on the side of filial duty, it is no wonder that John's other reasons for wanting to take such a voyage have been ignored. Unfortunately, as a result we are left with an unbalanced view of his Cape "Sir John Herschel," Encyclopaedia Britannica, ninth edition, vol. II (American reprint, Philadelphia: 1. M. Stoddart & Co., 1880),686. As quoted in David S. Evans, "Dashing and Dutiful: Herschel and Mac\ear Made a Strange if Effective Team in their Astronomical Work at the Cape of Good Hope," Science 127 (25 April 1958), 937. In the same entry in later editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica the explanation of the Cape voyage as the result of filial duty is absent; see for example the 14th edition (1929). 21 Silvan S. Schweber, however, takes a strong Freudian view of John Herschel's life and concludes that because he was never able to stand up to his father before the old man died, John was forever enslaved to William's astronomical projects. Thus filial duty, in Schweber's words, "never allowed [John] to fulfill his own creativity and shackled his energies to investigations in which his obligations to complete his father's work always loomed in the background." But this interpretation is overstated, as the argument of this chapter suggests. S. S. Schweber, ed., Aspects in the Life and Thought o/Sir John Frederick Herschel vol. 1 (New York: Amo Press, 1981),50. 22 As quoted in Buttmann, The Shadow o/the Telescope, 20.

20

12

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

voyage. We lack a sense of what that voyage meant to John Herschel, the private and adventurous man of science, as opposed to John Herschel the astronomical scion. It is the purpose of the rest of this chapter to demonstrate that his Cape voyage was as much a "private adventure" as it was a completion of his and his father' s astronomical project. It is time to remove some of the weight of filial duty from John 's shoulders and let him enjoy his voyage.

The Age of "Romanticism" and Humboldtian Traveling Herschel and the Age of "Romanticism"

In so far as anyone is a product of his or her age, John Herschel was a product of his. And that age, especially during the first half of his life, was the age of "romanticism." Roughly spanning the years 1770-1830, the intellectual and cultural climate of this period was a marked change from that of the eighteenthcentury Enlightenment. The mechanical or clockwork universe,23 based upon "Newton' s mathematical way,,,24 was losing ground. Concepts of mathematical certainty and determined regularity gave way to the notion of a cosmos made stable by a dynamic interplay of competing forces. Harmony, in nature and society, was achieved not by mathematics and mechanism but by a balance of various and opposed forces . It was also an age of exploration. During this period the world was opening up before explorers like Captain James Cook and, later, Alexander von Humboldt. Much that was "romantic" about this period was the result of European interaction with new and exotic lands and cultures. And at an individual level, there was an emphasis on the personal exploration of the imagination and feelings-the perspective of the individual in the experience and understanding of nature. Something of the spirit of this age can be found in the character of John Herschel. He is usually recognized as a scientific polymath more in the Enlightened tradition, the genius known for his achievements in astronomy, chemistry, optics, mathematics, and natural philosophy. But this is not the entire John Herschel. There is also John the artist, the poet, the traveler, the musician, and the man of faith . Without placing him in the cultural context of his own day, without knowing something of what motivated him beyond his scientific pursuits, the historical picture of John Herschel is incomplete and much of the impetus for his Cape voyage is ignored.

23 See Dorinda Outram, The Enlightenment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), especially chapter 4: "Science and the Enlightenment: God' s Order and Man' s Understanding," 47--62. 24 For discussion see Henry Guerlac, '''Newton' s Mathematical Way': Another Look," British Journal/or the History o/Science 17 (1984), 61-4.

Recasting Herschel 's Cape Voyage

\3

Romanticism as a moment is said to have begun with Jean Jaques Rousseau. Rousseau is generally credited as the father of romanticism, siring as he did the first romantic novel, La nouvelle Heloise, in 1761. 25 Romanticism as a movement began in Germany later in the eighteenth century. The German romantic movement was an outgrowth of numerous intellectual and literary trends, and it offered a critique of the Enlightenment claim that humanity, in accordance with nature, was perfectly rational and therefore perfectly understandable. 26 The core group of German romantics was found in the university town of Jena, and came to be known as the Jenaer Kreis. Forming around Johann Gottlieb Fichte, this circle's membership contained some of the most influential figures in German literature and philosophy: Friedrich and August Wilhelm Schlegel, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling, and Friedrich von Schiller. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was also involved with this group. In the beginning of the nineteenth century, following the Napoleonic wars, the Kreis ' members would enter the newly formed German university system and propagate their views. What started as a movement became the foundation for nineteenth-century German culture. What was important to the German romantics was not that nature be perfectly rational in and of itself. Instead, their focus was on the role of the human imagination in the comprehension of nature. The German "romantic school" began as a reaction to Enlightenment rationalism. 27 Similar sentiments first arose in England in the person of Edmund Burke. His A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful (1756) gave the English an epistemological framework by which subsequent "romantic" notions were conceived and expressed. In Burke's Enquiry, the source (or "efficient cause") of the sublime was the sensation of terror; the source of the beautiful was the sensation of passion (for Burke synonymous with love). In both cases the sensations (usually) arise from an experience of nature. His use and definition of these two words were formative for the discourse of English romanticism as the eighteenth century gave way to the nineteenth. Burke argued, for example, that beautiful objects "relax" the fibers in the senses. Sublime objects, in contrast, "tense" the fibers . With this system Burke gave the British an epistemological basis for the moral relationship between nature and the mind. He linked, physiologically via sensation, the external world with internal sentiments-beauty, terror, and other "states of the soul." The poets William Blake, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, William Wordsworth, Lord Byron, and others Maurice Cranston, The Romantic Movement (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell, 1995), I. For an excellent interpretation of the significance of La nouvelle Heloi"se , see Robert Damton, "Readers Respond to Rousseau: The Fabrication of Romantic Sensitivity," chapter six in The Great Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History (New York: Basic Books, 1984). 26 Ibid., 21. 27 Maurice Cranston, The Romantic Movement (Cambridge, Massachusetts : Blackwell, 1995),47. 25

14

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

were each in their way heirs to Burke's romanticism .28 Like the German romantics, Burke's Enquiry rejected "rationalism and classical formalism" in favor of a new version of aesthetics.29 At some point in his early life John Herschel had read Burke's Enquiry:30 in 1821, in a letter to Charles Babbage, he wrote (or, rather, quipped) "I am meditating an Essay on the Mean and Ugly, to run in opposition to Burke on ye Sublime and beautiful.,,31 Years later, in March or April of 1834, Herschel wrote a letter to his brother-in-law Duncan Stewart. Stewart had apparently asked Herschel for a list of readings for his personal edification. Herschel responded, as requested, with "a course of study, to name the Books which should be regarded as standard and pre-eminent authorities in a great variety of departments & which approximate nearest to my own ideas of what, in each, is the truth.,,32 In this letter Herschel provided something of a personal statement of aesthetics: "As to Fine Arts, as I have said before, I am not sure that I have a very discriminating taste for them or a capability of fully apprehending the distinctions of Virtue. But [Sir Joshua] Reynold's Discourses and Burke on the Sublime and Beautiful are two works of such pre-eminent merit in their general bearings so full of general truth that a man need not be an artist to admire the one-in the other the allusions to art are only incidental. ,,33 Herschel was thus influenced by the romantic movement at home, and he was also influenced by the movement abroad, especially by the Germans. Of the known works by members of the German romantic movement in Herschel's library, however, few are found. But there are found the works of August Wilhelm

28 Edmund Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, James T. Boulton, ed. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968[1756)). Also Cranston, The Romantic Movement, chapter 3: "English Romanticism." 29 Cranston, The Romantic Movement, 48. 30 Burke's views, however, were not simply adopted by British intellectuals as they stood. According to one of Burke's critics, Dugald Stewart, the problem with Burke's "efficient cause" was its physiological connection: "[Burke] has suffered himself to be led astray by a predilection for that hypothetical physiology concerning the connection between Mind and Matter, which has become so fashionable of late years." (Dugald Stewart, Philosophical Essays, in The Collected Works of Dugald Stewart, vol. 5, Sir William Hamilton, ed. (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1855), 213.) Herschel, as Marvin Bolt has argued, would have disagreed with Burke on this specific point because Herschel's conception of Mind was that it was of spiritual constitution, not material. Thus, for Herschel, the source or "cause" of the beautiful or the sublime would have been metaphysical, not physical. See Marvin Bolt, John Herschel's Natural Philosophy: On the Knowing of Nature and the Nature of Knowing in Early-Nineteenth-Century Britain (Notre Dame: Ph.D. Dissertation, 1998), 199 n263.

31 John Herschel to Charles Babbage, 5 November 1821 (RS:HS 20. I 27/CCJH 622). 32 John Herschel to Duncan Stewart, April 1834 (UCT JH Letters AI.47/CCJH 2960). Reprinted as "A Course of Reading in 1834," South African Libraries 7 (1940), 138-44; 145-54. 33 Ibid.

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

15

Schlegel, Fredrich Schiller, and Johann von Goethe. 34 Herschel's fascination with Schiller's poetry (and poetry generally) was considerable, and lasted his entire life.35 Herschel was not, however, enthusiastic about the metaphysics of Fichte, and his predecessor Immanuel Kant. In 1838 Herschel wrote to his wife that the metaphysical speculations of Kant and Fichte amounted to a "puddle of dirty water": I should come to the conclusion that all this enormous maB of learning which these 'Philosophers' have heaped up, is no worthier a pile than would be a snowball ... begun by schoolboys and rolled and rolled till it grew so very large that all the town cried out "My! What a snowball" and so set seriously to work to roll it bigger & bigger-and called in the townsmen of the next town, and then the next, till they could roll it .!!Q bigger-so they stood puffing & blowing and shouting over their work, and then went & got tipsy in its honor & glory, and threw up their hats and called it a world!-a Universe!! Then came the sun &c &c &c and their universe turned into a puddle of dirty water. 36

On first glance, then, it may seem that German romantic influences on Herschel were minimal, and that works like Burke's Enquiry had more of an impact. But it should be remembered that Herschel was himself half German; his father William was born in Hanover. John grew up speaking and reading German, and spent considerable time in that country (usually visiting his aunt Caroline in Hanover) during his life. If he was not impressed with the metaphysics of German thought, he was still inspired by its aesthetics. In any case, there was a direct connection between Herschel and the German romantics. That connection was Alexander von Humboldt. The Influence ofAlexander von Humboldt

In the person of Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859), John Herschel can be linked to the German romantic movement, and, more significantly, to a new conception of the natural world. In his own youth, Humboldt had interacted regularly with Schiller, Schelling, the Schlegels, and Goethe. This interaction left Humboldt with a fairly strong sense of Schelling' s and Goethe's conceptions of nature. Humboldt was sympathetic to the primacy of mind found in their Naturphilosophie . In 1807 his support of Schelling's philosophical system was 34 In the Herschel library were recorded: Augustus Wilhelm Schlegel,. Commentatio de Zodiaca Antiquitate et Origine; Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller, Siimmtliche Werke ; Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Wilhelm Meister's Lehrjahre: Ein Roman and Faust: Ein Trag6die. 35 See Appendix 1. 36 John Herschel to Margaret Brodie Herschel, 9[?) July 1838, (TxU:H/L-0538.1; Reel

I053 /CCJH 3719).

16

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

stated publicly in the preface to his Ideen zu einer Geographie der Pflanzen: "Nicht vollig unbekannt mit dem Geiste des Schellingischen Systems, bin ich we it von der Meynung entfernt, als konne das achte naturphilosophische Studium den empirischen Untersuchungen schaden, und als sollten ewig Empiriker und Naturphilosophen als streitende Pole sich einander abstossen.,,37 When 21 years old, Alexander von Humboldt traveled to England with his friend Georg Forster, who had traveled around the world on Captain Cook's second voyage. First inspired by Forster, Humboldt was further inspired in England upon hearing a lecture by Joseph Banks. As a result, Humboldt aspired to explore the world. In 1797 he quit his official position in the Prussian Mining Department and spent two years looking for an opportunity to travel. After a few potential voyages fell through he was able to sail to South America in 1799, under the auspices of the Spanish monarchy. The voyage lasted five years, during which time he explored the northern part of the continent, and visited central and north America as well. On his return to Europe in 1804 he brought with him 45 cases of specimens, containing over 60,000 botanical, geological, zoological, and ethnographical items. 38 Throughout Europe he was hailed as a hero. The next twenty-two years of his life were spent in Paris writing up what would amount to a thirty-volume account of his explorations. 39 Through his writings about his travels (especially his best-selling Personal Narrative as well as his Aspects of Nature 40 ), Humboldt (figure 1.2) inspired the idea of scientific traveling: a combination of exploration and the scientific measurement of natural phenomena. In South America he had traveled with a huge inventory of scientific instruments; these included chronometers, telescopes, micrometers, sextants, compasses, barometers, thermometers, hygrometers, electrometers, eudiometers, aerometers, a microscope, a micrometer, as well as a variety of vials, compounds, apparatuses, and tools for repair and maintenance. 41

37 Alexander von Humboldt, Ideen zu einer Geographie der Pflanzen (Leipzig: Geest und Portig K.-G., 1960(1807]), 24. "Not entirely unfamiliar with the spirit of Schelling's system, I am in fact far removed from the notion that true naturphilosophische studies could deplete empirical investigations, and empiricists and Naturphilosophen should cease to consider each other as being on opposite sides of an argument." 38 Douglas Botting, Humboldt and the Cosmos (New York: Harper and Row, 1973), 176. 39 Michael Dettelbach, "Humboldtian Science" in Cultures of Natural History, N. Jardine, J. A. Secord, and E. C. Spary, eds, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996),288. 40 Alexander von Humboldt (and Aime Bonpland), Personal Narrative of Travels to the Equinoctial Regions of America During the Years 1799-1804 (3 vols.), translated and edited by Thomasina Ross (London: George Bell and Sons, 1907(1851]); and Alexander von Humboldt, Aspects of Nature (third edition), translated by Elizabeth Sabine (Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1850). 41 In his Personal Narrative , Humboldt listed the instruments he carried with him during his travels in South America. See Cannon, Science in Culture, 75-6.

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

Figure 1.2 Alexander von Humboldt

17

18

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

These instruments were constantly employed, measuring the natural processes he encountered: magnetism, electricity, the currents of wind and water, the heat of the sun, and so on. The natural forces measured, however, were not understood in isolation from one another. Everything that could be measured was fit into a larger, dynamical conceptual structure-Humboldt's theory of the interrelationship of all natural forces. In short, Humboldt's genius was to represent South America as a dynamic, inter-related whole, and not a collection of elemental parts. He had set new precedents for scientific writing and measurement, for scientific voyages, and for the way nature was to be perceived. One might best call this program, as Humboldt often did, terrestrial physics ("physique de la terre"). Its first principle was general equilibrium, the idea that the natural forces operative on the earth were in a state of constant conflict. The end result of this conflict was an equilibrium that produced a stable order out of the variety of dynamic, even antagonistic, forces. To understand this equilibrium, it became incumbent on the terrestrial physicist to understand each of the forces individually. And that was best done by measurement. If the first principle of the terrestrial physicist was general equilibrium, then measurement was its practical corollary. Measurement by means of a variety of instruments enabled the terrestrial physicist to "track the great and constant laws of nature manifested in the rapid flux of phenomena, and to trace the reciprocal interaction, the struggle, as it were, of the divided physical forces.'>42 "Humboldtian science,,,43 as this has been called, became for many Europeans the model of scientific exploration in the first few decades of the nineteenth century. To "track the great and constant laws of nature," one had to travel. And thus Humboldt impacted scientific practice in two important ways. First, he 42 Humboldt before the Berlin Academy of Sciences (I805), as quoted in Dettelbach, "Humboldtian Science," 289. 43 Susan Cannon, "Humboldtian Science," chapter three in Science in Culture. Historiographically, there have been two broad notions of what exactly "Humboldtian" science was. For Cannon, to be Humboldtian (and British) meant being a Baconian factgatherer with a global purview: "Humboldtian science [was] the accurate, measured study of widespread but interconnected real phenomena in order to find a definite law and a dynamical cause." (ibid., 105). This view is echoed by Lewis Pyenson and Susan SheetsPyenson, for whom "[t]he Humboldtian ethos offered a clear justification for dozens of long-term Baconian research programmes ... " (Lewis Pyenson and Susan Sheets-Pyenson, Servants of Nature: A History of Scientific Institutions, Enterprises, and Sensibilities (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1999), 259.) For Michael Dettelbach, however, Cannon's version of "Humholdtian science" neglects the contemporary emphasis on the harmonious cosmos: the "narrative and drama" of the dynamic equilibrium of forces "illuminates the reorganization of knowledge and disciplines in the early nineteenth century that defined the emergence of natural science out of natural philosophy." ("Humboldtian Science," 304.) This present work reflects Dettelbach's position: that Herschel (as a Humboldtian terrestrial physicist) was less interested in the mere gathering of facts than he was in further developing Humboldt's conception of the dynamic cosmos and the scientific framework this view provided.

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

19

brought a new (and elegant) literary style to the scientific description of nature. In Humboldt's works we find an exchange of mechanical concepts (and their corresponding metaphors) for organic ones-nature in its totality as dynamic, active, even alive. Second, he provided a new method of scientific investigation at a time when, in the wake of Captain Cook,44 voyages of scientific exploration were experiencing a renaissance. Thus in Humboldt a new conception of natural order came into being during a new age of terrestrial exploration. In what way was Humboldt romantic, and why was he so inspiring? Put simply, in South America Humboldt was not simply describing and cataloging what he saw; he was defining~r, better yet, redefining-the Americas. And in so doing he was helping to define romanticism. Mary Louise Pratt has made this point in her excellent Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation: To the extent that Humboldt 'is' a Romantic, Romanticism 'is' Humboldt; to the extent that something called Romanticism constitutes or 'explains' Humboldt's writing on America, those writings constitute and 'explain' that something. To argue that the former simply 'reflects' the latter is to privilege the Literary and the European in a way which must be opened to question. [This] perspective ... would call for rethinking 'Romanticism' (and 'Literature' and 'Europe') in the light of writers like Humboldt and historical processes like changing contact with the Americas ... Romanticism consists, among other things, of shifts in relations between Europe and other parts of the world ... 45

Humboldt's new conception of nature was what was so sensational about his travels, and was why his description of nature-dynamic, organic-beguiled so many Europeans. 46 Malcolm Nicholson has written, "While Humboldt had no students as such, he inspired, either directly or by the example of his published works, a whole generation of younger investigators ... In Britain his works were eagerly read by ... Charles Lyell and Joseph Hooker [and] Charles Darwin ... "47 Indeed, the influence of Humboldt (and also Herschel) on nineteenth-century British science is evident in the following quotation from Charles Darwin's

44 David MacKay. In the Wake of Cook: Exploration, Science and Empire, 1780-1801 (New York: St Martin's Press, 1985). Mary Louise Pratt, Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation (New York: Routledge, 1992), 137-8. 46 Historians have noted that the spread of the romantic movement among European scientists in the first part of the nineteenth century was pervasive. It was a period in which, according to Stefano Poggi, "European scientists ... strongly aspired to a global, yet profound vision of knowledge." (Stefano Poggi, "Introduction," in Romanticism in Science: Science in Europe, 1790-1840 (Boston: Kluwer, 1994), xii.) 47 Malcolm Nicholson, "Historical Introduction" to Alexander von Humboldt, Personal Narrative of a Journey to the EqUinoctial Regions of the New Continent, abridged and translated by Jason Wilson (New York: Penguin Books, 1995), xxxi.

45

20

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Autobiography: "During my last year at Cambridge, I read with care and profound interest Humboldt's Personal Narrative. This work and Sir John Herschel's Introduction to the Study of Natural Philosophy [actually the Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy] stirred up in me a burning zeal to add even the most humble contribution to the noble structure of Natural Science.,,48 To this list can be added John Herschel as one who was directly inspired by Humboldt, as well as by his published works. In July of 1821 Herschel, then 29, undertook his first Grand Tour49 of the European continent. While visiting Paris with Charles Babbage and other friends 50 he met Alexander von Humboldt for the first time. It was a meeting no doubt facilitated by Herschel's last name; Humboldt had long been an admirer of William Herschel. John wrote to his mother of this meeting: " ... Baron von Humboldt request[s] to be ... remembered to my Father. [Humboldt] has been of great use to me, & is a most charming man.,,51 Exactly how Humboldt was of use to Herschel is unclear. One thing is certain, however: during this trip Herschel was on the continent much in the capacity of a Humboldtian terrestrial physicist-laden with instruments. 52 He and Babbage spent considerable time exploring the Alps, engaging in both geological and meteorological investigations. Herschel kept a notebook of his travels that listed his very Humboldtian collection of measuring instruments:

48 Quoted in Susan Cannon, Science in Culture, 86. Later Darwin would write from Rio de Janeiro (in 1832): "Here I first saw a Tropical forest in all its sublime grandeur .. . Iformerly admired Humboldt, I now almost adore him; he alone gives any notion of the feelings which are raised in the mind of first entering the Tropics." (Ibid., 87.) 49 The very act of taking a "grand tour" was a quintessentially romantic experience, allowing the (usually wealthy and young) English traveler a chance to visit Paris and the key Italian cities-Rome, Venice, Florence, and Naples. See Jeremy Black, The British and the Grand Tour (London: Croom Helm, 1985), 5. The reasons for taking a grand tour were numerous-the experience of continental art, fashion, and other cultural refinements being chief among them. For many "young lions" of British society (and certainly John Herschel may be counted among these) a grand tour was thought to add a bit of social polish (see Black, 239). Herschel himself took three of grand tours in his life (1821,1822, and 1824). The last of these, the longest at six and a half months, was undertaken in part to absent himself from England after a failed engagement. 50 Richard Jones (1790-1855), he would become a political economist and instructor at Haileybury College; and George Peacock (1791-1858), mathematician and later Lowndean ~rofessor at Cambridge. I John Herschel to Mary Pitt Herschel, 31 July 1821 (TxU :H/L-0515.2; Reel J053/CCJH 593). 52 The mark of any Humboldtian was their large collection of instruments. Humboldtian scientific traveling required instruments of all types to properly do terrestrial physics. The Humboldtian theme of Herschel and Babbage's trip is also recognized by Bruce Hevly, "The Heroic Science of Glacier Motion," Osiris II (1996),68.

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

21

A mountain Barometer A small chest of Chemical apparatus A Tennant's Blowpipe with the usual appendages A Pocket Compass A Small Pocket Sextant A Good Thermometer A large & small Mineralogical hammer A reflecting Goniometer A Camera Lucida, Drawing board & other apparatus for drawing with various other useful apparatus. 53

From his correspondence during this trip we know that Herschel was engaged in taking readings in the Alps with his "mountain barometer.,,54 He and Babbage worked together at making measurements of the various alpine phenomena they encountered. 55 Such Alpine measurements were no doubt inspired by Humboldt as well: Humboldt's 1802 climb of Mt. Chimborazo (6310ml20,700ft) had become the stuff of legend in Europe. Although he never reached the summit, Humboldt did set the contemporary world record for altitude attained: he made it to 5875m (19,309ft). Of course, throughout the climb he took a variety of measurements at different elevations. This climb would eventually symbolize his entire South American expedition. It was a sort of scientific reconquering of the New World: the mountain-then thought to be the highest in the world-had been climbed, explored, and its natural phenomena recorded. Depictions of Chimborazo itself would later be used by Humboldt to detail the varieties of plant life he found at different elevations. 56 It is therefore not surprising that, among his many Alpine pursuits with Babbage on their grand tour, Herschel also engaged in a mountain-climbing

Larry J. Schaaf, Tracings of Light: Sir John Herschel & the Camera Lucida (San Francisco: The Friends of Photography,1990), 17. 54 See for example John Herschel to Mary Pitt Herschel, 15 August 1821 (TxU:HlL-0515.3; Reel 1053/CCJH 602). 55 Upon their return to England Herschel and Babbage would publish a set of barometrical measurements from their investigation of a waterfall near Lauterbrunnen, Switzerland. In this brief report we see them concerned with the variety of forces affecting the course of the fall: wind strength, water temperature, barometric pressure, etc. In true Humboldtian style, they performed repeated measurements in an attempt to obtain an average or "mean," the balance or equilibrium of the forces affecting the fall. Babbage was optimistic that he and Herschel had achieved this: "Notwithstanding the differences in [his and Herschel's] observations, I am inclined to believe the mean [that they had obtained] to be extremely near the truth." John Herschel and Charles Babbage, "Barometrical Observations Made at the Fall of Staubbach," Edinburgh Philosophical Journal 6 (1821-22), 224-7. Also in Notizen aus dem Gebiete der Natur- und Heilkunde 2 (1822), 308-9. 56 See Alexander von Humboldt, [deen zu einer Geographie der Pflanzen. 53

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

22

expedition to what he thought was the summit of Monte Rosa (it was actually the Breithom)57 near Como. He believed he was the first Englishman to reach the summit; and of course he took barometric measurements from the peak.58 Herschel had been quite inspired for the climb: it excited his Humboldtian sensibilities and put him well ahead of the passion for alpine climbing (scientific and recreational) that would overtake Victorians in the late 1850s. 59 Herschel met Humboldt again on another, longer grand tour in 1824. At the outset of this tour Herschel visited Paris where he met the leading scientific figures then present in that city. Humboldt was among them, and Herschel interacted with him on at least two or three occasions: We arrived in Paris Monday morning ... [I] walked out to the observatory where I met Msr . Arago by good luck going to a Session of the Institute, whither I accompanied him. Thus within 8 hours after my arrival in Paris I found myself in company with almost everyone I wished to see ... [among them] Baron Humboldt (who afterwards called on me with M. Mitscherlich the Swedish Chemist and Crystallographer a Gentleman I considered myself particularly fortunate in meeting with) ... I breakfasted the next morning Tuesday with the Arago ' s [sic] at the Observatory ... we were joined by Humboldt who gave me some very useful information respecting the Alps-Vesuvius, &c ...60 In his lifetime Herschel also acquired and read a number of Humboldt's works. These included (in German, French, and also English translation) : Ansichten der

Natur, Asie centrale, Sur I'Etablissement de Stations Magnetiques, Melanges de Geologie et de Physique Generale, and all five volumes of Kosmos: Entwurf einer physischen Weltbeschreibung. 61 Some of these were personally inscribed to Herschel by Humboldt. 62 As a young man Herschel followed Humboldt's example in his descriptions and depictions of the natural world . Humboldt's descriptions of nature, unlike the 57 Schaaf, Tracings of Light, 17. 58 John Herschel to Mary Pitt Herschel, 15 September 1821 (TxU:H/L-0515.4 Reel 1053/CCJH 607); John Herschel to Signor Configliachi, 21 September 1821 (WT 65659/CCJH 608).

59 Colin A. Russell, Edward Frankland: Chemistry. Controversy and Conspiracy in Victorian England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). See chapter 14, '''The Wildest Parts' of Nature," including the first section, "Science from the Mountains." 60 John Herschel to Mary Pitt Herschel, 7 April 1824 (TxU :HIL-0517 .5, Reel 1053/CCJH 986). This letter is also quoted in part in Buttmann, The Shadow ofthe Telescope , 39-40. 61 SRC 1574-83. 62 For example, Herschel's personal copy of the first volume of the German edition of Cosmos is inscribed: "Seinem verehrten Freunde, Sir John Herschel, Bart. als ein schwaches Zeichen unverbrechlicher Anhanglichkeit und Bewunderung des Verf' ("My honored friend, Sir John Herschel, Bart., as a feeble token of uninterrupted attachment and admiration"), SRC 1574.

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

23

mechanical natural descriptions of the Enlightenment, gave dynamism and life to natural objects. Humboldt's Ansichten der Natur ("Aspects of Nature"), first published in 1808 in both German and French, heralded this transition. Its novel and dramatic literary representation of South America made it a bestseller. Herschel owned the second (1826) and third (1850) editions of this work, but it is probable, given his personal acquaintance with Humboldt, the wide popularity of the work, and his ability to read both German and French, that Herschel had also read the first edition. In the following excerpts we get a sense of Humboldt's vision of dynamic interrelationships, and can understand why such evocative descriptions of nature were so inspirational to those, like Herschel and Darwin, whose interest in investigating nature developed during the romantic period of the early nineteenth century. Humboldt wrote this description-perhaps it is better to call it a verbal painting--of a rainstorm over the Llanos, the steppes or plains of northern South America: A single cloud appears in the south, like a distant mountain, rising perpendicularly from the horizon. Gradually the increasing vapors spread like mist over the sky, and now the distant thunder ushers in the life-restoring rain. Hardly the surface of the earth received the refreshing moisture, before the previously barren Steppe begins to exhale sweet odors, and to clothe itself with Kyllingias, the many panicules of the Paspalum, and a variety of grasses. The herbaceous mimosas, with renewed sensibility to the influence of light, unfold their drooping, slumbering leaves to greet the rising sun; and the early song of birds, and the opening blossoms of the water plants, join to salute the morning. 63

Humboldt wrote in similarly evocative and dynamic style of a raging cataract on a tributary of the Orinoco river: A foaming surface of four miles in length presents itself at once to the eye: ironblack masses of rock resembling ruins and battlemented towers rise frowning from the waters. Rocks and islands are adorned with the luxuriant vegetation of the tropical forest; a perpetual mist hovers over the waters, and the summits of the lofty palms pierce through the cloud of spray and vapor. When the rays of the glowing evening sun are refracted in these humid exhalations, a magic optical effect begins. Colored bows shine, vanish, and reappear; and the ethereal image is swayed to and fro by the breath of the sportive breeze.64

Alexander von Humboldt, Aspects of Nature (third edition), translated by Elizabeth Sabine (Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1850),37-8. 64 Ibid., 181. 63

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

24

From these examples we get a sense of the way Humboldt's view of nature differed from the 'Newtonian' or Enlightenment view. Gone are the analogies to the clock. Present are the analogies to, or direct descriptions of, organisms: exhaling breath, unfolding leaves, and growing, rising, piercing, and singing. Now let us compare Humboldt's descriptions to this excerpt from a letter John Herschel wrote to his mother from Chamonix, France, in 1821. Herschel was on his first Grand Tour of Europe with Charles Babbage and their collection of measuring instruments. Notice his similarly dynamic prose: Chamouni Wednesday, IS August 1821 My dear Mother, Though it grows late and I am a good deal tired I cannot refuse myself the pleasure of beginning you a letter from this wonderful spot.-From the window of my bedroom I have now before my eyes the sublimest spectacle which I believe exists in Nature. The Sky after a long continuance of wet is at length cloudless and the full moon has just risen above the snowy summit of Mont Blanc which immediately overhangs the house we are in. Nothing can be conceived more beautiful than the mild light as it falls on the rounded dome which forms the top of this enormous mass, and the numberless pinnacles, sharp as needles and shooting up in pyramidal groups round its base, all splintered in a thousand rifts, and covered with snow wherever the steepness of the rock will suffer it to rest. Immediately in front of my window is a huge hill probably S or 6 thousand feet high covered from top to bottom with a dark forest of pines, and which forms the immediate base from which the loftier peaks spring-The Aiguille de Midi, which seems so close one might touch it is at least 12000 feet high ... When I look out of my window I see immediately on my left the Glacier de Bois which forms the lower part of what is called the "Mer de Glace" or Sea of Ice, and which descends quite into the valley, while on the right, and within about half a mile is another huge bank of ice, broken with bristling pinnacles of the most singular and picturesque forms, called the Glacier de Bui/son, which we visited yesterday ... 65

The dynamic, active conception of nature is evident: rock pinnacles "shoot" upwards, peaks "spring" aloft, a glacier "descends" like a waterfall, and ice shards "bristle" like the hairs or spines of a living creature. The view described is also harmonious: we get a sense of the unity of the scene of rock, ice, trees, and moonlight around Mont Blanc. And, perhaps most telling, there is an underlying scientific precision to Herschel's description: he gives exact (to his estimation) heights and distances, and the .structure and shape of the ice and rock is described in near crystallographic terms. 65

John Herschel to Marry Pitt Herschel, IS August 1821 (TxU :H/L-OSIS.3: Reel

I OS3/CCJH 602).

Recasting Herschel 's Cape Voyage

25

Susan Cannon has suggested that in different respects Herschel is and is not Humboldtian: "But Herschel ... was perhaps a Herschelian first , and a Humboldtian second."66 Certainly, Herschel had many other influences in his life than Humboldt, or his father. 67 It is here argued, however, that in his desire for a voyage to southern Africa, John Herschel was just as, if not more, inspired by the example of Humboldt than motivated strictly by the opportunity to complete his father's star surveys. Strong evidence for his desire to be much more than an astronomer comes from a letter he wrote to the Rev. Arthur Judd Carrighan. In this letter, dated 28 December 1827, Herschel was declining the proposition of numerous friends and colleagues that he stand for election to the Plum ian Professorship of Astronomy at Cambridge. In his refusal to stand for election he indicated that astronomy was not his true passion. Although he admitted "I have a work in hand which I consider it a sort of duty to complete, I mean the review and redetermination of my father ' s nebulae ... " he nevertheless went on to imply that this "work" would take him away from England ("I think it probable that this may lead me farther than I at first foresaw") and that in any case his scientific interests went well beyond that of astronomy: "I have other pursuits to which I am at least as deeply devoted as to Astronomy and which I am not sure that I do not like better and which, if I profess astronomy I must resign ... ,,68 That Herschel was interested in a multitude of scientific pursuits is well known. But here it is suggested that the influence of Humboldt was something more than just a passing one. As further evidence of this, we have Herschel's review of the first volume of Humboldt's Cosmos. This review indicates by its sheer (and uncharacteristic) enthusiasm that Herschel looked to Humboldt as a source of scientific inspiration. Indeed, Humboldt provided the nineteenth century with a complete system for the synthesis of natural knowledge, something that resonated very strongly with Herschel. This review firmly established Herschel's strong sympathies with Humboldt's scientific Weltanshauung.

In the realm of astronomy, according to Cannon, John Herschel was more influenced by his father than by Humboldt. Still, "John was, in other areas at any rate, influenced by what Humboldt had done with William Herschel's ideas ... Humboldt's 'astrometer' for measuring the relative intensity of starlight is case in point. It was a device inspired by William Herschel's work, and it in turn stimulated John Herschel." Cannon continues: "John Herschel's giant scheme for worldwide meteorological observations was directly Humboldtian; it was modelled after the terrestrial magnetism network of observers .. . " Science in Culture, 81-2. 67 For other influences on Herschel see Marvin Bolt, John Herschel's Natural Philosophy, section 3.2.1: "Economies of Politics and Nature," 204-31; the chemist William Hyde Wollaston was also an important early influence on Herschel; see Buttmann, The Shadow of the Telescope, 16. 68 Sarah Moore, "A Newly-Discovered Letter of J. F. W. Herschel Concerning the Plumian Professorship," Journalfor the History ofAstronomy 25 (1994), 143. 66

26

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Herschel's review of the first volume of Cosmos appeared in the Edinburgh Review in 1848. 69 It began with a dramatic flourish more akin to a literary review,

drawing as much upon poetic sensibilities as scientific interest: Kosmos, the adornment, the orderly arrangement, the ideal beauty, hannony, and grace of the universe! Is there or is there not in the mind of man a conception answering to these magnificent, these magical words? Is their sound an empty clang, a hollow ringing in our ears, or does it stir up in the depths of our inward being a sentiment of something interwoven in our nature of which we cannot divest ourselves, and which thrills within us as in answer to a spell whispering more than words can interpret? Is this wondrous world of matter and of thought, of object and of subject, of blind force and of moral relation, a one indivisible and complete whole, or a mere fragmentary assemblage of parts, having to each other no inherent primordial relations? If the fonner, contradiction and ultimate discordance can have no place ... If the latter, Chaos is reality, Polytheism a truth ... 70

The question Herschel poses is rhetorical. Such a harmonious conception of the universe is possible. Furthermore, it can be arrived at by "pure reason and the inborn feeling.,,71 It is given to certain humans, by use of these faculties, the rare opportunity to "embody and realise to our conceptions the UNITY OF NATURE ... to spring a little way aloft-to carol for a while in bright and sunny regions-to open out around us ... views commensurate with our extent of vision ... "72 More to the point, certain men of genius may be able to "throw off, in broad and burning outline, a picture of THE WHOLE as it has presented itself to their aspiring conceptions.,,7) But not just any unified view will do. It must, "to be in any way successful ... be, in the highest possible sense of the word, picturesque, nothing standing in relation to itself alone, but all to the general effect.,,74 Herschel, in further following this line, relates dynamic nature to picturesque art, to poetry and philosophy,15 and to music. 76 In "cosmos" everything matters, all is inter-related, and because of this harmony, and not chaos, is the rule. 69 John Herschel, review of the first volume of Alexander von Humboldt's Cosmos, Edinburgh Review 87 (1848), 17(}-229. Ibid., 170. 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid., 171. 7) Ibid. 74 Ibid. That Herschel was concerned in his review of Cosmos to see Humboldt in the tradition of the picturesque has also been noted by W. H. Brock: "No matter how beautiful or striking an object Humboldt was describing, Herschel noted, his aim was to associate it with other things-its true significance lay entirely in its associations and relationships." W. H. Brock, "Humboldt and the British: A Note on the Character of British Science," Annals a/SCience 50 (1993), 367. 75 " ... as the poetical enjoyment of nature springs out of this its endless variety, so, on the other hand, the unity of plan, which even uncultivated minds fail not to recognise amid so 70

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

27

Thus Herschel segued to Humboldt as the one who had achieved this unified vision. Humboldt is "assuredly the person in all Europe best fitted to undertake and accomplish such a work. Science has produced no man of more rich and varied attainments, more versatile in genius, more indefatigable in application of all kinds of learning, more energetic in action, or more ardent in inquiry ... [he has realized] the ideal conception of a perfect traveller ... ,,77 Like Humboldt, Herschel shared in the belief that the physical and the moral forces in nature worked in harmony. It is the unity of the whole, and not the analysis of the parts, that both men aspired to present. Analysis should only ever be done with one eye on synthesis. And here Herschel went one step beyond Humboldt and gave nature its Author. In his review of Cosmos he wrote: " .. . the contemplation of nature can be said to lead us up, by legitimate induction, to its Author .. . But that it may do so, we must educate our perceptions by practice and habit, till we learn to disregard specialties, whether of objects or laws, and see rather their relations and connexions, their places in a system, their fulfillment of a purpose, their adaptation to an interminable series of intersubservient ends.,,78 Throughout his life Herschel would, especially in his public writings, combine the dynamic and interrelated forces of the Humboldtian cosmos with the presence of the divine. In 1830 in his Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy, he advocated the study of nature as a means of gaining a better understanding of nature's Creator. 79 And in 1865 he wrote a short piece entitled "On the Origin of Force." This was written for a popular audience, so we must be careful not to give it too much scientific weight. Still, we see that Herschel continued to promote the role of the divine in the natural order, wherein "force" was always the result of will or "volition,,:80

much diversity, calls forth the latent germ of the philosophic spirit." Herschel, review of Cosmos, 176. 76 "Enjoyment of a different ... richer .. . and more exciting kind, is that which depends on the peculiar physiognomy of natural scenes. Harmonising, like music, with internal trains of thought and imagination, and with every conceivable state of mind, they awaken of themselves, as soon as presented, sentiments congenial to them, and lead the spirit, by strong associative links, through every phase of feeling ... " Ibid. 77 Ibid., 172-3. 78 Herschel, review of Cosmos, 177-8. 79 John Herschel, A Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987[1830)), 16-17. 80 "In every [physical] change we recognize the action of FORCE. And in the only case in which we are admitted into any personal knowledge of the origin of force, we find it connected (possibly by intermediate links untraceable by our faculties, but yet indisputably connected) with volition, and by inevitable consequence, with motive, with intellect, and with all those attributes of mind in which ... personality consists." John Herschel, "On the Origin of Force," in Familiar Lectures on Scientific Subjects (London: Alexander Strahan and Company, 1868), 461-2. (Originally in Fortnightly Review I (1865),435--42.)

28

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

The universe presents us with an assemblage of phrenomena, physical, vital, and intellectual-the connecting link between the worlds of intellect and matter being that of organized vitality, occupying the whole domain of animal and vegetable life, throughout which, in some way inscrutable to us, movement among the molecules of matter are originated of such a character as apparently to bring them under the control of an agency other than physical, superseding [sic] the ordinary laws which regulate the movements of inanimate matter, or, in other words, giving rise to movements which would not result from the action of those laws uninterfered with; and therefore implying, on the very same principle, the origination of force. The first and greatest question which Philosophy has to resolve in its attempts to make out a Kosmos,-to bring the whole of the phrenomena exhibited in these three domains of existence under the contemplation of the mind as a congruous whole,-is whether we can derive any light from our internal consciousness of thought, reason, power, will, motive, design-r not ... Will without Motive, Power without Design, Thought opposed to Reason, would be admirable in explaining a chaos, but would render little aid in accounting for anything else.81 In this passage, as in his review of Humboldt's Cosmos , Herschel married divine agency with dynamic nature. If nothing else, we see that for Herschel that the conception of a "Kosmos" provided an overarching framework for the structure of natural knowledge. This is indicative of the broad impact Humboldt had on the European conception of nature, which had long been obvious to Herschel: "The respect of Europe, indeed, has gone along with [Humboldt] to a point which has almost rendered his recommendations rules. It has sufficed that von Humboldt has pointed out lines of useful and available inquiry, to make everyone eager to enter upon them .,,82 Indeed, Herschel was more than an advocate of Humboldt's Co smos: he had been a direct contributor to the work . Humboldt had relied extensively on Herschel for input on astronomical, as well as other forms, of natural knowledge. 83

The Cape Voyage: Humboldtian Traveling and Filial Duty The degree to which Herschel modeled himself after Humboldt might be considered incidental if not for what it indicated of his private inclinations for his Cape voyage. His interest in Humboldtian scientific traveling supports the notion that he had his sights set on additional scientific pursuits in the southern hemisphere other than an astronomical survey. Like Humboldt, Herschel remained

81 Herschel, ibid., 473-5. 82 Herschel, review of Cosmos, 173 . 83 Petra Genz-Wemer, "Alexander von Humboldt's ' Cosmos, a Sketch of a Physical Description of the World'-A Product of Teamwork?", unpublished MS delivered at the History of Science Society Annual meeting in November, 2000, in Vancouver, Canada.

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

29

an ardent amateur with broad scientific interests. Under the Humboldtian influence, Herschel wanted to explore the world, and measure, describe, and draw it. And the Cape provided him with the opportunity to do so. When he finally got to the Cape Herschel did explore, measure, describe, collect, and draw. While there he made a number of expeditions to explore the local surroundings. Many of these were expeditions to collect bulbs of indigenous Cape flora, about which Herschel and his wife were passionate. They created their own garden, and, with John tracing (via his camera lucida) and Margaret painting, made a multitude of beautiful drawings. 84 He would, also with the camera lucida, make numerous drawings of the natural environment in and around Cape Town, drawings which emphasized the "stupendous display of wild and gigantic nature," as Humboldt put it, over "man and his productions.,,85 Herschel drew Africa in the same way Humboldt described the New World-dynamic, massive, and dwarfing the products of civilization. Perhaps the best example of this is Herschel's drawing of his 20-foot reflecting telescope amidst the lush Cape vegetation, with Table Mountain towering above it (figure 1.3).86 This drawing became the frontispiece of the Cape Results. Image making was as important a part of Humboldt's representation of nature as were his literal descriptions. So also for Herschel at the Cape, who, like Humboldt, made images of plants, landscapes, as well as maps, to further record his study of the natural world. Herschel's astronomical survey of the southern heavens was similarly supplemented by such images: a glance through the back of the Cape Results reveals a number of beautiful celestial drawings. Their detail is not merely a testament to Herschel's skill; it is indicative of his emphasis on precision in all forms of scientific data. That both Herschel and Humboldt looked to images as one extension of terrestrial physics is found in their similar and simultaneous response to the initial photographic inventions of Louis J. M. Daguerre.

84 Brian Warner and John Rourke, Flora Herscheliana: Sir John and Lady Herschel at the Cape 1834 to 1838 (South Africa: The Brenthurst Press, 1998). 85 Referring to the New World, Humboldt wrote "In the Old World, nations and the distinctions of their civilization form the principal points in the picture; in the New World, man and his productions almost disappear amidst the stupendous display of wild and gigantic nature." As quoted in Mary Louise Pratt, Imperial Eyes, III. See also Alexander von Humboldt, Personal Narrative (abridged), 12. 86 Brian Warner has noted that some of Herschel's drawings at the Cape were made to be precise, scientific records: "It is interesting to note that Herschel brought the ... principle [of evolution by natural transition] to bear in at least some of his terrestrial topographic drawings, made with the aid of a camera lucida. For example, [a] sketch of Table Mountain ... as seen from his Ft"\dhausen estate has the caption 'a very elaborate and exact portrait of it. ' This was evidently made with the aim of investigating the rate of erosion." Brian Warner, "The Years at the Cape of Good Hope," 55.

30

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Figure 1.3 Herschel's 20-ft. Telescope at the Cape

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

31

When it was announced that Daguerre had developed a way of fixing images to thin metal plates in Paris in January 1839, both Herschel (back from Africa for less than a year) and Humboldt reacted with immediate enthusiasm to the news. Herschel quickly developed his own method for fixing images to specially-treated paper,87 and sent some examples of both his and his own "fixed" images to the Royal Astronomer at the Cape of Good Hope, Thomas Maclear, with whom he had worked diligently on southern hemisphere astronomical observations. 88 Herschel then set off for Paris to see Daguerre and his work first hand. 89 At about the same time, Humboldt, upon hearing of Daguerre's invention, marched across Paris, collected Daguerre, and took him to the Paris Observatory where, with the aid of the astronomer Franc;:ois Arago, they made some of the first fixed astronomical images. For both Humboldt and Herschel, who attributed dynamic power to the entities of nature, the opportunity to capture that dynamism with a process that ensured a high degree of precision was certainly an advancement in their concept of terrestrial (and celestial) physics. Photographic image making could precisely capture the dynamism of nature. During his Cape voyage, also like Humboldt, Herschel spent considerable time making measurements. The habit began on board the Mountstuart Elphinstone, in the months before he reached the Cape. During the voyage Herschel took almost daily temperature measurements with thermometers, usually attempting to determine the mean. 90 He also made measurements of barometric pressure, kept regular notes on their position at sea, and even, because of "excessive langour and debility," kept track of his maximum and minimum pulse rates. 91 He also took measurements of solar radiation with his actinometer-a device of his own invention92-as well as a series of measurements of the temperature of the sea 87 Herschel's important role in the development of photography is well detailed in Larry Schaaf, "John Herschel, Photography and the Camera Lucida," in Brian Warner, ed., The John Herschel Bicentennial Symposium (Royal Society of South Africa, 1992), 87-102. 88 The images Herschel sent to Maclear (along with the comment "Photography or Photogeny or what not is all the rage now") were probably the first examples of photography in the Cape colony. Brian Warner, Charles Piazzi Smyth, Astronomer-Artist: His cape Years, 1835-1845 (Cape Town: A. A. Balkema, 1983), 116. 89 John Herschel to William Henry Fox Talbot, 22 April 1839 (RS:HS 22.11/CCJH 4080). 90 For example see David S. Evans, Terence 1. Deeming, Betty Hall Evans, and Stephen Goldfarb, eds, Herschel at the Cape: Diaries and Correspondence of Sir John Herschel, 1834-1838 (Austin : University of Texas Press, 1969). This contains much of Herschel's diary for the years 1834-1838. See the entries for Wednesday 20 November 1833 to Friday 22 November 1833. 91 Herschel diary, 3 December 1833, ibid., 13. 92 Herschel diary, 20 December 1833, ibid., 16. Herschel's actinometer was a device he invented for the measurement of solar radiation. It consisted essentially of a large cylinder, the top of which was a thermometer tube, and the bottom of which was a larger cylinder filled with dark liquid, the volume of which was variable by means of a seal attached to a screw. The entire instrument was alternately exposed to sun and shade, and the values for temperature change were recorded. This instrument was recently rebuilt and trials were

32

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

water. 93 Similar pursuits included the capture and dissection of a variety of marine life,94 and the observation of a lunar eclipse. 95 All of these dissections, measurements, and observations were duly recorded, exactly as Humboldt had done on his travels through South America. 96 Herschel would continue such measurements and observations of natural forces and phenomena once he and his family arrived at the Cape. In the heavens, in addition to his telescopic surveys, he would continue to measure solar radiation with his actinometer, as well as the intensity of light emitted by stars with his astrometer. With Thomas Maclear, the Royal Astronomer at the Cape, Herschel would help measure a geodetic baseline for a later survey of southern Africa. 97 Herschel and Maclear also devised a program of tidal observations in Table Bay (north of Cape Town) and Simon's Bay (southeast of Cape Town). This was part of a world-wide project headed by William Whewell in England, the goal of which was to obtain chronologically-coordinated global tidal observations. 98 Herschel also collected many natural specimens, including birds and fossils. The latter were collected for Herschel in an area north of Cape Town by Andrew Smith, who was exploring southern Africa. The fossils were given to Herschel, who sent them on to England. These fossils aided Roderick Murchison in determining that the silurian system was indeed a general phenomenon (and which fossils Murchison would name after Herschel: Homa/ontus herscheli, later Burmeisteria herscheli).99 Herschel was involved as well in the collection of meteorological data, engaging the South African Literary and Scientific Institution (for which he served as President 100) in contributing to that same end. Additionally, he was on the committee, and later the chairman, of the Cape of Good Hope Association for Exploring Central Africa, which directed the expedition of Andrew Smith.101 Thus, like Humboldt and European Humboldtians, while at the Cape made with it. See Adelheid Voskuhl, "Recreating Herschel's Actinometry: An Essay in the Historiography of Experimental Practice," British Journal for the History of Science 30 997), 337-55. 3 Herschel diary, 28 November 1833, Evans et aI., Herschel at the Cape, II. 94 For example, the crew pulled up dolphins and tuna, from which Herschel got the eyes ~Herschel diary, 7-8 December 1833, ibid. 15-16). 5 Herschel diary, 26 December 1833, ibid., 17. 96 See John Herschel, "Account of Fishes eyes," and "An Eclipse of the Moon," ibid., 23. On Humboldt's studies of marine creatures, see Botting, Humboldt and the Cosmos, 66-75 . 97 Evans, "Dashing and Dutiful," 942-3. 98 Ibid., 948. 99 Brian Warner, "Sir John Herschel at the Cape of Good Hope," in The John Herschel Bicentennial Symposium, 49-50. 100 Herschel's involvement in the activities and societies of the Cape colony received public acknowledgment. The August 1834 Cape of Good Hope Literary Gazette reported, on page 148, that" ... Sir John Herschel was elected President of the [South African Literary and Scientific] Institution." 101 Ibid., 46-7. The 'handbook' for the expedition, "Instructions Addressed to the Director [Andrew Smith] of the Expedition into Central Africa," was published as an open letter in

p

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

33

Herschel was involved in the project of exploring, measuring, and describing the natural world. And all of this in addition to his formidable task of surveying the night sky of the southern hemisphere. That Herschel was mindful of Humboldt and his program of terrestrial physics while at the Cape is evident in a letter he wrote to Humboldt on 31 July 1838, soon after his return to England. Humboldt had long encouraged men of science throughout Europe to collaborate on a system of worldwide geomagnetic observations. It was a project which, while it encouraged international collaboration among men of science, also fostered competition because of the involvement of self-interested national navies. 102 Such observations had been part of Humboldt's researches even before he went to South America. Following his own rise to scientific fame, he headed a loosely-organized international group of observers dedicated to these geomagnetic researches. The British were the last to jump on the bandwagon, with John Herschel and Edward Sabine leading the British effort. What is relevant here is Herschel's expressed eagerness to participate in Humboldt's network of geomagnetic observations after his return from the Cape, and his commitment to lobby the British government and the Admiralty to support the project. Herschel wrote to Humboldt: While at the Cape, I had not the means of taking part in that important and delicate system of magnetic observations ... Immediately on my return to London ... I acquired a knowledge of those methods, and of their so far, highly satisfactory and curious results, which has been since made more clear and perfect by communications written [by] M. [Carl Friedrich] Gauss in Gottingen ... Having occasion to call the attention of My Lords of the British Admiralty to the improvement and extension of the Observatory at the Cape, you may be sure, that I did not neglect that opportunity of pressing upon them the importance of a series of magnetic observations to be made there in correspondence with those in Europe ... India, Australia, Mauritius, and in short at as many stations as possible in the English Colonial possessions. 103

the South African Quarterly Journal 3 (April-June 1834),257-71; it was also published in the South African Commercial Advertiser (23 June 1834). For discussion of the expedition see Elizabeth Green Musselman, "Swords into Ploughshares: John Herschel's Progressive View of Astronomical and Imperial Governance," British Journalfor the History of Science 31 (1998),432-3. 102 John Cawood, "Terrestrial Magnetism and the Development of International Collaboration in the Early Nineteenth Century," Annals of Science 34 (1977): 551-87. Although Edmund Halley was probably the first to make geomagnetic observations on anything approaching a global scale, it was Humboldt who gave the project vitality and had the organizational skill to make it viable. See Cawood, "Terrestrial Magnetism," in rcarticular sections 5-6 and 11-14. 03 John Herschel to Alexander von Humboldt, 31 July 1838 (RS :HS 21 .255/CCJH 3733).

34

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Herschel would soon become very involved in this "Magnetic Crusade" and in promoting the construction of Humboldtian, "Terrestrial Physics ... observing stations" to study the "gigantic problems of meteorology, magnetism, and oceanic movements ... ,,104 To add some balance to this discussion, Humboldt's opinion of Herschel is worth mentioning. The German was no doubt impressed by John; he was also aware that his younger English colleague held him in high esteem. Humboldt once wrote to another correspondent that he had received a "letter from Sir John Herschel, full of flattery." 105 Though Humboldt was certainly used to such praise, Herschel's letters to him were indeed often effusive. 106 But Humboldt's opinions of Herschel were not mutual. For Humboldt, it was William Herschel, and not John, who evoked his admiration: "the African (Herschel) [John] ... in spite of his erudition and the observations and the children he has made at the Cape [and other achievements] ... appears to me inferior to the originality of his father, astronomer, physicist and poetical cosmologist all at once.,,107 Indeed, William provided Humboldt with the bridge between terrestrial and celestial physics, as was indicated in the initial pages of Cosmos: "In the science of the Cosmos ... [t]he physical history of the world must .. . begin with the description of the heavenly bodies and with a geographical sketch of the universe, or, I would rather say, a true map of the world, such as was traced by the bold hand of [William] Herschel.,,108 Humboldt was flattered by John Herschel-appreciating and often needing his scientific expertise-but he was, at least in 1840, more impressed by William. In concluding this section, let it be said that what is important here is not only the degree to which John Herschel was like Humboldt, but also the degree to which he was not entirely like his father. By focusing on Humboldt's influence on Herschel, it has not been the intention to argue that Herschel was Humboldtobsessed. Humboldt's influence on Herschel has been discussed in detail here as a contrast to the judgment of "filial duty" that the historical record has passed upon Herschel's Cape voyage, and on much of his scientific life. Indeed, although it is 104 John Herschel, Presidential Address in Report of the Fifteenth Meeting the British Association for the Advancement of Science; Held at Cambridge in June, 1845 (London: John Murray, 1846), xxxiii-xxxiv. 105 Alexander von Humboldt to Vamhagen von Ense, I April 1844, as quoted in Letters of Alexander von Humboldt to Varnhagen von Ense (London: Triibner and Co., 1860), 110. 106 See for example John Herschel to Alexander von Humboldt, 21 December 1843, in which Herschel praises Humboldt and his recently published Asie Centrale (Central Asia, 1843). Even for Herschel this letter is remarkably polite, and abounding in acclaim: "so completely do you succeed" and "I must congratulate you .. . on another great achievement" and "your funds are inexhaustible!" As quoted in Letters of Alexander von Humboldt to Varnhagen von Ense (London: Triibner and Co., 1860), 119-20. 107 Alexander von Humboldt to Fran~ois Arago, 19 February 1840. As quoted in L. Kellner, Alexander von Humboldt (London: Oxford University Press, 1963), 188. 108 Alexander von Humboldt. Cosmos: A Sketch of the Physical Description of the Universe, vol. I, trans. E. C. Otte (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997[1858]),23 .

Recasting Herschel's Cape Voyage

35

true that in the first part of the nineteenth century "Humboldtian science" was perhaps the most inspirational and comprehensive program for the investigation of nature, this does not mean Herschel or others were Humboldt clones. To whatever extent Herschel followed the program of Humboldtian science, it is at least as important to recognize that he was not engaged only in astronomical pursuits for the sake of his father's legacy.

Conclusion When John Herschel wrote to Fearon Fallows about a possible journey to the Cape on 9 January 1831, he had something more in mind than just an astronomical expedition. Consider how, just two days later, Herschel responded to an invitation by his brother-in-law, James Calder Stewart, who was in India and had asked the Herschels to visit. John responded as he did to Fallows, mentioning his desire to observe the southern heavens. He wrote that he was considering the Cape, but he revealed as well that he had once thought of observing from Paramatta, in Australia, and additionally that he would love to visit India, which would give him an excuse to see the Himalayas. In fact, as he told one correspondent, if after he arrived at the Cape the conditions for astronomical observation were not favorable, he would simply move on with his family to India. 109 He had a plan, in short, "to see the world & '" acquire knowledge."IIO Additionally, in planning for his return from the Cape, in 1835 he wrote to Francis Baily: "Among projects, possible, & impossible, I have one for returning via Rio Janeiro [sic]"III-South America, where Humboldt had been. It would seem that the whole terrestrial world, and not just the southern heavens, had been on Herschel's mind. In the end it became obvious that Herschel's mind had not in fact always been on astronomical observation. Once he returned to England he never again engaged in any extensive observational astronomy. After 1838, with the exception of the reduction of his Cape observations, he focused his scientific attention almost exclusively on earthly scientific investigations. It has been argued here that Herschel was influenced by the Humboldtian spirit of scientific traveling, which spirit he brought with him to the Cape along with his father's telescopes. Thus, in addition to his telescopic survey, his desire for an Humboldtian terrestrial physics experience made his voyage something more than filial duty . Having thus added the context of his private scientific intentions, we are

John Herschel to M. Perrey, 16 March 1833 (RS:HS 25.3.12/CCJH 2761). John Herschel to James Calder Stewart, II January 1831 (TxU:H/L-0412 ; Reel \055/CCJH 2279). About this same time Herschel indicated that experiments on the propagation of sound "in the elevated passes of the Himalaya Mountains would be interesting." John Herschel, "Sound," Encyclopeadia Metropolitana (1830),747. III John Herschel to Francis Baily, 4 December 1835 (RS:HS 3. 130/CCJH 3223). 109

110

36

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

led to expand our understanding of Herschel's voyage. Like Humboldt, Herschel's private scientific vision was comprehensive as well as communal. Also like Humboldt his scientific curiosity was almost insatiable, and he encouraged other investigators to combine their gathered knowledge into a unified and general description of natural phenomena for the benefit of all. This will be discussed further in the next chapter. And with that, one item further should be born in mind: part of the argument of the next chapter is that Herschel's refusal of aid from the British government demonstrated his sincere commitment to a "private adventure." Had he only been interested in going to the Cape to complete his father's survey, it is doubtful that he would have so adamantly refused the proffered aid. More than likely, were the voyage not ultimately a personal one, it would have been much easier for him and the survey if had he accepted financial assistance from his government. The private motivation for Herschel's Cape voyage is only superficially explained if one suggests that it was the fulfillment of a scientific duty owed to his father. That alone tells us little of John's personal thoughts, desires, and private scientific intentions. Something more was involved than a son's responsibility to his father's obsession with astronomy, and hopefully this addition has been made: John Herschel wanted a chance to see more of the world, and to do so in the Humboldtian way in which the world was then being seen.

Chapter 2

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

... my question is, whether the time annihilated by learned bodies ('par les affaires administratives') is balanced by the good they do. Fancy exchanging Herschel at the Cape, for Herschel as President of the Royal Society, which he so narrowly escaped being, and I voting for him too! I hope to be forgiven for that.) -Charles Lyell to Charles Darwin, 1836 King's ships would have other fish to fry than landing stargazers at the world's end. -John Herschel to John William Lubbock. 1833

Introduction Science is often used as a means of legitimizing other activities. In the context of British imperialism this was often the case. The first voyage of Captain James Cook in 1768 was given official papers from the British Admiralty and the Royal Society stating that it was a scientific voyage to the south Pacific, the object of which was to observe the transit of Venus. Cook and the crew of the Endeavour, however, had secret orders to search the Pacific Ocean for undiscovered lands that could be claimed by the Crown. 2 In particular, Cook was to look for the legendary Terra Australis, for which the French and Dutch were also searching and which was rumored to contain spices, silks, and other riches. His discovery of that southern continent is itself legendary, but is the subject of other histories. Scientific activity was not merely cover for imperial activity, of course. To the contrary, science and imperialism often went hand in hand, providing reciprocal benefits. Imperial governments could benefit from the natural knowledge of distant areas of the world provided by scientific expeditions, and men of science, under imperial auspices, were given access to new regions of the natural world to investigate. 3

) As quoted in Marie Boas Hall, "The 'Distinguished Man of Science'" John Herschel /792- 1871: A Bicentennial Commemoration, ed. by D. G. King-Hele (London: The Royal Society, 1992), 120. 2 Peter Aughton, Endeavour: The Story o/Captain Cook's First Great Epic Voyage (Great Britain: Barnes & Noble Books, 1999),3. 3 For general discussion and examples see David Philip Miller and Peter Hans Reill, eds, Visions 0/ Empire: Voyages, Botany, and Representations 0/ Nature (Cambridge University

38

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Along these lines, it is the argument of this chapter that the British government, to some extent, used John Herschel's Cape voyage to legitimize its control and possession of the Cape colony in southern Africa, and even to legitimize its designs on the rest of that continent. Herschel, aware of the attempt to use his voyage in this way, resisted it. Nevertheless, the reciprocity of science and imperialism enabled Herschel to undertake his voyage to the Cape colony in the first place, and prosecute the astronomical and other scientific investigations he did while there. Herschel used the scientific project of completing his father's astronomical survey as a way to enable a more broadly conceived scientific voyage, one that would enable him to see and investigate more of the world. It was, however, its political and imperial ambitions that led the British government to attempt to use Herschel's Cape voyage to legitimize its control of the Cape colony, as well as its incipient explorations of the African continent. Though it was unable to convince Herschel to travel to the Cape under its protection and funding, in the end it was able to create a public perception of Herschel as a participant in its imperial designs on the Cape, and on Africa. As a result Herschel became a national hero for reasons he never intended. By leaving the metropolis for the periphery, in the public mind Herschel was seen in the same light as other men of science who undertook voyages of discovery. Following Captain Cook and Joseph Banks, but even going as far back as the voyages of Edmond Halley, science and British expansionism were closely linked. Thus Herschel's voyage, regardless of how he may privately have envisioned it, was fated to invoke the same imperial sentiments. There was no conspiracy on the part of the British government to make Herschel's voyage appear as if it was directly linked to the ambitions of Whitehall and the Crown. Indeed, none was needed. Statements recognizing the imperial significance of Herschel's Cape voyage, which were made by members of the government, the scientific community, and others, were printed in popular periodicals. The British read these, and made the assumption themselves.

The Importance of Scientific Voyages to Post-Napoleonic Britain James Cook and Joseph Banks It was in the latter decades of the eighteenth century that the precedents for nineteenth-century voyages of scientific exploration were set. During the second half of the eighteenth century European governments sent out explorers to chart distant lands and bring back examples of what those lands contained, so that these lands could be better understood back home. It was a period in which naval powers Press, 1996), and John M. MacKenzie, ed., Imperialism and the Natural World (New York: Manchester University Press, 1990).

The Politics ofHerschel's Cape Voyage

39

employed science for imperial purposes. The goal of such expeditions was that by exploring, mapping, cataloging, and bringing back specimens of distant parts of the globe, those distant parts would be brought home in representation and, by the accumulation in Europe of this knowledge, controlled. This is the model of knowledge accumulation by scientific exploration proposed by Bruno Latour in his book Science in Action. Latour considers imperial uses of science as a way to bring the wide world back home to European metropolises. This he calls "translation towards the centres," the idea being that a scientific voyage will leave a metropolis, explore part of the world, and bring back a record of its findings: specimens, maps, drawings, etc. With this first survey the next voyage to that part of the world will be more knowledgeable, and will build upon the success of the first, bringing more information back to the metropolis. And so this goes on, until the metropolis-the center of this cycle-has in representation models of lands far off, models that provide the knowledge necessary to control those distant lands. The representations as knowledge are later made mobile (books, maps, etc.), stable (as free as possible from corruption or distortion), and combinable (standardized and cumulative). Finally this process is reversed; these centers, themselves made mobile, begin to spread themselves outward to the periphery, establishing a network that stabilizes the knowledge of the original center throughout the world and furthers control by that center. 4 Perhaps the best British examples of this activity were the voyages of Captain James Cook. Cook's first voyage on the Endeavour (1768-1771) went initially to Tahiti to observe the transit of Venus; this was of course a partial ruse. While scientific investigations were indeed executed, the Endeavour expedition was such a success in its discovery of new territory for England (including the hitherto Terra Australis Incognita) that the British Admiralty sent him on two further expeditions. Scientific investigation was again a key mission, and the Admiralty fell all over itself to outfit his ships with every available scientific apparatus for gathering natural knowledge of the antipodes. In Cook's own words before his second voyage in 1772, "every department seem' d to vie with each other in equiping [my] Sloops ... every necessary and useful article was granted as soon as asked for.,,5 His voyages were also means of testing new navigational technologies; he was provided with the latest navigational instruments, in part to test the newly developed nautical watches: "The Board of Longitude were not wanting on their part in providing the Astronomers [on his ships] with the very best of I[n]struments both for makeing Celestial and Nautical Observations ... ,,6

Bruno Latour, Science in Action (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987). See chapter 6, "Centres of Calculation." 5 As quoted in David Philip Miller "Joseph Banks, Empire, and 'Centers of Calculation' in Late Hanoverian London," in Visions of Empire: Voyages, Botany, and Representations of Nature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 25~. 6 James Cook, The Journals of Captain Cook (England: Penguin Books, 1999),229-30.

4

40

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

On board Cook ' s first voyage was Joseph Banks, the wealthy citizen and naturalist. As a result of his involvement with this and his other voyages of discovery (to Labrador and Iceland), Banks was able to marshal the success of the Endeavour voyage to his own ends.7 With astute politicking and by popularizing his scientific accomplishments during his voyage, Banks positioned himself at the very center of the British scientific scene. He dominated the Royal Society as its President for 42 years, from 1778 until 1820, and from that central position and with the backing of the government affected almost every domestic and international scientific expedition. 8 Banks was also domineering. Indeed, Martin Rudwick has described Banks as "the Royal Society's autocratic president."9 And later it was this Banksian scientific regime at home that was seen by John Herschel's contemporaries as the biggest stumbling block to scientific progress in Britain.1O During Banks's long tenure as President of the Royal Society he had many opponents, even enemies. II But the reformers of Herschel's generation mounted the strongest effort to reorganize British science during Banks's lifetime, usually in spite of the Royal Society and it members: Banks balked when these upstarts dared to form an astronomical society outside of the jurisdiction of the Royal Society.12 Yet although Banks was often vilified by members of Herschel's generation, Herschel himself was not a strong critic of the man. After all, it was Banks who had been one of his father William's strongest supporters during the early stages of his astronomical career. If an appreciation of, or interest in, sophisticated mathematics was not in Bank's nature, it was however in the nature of the next generation: that of Herschel, Babbage, and others. When Herschel and his friends revised the Cambridge mathematical curriculum in the early 1810s, they were consciously stepping away from the utilitarian emphasis placed upon science by Banks and his Royal Society. It is perhaps ironic then that Herschel was made a Fellow of the Royal Society (in 1813) on the basis of his mathematical work. During Banks' presidency of the Royal Society, British science was thus inferior to French science in almost every way. Banks was best as an administrator 7 For a good general discussion of Banks' life, including his success on Cook's voyages and his subsequent rise to the top of the British scientific scene, see Patrick O'Brian, Joseph Banks: A Life (Chi£ago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987). For Banks' role in British imperial science, see John Gascoigne, Science in the Service of Empire: Joseph Banks, the British State, and the Uses of Science in the Age of Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 8 For more on Banks' unrivaled position as the center of British science and his legacy, see Miller, "Joseph Banks, Empire, and 'Centers of Calculation' in Late Hanoverian London." 9 Martin J. S. Rudwick, The Great Devonian Controversy, 20. 10 For the best summary of the reformers complaint with British science under Banks' s Royal Society, see Charles Babbage, "Reflex ions on the Decline of Science in England, and on some of its Causes," Quarterly Review 43 (1830),305-42. II Patrick O'Brian, Joseph Banks: A Life, chapter 8, "President of the Royal Society." 12 This society would survive and eventually become the Royal Astronomical Society.

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

41

and "promoter of useful knowledge," more interested generally in the application of science towards practical ends. Indeed, while Banks advised a succession of governments as British exploration and trade increased in the Pacific and elsewhere,13 the "pure" or physical sciences often languished; they were generally outside of his interest. 14 To the degree that Britain's military and industrial strength was supported by its scientific achievements, they were usually the result of practical applications of those achievements. IS But regardless of the tensions between the younger scientific reformers and the "Banksian regime," before 1800 state-sponsored voyages of scientific exploration gave Britain significant control over distant parts of the world, increasing its political reach and transforming its scientific explorers into heroes at home.

Private Scientific Voyages Not all voyages of scientific merit were state sponsored-at least not on such a grand scale as the voyages of James Cook. Following the Napoleonic era voyages and expeditions of scientific exploration took on a variety of forms. Peter Raby has shown that in the nineteenth century many voyages were undertaken at personal expense, out of "private enthusiasm and enterprise.,,16 In Bright Paradise: Victorian Scientific Travellers, Raby provides interesting examples of the voyages of Victorian explorers and the social and political factors that influenced their travels. Eager explorers were often entrepreneurs, planning and executing their own expeditions, and selling exotic specimens for funding. The precedent and inspiration for many of these explorers was Alexander von Humboldt, whose voyage to South America was discussed in chapter 1. Although his expedition was underwritten by the government of Spain, Humboldt demonstrated how voyages of exploration could be turned into private industries. Humboldt not only altered the methods of scientific exploration for all Europeans, but he demonstrated as well how such voyages could be lucrative-the publication of travelogues, scientific papers, and maps, the giving of public lectures, and so on.

13 Harold B. Carter, "Sir Joseph Banks and the Royal Society," in Rex E. R. Banks, et a!., Sir Joseph Banks: A Global Perspective (Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens, 1994), 10. 14 David Knight, "The Application of Enlightened Philosophy: Banks and the Physical Sciences," in Rex E. R. Banks, et a!., Sir Joseph Banks: A Global Perspective (Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens, 1994),84. IS For example, Banks praised Humphry Davy's invention of the coal miners' safety lamp as a great boon to Britain and all of humanity, and a product that would "place the Royal Society in a more popular point of view than all the abstruse discoveries beyond the understanding of unlearned people." As quoted in David Knight, "The Application of Enlightened Philosophy: Banks and the Physical Sciences," 77. 16 Peter Raby, Bright Paradise: Victorian Scientific Travellers (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996),6.

42

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

With this said, it should be pointed out that, even in the nineteenth century, government support of voyages of scientific exploration did not diminish. Most such voyages would never have been undertaken without government support, and in all cases explorers maintained their sense of national identity, even when they were deep in the heart of the Amazon basin or on the far side of Tasmania. The British government in particular was an imperial one, and as such used voyages of scientific exploration for political control of distant lands. This was especially true after 1815, following the defeat of Napoleon. With the war over and the seas once again safe, and a surplus of sailors and soldiers in the British Royal Navy, one opportunist in the Admiralty began a new phase of state-sponsored exploration. That opportunist was the Second Secretary of the Admiralty, John Barrow. John Barrow and the New Use of the Royal Navy

From the perspective of being British in the 1830s, John Herschel could not have chosen a better time to undertake a scientific voyage. By that time the Admiralty was supporting expeditions throughout the world, especially to Africa. Thus, from the perspective of the British Admiralty in the 1830s, Herschel's proposed voyage could not have come at a better time, nor could he have picked a more ideal location. Discovering the contents of the mysterious interior of Africa-the "dark continent"-was a preoccupation of the British government, as well as the public. The potential for political power and material wealth lured the British government to all comers of that continent. This heyday of British exploration of Africa (and much of the rest of the world) was in large part the result of two men, Napoleon Bonaparte and John Barrow. The campaigns of the former forced the British to increase its navy to massive size. And the opportunism of the latter put the post-war Royal Navy to peacetime uses. As Second Secretary to the British Admiralty following the defeat of Napoleon, Barrow was able to use part of the enlarged fleet for scientific purposes. He positioned himself at the center of British exploration in the decades following 1815. It was he who recognized the political need for natural knowledge of the world that scientific exploration could provide, and it was he who was able to marshal to that end (often against considerable odds, and occasionally surreptitiously) the sometimes idle Royal Navy. John Barrow (1764-1848) was the Second Secretary to the Admiralty from 1804-1840. Before taking that position he had been an ambassador to China, had lived in South Africa, and had written books on both places. 17 He was involved in

17 John Herschel had John Barrow's Travels through South Africa (2 vols. London, 1806) in his library (SRC 268). Barrow had occasionally corresponded with Herschel on official Admiralty business. See John Barrow to John Herschel, 7 November 1825 (RS:HS 5.2I1CCJH 1247) and John Barrow, et aI. , to John Herschel, 22 November 1830 (TxU :WM-0942; Reel 1083/CCJH 2243).

The Politics of Herschel 's Cape Voyage

43

the advancement of geographical knowledge; he contributed frequently to the Quarterly Review, was a cofounder of the Royal Geographic Society, and in 1806 he became a Fellow of the Royal Society where he came under the influence and favor of Joseph Banks. Like Banks he was fascinated with empty spaces on maps and wanted to fill them. Thus after 1815 when the Royal Navy was largely idle, he used his position as second secretary to the Admiralty to attempt to fill in some of those blank spaces. In 1816 he wrote, "To what purpose could a portion of our naval force be ... especially in a time of profound peace, more honourably or more usefully employed than in completing those details of geographical and hydrographical science of which the grand outlines have been boldly and broadly sketched by Cook, [George] Vancouver and [Matthew] Flinders, and other of our countrymen?,,18 Expeditions of this kind were not, however, of high priority for the Admiralty. But as Second Secretary he was effectively at the helm of the Navy. And with the support of Joseph Banks, such expeditions were just what Barrow set out to accomplish. By the end of his career in 1840 he had masterminded some of the most significant expeditions of the nineteenth century, from John Franklin's failed search for a Northwest passage to John and James Ross's expeditions to Antarctica, and numerous other expeditions to places in between. One of those places was Africa. The Importance ofAfrica At the beginning of the nineteenth century Africa was still a great mystery to the British. Its interior was uncharted, but it was thought to contain great natural wealth and thus significant commercial potential. In 1788 the African Association had been formed for the express purpose, according to its founders, of "Promoting the discovery of the interior parts of Africa."19 Joseph Banks was a founding member of the African Association (Dorothy Middleton has called Banks "the father of African exploration,,20), and Alexander von Humboldt would later join. The goal was to open the mysterious heart of Africa to European commerce, and to civilize its uncivilized inhabitants. European commerce, according to the early nineteenth-century Benthamite utilitarian philosophy, would civilize the African peoples. Commerce, so it was thought, would bring the Africans more and more into public life, and public life would bring to bear the moral pressures necessary for virtuous progression. As Peter Raby characterizes this view, "Commerce was to be the means of bringing enlightenment, and improvement .. . [for] men like [Lord] Palmerston, whose approach to Africa rested on a fervent belief in the benefits of

18 As quoted in Fergus Fleming, Barrow's Boys: The Original Extreme Adventurers (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1998), I. 19 Peter Raby, Bright Paradise, 45. 20 Dorothy Middleton, "Banks and African Exploration," in Rex E. R. Banks, et aI., Sir Joseph Banks: A Global Perspective (Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens, 1994), 171.

44

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

commercial expansion ... It was not just a matter of self interest, but a moral dUty.,,21 The lure for explorers like Banks and Humboldt, however, was intellectual and personal, and not always in the first instance so idealistic or altruistic. For these two the lure was of course the discovery of the unknown, even if it was not they who would be doing the discovering first hand. The expedition of Mungo Park was one of the first successful ventures into the unknown interior. In 1795 Mungo Park set out to open a path for the British into the middle of Africa by discovering the "course, and, if possible, the rise and terminus of the Niger River.'>22 The course of the Niger was the great geographical problem in Africa during the early nineteenth century: it was considered the key to the interior of that continent. But Park did not discover the river's terminus. He was able only to follow its upper course for roughly 300 miles. He had been the first British explorer to do so, however, and that feat was success enough for the African Association. His account of the expedition, Travels in the Interior Districts of Africa, was published in 1799 and was a best-seller.23 It encouraged the British to continue their exploration of Africa, but the outset of Napoleon's campaigns in 1804 put further exploration of Africa on hold. When war was over in Europe in 1815 the African Association slowly got back into business. In 1825, Captain Hugh Clapperton and his expedition again reached the Niger for the British, but only his personal servant, Richard Lander, returned to England. All others had perished. Undaunted, Lander returned in 1830 to stalk the Niger. With the half-hearted, shoe-string budget support of John Barrow through the Colonial Office 24 and the aid of his brother John, Richard Lander charted the entire river from headwaters to delta. Richard and John returned triumphantly to England in June of 1831; the course of the Niger had been charted and Britain had an entrance to Africa. The importance of the Lander's discovery was made clear in the Edinburgh Review: These volumes [Journal of an Expedition to explore the Course and Termination of the Niger; with a Narrative of a Voyage down that River to its Termination, by Richard and John Lander (London: John Murray, 1832)] record perhaps the most important geographical discovery of the present age .. . The question as to the termination of the Niger has, for upwards of forty years, excited an interest beyond any other connected with the knowledge of the earth. But to acquire and to complete the knowledge of any of the grand phenomena of nature ... forms a just ground for

21 Raby, op. cit., 42-4. 22 Raby, op. cit., 46. 23 Mungo Park, Travels in the Interior Districts of Africa, 1795- 97 (London: W. Bulmer & Co., 1799). In 1790, Fran~ois Le Vaillant's Travels into the Interior Parts of Africa, by the Way of the Cape of Good Hope ; in the Years 1780, 81, 82, 83, 84, and 85 (London: G. G. 1. and J. Robinson, 1790, anonymous translation), was also a best-seller in England. 24 For Barrow's low opinion of Lander's fitness for the expedition, as well as his expendability, see Fleming, Barrow 's Boys, chapter 16, 'The Riddle of the Niger," 253-73.

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

45

national glory. Britain, therefore, acted in confonnity to a noble and liberal spirit when she adventured, in successive African expeditions, a portion of her treasure, and the lives of some of her citizens.25

According to historian Beau Riffenburgh, when "the route of the Niger was solved ... the principal investigators-Hugh Clapperton ... and Richard and John Lander-became household names.,,26 The Landers' published journal, a widely popular work, brought new life into the goal of African exploration. It is therefore not without significance that at about the same time the Landers' discovery was such a sensation and provided new promise for British commerce and control within Africa, John Herschel made public his own intended African voyage. Although he would remain on the periphery of Africa in a location long under European influence, he was British and he was going to Africa, and that invoked in his countrymen that same sense of the "national glory" that was felt for the Landers. Thus an expedition to Africa after 1831 invariably provoked national interest, because it invoked national pride. Imperial Politics, the Cape Colony, and the Royal Observatory at the Cape The British had wrested the Cape colony first from the French in 1795, and then from the Dutch in 1806. Following this military acquisition there was considerable tension at the Cape between the new British government and the Afrikaans inhabitants, to say nothing of the ongoing tension between these Europeans and the native Zulu, Xhosa and Khoikhoi peoples. For these reasons, legitimizing British authority was an important task there. In 1832 the British began to focus seriously on exploring the interior of Africa, following Richard Lander's successful charting of the Niger. Thus all of sub-Saharan Africa was important for British imperial interests. Having John Herschel, the epitome of British science, in Cape Town could be nothing but beneficial to the empire. Herschel's presence would help to signify the beginning of British scientific exploration of the African continent, and it would further strengthen British authority over the former Dutch colony at the Cape of Good Hope. Considering the Cape colony in particular, what scientific work was going on there, and what was its significance? The Cape was of obvious importance to the British Empire, as it provided a strategic point on maritime routes between London and the far east, especially India. The southern hemisphere was not as well charted 25 Review of Journal of an Expedition to explore the Course and Termination of the Niger; with a Narrative of a Voyage down that River to its Termination, by Richard and John Lander, London: 1832. In the Edinburgh Review 55 (1832): 397. 26 Beau Riffenburgh, The Myth of the Explorer (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 16. See also the discussion of the political and economic ramifications of the charting of the Niger in Ronald Robinson and John Gallagher, Africa and the Victorians: The Official Mind of Imperialism, second edition (New York: Macmillan, 1985),33-7.

46

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

as the northern for navigational purposes. So it was to the empire's advantage to set up permanent observatories there to provide this crucial information. In 1820 the Board of Longitude met and proposed that there should be a Royal Observatory at the Cape of Good Hope. Joseph Banks, a member of the Board, seconded the proposal; it was "his opinion that nothing could more essentially promote the glory of this country [England], than to be foremost in such an undertaking.'>27 John Barrow, who had lived at the Cape from 1796 to 1802, was also a member of the Board and supported the proposal as well. Not only would such an observatory benefit the British Navy, but it would show that British science, particularly astronomy, was advancing. The historian and South Africa-based astronomer Brian Warner has noted that some of the impetus for building the Royal Observatory at the Cape came from the concern of many British scientists (including John Herschel) who lamented what they thought was the poor state of scientific activity in Britain, and its obvious lag in this area behind other European countries. 28 Warner notes that the observatory at the Cape may have been built in part to impress other European countries: "This extraordinary [proposal for the Observatory at the Cape] ... contained the requisite emphasis on national achievement ... on improvements to astronomy ... and the intent that the results would mostly benefit (i.e., impress) the Europeans ... ,,29 On 9 August 1820 the proposal for the observatory was approved by King George IV, who gave it full backing and financial support. The written proposal that was sent between the Board of Longitude, the Royal Society, the Admiralty, and the Royal court played up the national and imperial benefits the observatory would have: " ... nothing could more essentially promote the glory of the British name, than that this Nation should be the foremost in such an undertaking, which would afford to the astronomers of Europe, if properly executed, a series of comparative observations ... ,,30 The King, on the recommendation of his Privy Council, approved the proposal and the Royal Observatory at the Cape of Good Hope was born. Fearon Fallows, Herschel's friend since university, was the first Royal Observer at the new Cape observatory, and part of his initial duties was simply to pick a site and have a building constructed. By 1822 a suitable site was selected and the Board of Longitude of the Admiralty gave Fallows permission to find a

27 Minutes and Papers of the Board of Longitude, 3 February 1820 (Library of the Royal Society). As quoted in Brian Warner, Royal Observatory. Cape of Good Hope: 1820- 1831 (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995),3. 28 Warner, Royal Observatory. Cape of Good Hope: 1820-1831, 1-9. David Evans also provides a short history of the Cape Observatory in Under Capricorn: A History of Southern Hemisphere Astronomy (Philadelphia: Adam Hilger, 1988), "The Cape Observatory,"

3~0 . 29 30

Warner, ibid., 8. As quoted in Warner, ibid., 8.

The Politics ofHerschel's Cape Voyage

47

contractor and begin building. 31 It was completed in 1827. The tasks of the observatory were multiple, but all were directed toward providing the Admiralty with information useful to the more efficient running of its navy. Thus was incipient science introduced to Britain's Cape colony. Confirming the hopes of the King and Admiralty at the end of the nineteenth century, Agnes Clerke, the historian of British astronomy, remarked that the Royal Observatory at the Cape supported a national astronomical network and mirrored "the world wide-dominion of which it is the corollary. British empire on the seas led directly to British empire over the skies; the one gaining completeness as the inevitable consequence of the expansion of the other.,,32

Herschel's Cape Voyage: A "Private Adventure" in Imperial Space Landing Stargazers at the World's End

By mid-1832 John Herschel was preparing to go to the Cape. It was a potentially perilous voyage, and as such it is important to note that despite offers of assistance from the Admiralty, he chose to provide his own passage. From the outset his voyage was indeed a personal one, and although the outcome was sure to have public and perhaps political benefit-and to evoke that sense of "national pride" that came from being British and going to Africa-its undertaking was meant to be, in Herschel's own words, a "private adventure." John expected to cover the entire cost of the voyage himself, and in the end he did so. He had a considerable fortune that came in part from the money his father had made selling telescopes/3 and also from the estate he inherited from his mother, Mary Pitt Herschel, who had been a widower before she married William Herschel. Her first husband, a London merchant, had been a man of considerable wealth. Regardless of the source of his funds it is important to understand the tremendous expense Herschel would incur in undertaking the Cape voyage. Not only would private passage to and from the Cape for him, his wife, and children be expensive, but there was also the matter of transporting his 20-foot telescope and other instruments. Furthermore, he expected to purchase for his family a house at the Cape for the duration of their stay. Such expenditures were beyond the means of most, yet John was fully prepared to pay whatever was necessary so that he might survey the southern heavens on his own terms.

31 Ibid., 60. 32 Agnes Clerke, " A Southern Observatory," Contemporary Review 55 (1895), 384. Many thanks to Bernard Lightman for providing this quotation and reference. 33 William Herschel, as reported the Gentleman 's Magazine, left £25,000 as well as lands and properties to John Herschel. See Gentleman 's Magazine 132, (1822), 650. See also "Will ofthe late Sir William Herschel," The Times (9 October 1822), 2.

48

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Of further interest then is the fact that Herschel was given the option of having much (and later all) of his proposed voyage paid for by the British government. But his insistence that the trip be a private affair led to him turning down such offers repeatedly. In an interesting exchange of letters from 1832-1833 we become privy to his views on the role of external political forces, especially the Admiralty, on private scientific matters-particularly his own. Herschel believed that science at its most pure would be individual and private in practice. In a period when utilitarianism was a guiding principle in many things British, especially in turning scientific pursuits to the advantage of the empire,34 Herschel's firm resistance to anything of an official nature intruding upon his private scientific pursuits presents a striking contrast. But this "anti-utilitarian" position is one that perhaps only John could manage, with his high scientific stature and financial independence. The first indication that the government was willing to offer assistance comes from a letter Herschel wrote to Francis Baily, a close friend, fellow astronomer, and (like Herschel) a co-founder of the Astronomical Society (later the Royal Astronomical Society). In this letter, dated 24 April 1832, Herschel was responding to a letter from Baily in which he had informed John of an offer of assistance from the President of the Royal Society, Augustus Frederick (to whom John had narrowly lost the election for that position). The assistance being offered was passage on a government vessel, most likely a man 0' war of the Royal Navy. Herschel politely rejected the offer, and even downplayed the scientific status of his voyage to make it appear as merely a family vacation: With regard to ... passage in one of the Government vessels which may be going to [the Cape] I am perfectly aware of the superior comfort and advantages of that mode of conveyance, over what would be afforded by a private or Company's shipl but not to mention the impossibility of naming at this moment the time of my departure ... I confess I do not see how, consistently, with the view I entertain of the project, which is that of an entirely irresponsible private adventure (a mere party of pleasure in short) I could avail myself of any application to the Admiralty, either on the part of His Royal Highness [Augustus Frederick, the Duke of Sussex], or otherwise, the effect of which would be not only to confer something of an official character to the undertaking, but to shift from my own shoulders on the Public a considerable ... expense which I have resolved to meet, as a necessary attendant on the execution of it. 3s

34 One embodiment of this sort of utilitarian application of science to the imperial enterprise was the geologist Sir Roderick Murchison. Murchison not only used his knowledge of geology to help locate precious metals for the empire throughout the world, he also became a master at organizing voyages of scientific exploration. See Robert A. Stafford, Scientist of Empire: Sir Roderick Murchison, Scientific Exploration and Victorian Imperialism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). 3S John Herschel to Francis Baily, 24 April 1832 (RS:HS 21.1 06/CCJH 2560).

The Politics ofHerschel 's Cape Voyage

49

Herschel does, perhaps by way of concession, offer to accept any "recommendation to the Acting Government at the Cape" by Augustus Frederick (or procured by him from others) that might facilitate his introduction to important members of the Cape colony. But any assistance beyond this was quite clearly rebuffed. Or at least it was clear to Herschel that it was rebuffed. But later that year the Admiralty tried directly to interest Herschel in travelling to Africa under its auspices. This time the offer came via Basil Hall, a naval officer, in a letter dated 3 September 1832. Hall wrote that he had been having a conversation with Sir James Graham, of the Naval Board of the Admiralty, during which Herschel's impending voyage was discussed. At Hall's prompting Graham was eager to offer Herschel passage to the Cape on behalf of the Admiralty, "managed so as to suit Sir John's conveniences. ,,36 Upon receiving this communication Herschel replied, as he had to Francis Baily, that he was planning on providing his own passage. He wrote, "I have made up my mind from the moment when I determined on my voyage to stand from first to last in the situation of an amateur embarking in a party of pleasure.',J? Herschel then added something he had not mentioned to Baily that indicated the seriousness of his commitment to self-sufficiency. He revealed that he would either go by his own private means or not go at all. Hall had raised the concern that Herschel might have problems transporting his telescope on board a private ship, and suggested that he might have better luck on a man 0' war. Herschel responded: Should such occur and prove insuperable I shall though with extreme reluctance abandon the project, rather than take any step which may give it the slightest tincture of an official character. The comforts, advantages, and honours of such a passage as Sir James offers I must therefore decidedly forego. As to the expense of the voyage-of course it will be heavy, but having all along included it in my estimates, as a necessary item it ceases to be thought of as a hardship or to excite any desire to be relieved from it by a free passage in the King's ship.38 Even though this message was relayed to Graham, in October Hall replied to Herschel that Graham appeared insistent on offering Herschel passage to the Cape. Graham had written to Hall in a letter marked "private": I consider the voyage of S[ir] John Herschel to the Southern Hemisphere so intimately connected with the highest objects of science & with the Naval Service, that I am anxious to give him every assistance, & should be most happy, if an opportunity [arose?] for ordering him & his attendants a passage in a King' s ship to the Cape of Good Hope. At the present moment no ship is under order for that

36 Basil Hall to John Herschel, 3 September 1832 (RS:HS 9. 1711CCJH 2625). J7 John Herschel to Basil Hall, 16 September 1832 (RS:HS 21.115/CCJH 2630). 38 Ibid., emphasis Herschel's.

50

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage station ... but if Sir John will wait a little, & see ... before he makes any private arrangement for his Voyage, 1still may be able to serve both him & the Public by offering him some facility.39

Graham's insistence caused Hall some embarrassment when he relayed this note to Herschel, because Hall knew that Graham was pressing an offer Herschel had already declined. This is not surprising, however, because Graham considered Herschel's voyage a "Public" matter and therefore within the Admiralty ' s jurisdiction. His desire for "ordering [Herschel] & his attendants a passage" is almost a military command. But Hall kept his humor and apologized to Herschel, dismissing the whole matter as a misunderstanding: ... hang me if 1 know how a poor half pay officer is to get out of the scrape. It almost amounts to an order for me to go to Slough [Herschel's home] with a party of Marines, & force you at the point of the bayonet to accept a passage in a man of war!40

That said, Hall encouraged Herschel to be cautious: Seriously ... there will be no end of misunderstandings till you go to the Admiralty and ask to see Sir James Graham ... although you may not find it convenient to avail yourself ... of obliging official offers-circumstances may .. . be changed by & by. At all events, the cause of Science might be materially injured ... by the .. . offer of assistance being slighted. Slighted is not the word I wish to use-but you will see, 1think, what I am at-that it might be indiscreet not to let Sir James feel that he is showing a good spirit for an official man ... 1 know that [Graham] is desirous of making your personal acquaintance-& it is the easiest thing in the world to carry on an intercourse with a man of power when you want nothing-this I feel-& therefore I speak confidently upon it. 4\

Herschel's response to this was conciliatory. On 10 October 1832 he replied to Hall: There are two ways of viewing Sir J. Graham ' s reply. The 1st (w h it is perhaps treason to suspect but w h 1 cannot help thinking not impossible) is that your enclosure to him [Herschel's initial rejection of the offers of assistance] was either not read at all, or so glanced over in the hurry ... as to not convey its purport to the Sensorium .. . The other view of it is, that-whatever may be my own way of looking at it-Sir 1. wishes it at all events understood by me that the offer is made.

39 James Graham to Basil Hall, in a letter from Basil Hall to John Herschel, 6 October 1832 (RS :HS 9. I 73/CCJH 2640). 40 Basil Hall to John Herschel, ibid. 4\ Basil HalI to John Herschel, ibid.

The Politics ofHerschel's Cape Voyage

51

In either light it is impossible not to perceive & acknowledge Sir Jas. ' conduct to be such as shows him to be really desirous of forwarding scientific objects by the powerful means placed at his disposal-and as such to deserve my warmest acknowledgements-I shall certainly make a point of offering them personally as the last thing I could wish would be to be thought capable of slighting any symptom of proper feeling on the part of the higher powers towards science & its votaries. 42 One final attempt was made to entice Herschel to go to the Cape aboard a government vessel. This came again from Augustus Frederick. On 15 May 1833 John WilIiam Lubbock wrote to Herschel from the Royal Society to inform him that he (Herschel) had won the Society's Gold Medal for his work on double stars. Lubbock then continued: "Allow me to suggest to you ... that you do wrong in throwing cold water upon the President's desire to provide a passage for you to & from the Cape of Good Hope in a government vessel, say a man of war.,,43 To this offer Herschel replied much as he had before: I hope I entertain a due sense of the kindness of disposition and regard for the interests of Science which prompted H.R.H. the President's offer of his interest to procure myself & family a passage to the Cape in a Ship of War-A direct offer of such a passage has been (I believe without any communication with H.R.H. on the subject) very liberally made me by Sir J. Graham, as soon as my intention became known. It is not with any other feeling than a simple wish to make myself responsible to no one for the results of my expedition, and to retain within myself the unconditional power of prosecuting it or abandoning it at any moment that it may suit my caprice, that I have resolved to resign the obvious comforts and advantages which such a mode of conveyance holds out. There is only one contingency which would induce me to look on the matter differently-viz: a declaration of war with a maritime power-In such an event, should the voyage become admittedly unsafe-the security of such a ship might be very enviable-but on the other hand in that event the King's ships would have other fish to fry than landing stargazers at the world's end. Do not therefore blame me more than you can help for a determination which I feel to be quite essential to my comfort under a variety of contingencies for which I must be prepared. 44 Herschel had no intention of exposing his project to intervention or influence by his government. Doing so would allow the government to impose upon his time and skills while he was at the Cape, which he clearly did not want. His point was firmly made: he did not wish to spend his time at the Cape in any official service to the empire. The offers were politely made to John and were just as politely

42 John Herschel to Basil Hall, 10 October 1832 (RS:HS 9.174 and 21.117/CCJH 2641). 43 John William Lubbock to John Herschel, 15 May 1833 (RS:HS I J.359/CCJH 2793). 44 John Herschel to John William Lubbock, 16 May 1833 (RS:HS 21. 136/CCJH 2794).

52

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

rejected. When he did finally set sail he paid for private passage to and from the Cape. The Mountstuart Elphinstone landed him at Cape Town and the Windsor returned him to England.

Herschel, D 'Urban, and the Cape Colony Frontier Having forgone passage on a ship of the Royal Navy, Herschel sailed to the Cape on 13 November 1833 aboard a private ship, the Mountstuart Elphinstone . Also on board was Sir Benjamin D'Urban, who was going to the Cape as the new Governor of the Cape Colony. Herschel and D'Urban had over two months to become acquainted before arriving on 16 January 1834. After landing, however, their individual pursuits would preclude much further contact. They both shared the same limited social circle of Cape Town, but D'Urban was more regular there than was Herschel. In fact, initially Herschel intended to be something of a social recluse, although later this intention would not bear out. On 28 March 1834 he wrote his Aunt Caroline: "We [John and Margaret] have been very attentively received by almost all the resident English & Dutch families of the best note, so that if we wish it we may form a very large & good acquaintorium but we shall not enter into very much company.,,45 And to his brother-in-law James Calder Stewart he wrote that although he and Margaret expected to entertain in their home once one was purchased, they were not averse to being isolated: " . . . neither Maggie nor myself fear solitude, especially when we can face that bugbear of the idle & empty, together ...,,46 Herschel's life at the Cape began just as he intended-he was a private citizen, there to pursue his astronomical observations and other scientific investigations in the "situation of an amateur." D'Urban, however, did not enjoy such status. The new governor had been selected for the purpose of getting some tough jobs done at the Cape colony. His major tasks were two-fold: First, he was to balance the colonists' desire for self-government with the more powerful and domineering British Parliament back home. Second, he was to alleviate the tensions on the frontiers ofthe Cape colony, particularly with the native Xhosa people. Regarding the former, D'Urban had to face a disgruntled mob of colonists. Earlier in 1833 both houses of Parliament had passed resolutions to abolish slavery throughout the empire. The primarily non-British Cape colonists, who had been used to, and dependent upon, slave labor under Dutch rule, were not pleased. They had petitioned London for the right to have their own representative government,

45 David S. Evans, Terence J Deeming, Betty Hall Evans, and Stephen Goldfarb, eds, Herschel at the Cape: Diaries and Correspondence of Sir John Herschel, 1834- 1838 University of Texas Press, 1969),54. 6 Ibid., 56--7.

~Austin :

The Politics of Herschel 's Cape Voyage

53

but Parliament refused their requests repeatedly.47 D'Urban was there to provide a compromise. He came to give the colonists a partial voice in government in the form of a Legislative Council. This Council provided the colonists seven seats while the British representatives had five . Obviously under this setup the colonists could outvote the Parliamentary representatives. But the office of governor, in this case D'Urban, had veto power over any decision, and could thereby prevent the colonists from going too far in the direction of self rule. D'Urban's second major task-one more relevant to Herschel's time at the Cape-was to do something about the ongoing tensions at the frontier of the colony.48 But the initial months D'Urban spent reorganizing the government in Cape Town immediately after his arrival meant months more of mounting tension on the frontier. This tension arose over the issue of land rights. The native Xhosa depended on the good grazing land of the frontier for their cattle. But for years they had been pushed onto poorer land and were becoming restless to the point of violence. They wanted land they could call their own and that would sustain their herds. To this end D'Urban had been given the power to form a treaty with Xhosa chiefs. If they would be willing to become subjects of the Crown, they would receive their own land. D'Urban had been sent to negotiate peace, but the situation at the frontier seemed to preclude it. He had been needed at the frontier immediately upon his arrival in the colony, and the Xhosa had grown tired of hearing that the new governor would be arriving "any day." Furthermore, being new, D'Urban relied on others' reports of the situation, especially those in the colonial military and the missionaries who worked with the Xhosa. Two missionaries, Dr. John Philip and James Read, were as close as anyone to the Xhosa; they were able to communicate with the natives in a spirit of mutual trust whereas the colonial military officials could not. In August of 1834, six months after his arrival in the colony, D'Urban finally headed for the frontier to meet with the Xhosa chiefs. But by that time tensions had reached the breaking point. For reasons that are beyond the scope of this book, what is now known as the Sixth Frontier War broke out in December of 1834. Nine months later, at the end of the war the "victorious" D'Urban exacted a harsh penalty on the Xhosa. Not only were they forced to become British subjects, but the governor also placed all frontier land held by the natives in the colony's possession, pushing them further from their land than ever before. This action of D'Urban upset the missionary Philip. He believed that D'Urban had betrayed both

47 Noel Mostert, Frontiers: The Epic of South Africa 's Creation and the Tragedy of the Xhosa People (New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1992), 637. 48 Elizabeth Green Musselman provides a good discussion of this situation and its impact on Herschel in "Swords into Ploughshares: John Herschel's Progressive View of Astronomical and Imperial Governance," British Journalfor the History of Science 31 (1998),419-35. See pages 427-32 in particular, "The Frontier Wars and the Project for Reconnaissance."

54

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

the Xhosa and Philip himself, who had been promising the natives peace and their own land. The astute missionary knew that D'Urban's task was to provide land for the Xhosa and to make them subjects, rather than steal their land and leave them homeless. In letters he sent back to Westminster, Philip raised a tremendous din against D'Urban's actions. Eventually the annexation of the Xhosa-occupied frontier was nullified, and by 1836 D'Urban was ordered off the frontier and back to Cape Town.49 What role did Herschel play in all this? Although there is no doubt that Herschel's international reputation could have aided D'Urban somewhat in justifying the abolition of slavery (and perhaps such an action on Herschel's part was expected), Herschel did nothing along those lines. Herschel was nevertheless wholeheartedly behind the abolition of slavery. Regarding the frontier war, he had a fairly strong friendship with the missionary Philip, and he was opposed to D'Urban's treatment of the Xhosa. In fact, Herschel wrote to Philip: The sentence of expulsion of a whole nation [of] men, women and children-widows-orphans of men slain in the war, from the land which gave them birth, and where they have their homesteads, at a dash of the pen, to seek new domiciles, to dispossess others, to spread war and famine, under pain of what? to be treated as enemies i.e. to be shot down by any man calling himself a/riend! Here is a 'facinus majoris abolle.' Here is the question of might versus right, and such transactions make one yearn for the coming of that Kingdom when and where only the might and right will make common cause. 50 Herschel's wife Margaret echoed a similar if more sarcastic sentiment in September 1835: "The frontier war is going on with great vigour, viz great courage is shewn by our brave Soldiers in burning Huts & stores of corn, & Dr. Murray recommends 'firing & leaden pills' for the 'brutish Savages' who will persist in loving their native soil in spite of his Excellency's Proclamation of Peace, which in these days means that his Excellency intends not to be contradicted.,,51 During his entire time in the Cape colony John never went as far as the frontier. As a member of the Cape community, however, given his public stature and authority, his opinion (or hint thereof) on the situation at the frontier was not lacking in strength. So it is interesting to consider Herschel's reaction to D'Urban's actions following the Sixth Frontier War. The Herschel home just outside Cape Town saw numerous visitors. But besides his wife John really had but one close friend in the colony: Thomas Maclear, the newly-appointed astronomer at the

49 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 42 n22. 50 John Herschel to John Philip, 2 June 1835 (RS:HS 13.385/CCJH 3126), as quoted in Green Musselman, "Swords into Ploughshares," 429. 51 Brian Warner, ed. Lady Herschel: Letters/rom the Cape 1834- 1838 (Cape Town: Friends of the South African Library, 1991),84.

The Politics ofHerschel's Cape Voyage

55

Royal Observatory at the Cape. Herschel and Maclear, who arrived at the Cape within a month of each other, became fast friends. They wrote to each other almost daily, they traveled together through the colony occasionally, they aided each other in their astronomical projects, and they informally shared scientific data. Another thing that Herschel and Maclear shared was a distaste for D'Urban's frontier war. The pertinent example of this was their intent to be absent from the Cape upon D'Urban's return from the frontier. Because both Herschel and Maclear were prominent members of the Cape Town community they knew their attendance would be expected at any social or political events ratifying or generally commending D'Urban's completion of the war. Of course, one's presence at such events would be a tacit approval of D'Urban's treatment of the Xhosa. To avoid such implication the two astronomers made plans to be absent at D'Urban's return. Soon after D'Urban came back to Cape Town they left for Paarl, a small town to the northeast. 52 D'Urban's initial treaty with the Xhosa had been signed on 17 September 1835. News of this event quickly spread back to Cape Town. Five days later Herschel wrote to Maclear, "Peace is signed-(I suppose Macomo & Tyali [Xhosa chiefs] have put their marks) so we shall soon have the ruling powers among us.-I hold myself in readiness for Paarl or elsewhere as it shall seem good.,,53 Four days later Maclear responded: " ... I have only time to add that Macomo having given peace to the Colony I am ready for the Paarl when the signal shall be given.,,54 On 4 January 1836, D'Urban finally returned and Herschel, according to his diary, "[a]ttended Levee at the Governors on his arrival from the Frontier.,,55 But the worst was yet to come: an honorary dinner for the Governor on 15 January. Around 8 January Herschel wrote to Maclear with plans for their escape to PaarJ; his conspiratorial tone is made complete by mention of their getaway cart: I am afraid I have created some confusion by a confused statement, at least now I am told it is not this next Evening Monday but the Monday after i.e. the 18th that the thing is to be.-Now this mayor may not be so. If you have positive information that it is to be this Monday viz. the 11 th-then Allons,-I have desired Achmet [from whom the cart was hired] to call with this & you have only to order him to be at the Obs[ervator]y at any time you think of starting & I will over & join in timeBut if you are not quite certain of this independent of any information of mine then it will be well to tell A[chmet] that he shall have word tonight or Early tomorrow on

52 Brian Warner, "The Years at the Cape of Good Hope," in D.G. King-Hele, ed., John Herschel 1792-1871: A Bicentennial Commemoration (London, 1992), 65; and Green Musselman, "Swords into Ploughshares," 428. 53 Brian and Nancy Warner, Mac/ear & Herschel: Letters & Diaries at the Cape of Good Hope 1834-1838 (Cape Town: A. A. Balkema, 1984), 105. S4 Ibid., 106. ss Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 4 January 1836,209.

56

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

what day the Cart will be wanted ... It would be a pity to start a week too early & be backjust in time for the treat. 56 Herschel and MacIear did go to Paarl; they left on 15 January, the day of the dinner, and returned on the 18 th . 57 Thus Herschel's reluctance to be involved with the affairs of the British empire at the Cape was apparent, at least those affairs that would cause him to compromise his own strongly held scientific, or, as in this case, moral commitments. An interesting assessment of Herschel's opinions on the frontier war was given by his wife in a letter she wrote to Caroline Herschel. During the middle of the war, on 19 May 1835, Margaret wrote: Everything here delights us as it did at first, except perhaps a tyrannical Spirit which Colonies are apt to engender among their Inhabitants towards the Natives & which has now involved the Governor [D'Urban] in an offensive & defensive war on the frontier of this Cape far enough away from us to do ought but grieve our hearts that such steps should be necessary-Herschel, who is alive to anything concerning his fellow creatures, as to things above, is much interested in the causes of this war & throws the weight of his name & character into the side which humanity & justice dictate, & which is guarded by a mournful minority at the Cape ... 58 How exactly Herschel threw "the weight of his name and character" around is not known. It is unlikely that his protests were vociferous; his obvious absence at D'Urban's dinner was more the style of his quiet, non-confrontational nature. His response, however, to the political situation of the Cape Colony reveals him to be a person of strong character, one who took not only science but also morality seriously. According to Margaret he was willing to stand against majority opinion on human rights issues, just as readily as he would stand up to promote science as he felt it should be done-privately, as a matter of personal conscience. It might not be too much to say that for John, science and morality were closely tied together. This point has also been made by Elizabeth Green Musselman, who has argued that while he was at the Cape Herschel was greatly affected by the ill treatment of the natives . She notes that Herschel altered his own scientific language, from an argot of hunting and capturing celestial objects to a less violent, more agricultural argot of harvesting. 59 Brian and Nancy Warner, Maclear & Herschel: Letters, 120. Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 210-13. 58 Ibid., 167. 59 Elizabeth Green Musselman has argued that while making his initial astronomical observations at the Cape, Herschel had considered himself to be a hunter of stars and nebulae, as well as one of the local plants and animals. But after he had seen how the Cape Colony' s "violent political milieu" encouraged abhorrent treatment of the natives he changed this view. He no longer wanted to think of himself as a hunter. He began to see his 56 57

The Politics of Herschel 's Cape Voyage

57

D'Urban's unforgiving war did not reflect British sentiment towards African natives during the 1830s. During the same period the Royal Navy was actively (though often ineffectively) engaged in suppressing the slave trade on both coasts of the continent. And expeditions into Africa's interior, like those of Andrew Smith in southern Africa (with Herschel acting as that expedition's chairman), and Lander on the Niger, were seen as anti-slavery events as well: it was hoped that direct trade in goods might help offset the trade in people. 60 Nevertheless, Herschel ' s response to Governor D'Urban's war and policies demonstrates why he did not want his Cape voyage to have an "official tincture." As a figure of international renown he wanted his authority to benefit the realm of science alone, and not the often harsh vicissitudes of imperial policy. It was thus best to remain as unofficial as possible. In the end, however, the perception of him and his Cape voyage would be that which he did not want-upon his return his voyage was perceived as a voyage of scientific exploration tied closely to Britain's imperial aims.

Herschel Comes Home to Dinner Herschel left the Cape and returned to England in 1838. Upon his return his career as an observational astronomer was effectively over. With but a few minor exceptions, he would never again use his telescopes for the purpose of systematic astronomical observation: " ... with the publication of my South African observations (when it shall please God that shaIl happen) I have made up my mind to consider my astronomical career as terminated.,,61 Furthermore, along with his return to England came an end to the privacy he so much enjoyed while at the Cape, years he would describe as fuIl of "a thousand pleasing and grateful recoIlections" and "spent in agreeable society, cheerful occupation, and unalloyed happiness."62 Once back in London his life would become as hectic as the

search for stars and nebulae as that of a farmer who harvests crops, rather than a hunter who kills his prey. Elizabeth Green Musselman, "Swords into Ploughshares," 419-35. 60 See Paul Michael Kielstra, The Politics of Slave Trade Suppression in Britain and France. 1814-48 (New York: St Martin's Press, 2000), and David Ellis and James Walvin, The Abolition of the Atlantic Slave Trade: Origins and Effects in Europe, Africa, and the Americas (Madison, WI : University of Wisconsin Press, 1981); on Lander's expeditions see W. E. F. Ward, The Royal Navy and the Slavers: The Suppression of the Atlantic Slave Trade (New York: Pantheon Books, 1969), 189. 61 Buttmann, The Shadow of the Telescope, 119. 62 Sir John Herschel, Results of Astronomical Observations Made During the Years 1834, 5, 6, 7, 8, At the Cape of Good Hope; Being the Completion of a Telescopic Survey of the Whole Surface of the Visible Heavens, Commenced in 1825 [abbreviated in this book as the Cape Results], (London: Smith, Elder and Company, 1847),452.

58

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

metropolis itself. Although the Herschels lived outside the city,63 John's numerous scientific passions kept him actively involved with Britain's scientific circles. And in such circles, as with everything in the empire, all roads led to London. Herschel's love of privacy and independence remained, but the relative calm that had surrounded him while at the Cape was shattered the moment he returned. The "unalloyed happiness" that he enjoyed in Cape Town would never really come again. Compared to the tranquillity of his Cape years, the events Herschel found himself caught up in upon his return were overwhelming. News of his arrival spread quickly. This short note in The Mirror is indicative of what other such announcements would have relayed: Sir John Herschel has returned, after near four years sojourn at the Cape of Good Hope, to observe the accurate positions of the stars in the southern hemisphere. It is said he has brought home with him a large mass of valuable astronomical and other observations, which will shortly be arranged and published. 64

About a month after his return, on 28 June 1838, Herschel was awarded a baronetcy. Appropriate to the esteem in which he was held, this honor was presented in Westminster Abbey at the coronation of Queen Victoria. 65 Thus was Herschel a small, even reluctant,66 part of the beginnings of the golden age of the British empire-the Victorian era. Indeed, besides the pomp and circumstance, the actual event of receiving his baronetcy hardly made an impression on him, as indicated by his diary entry on that day: June 28 Coronation Day. Rose at 6. Got into the Abbey at 8-there parted with Margaret and Cousin Mary whose tickets were for the North transept, & took my place in the Nave gallery, where after seeing divers Peers & Peeresses sweep along in Ermines & Velvet trains most majestically (nothing £ill! be more noble & becoming than those trains & the full dress of a Peeress) got transferred by good offices of Mr. ... (Miss C Slingsby's husband) to join my ladies. [a line too faint to read] to see the Carriages depart.

63 From 1850-55 Herschel had an apartment in London; during this period he was, as Newton had been, Master of the Mint. 64 Anonymous, The Mirror 31 (I 838), 424. 65 Buttmann, The Shadow of the Telescope, 121. 66 Buttmann notes that when first offered the baronetcy, Herschel tried to refuse it because he felt "the obligations of such a position would interfere with his scientific researches." Buttmann, The Shadow of the Telescope, 121.

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

59

At 6. Left the Abbey Dined at home. After tea took the children out to see fireworks in the Regents Park. Poor Carry [Herschel's daughter] was terribly frightened at the Rockets & Crackers & C. 67 Yet there was another event in honor of Herschel that is more relevant to this study. This was a dinner given in Herschel's honor on 15 June 1838, a few weeks prior to the ceremony at Westminster. The Times announced the dinner on 21 May 1838: It is intended to give to Sir John Herschell [sic] a public dinner in due and proper commemoration of his safe arrival in England, after his four years' absence in Southern Africa. Nearly every individual of note in the scientific world has come forward to aid in this tribute. 68

A full account of the dinner is given in the Saturday, 16 June 1838 edition of the Athenaeum. And what an event it was! The list of notable attendants reads like a "who's-who" of early Victorian men of science, as the Times had predicted. Held at the Freemason's Hall (or Freemason's Tavern), it included (to name a very few) William Rowan Hamilton, Roderick Murchison, Charles Lyell, William Sommerville, and Charles Darwin. Even Michael Faraday, who by his own admission almost never attended public events, made a rare exception in this case. When, a few years later in 1840, Faraday declined an invitation to dine with Herschel, he recalled with wry humor: "Many thanks for your kind invitation which I should most gladly accept but that I never dine out on any occasion. I believe the last time I did do so was to dine with you at the Freemasons Hall & that was a solitary occasion.,,69 Herschel's close friends and fellow scientific reformers were there as well: William Whewell, Charles Babbage, and George Peacock. John Barrow was not in attendance, but his Arctic and Antarctic explorers were: William Edward Parry, and John and James Ross. Other members of the Admiralty were there as wel1, including Basil Hall. And the list went on to include Lords, Earls, Bishops, members of Parliament, military officers, and professors. AI1 in al1, estimated the Athenaeum, there "could not be less ... than 400 persons present.,,70 The dinner

67 From John Herschel's diary, 28 June 1838 (Michael J. Crowe and David R. Dyck, eds, John Herschel's Diary, unpublished manuscript transcription). 68 The Times, 21 May 1838, 5b. 69 Michael Faraday to John Herschel, RS :HS 7.182, CCJH 4393. Quotation from Frank A. J. L. James, The Correspondence of Michael Faraday (London: Institute of Electrical Engineers, 1993, vol. 2), 629, letter 1234. Many thanks to Frank James for bringing this letter to my attention. 70 Anonymous, "The Herschel Dinner," Athenaeum, 16 June 1838,423.

60

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

was also reported in the London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and

Journalo/Science. 71 The dinner can be rightly understood on different levels. As a meeting of men of science, it can been seen as a reconciliation-in the person of John Herschel-between the old Banksian regime with the younger scientific reformers: Herschel had a foot in both worlds, and his honorary dinner was one of the few times almost everyone from both sides came together. The dinner can also, perhaps as a corollary to the last point, be seen as a prelude to Herschel becoming the President of the Royal Society-a move that nearly everyone at the dinner expected. His narrow loss to the Duke of Sussex for that position in 1830 no doubt enhanced his status as a disinterested natural philosopher. Consider again the quotation by Charles Lyell (presented at the beginning of this chapter), writing to Charles Darwin in 1836: " ... my question is, whether the time annihilated by learned bodies ('par les affaires administratives') is balanced by the good they do. Fancy exchanging Herschel at the Cape, for Herschel as President of the Royal Society, which he so narrowly escaped being, and I voting for him too! I hope to be forgiven for that.,m After his voyage, however, things were different. Herschel had left England a highly respected man of science, but he came home a national scientific hero. Before his Cape voyage, Herschel was a contender for President of the Royal Society. After his return, he was a certainty. The honorary dinner was anticipated by many as a prelude to his presidency. But this was eight years later and Herschel, having narrowly escaped the job the first time, now had no desire to take on a position that would have seemed to him, especially after the freedom of the Cape, something closer to a prison sentence. Two months after the honorary dinner, in August 1838, the Duke of Sussex announced that he would resign his position as President. Immediately all eyes turned to Herschel, and just as immediately Herschel made it clear he was not interested. He repeatedly told William Whewell-on whom he could count to spread the word-to put an "absolute negative" on anyone's notion that he was interested in the presidency of the Royal Society.73 If in the end Herschel's honorary dinner was not a prelude to his obtaining the highest scientific seat in the empire, even though those in attendance that night thought it might be, it was still (perhaps for that reason) an imperial celebration. While the ostensible purpose of the dinner was to honor Herschel for the successful completion of his surveys and his safe return to England, the actual purpose seemed to be to use Herschel as a vehicle to promote the glory of Britain and its

71 "The Herschel Dinner," in The London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journalo/Science 13, July-December 1838,75-7. 72 Hall, "The Distinguished Man of Science," 120. 73 John Herschel to William Whewell, 13 September 1838 (RS:HS 21.258/CCJH 3770); and John Herschel to William Whewell, 17 September 1838 (RS:HS 21.259/CCJH 3773).

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

61

empire. His country's gratitude was manifest materially in a specially made silver vase, and immaterially in numerous speeches made in his honor. After dinner the speeches began with the unveiling of the vase. Then Augustus Frederick, the Duke of Sussex and still President of the Royal Society, stood up. Addressing the crowd before him, who comprised the "brightest ornaments of the British Empire,,,74 he began the lengthy introductory oration expected of the man occupying the chair. His speech centered on Herschel, "for never was there a person who deserved more justly and universally, the praise and esteem of his country, than the distinguished individual, who now sits on my right hand,,75-where John was sitting humbly. Acknowledging the independent nature of the voyage, "independent of every person's assistance ... refusing, gratefully and respectfully, the offers of government ... ,,76 the Duke went on to implore others not to follow Herschel's example and to make use of government aid. "Gentlemen, while I admire [Herschel's] independence ... I hope it will not certainly be looked upon as a precedent, or furnish an argument for refusing every man of science that aid which, under circumstances, may be indispensable ... I trust our government will never be (if I may use the expression) so narrow-fisted as to put an extinguisher on claims of that sort.,m Then, after a few more laudatory sentiments, the vase was set upon the table before Herschel, a toast raised to "Our distinguished Guest," and John rose to speak. Or, rather, mumble. So quiet was John, so averse to public speaking that "he addressed the company ... in so Iowa tone of voice, that his observations were wholly inaudible to the greater part of the meeting.,,78 His speech was audible at least to the writer from the Athenaeum, and the first words reported to come from John's mouth were self-effacing. He felt himself unworthy of the attention and honor he was receiving from the assembly around him. He asserted that he had done nothing more than what his private inclinations led him to do. Then, before his admiring guests, he eloquently and unpretentiously reduced his five year voyage to appear as nothing more than a trifling excursion within a larger, more important journey. The glory should not be placed on him, he said; instead, the glory "has reference to a far higher and more dignified object" of which he and his

74 "The Herschel Dinner," Athenaeum, 424. 75 Ibid., 423 . 76 Ibid., 424. 77

Ibid., 424.

78 Ibid., 424. This contrasts greatly with the impression of Herschel given by Janet Browne. According to Browne, at the 1845 BAAS meeting in Cambridge, Herschel is said to have "thundered to the assembled dignitaries" against the idea of transmutation of species recently put forth in Robert Chambers anonymous Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (Browne, Charles Darwin: Voyaging, London : Jonathan Cape (1995), 464). This is highly unlikely; more probably Herschel merely spoke, as he always did, confidently though very quietly.

62

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

voyage were "but as one drop in the ocean."79 The "object" he was referring to, of course, was the larger journey of scientific progress. All scientists in attendance that night were part of that journey, and the glory never belonged to anyone of them but to them all. I hope we shall never allow ourselves to forget the infinitely higher and more important circumstance, that it is the great truths of science, that it is the interpretation of God's great book of nature, and not the men who interpret these pages, that are the ultimate objects of all this praise 80 . .. It is true that a portion of the glory will glance aside, and shed its lustre on these men; and it becomes them by so much the stronger ties to justify it by the moderation and circumspection of their demeanor, and by their moral worth, and brotherly union, and good feeling one towards another ... 81 He went on to acknowledge the important help and camaraderie he received from Thomas Maclear. And then he mentioned the issue of his refusal of aid, and wanted it known that by refusing government aid on his voyage he was by no

79 Ibid., 424. 80 This comment was not just a rhetorical flourish, or a nod to a socially requisite piety. It was indicative of Herschel's sincere religious commitment; it was his wife who noted that John " ... is alive to anything concerning his fellow creatures, as to things above ... " (Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 167). His diaries from 1834-38 are peppered with his thoughts and comments on God and the Christian religion. From them we also learn that John regularly attended church near Cape Town, and frequently read the Bible with his family. Thus it is no surprise to find that John viewed scientific discovery as something akin to worship. In his A Preliminary Discourse on the Study 0/ Natural Philosophy, published in 1830, John describes the process of science as leading one to certain knowledge of God, although in this book "God" is a nondescript deity, and not the overtly Christian God of his private beliefs. With sufficient and disciplined study, the man of science ... approves and feels the highest admiration for the harmony of[the world's] parts, the skill and efficiency of its contrivances ... Thus he is led to the conception of a Power and Intelligence superior to his own, and adequate to the production and maintenance of all that he sees in nature,-a Power and Intelligence to which he may indeed apply the term infinite ... " John Herschel, A Preliminary Discourse on the Study 0/ Natural Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 4. It is also not surprising to find John taking definite moral stances on the treatment of the native Xhosa in D'Urban's frontier war. As an orthodox Christian but one of a reformist stripe, his conception of the world was that it contained both moral and natural laws, both of which had been laid down by the Creator. God was the first principle of both his philosophy of nature and of his morality. Moral and natural philosophy had the same foundation. In that sense, then, John's practice of science can be seen as part of his faith. Science was the uncovering of God' s laws of nature. 81 "The Herschel Dinner," Athenaeum, 424.

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

63

means ungrateful. On the contrary, he stated simply that "if [such offers of aid were] accepted, they would compel me to extend my plan of operations, and make a larger campaign; and that, in fact, it would compel me to go, in some degree, aside form my original plan.,,82 His scientific task now over, however, he was more than happy to accept the aid of the Duke of Northumberland, a patron of science, to help defray the publication costs of the results of his observations once they had been properly prepared. Herschel then concluded with another gracious display of thanks to all those who came to pay him honor, and then, according to the Athenaeum, "resumed his seat amid loud and very general cheering.,,83 His speech had made one thing clear: his voyage had been for the purposes of advancing the realm of science alone. Neither his own glory, the glory of other scientists, nor the glory of the British empire were his goals. But in the speeches to follow this noble sentiment was forgotten, as others in attendance would attempt to unite rhetorically Herschel's voyage with other projects of the empire. After Herschel sat down the renowned geologist Adam Sedgwick got up and began an oration in praise of the Augustus Frederick and the Royal Society. Under the Duke, Sedgwick claimed, the Royal Society had seen its greatest period of "scientific investigation" yet. Sedgwick seems to have ignored Herschel's speech by singling out the Duke for unique praise in the cause of science; he went on to laud other individuals (like Michael Faraday and William Rowan Hamilton) for their recent scientific contributions. But Herschel topped Sedgwick's list; whether John liked it or not he was the man of the hour. In his speech Sedgwick set Herschel at the pinnacle of the Royal Society's achievements, explicitly placing him within the ranks of imperial explorers and conquerors as well: If, in the past history of science, there had been much to rejoice at, there was still much more to look to and anticipate. It had been during his Royal Highness's [Augustus Frederick] Presidency of the Royal Society, that this great intellectual triumph had been accomplished-that Sir John Herschel had gone out to the South, and returned to his native land laden with spoils richer than ever adorned the car of a conqueror. 84

Next the voices of the army and navy chimed in to remind those gathered of the role that the military played in imperial scientific endeavors. The Duke of Sussex proposed "Prosperity to the Army!" and Sir Thomas Brisbane spoke on its behalf, praising the discipline of its soldiers and their role in founding the colonial observatory at New South Wales. The Duke then proposed "Prosperity to the Wooden Walls of Old England!" whereupon Admiral C. Adam spoke in praise of 82 Ibid., 424. 83 Ibid., 425. 84

Ibid., 425.

64

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

scientists in general, and astronomers in particular, for the way their science helped the Navy successfully navigate to the farthest corners of the earth. Herschel especially was lauded as "foremost ... of those by whose labors and research the British Navy was enabled to cross the pathless ocean in security and confidence.,,85 Thus was Herschel linked to the British military in spite of his stated avoidance of pursuing science for any purpose of such an "official character." Adam concluded, "The Navy of England and the whole maritime world owed Sir John Herschel and his illustrious father a debt of gratitude, which could never be repaid, and which [Adam] deeply appreciated ... ,,86 The night wore on and others added their voices. But one speech more will suffice to indicate how the honorary dinner linked Herschel to the imperial ambitions of the British government. The Marquis of Lansdowne, speaking on behalf of the Chancellor of Cambridge University (where Herschel had been an undergraduate and Fellow at St John's), also rose to praise John and to thank him for the honor he brought to his former university. The Marquis noted that Europe had seen twenty years of general peace (since the end of the Napoleonic wars), and that this peace had enabled the advancement of science throughout the world . British scientists, as imperial explorers, had thus been able "to step forth from their scientific retreats ... and devote not only their minds, but their persons, to the pursuit of science in every path, through climes and through places scarcely frequented and visited before . .. with a view to extend the dominion of knowledge.,,87 He went on to mention that the southern tip of Africa, "at the close of a long and arduous war," became a British holding and was thus ripe for similar scientific exploration: ... I can recollect when it was a matter of congratulation, that, by establishing there [southern Africa] the dominion and authority of Great Britain, we had obtained a stepping-stone and a key to those vast possessions, which it had been the fortune of British arms to acquire, and which since ... it has been the policy of British councillors to improve .. . It is no less a matter of congratulation, that having made this acquisition for military and political purposes, we are now called upon to contemplate it in a no less interesting point of view, for the excellent person ... [Herschel] nas made it, as it were, the outpost of science, for communicating and receiving knowledge ... Let us recollect, that we are to contemplate that situation not as guarding and commanding extensive territories, but as having opened a new hemisphere to the eye of the scientific observer; as having made accessible to the

85 Ibid., 426. It should be pointed out that the astronomical work of both William and John Herschel was not primarily positional in nature, and thus contributed very little to the sort of astronomical knowledge used by the Royal Navy for navigational purposes. 86 Ibid., 426. 87 Ibid., 426.

The Politics of Herschel 's Cape Voyage

65

highest pursuits and aspirations of philosophy, that hemisphere, the riches of which our talented and excellent guest has described to us, and which he has been the means of annexing to the empire of knowledge, making it available for its own purposes, and, as it were, conquering itself, for the benefit, not of this country alone, but of all countries and of all after-times ... Peace has her victories no less renowned than war ... To these victories [Herschel] has greatly added, and has added to the honour and glory of his country, and to the honour and glory of [Cambridge University].88

It is relevant here to note that the words "dominion, acquisition, outpost, commanding, annexing, conquering, and empire," as used by the Marquis, are not words used, in the first instance, to describe the activities of science. It is only when such words imply exploration with imperial intent that they describe scientific activity so well. The independent and unofficial nature of Herschel's voyage had been briefly acknowledged. But imperial rhetoric dominated the honorary dinner, both in the example of the Marquis as weIl as generaIly, and Herschel's private sentiments were largely ignored. It was as if everyone at the dinner and, presumably, those who read the account of that dinner in the Athenaeum the following day, held the same view: that Herschel was quite plainly a willing participant in one of Britain's imperial projects. In his speech the Marquis of Lansdowne described Herschel's voyage as an "annexing" and "conquering" of the "empire of knowledge." Even with war over and peace secured, the Marquis still saw militaristic "victories" in Herschel's voyage. Like a decorated soldier, John was praised for the "honour and glory" he brought to his university and to his country. Thus throughout the evening science was linked closely to British imperialism. Science was portrayed as inseparable from political and military projects of conquering and maintaining the empire. And as to the politics of the empire, it seemed as if everyone at dinner that night accepted the same premise and corollary: the empire was good, and science could only help make it better. Thus as the guest of honor Herschel was rhetorically portrayed as being an imperial man of science . Did he express distaste at this rhetorical linkage? Ambivalence? Agreement? The Athenaeum never says. If John had objections to anything said that night he kept them to himself, while the evenings' speeches became an ascending paean to him and his voyage, to science, and to Britain's imperial accomplishments. By the end of the evening Herschel had come to personify everything noble in the idea of a British explorer. He was at the peak of British science, he had represented and practiced that science in a distant and hostile land, and he had returned home with new knowledge and thereby honor for his country. As the London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science reported, 88

Ibid., 426.

66

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

the final toast to Herschel at his honorary dinner was given by the geologist Roderick Murchison: "May it ever be the pride of our hearts to repeat: 'I was one of those who welcomed Herschel to his native land. ",89

Herschel, the Admiralty, and the Cape after 1838 Following his return to England, Herschel became further involved with certain projects of the Admiralty for the scientific exploration of the earth. Although he was still a somewhat reluctant participant in so far as such projects were political, he was an eager participant providing that the projects anticipated an increase in the accumulation of scientific knowledge. True to his inclinations, it was the progress of science, and not the empire, that Herschel promoted when he worked with the Admiralty. In part as a favor to Thomas Maclear, Herschel worked with the Admiralty to supply the Cape with a new telescope. In August of 1843, he received a request from the Admiralty to obtain a new telescope for the observatory at the Cape. He solicited the help of George Biddell Airy,9O then Astronomer Royal and a long-time friend, who may have passed on the request for a new telescope to Herschel. 91 Herschel agreed to the project and, with the full backing of the Admiralty, ordered a telescope from Georg Merz & Son, a prominent instrument maker in Munich, and the world's leading telescope maker. When the telescope was finally ready in 1847 Herschel went so far as to pay for it from his own bank account and await reimbursement from the Admiralty.92 A few years later, in 1851, he also helped Maclear obtain, through the Admiralty, a much needed transit circle for the Cape observatory. For all of this Maclear was very grateful. 93 Another, much larger project of the Admiralty on which Herschel worked was the Manual of Scientific Enquiry/4 published first in 1849. Herschel's recognized scientific prowess, his central position in British scientific circles, and his perception as a veteran explorer made him the obvious choice to edit the Manual. "The Herschel Dinner," in the London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine, 76. John Herschel to George Biddell Airy, 16 August 1843 (RS:HS 25.6.17/CCJH 5566). 91 George Biddell Airy to John Herschel, 13 August 1843 (RS:HS 127. I/CCJH 5564). 92 Initially, Herschel's personal account was overdrawn (Drummond's Bank to John Herschel, 21 December 1847 (TxU :H/M-0170;Reel 1087/CCJH 7437» and the payment to Merz was delayed. Herschel complained to the Admiralty and within two days the Admiralty had deposited the necessary sum in Herschel's account. Thus the matter was taken care of at only moderate inconvenience to Herschel (Francis Beaufort to John Herschel, 23 December 1847 (TxU:HIM-0066; Reel 1087/CCJH 7443». 93 Thomas Maclear to John Herschel, 30 April 1852 (RS:HS 12.157/CCJH 9357). 94 The full title of the manual is A Manual of SCientific Enquiry: Prepared for the Use of Officers in Her Majesty's Navy; and Travellers in General, Edited by Sir John F. W. Herschel, Bart., second edition (London: John Murray, Albemarle Street, Publisher to the Admiralty, 1851). 89 90

The Politics ofHerschel's Cape Voyage

67

In its conception it was to be a general and standardized summary of the knowledge and technique required by Naval officers to successfully execute scientific investigations while in distant parts of the globe. 9s Herschel was first approached for suggestions on such a manual in 1844. 96 But not until 1847 did the project get under way. George Eden, the first Earl of Auckland, headed the project for the Admiralty. On 19 November 1847 Eden asked Herschel ifhe would edit the Manual and solicit the appropriate authors for contributions. Herschel agreed and was soon in correspondence with a number of prominent scientists. By the time the Manual was published in June of 1849, Herschel had gathered and edited contributions from a number of Britain's key scientific thinkers. The final publication included essays from George Biddell Airy ("Astronomy"), William Whewell ("Tides"), Charles Darwin ("Geology"), William Hooker ("Botany"), Richard Owen ("Zoology"), and Herschel himself ("Meteorology,,).97 The production of the Manual was enough work for Herschel, and he was not interested in maintaining his ties with the book in any capacity once his task as editor was done and the Manual was published. He had done his job not for the Admiralty directly, but for what that office and the Manual would do in furthering worldwide scientific cooperation. In his introduction to the work he wrote: With the publication of this work the Editor's connexion with it ceases, beyond a general and earnest interest in its success in forwarding the objects proposed by it. Observations made in any of its departments, in pursuance of the recommendations contained in it, by officers in Her Majesty's service, if officially communicated in the proper quarter, will of course be dealt with officially. But as the work may, and probably will, fall into the hands of voyagers and travellers unconnected with the public service, it may be right to state, for the avoidance of possible misapprehension, that he cannot charge himself with the reception, examination, or discussion of any masses of observations they may accumulate. 98

The Manual itself was exactly the sort of project with which Herschel could willingly be involved. Its object corresponded with his own view of scientific

9S According to the introduction of the Manual: "It is the opinIOn of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty that it would be to the honour and advantage of the Navy, and conduce to the general interests of Science, if new facilities and encouragement were given to the collection of information upon scientific subjects by the officers, and more particularly by the medical officers, of Her Majesty's Navy, when upon foreign service; and their Lordships are desirous that for this purpose a Manual be compiled, giving general instructions for observation and for record in various branches of science." A Manual of Scientific Enquiry, iii. 96 William A. Baillie Hamilton to John Herschel, 18 June 1844 (RS:HS 9.206/CCJH 5844). 97 Other essays were on "Magnetism," "Hydrography," "Geography," "Earthquakes," "Mineralogy," "Atmospheric Waves," "Ethnology," "Medicine," and "Statistics." 98 Herschel, ed., A Manual afScientific Enquiry, ix.

68

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

progress, for the "far higher and more dignified object" of scientific, and not political, progress, and the brotherhood that object would foment. In this sense the Manual resonated with the universal scientific program of Alexander von Humboldt, which Herschel so much admired. All "scientific travellers" would benefit from the Manual, and the more observations it enabled them to collect and bring into circulation, the better for understanding the cosmos. It is perhaps not going too far, then, to note that in the final pages of the second edition of the Admiralty's Manual of Scientific Enquiry, in the section in which the publisher advertised other books, that the first two books advertised are by Alexander von Humboldt: his Cosmos (then out in three volumes) and his Aspects of Nature in Different Lands and in Different Climates. Finally, Herschel became involved in what was called the "Magnetic Crusade."99 This was the effort on the part of British scientists (originating in the British Association for the Advancement of Science) to develop a worldwide network of geomagnetic observatories. Not surprisingly, the inspiration for this project came initially from Humboldt, and similar efforts had been made under his and Gauss's direction by the French and German governments. As was the initial rallying cry of the BAAS, the British must follow suit in these endeavors, lest they fall behind work being done on the continent. The direct aid of the government, including the Admiralty, was required. Edward Sabine led the charge for the Crusade in the 1830s, but according to John Cawood nothing happened until John Herschel returned from Africa. "The large-scale project' [of worldwide geomagnetic observatories] envisaged by Sabine and his colleagues and outlined by Humboldt produced little response either from the leadership of the Royal Society or from Government and military offices until John Herschel returned from South Africa in 1838.,,100 Cawood recognizes the influence Herschel had in achieving scientific projects when the Government, as well as the Crown, needed to be convinced of their utility. Herschel's new found status and authority gave him this influence, especially when it came to a project, like the "Magnetic Crusade," which required the funding of the government, the ships of the Admiralty, and the cooperation of a national and international body of scientists. As with his Cape voyage, Herschel never aided the Admiralty in their project of using voyages of scientific exploration to benefit the British empire. That was left to men like John Barrow, for whom it was their own duty and passion. Herschel gladly offered his advice to any Admiralty expedition that sought it (as he did for James Ross, whose travels to the Antarctic in the Erebus and Terror in 1839 were

John Cawood, "The Magnetic Crusade: Science and Politics in Early Victorian Britain," Isis 70 (1979): 493-518. See also John Cawood, "Terrestrial Magnetism and the Development of International Collaboration in the Early Nineteenth Century," Annals 0/ Science 34 (1977): 551-87. 100 Cawood, "The Magnetic Crusade," 505. 99

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

69

part of the "Magnetic Crusade"IOI). But his advice for, and support of, any such expedition never went beyond the scientific, and all of his politicking was ever to grease the wheels of scientific investigation.102 Timothy Alborn has commented that in 1830, prior to his departure for the Cape, Herschel and his fellow scientific reformers believed that British men of science suffered "from inadequate employment opportunities," and "a failure of [Britain's] varied [scientific] geniuses to be organized effectively.,,103 Following his return, Herschel had the prestige necessary to provide the influence and organization British scientists needed.

Conclusion This chapter began with the statement that science is often used as a means of legitimizing other activities. In the case of Herschel's Cape voyage, there were two such legitimizations. In chapter 1 it was argued that Herschel used the completion of his and his father's astronomical survey project as a means to fulfil his personal desire to explore more of the world. In this chapter, it has been argued, the legitimization was on a national level: the British empire used Herschel's voyage to justify one of its colonial conquests. As a result, a new public persona was created for Herschel. This persona, however, was not Herschel's own view of himself. Nevertheless, the political and public perception of him and his Cape voyage became that which he did not want: that of a scientific voyage beneficial to Britain's imperial aims. Whereas the British government's perception of Herschel's voyage was that it should help promote the glory of the nation and its empire, Herschel's private perception was that it should promote the glory of science alone. In the end, however, the official perception of Herschel's Cape voyage became the public one. In 1885, fourteen years after Herschel's death, Agnes Clerke wrote

101 In the months prior to his departure Ross wrote to Herschel requesting his support in influencing the Treasury to provide funds for purchasing scientific instruments for his expedition. See James Clark Ross to John Herschel, 28 March 1839 (TxU:HIM-0461; Reel 1093/CClH 4029) and James Clark Ross to John Herschel, 30 March 1839 (TxU:H/M-0462; Reel 1093/CCJH 4039). Herschel did his best to assist Ross, for example encouraging the Admiralty and the Royal Society to help Ross prepare the necessary instruments for his voyage. John Herschel to [Unknown], 6 June 1839 (TxU:HIL-064I ; Reel 1089/CCJH 4119). Buttmann briefly describes Herschel's involvement with the Ross expedition in The Shadow ofthe Telescope, 126-7. 102 For examples of Herschel's influence in government and at Court for scientific ends, see Cawood, "The Magnetic Crusade," 507-11; the sections "John Herschel and the Newcastle Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science," and "Realizing the Resolutions. " 103 Timothy Alborn, "The Business of Induction: Industry and Genius in the Language of British Scientific Reform, 1820-1840," History ofScience 34 (1996), 94.

70

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

in her book A Popular History of Astronomy During the Nineteenth Century that the "success" of Herschel's "enterprise" was one in which "scientific zeal was tinctured with an attractive flavor of adventurous romance" and "was justly regarded as a matter of national pride."I04 Perhaps it would have been better to use the word 'unjustly,' if only because with all the talk of national pride it was easy to forget that Herschel's voyage was, in his own words, a "private affair." That Herschel's voyage could have been regarded by any popular history as a matter of national pride required that it had been first transformed from a private to a national event. And this required an alteration of Herschel ' s public persona, from domestic astronomer and natural philosopher to that of famous explorer. Indeed, although the British government could not compel Herschel to alter his plans for his private scientific voyage, in the end it was able to create a public perception of Herschel as a participant in its increasing control and exploitation of Africa. After Herschel's return from Africa, what changed in the public imagination was the conception of Herschel's place in British society. It was one thing to be an astronomer or natural philosopher, no matter how accomplished. It was quite another to journey to a far corner of the empire and return "laden with spoils,,,105 as Adam Sedgwick had said. Yet this was exactly how Herschel's Cape voyage was perceived: as a voyage the success of which vastly increased the glory, honor, and even wealth of Britain. Years later, following Herschel's death on II May 1871, the author of an obituary in the journal Nature wrote: "We now reluctantly but necessarily pass over much that is interesting and instructive in the career of the younger Herschel, and approach that crucial period of his life, when, accompanied by his wife and family, he left England for the Cape of Good Hope .. . ,,106 How interesting: of all possible periods in Herschel's successful life that could have been singled out as "crucial," it was the Cape voyage that received the distinction. That the Cape voyage was reported as the "crucial period" in Herschel's life makes a salient point. Although it was perhaps Herschel ' s greatest period of scientific achievement, it was also a period when John was absent from the scientific scene in Britain: years spent in a far off colony in relatively uneventful domestic tranqUility. At his honorary dinner, Herschel was aware of the disparity between the "honour and glory" he was receiving for his conspicuously calm four years at the Cape when compared with other, much more dangerous voyages of scientific exploration and discovery. In his speech he had said: "If such be the honour ... which await those who, like myself, have done nothing but follow the bias of my own natural inclinations, who have after all encountered no danger, undergone no privations ... chalked out no new path of science, but merely 104 Agnes Clerke. A Popular History of Astronomy During the Nineteenth Century (Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black, 1885),64. 105 Anonymous, 'The Herschel Dinner,' Athenaeum, 425. 106 Nature 4 (25 May 1871), 70.

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

71

foIlowed the path already pointed out, what should be the honours which ought to fall on those who ... have had to contend against difficulties and privations! What should be the honour of the circumnavigators of the globe, whose career is a career of suffering and privation . .. ?,,107 And yet it was immediately foIlowing his voyage that Herschel had the many honors heaped upon him. The award of a baronetcy and the honorary dinner were given upon his return, and not following the publication of the astronomical observations he had obtained while at the Cape. These appeared as the Cape Results nine years later, in 1847 . lOS This implies that it was the voyage itself, and not the astronomical observations, that had aroused Britain to so honor Herschel. For the British, it was Herschel's voyage, and not his astronomy, that appears to have been "crucial." Two factors may account for this. The first was that of propaganda. Key figures in the British government and ruling class wanted to project onto Herschel's voyage their own imperial ambitions. James Graham believed Herschel's voyage to be so close to the Admiralty'S other projects that it was a matter of national (or "Public"), and not merely private, interest. 109 RecaIl as weIl the words used by the Marquis of Lansdowne to describe Herschel's Cape voyage: [Herschel] has been the means of annexing [the Cape colony] to the empire of knowledge, making it available for its own purposes, and, as it were, conquering itself, for the benefit, not of this country alone, but of all countries and of all aftertimes ... ,,110 If Herschel made the Cape an outpost of science for "all countries," the Marquis made it quite clear at least that it was a British outpost. What better vehicle than science to affect such legitimization of British control over the Cape? And what better scientific practitioner to marshal to that end than the internationally recognized Sir John Herschel? The second factor for the "crucial" nature of Herschel's Cape voyage in the British imagination was that Herschel embodied that important mix of scientific genius and morality that, as Richard Yeo has demonstrated, the British had come to

107 "The Herschel Dinner," Athenaeum, 424. 108 In order that this point not be overstated, it should be mentioned that many people had no knowledge of the length of time it would take for Herschel to reduce his observations, and expected that the observations would be published soon after Herschel's return to England-perhaps within a year or two. Herschel himself had no idea it would take nearly ten years. 109 James Graham to Basil Hall, in a letter from Basil Hall to John Herschel, 6 October 1832 (RS:HS 9. I 73/CC1H 2640). 110 "The Herschel Dinner," Athenaeum, 426.

72

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

expect from (and project upon) their scientific practitioners since Newton. 111 A public sense of exactly those elements surrounded Herschel's south African accomplishment. The London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science reported that: "In every point of view . .. the Herschel Dinner must be considered as one of the most interesting and successful meetings ever held to promote the triumphs of intellect and social virtue."112 In addition, there were the key elements of the heroic explorer. In The Myth of the Explorer, Beau Riffenburgh considered the Anglo-American cultural construction of heroic explorers in the late nineteenth century. Even though Herschel's voyage took place in the earlier part of that century, many of the elements of a late nineteenth-century heroic explorer can be located in Herschel as well, and were presented in the popular press. There was the element of the "exotic setting,,, I13 as well as the imperial element: "Explorers, confirming as they did the heroism, romance, and adventure of empire, were a particularly celebrated genre.,,114 And the elements of the "personal qualities" of "energy and action" and "unbounded intelligence and moral cIarity,,1I5 were present as well in the public presentation of Herschel's postCape persona. The historian Walter Cannon put it this way: "In November 1833 [Herschel] sailed for the Cape of Good Hope to observe the nebulae of the southern heavens, and sailed into apotheosis. After 1833 it was very difficult for an English writer to discuss, or even mention, Sir John Herschel in a scientifically impersonal tone . [Augustus Frederick, the Duke of Sussex and President of the Royal Society] summed up his opinion by saying that Herschel was 'such a model of an accomplished philosopher, as can rarely be found beyond the regions of fiction. ",116 Thus the virtues the public perceived in Herschel, coupled with his new status, raised him effortlessly to the level of national hero. All the components for such status were found in his Cape voyage except one, and that was its unofficial nature. But this difficulty was minor and was easily remedied: it was ignored. In conclusion, we can say that, for John Herschel, science at its most pure and advantageous was an activity done for its own sake, and not as a means to political (or any other) ends. This has been demonstrated in the lengths to which he went to ensure his own voyage to the Cape colony would incur no official status or official duties, but would instead be the "private adventure" of an amateur. And although

III Richard Yeo, "Genius, Method and Morality : Images of Newton in Britain, 1760-1860," Science in Context 2 (1988): 257-84. 112 "The Herschel Dinner," in The London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journalo/Science 13 (July-December 1838), 77. 113 Riffenburgh, The Myth o/the Explorer, 6. 114 Ibid. , 2. 115 Ibid., 6. 116 Walter F. Cannon, "John Herschel and the Idea of Science," Journal 0/ the History 0/ Ideas 22 (1961), 217-18.

The Politics of Herschel's Cape Voyage

73

scientific and not imperial progress was his goal, Herschel was fully aware of the scientific advantages that the empire could provide. What better way to gain natural knowledge of the earth than under the aegis of a worldwide empire? For this reason, along with his (and others') goal to reform British science, Herschel was willing to become involved in such official projects as the Admiralty Manual of Scientific Enquiry, and to use his influence in support of scientific projects like the "Magnetic Crusade." For the same reason he would accept funding for the publication of the Cape Results, when it was finally prepared. Such funding enabled his southern hemisphere astronomical observations to reach a wider scientific audience than they may have, had they only been published in an institutional publication like the Transactions of the Royal Society. Aid used in this way for the advancement of science resonated well with Herschel's private scientific ideals.

Chapter 3

Appropriating Astronomy: Herschel's Cape Observations, Real and Imagined

Observations, 1837 In the Mass of facts relations exist as Statues exist in Marble-It is the mind which chisels them out and gives them body-by the instrumentality of abstract terms which are the tools and the inward perception of harmony and beauty which guides them. As there is but one beauty there is but one truth-but to recognize it requires the experience & testimony of whole generations & ages of mankind So beschreibt mit Figuren der Astronome den Himmel / (Dass in dem ewigen Raum leichter sich finde der Blick) / Kniipft entIegene Sonnen, durch Siriusfernen geschieden, / Uneinander im Schwan und in den Hornern des Stiers. &c &c [Friedrich] Schiller I -John Herschel, 1837

Introduction

This chapter is about the cultural appropriation of Herschel's Cape voyage, in particular his astronomical observations. In the last chapter it was argued that Herschel's voyage was, in the context of the British empire, more important than his astronomical observations. This should not, however, downplay those observations and the scientific and cultural impact they had, in so far as this impact can be separated from its broader imperial connections. Because the second half of this book considers the scientific impact of Herschel's observations, this chapter will focus on their cultural impact. The theme around which this cultural impact can best be organized is that of appropriation. Herschel's voyage, and his astronomy, represented different things I As quoted in Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, "Observations, 1837," 334. Translation of lines of Schiller (from "Menschliches Wissen"): "So the astronomer describes the heavens with constellations / (which in endless space make easier his observations) / connecting distant suns, separated by Sirius-distances / in the [constellations of the] swan and the horns of the bull."

76

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

in different cultural contexts. And these contexts, driven as they were by their own intrinsic concerns and values, each appropriated Herschel's voyage in a way commensurate with those concerns and values. The cultural contexts considered here are public ones: they are the British (and European) public, the Cape colony public, and the American public. No attempt is made to differentiate among strata within these publics; " public" in these cases means generally an educated, reading public. This is because the evidence for public interest in Herschel's voyage has been taken primarily from periodicals of the 1830s. If there was corresponding interest in Herschel's voyage and astronomy among less-educated classes it is demonstrated here by implication only. Furthermore, this discussion does not consider the cultural differences between the publics of these three very different parts of the world. That sort of discussion is outside the scope of this chapter. Before discussing the appropriation of Herschel's astronomical observations in these three cultural contexts, however, it is important to first consider those observations from Herschel's private perspective. Without some discussion of his private science, its public appropriation lacks strength of contrast. It is also important to have some idea of the sort of astronomical observations he was making. With that done, it will be apparent that the privacy with which Herschel surrounded his voyage and his observations in part enabled the different cultural appropriations of them: had they been official and more transparent, there would perhaps have been less room for the imposition of public proprietorship and unwarranted speculation. As it was, aspects of Herschel's voyage and observations became what others wanted them to be.

Making a Private Colonial Observatory It is difficult to imagine all of the details involved in setting up a colonial observatory in British territory in the 1830s. That there would be difficulty is certain, however, and is evident in the fact that the only two colonial observatories then in existence in the southern hemisphere were projects of the British government. These were at Paramatta in Australia, and the Royal Observatory at the Cape of Good Hope. They had the advantage of being government-funded stations, with all of the material and political benefits such status brought. A private observatory, as was Herschel's, was a different matter. How could erecting an observatory thousands of miles from home be possible without the aid of the imperial government, which aid Herschel had eschewed? The answer, in Herschel's case, was his financial independence. In the absence of the direct support of the British government, it would have been impossible for Herschel to transport his family, servants, telescopes, and other necessities to the Cape without his inherited wealth. But this wealth enabled him to avoid accepting his government's aid, a situation that otherwise, as he indicated, would have left him with no alternative but to abandon his voyage

Appropriating Astronomy

77

altogether. His only reliance on the government during the duration of his Cape voyage was that which many of the British enjoyed-imperial citizenship. As a citizen of considerable means in the British empire, he was able to take advantage of the imperial political economy: he could live and travel freely in the Cape colony. But his independent status enabled him to avoid conforming officially to the imperial moral economy. In the last chapter it was argued that Herschel's private voyage was eventually remade into a public event. This was a result of the (often unconscious) wishful thinking of officials in the British government and sympathetic members of affiliated agencies, societies, and institutions. The chronological foci of that chapter were the periods before and after Herschel's voyage. The exception to this was the discussion of Governor D'Urban's frontier war (and, in chapter I, discussion of Herschel's non-astronomical scientific pursuits). This chapter will now consider the years Herschel and his family spent at the Cape, with emphasis on the astronomical aspects of those years. By "astronomical aspects" is meant not only Herschel's actual astronomical observations, but also the public interest in Herschel's astronomical observations at the Cape. Feldhausen: A Privileged Space for Astronomy

Soon after the Herschels arrived at the Cape in January 1834, they located an estate about six miles outside of Cape Town. It was called "Feldhuisen" by its Dutch owner, and "The Grove" by the English residents of the Cape colony. The Herschels opted for a compromise and, drawing upon Herschel's German ancestry, renamed the place "Feldhausen." They moved near the estate in February, but did not move into Feldhausen itself until 23 April, as the house was being renovated and repaired. 2 While the house received the attention of the workmen, Herschel, his mechanic John Stone, and four local laborers readied the telescopes. 3 Feldhausen became a privileged space for Herschel's astronomical observations. The lUxury of Herschel's personal wealth kept it politically and socially insulated; it was, most importantly for him, gloriously isolated in its distance from London. It was also socially insulated at the Cape as the residence of the empire's premiere man of science, by its location in a wealthy district at a comfortable distance from Cape Town, and by the visually obstructive effects of the large trees on its grounds. Feldhausen was everything Herschel had hoped for as an escape from London: its hectic pace, its frustrating politics of science, and its suffocating urbanity. Less than a year after their arrival, Margaret Herschel noticed the change in her husband: "Nothing can be better than his health ... indeed he looks ten years younger, & I doubt if ever he enjoyed existence so much as now for there are not the numerous distractions which tore him to pieces in England, & 2

3

Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 23 April 1834,64. Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 17 February 1834, 47.

78

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

here he has time to saunter about with his gun on his shoulder & basket & trowel in his hand .. . ,,4 Feldhausen became the exclusive base camp for his "private adventure." Located on the same grounds as the domestic residence, Herschel's observatory at Feldhausen was part and parcel of its daily life. But even though astronomy was the sun around which the household revolved, Herschel's observations were themselves but one part of this diurnal revolution and were thus incorporated into its domestic routines. Like the orderly procession of the heavens Herschel was observing, Feldhausen, with its owner-occupants and servants, livestock and horses, grounds and gardens, and telescopes and other scientific apparatus, was also kept as much as possible in smooth running order. Margaret oversaw most of this order-she was responsible for the usual duties of the lady of the house, particularly with regard to the children and the chores of the servants5-enabling John to pay attention to his observations. In a diary entry that distilled to five words the degree to which astronomical observations became a seamless part of the Feldhausen routine, Herschel wrote, after a day spent around the Cape on various errands, that he "Returned to Dinner & Stars.,,6 Simon Schaffer has explored the relationship between "Physics Laboratories and the Victorian Country House,,,7 and some of his discussion of that relationship is relevant to the situation at Feldhausen. In particular, Schaffer considers the isolation of the estate houses from the larger populace, as well as the isolation of masters from servants, as that which enabled such estates to become privileged spaces for science. Although Schaffer is referring to English country homes of scientific gentlemen in the late nineteenth century (which, as a result of landed affluence, became self-contained laboratories with the introduction of "[g]as, electricity and hydraulics ... ,,8), Feldhausen was similarly privileged and selfcontained. First, Herschel could afford every amenity he required. Second, his family, his telescopes (as well as other scientific apparatus9), some of his servants, and other Margaret Herschel to Caroline Herschel, 29 September 1834, ibid., 98. Examples of her accounts of household expenditures are available in Brian Warner, ed., Lady Herschel: Lettersfrom the Cape 1834-1838 (Cape Town: Friends of the South African Library, 1991), 156--63. 6 Evans, et a!., Herschel at the Cape., 12 May 1834,68. 7 Simon Schaffer, "Physics Laboratories and the Victorian Country House," in Crosbie Smith and Jon Agar, eds, Making Space for Science: Territorial Themes in the Shaping of Knowledge (New York: St Martin's Press, 1998). 8 Schaffer, "Physics Laboratories and the Victorian Country House," 170. 9 On 31 May 1834 Margaret wrote: "[Herschel] has just unpacked his chemical cases, & fitted up a nice little laboratory in one of the cottages ... I suspect he will be as busy examining the chemical properties & juices of the extraordinary plants here, as looking at the stars-at least he wishes to do both, as well as bring home many sketches." Margaret Herschel to Emilia Calder Stewart, 30 May 1834. In Brian Warner, ed., Lady Herschel: Lettersfrom the Cape 1834-1838, 37-8. 4

5

Appropriating Astronomy

79

domestic possessions were brought from England, effectively recreating the scientific-domestic conditions available at the Herschel's English home, Slough. Third, Feldhausen was bucolic; it afforded Herschel that sense of quiet, order, and harmony that London, and much of his prior life in England, never had. Insulated as it was as the site of a private astronomical observatory (as well as the laboratory for his other scientific investigations), Feldhausen was free from the encroaching demands or expectations of anyone, official or otherwise, unless Herschel chose to be encroached upon. This was exactly the situation that Herschel had wanted to create for himself at the Cape. Feldhausen was, to use Schaffer's words, a sort of "production utopia[,] ... a peculiarly invulnerable social order which can yet represent itself apart from and against the existing culture."10 Although visitations were numerous, over the course of his time at the Cape Herschel was able to maintain that sense of isolation and independence he had longed for. Perhaps even if all of Cape Town paid regular visits to Feldhausen it would have yet been more tranquil than his life in London. And in any case, Herschel was used to it. After all, as a young boy in England he had lived at Slough with his father, cacophonously close to Windsor. His father William, as George III ' s personal astronomer, was frequently expected to entertain the notable guests the King brought over to see, and possibly look through, the giant telescopes. In the Cape colony as well, the Herschelian telescopes were a magnet for attention. Of course William, and later John, were part of the attraction. But visits to Feldhausen were not as frequent as those John had experienced at Slough, and when they occurred they were more often pleasant diversions than interruptions. If anyone enjoyed uninhibited access to Feldhausen, it was Thomas Maclear, His Majesty's Astronomer at the Cape. Maclear and Herschel became lifelong and likeminded friends, as was demonstrated in their solidarity against D'Urban's frontier war. Their collaboration on numerous scientific projects,1I their considerable correspondence,12 and the relative nearness of Feldhausen to the Royal Observatory at the Cape enabled this friendship . Herschel would also entertain explorers and naturalists stopping at the Cape en route to elsewhere. Charles Darwin made it a point to visit Herschel when the Beagle anchored in Table Bay in 1836; the young naturalist described Feldhausen as "a very comfortable country house, surrounded by fir and oak trees, which alone in so open a country, give a most charming air of seclusion and comfort."13 Herschel was also

10 Schaffer, "Physics Laboratories and the Victorian Country House," 149-50. See David S. Evans, "Dashing and Dutiful: Herschel and Maclear Made a Strange if Effective Team in their Astronomical Work at the Cape of Good Hope," Science 127 (25 April 1958),935-48. 12 See Brian and Nancy Warner, Mac/ear and Herschel: Letters and Diaries at the Cape of Good Hope. 1834-1838 (Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema., 1984). 13 As quoted in Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 242 n46. II

80

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

friends with local missionaries and businessmen. 14 And, as will be demonstrated, Herschel played host to a variety of curious Cape colonists who wanted to peer at the stars. The end result of Herschel's selective isolation at Feldhausen, as both a man of science and as a regular man, was a lasting sense of contentment. He became endeared to the tranquility of the Cape, and long after he returned to England he remained "attached by a thousand pleasing and grateful recollections of years spent in agreeable society, cheerful occupation, and unalloyed happiness.,,15 The psychological effect of these surroundings on his astronomy was to keep it an isolated and personal project for the duration of his time at the Cape, and even for a number of years after his return to England. He was able to maintain control of the entire project until it came time to publish the results in 1847. And at that point Herschel was glad to transfer his completed observations into other hands.

Herschel's Astronomical Observations All of the components of Herschel's private observatory made it safely to the Cape. Initially the telescopes, frames, mirrors, and other items, all in boxes, were taken off the Mountstuart Elphinstone and placed into government storage in the Cape Town docks in January 1834. In February the boxes were moved to Feldhausen, opened, and the assembly of the telescopes began. Herschel brought three telescopes with him to the Cape: a 20-foot reflecting telescope of 18.25-inch diameter, a seven-foot equatorial-mount refracting telescope of five-inch diameter, and a reflecting "comet sweeper" of nine-inch diameter. To support the 20-foot he brought the massive scaffolding that had held it in England. This scaffolding was of A-frame construction. It secured the telescope in the middle, along with a platform above the instrument on which Herschel could stand and look down into the eyepiece, which focused the light reflected up from the mirror at the bottom of the tube. The platform and telescope were raised and lowered by a system of pulleys, and the entire structured rotated by means of base-wheels set on a circular track. While Herschel observed, his mechanic was responsible for moving the telescope. On 22 February the 20-foot telescope was completely assembled and the

14 For some of Herschel's relationships at the Cape see Elizabeth Green Musselman, "Swords into Ploughshares: John Herschel's Progressive View of Astronomical and Imperial Governance," British Journal for the History of Science 31 (1998), 428 n 38; and Brian Warner, "Sir John Herschel at the Cape of Good Hope" in Brian Warner, ed., John Herschel 1792-1992: Bicentennial Symposium (Royal Society of South Africa, 1994), in ~articular "Herschel and Cape Society," 50-53. 5 Sir John Herschel, Results of Astronomical Observations Made During the Years 1834, 5, 6, 7, 8, At the Cape of Good Hope; Being the Completion of a Telescopic Survey of the Whole Surface of the Visible Heavens, Commenced in 1825, (London: Smith, Elder and Company, 1847),452.

Appropriating Astronomy

81

first object Herschel observed was, appropriately enough, the star a-Crucis in the constellation of the Southern Cross.16 The seven-foot equatorial was set nearby in a protective hut that had a roll-away roof, and the "comet sweeper" was given to the Royal Observatory at the Cape. Nights at the telescope could be long, often tedious, and solitary affairs. For hours on end it was just Herschel and his mechanic, John Stone. Before he left for the Cape, astronomical observations occasionally brought Herschel to the depths of despair, as he wrote to Margaret on 23 July 1830: "Two stars last night and sat up until two waiting for them. Ditto the night before. Sick of star-gazing-mean to break the telescopes and melt the mirrors.,,17 But at the Cape, under new skies and in Feldhausen's bucolic setting, free from the sense of filial duty and other pressures he had felt in England, the experience of observing was often supremely gratifying. On the night of 5 February 1835, he wrote: "Made a long nights Sweep, and the night being most superb-the mirror brilliant and the zone swept ... the richest perhaps in the heavens-attained the sublime of Astronomy-a sort of ne plus ultra .,. it is an epoch in my Astron l life.,,18 As the first half of this book is a social history of Herschel's Cape voyage, the more technical side of his Cape observations will not be discussed. Such a discussion exists elsewhere, and has been done very well by those with expert astronomical knowledge. 19 Therefore, for a sense of Herschel's astronomical labors while at the Cape, only a brief discussion is provided here. The primary astronomical goal for Herschel while at the Cape was to survey the southern heavens for nebulae, star clusters, and double stars. This is what William and John had both done in the northern hemisphere. The strange and varied structure of nebulae and star clusters piqued William's curiosity in the 1780s; from his observation of them he developed cosmological theories of star formation,20 and built increasingly bigger telescopes to have a better look at these

16 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 22 February 1834,48. 17 John Herschel to Margaret Herschel, 23 July 1830, as quoted in Agnes Clerke, The Herschels and Modern Astronomy (New York: MacMillan & Co., 1895), 154. 18 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape., 5 February 1835, \38. 19 See Brian Warner (astronomer at the UniversitY of Cape Town), "Sir John Herschel at the Cape of Good Hope," in The John Herschel Bicentennial Symposium, Brian Warner, ed. (Royal Society of South Africa, 1992), 19-55; and David S. Evans, Under Capricorn: A History of Southern Hemisphere Astronomy (Philadelphia: Adam Hilger, 1988), chapter 2, "The Early 19 th Century," 33-66. See also the discussions of Herschel's astronomical labors in Michael Hoskin, "John Herschel and Astronomy: A Bicentennial Appraisal," ibid., 1-17; GUnther Buttmann, "At the Cape of Good Hope," chapter 4 in The Shadow of the Telescope: A Biography of John Herschel (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1970); and also Michael Hoskin, "John Herschel's Cosmology," Journal for the History of Astronomy 18 (1987), 1-34. 20 See Michael J. Crowe, "Sir William Herschel : Celestial Naturalist," chapter 3 in Michael J. Crowe, Modern Theories of the Universe from Herschel to Hubble (New York: Dover, 1994), 71-145. See also Michael A. Hoskin, William Herschel and the Construction of the

82

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

various objects. 21 Double stars were of interest to many European astronomers: they could aid in the discovery of stellar distance by the determination of their parallax. 22 In 1825, three years after his father's death, John began a re-examination of all the nebulae and star clusters in the northern hemisphere that his father had previously surveyed. For eight years he worked on this re-examination, discovering in the process 525 new nebulae and star-clusters that his father had not found. From 1821-24 he re-examined the northern heavens for double stars. In this he had a partner, the London astronomer James South. 23 The seven-foot reflecting telescope Herschel brought to the Cape had been South's, and they had used it in their observations; Herschel purchased it from South afterwards. In re-examining the northern heavens as his father had done, Herschel not only satisfied himself that that half of the heavens had been thoroughly surveyed, but he also obtained what he considered "sufficient mastery" of his father's 20-foot reflecting telescope. He knew well the truth of his father's words that, as an astronomer, Seeing is in some respects an art that must be learnt. To make a person see with such a power [as his telescopes had] is nearly the same as if I were asked to make him play one of Handel's fugues upon the organ. Many a night have I been practicing to see, and it would be strange if one did not acquire a certain dexterity by such constant practice?4

Heavens (London: Oldbourne, 1963); and Hoskin, "The Nebulae from Herschel to Huggins" in Stellar Astronomy: Historical Studies (Bucks, England: Science History, 1982), 137-53. 21 1. A. Bennett, "The Telescopes of William Herschel," Journal for the History of Astronomy 7 (1976), 75-108. 22 See Mari Williams, "Beyond the Planets: Early Nineteenth-Century Studies of Double Stars," British Journalfor the History of Science 17 (1984), 295-309; see also Williams, "Was There Such a Thing as Stellar Astronomy in the Eighteenth Century?" History of Science 21 (1983), 369-85; and Michael Hoskin, "Stellar Astronomy in the Eighteenth Century: A Comment," History of Science 21 (1983),385-8. For a discussion of nineteenthcentury stellar parallax determination, see John North, "Bessel and Stellar Parallax," The Norton History of Astronomy and Cosmology (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1995), 414-20. 23 John Herschel and James South, "Observations of the Apparent Distances and Positions of 380 Double and Triple Stars, Made in the Years 1821, 1822, and 1823, and Compared with Those of Other Astronomers; Together with an Account of Such Changes as Appear to Have Taken Place in Them since Their First Discovery. Also a Description of a Five-feet Equatorial Instrument Employed in the Observations," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (1824) pt. 3, 1-412; see also summary in Edinburgh Journal of Science 3 (1825): 281-8, 4 (1826), 66-70. See also David Brewster, "Recent History of Astronomy [Review of Herschel and South on Double Stars]," Quarterly Review 38 (1828), 1-15. 24 As quoted in Michael J. Crowe, Modern Theories of the Universe from Herschel to Hubble, 74. See also Simon Schaffer, "Herschel in Bedlam: Natural History and Stellar Astronomy," The British Journalfor the History of Science 13 (1980), 216. On the need for William Herschel to convince other astronomers of the legitimacy of the powers of his

Appropriating Astronomy

83

William's massive telescopes, each with unprecedented optical clarity and Iightgathering power, required considerable practice by their users before full the extent of their power could be effectively employed. Once his re-examination was complete, John felt ready to undertake a similar survey in the southern hemisphere. At the Cape his survey of the southern hemisphere was methodologically similar to that of the northern. He surveyed the heavens in "sweeps," at a rate of about one per night of observing. A "sweep" was a horizontal (or constant value for polar distance, i.e. celestial latitude) survey of a band of the night sky three degrees in width. The giant 20-foot telescope would remain pointed in the same general direction for the entire sweep, moving only up and down to "sweep" the width of three degrees. Small bells marked the upper and lower limits of the sweep; they would chime when the telescope reached its maximum or minimum altitude for that sweep. Lateral motion would come from the revolution of the earth, which would bring the stars, nebulae, and clusters into view of the telescope; the telescope itself would undergo only minor adjustments in order to zero in on a particular object once it entered the telescope's purview. A more complete description of the process was given by Herschel himself: During a "sweep" [a] handle is constantly kept moving to and fro, by which the telescope is kept oscillating up and down and "sweeping" over an arc in Polar distances usually limited to 3'. On the entry of any object into the field the motion is arrested by an order to the assistant and by directing him, up and down, slow or fast, much or little, the object is easily brought to a bisection on a horizontal wire, to any degree of nicety. To warn the attendant when to reverse the motion of the handle a bell is made to strike at each limit of the sweep, and these bells differ in pitch, to indicate which limit is attained, the higher pitch corresponding to the top and the lower to the bottom of the zone ... 25

By the end of 1835 Herschel's sweeps for nebulae, clusters, and double stars were nearly complete. He wrote to his brother-in-law on 25 November 1835: "I have now nearly gone over the whole Southern Sky & over much of it repeatedly.,,26 The results were excellent: he cataloged 1,708 nebulae and star

telescopes, see Simon Schaffer, "Uranus and the Establishment of Herschel's Astronomy," Journal/or the History 0/Astronomy 12 (1981), 11-26. 25 As quoted in Brian Warner, "Sir John Herschel's Description of His 20-feet Reflector," Vistas in Astronomy 23 (1979), 94. Warner also discusses Herschel's sweeps in "The Years at the Cape of Good Hope," 57-8. 26 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape., 201. It is also worth noting here a contrary instance to the thesis of Elizabeth Green Musselman, in "Swords into Ploughshares: John Herschel's Progressive View of Astronomical and Imperial Governance." Her thesis is that while at the Cape, Herschel considered himself to be a "hunter" of stars and nebulae until he witnessed the horrible treatment of the colony's natives. At which point, around 1835-36, he no longer

84

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

clusters (1,268 of which had never before been recorded), and 2, I 02 pairs of double stars. These sweeps for nebulae, clusters, and doubles were not his only astronomical interests, however. Other objects in the heavens received his attention. Also following his father, John made a series of star-gauges: he counted the number of stars visible in roughly 2,300 sections of the sky (each section being 10 minutes in Right Ascension by 3° Polar Distance).27 He counted a total of 68,948 stars. 28 The purpose of these gauges was to attain statistical information on the distribution of stars in the Milky Way. As a result of his northern hemisphere star gauges, William was one of the first astronomers to propose a structure for our galaxy; he suggested that the Milky Way is a more or less flat "stratum of fixed stars,'.z9 whereas John, after his southern hemisphere star gauges, concluded it is an annulus, or ring. 30 John Herschel made other astronomical observations in the southern hemisphere. In October 1835 Herschel first observed Halley's comet; he and Maclear studied the comet-from both Feldhausen and the Royal Observatory at the Cape-for the next seven months until it disappeared. From 1835-37 Herschel observed the satellites of Saturn. He was able to locate Mimas and Enceladus,31 two of Saturn's inner moons, which had not been seen since his father had first found them in 1789.32 He made observations of sun spots. He also studied two of the largest and most spectacular objects in the southern heavens, the Magellanic Clouds. Many in Europe who awaited the results of Herschel's observations in the southern hemisphere did so primarily for his description of these two objects. He also took measurements with his actinometer and astrometer. The actinometer was a device of Herschel's own invention for measuring solar radiation.33 It was a simple thermometer with a large bulb filled with dark fluid; measurements were made by comparing times of direct exposure to sunlight with those of indirect exposure in shade. 34 The actinometer measurements were thrown

thought of himself as a hunter "bagging" stars, and instead switched to agricultural metaphors of harvesting when describing his astronomical observations. However, a close reading of his diary reveals instances of "hunting" terminology late in his years at the Cape. For example, on II December 1837 he wrote "worked at Equitorial till Daylight-reviewing but bagged hardly anything ... " Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 331. 27 See John Herschel, "Of the Distribution of Stars and of the Constitution of the Galaxy in the Southern Hemisphere," chapter 4 in Cape Results, 373-92. 28 Buttmann, The Shadow ofthe Telescope, 93. 29 As quoted in Crowe, Modern Theories of the Universe from Herschel to Hubble, 86. 30 Michael Hoskin, "John Herschel's Cosmology," Journalfor the History of Astronomy 18 (1987), 1-34. 31 John Herschel was the first to give the moons of Saturn their mythological names. John Herschel, Cape Results, 415. 32 Buttmann, The Shadow of the Telescope, \06. 33 Ibid., 110. 34 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 16 n 37.

Appropriating Astronomy

85

out, however, once Herschel returned home to England; he realized that he had not consistently used the same amount or formula for the dark liquid, and thus lacked consistency between observations. 35 Nevertheless, the actinometer represented an advance in the study of solar radiation. The astrometer was another invention of Herschel's; it was a device for measuring and comparing the intensity of starlight. 36 This was stellar photometry, and was achieved by comparing the light of any particular star to a standard for intensity: this standard was the sun's light reflected off the moon, and reduced to a point with the aid of a prism. 37 Herschel began to use the astrometer in earnest in 1836, once his regular sweeps were complete. When Herschel left Cape Town in 1838 he had completed the most thorough astronomical survey of the southern heavens ever undertaken. It would remain so until the mid-twentieth century. His observations, in a mathematically refined (or "reduced") and organized form, were published in 1847 as the Cape Results. The reduction, publication, distribution, and reception of the results are the subject of the second half of this book.

Herschel's Observations and the Public Astronomical Imagination The combination of astronomy and empire was a potent one for the popular imagination in the nineteenth century. Astronomy often became the arena for the working out of a number of imperial themes. Herschel's Cape voyage and his astronomical observations were no exception. One overt theme, that of control, was worked out in the relation of astronomy to military conquest: navigation, and the acquisition of territory. As was demonstrated in the last chapter, Herschel's Cape voyage fulfilled this purpose for many in Britain. In the popular imagination, 35 In February 1847 Herschel discovered a flaw in the actinometer he had used while at the Cape to measure solar radiation. He was forced to throw out all of the data he had collected, representing years of work. In his diary Herschel recorded his frustration, and included a moral for the episode from Schiller: February 19 [1847] At Work all day at my Actinometer observations and at night investigating more closely the formula for the [too faint). Discovered the reason of all those anomalies which had perplexed me in the non uniformity of dilatability of the liquid. If pure Water it would dilate as (temp)2 not as temp[.] This vitiates I fear irrecoverably the whole mass of my own and probably all the other Actinometer obsns . And so perishes a mass of hard work, consisting of near 400 sets of Cape Observations & perhaps half as many more Transference of my own besides all things! leaving only a warning for the future in aid of Schiller's anathema against him - Der nie gedacht was Er vollbringt! Retired to rest, sad and discomfited. Herschel diaries (unpublished), 19 February 1847. 36 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 217 n 14. 37 See John Herschel, Cape Results, "Account of some Attempts to Compare the Intensities of Light of the Stars One with Another by the Intervention of the Moon, by the Aid of an Astrometer Adapted to that Purpose," 353-72. See p. 354 for a diagram of the astrometer.

86

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

however, astronomy was linked to more than just imperial themes. It can and was also the location for the working out of cultural themes that were often only implicitly imperial. These include the development and extension of civilization, the achievement of social status, the demand for moral and social utility, and the scientific prospect of new natural discoveries (as well as combinations of these 38). Herschel's voyage was appropriated to these as well. As Steve Shapin has suggested, "[h]istorically the public have wanted much more from natural knowledge than technical and economic utility. Nature has traditionally been a theatre in which moral dramas are enacted and a classroom in which moral lessons can be learned. A socially (as well as technically) useable nature has been demanded of those entrusted with the task of producing representations of it. ,,39 This section will discuss some of the different cultural functions Herschel's voyage and astronomical observations served, and the degree to which the public imagination occasionally imputed to Herschel's observations more than he had discovered in the heavens. As is often the case, only that which is phenomenal captures the public imagination: the expeditions of men of science, the appearance of a comet, or the purported discovery of life on the moon. The British Public Astronomical Imagination

To what degree did the British public maintain an interest in the science of astronomy, and what does that indicate about their interest in Herschel's voyage? Ian Inkster has demonstrated that the science of astronomy did indeed have a popular following in England throughout modern history. As early as 1730 there was available to the more affluent public a variety of astronomical equipment-there was an abundance of books that described, and instruments that demonstrated, astronomical concepts. 40 During much of the eighteenth century large audiences were able to attend lectures on astronomical subjects in towns and cities throughout Britain; some of these lectures included demonstrations of astronomical instruments. Giant orreries were occasionally employed to aid the audiences' understanding. 41 The 1820s and 1830s saw the rise of numerous literary and philosophical societies; these invariably had contingents supportive of, or actively participating in, astronomical observations. 42 Furthermore, the name of William Herschel was undoubtedly one of the most frequently mentioned at the 38 See for example Alex Pang, "The Social Event of the Season: Solar Eclipse Expeditions and Victorian Culture," Isis 84 (1993), 252-77. 39 Steve Shapin, "Science and the Public," in Companion to the History of Modern Science, R. C. Olby, G. N. Cantor, J. R. R. Christie, and M. S. Hodge, eds, (New York: Routledge,

1996), 1005. Ian Inkster, "Advocates and Audience-Aspects of Popular Astronomy in England, 1750-1850," Journal ofthe British Astronomical Association 92 (1982), 119. 41 Ibid , 120. 42 Ibid. , 121. 40

Appropriating Astronomy

87

public lectures. "The range of appeal of astronomy was greater than that of any other science for this period," writes Inkster, describing the public interest in astronomy in the I 820s through the 1840s. John Herschel's voyage to Cape Town, of course, occurred in the middle of this period.43 It has been argued that much of the cultural significance of Herschel's voyage lies in the public perception of John as a scientific explorer allied with British imperial aims. Voyages of terrestrial exploration fired the public imagination with the prospect of a strange yet accessible reality: these voyages brought the distant world home to London, filling museums and markets with exotic objects and goods. Astronomy, however, was not exotic territory for the educated public, even though a distant place like the Cape colony might be. This fact, combined with the popularity that the name Herschel commanded, strengthens the notion that John Herschel's voyage was not of interest only to the scientific circles of Britain or its government. The literate public, and perhaps even the unschooled, had the understanding and motivation for fo\lowing Herschel's "great expedition.,,44 Herschel, the unwitting imperial scientific hero, had captured the public imagination, both at home and abroad. Six months or more before he left for the Cape the popular presses were announcing his impending voyage. In a letter to William Rutter Dawes on 4 May 1833, Herschel wrote: "The papers have told the truth for once-we sail sometime between Sept. and Dec.,,45 After Herschel left London in November, the British and European publics were eager for news of his journey. Back home in the metropolis the 5 April 1834 issue of the Athenaeum reported on Herschel's safe arrival at the Cape. "We are happy to announce that Sir John Herschel arrived safe at the Cape of Good Hope on the 16th of January last ... ,,46 After mentioning that he was able to locate a suitable observing site, it continued: We have ... peculiar pleasure in communicating to the public this earliest announcement of his safe arrival, and cannot too warmly congratulate the friends of science, that instruments whose magnitude and space-penetrating power have been so long duly appreciated in our own country, should be about to be directed to the splendid celestial canopy of a southern hemisphere by the illustrious philosopher himself ... whose devotion to the astronomical science, and self-expatriation in its

43

Ibid., 122.

44 In private correspondence Brian Warner has mentioned that part of the public appeal of Herschel's Cape voyage was that he was taking his family with him. In contemporary terms, Warner has suggested, that would be much like an astronaut taking his famil y with him to the moon. 45 John Herschel to William Rutter Dawes, 4 May 1833 (RS:HS 25.3.14/CCJH 2789). The French Academie des sciences also anticipated the Cape voyage; Herschel noted, however, that Simeon Denis Poisson had misdescribed his intentions for the voyage to that body. See John Herschel to William Sommerville, 11 March 1833 (RS:HS 21.l31 /CCJH 2757). 46 Athenaeum, 5 April 1834, 256.

88

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

cause, cannot, we think, receive from his countrymen too much of their admiration and praise.47 Soon after making the Cape John sent a letter to his Aunt Caroline in Hanover detailing his and his family's safe arrival. 48 Caroline's reply reveals that the news was of interest to their friends in Germany and throughout Europe; she wrote that one (probably German) doctor communicated to her that "the whole intelligent and scientific world in general are participating in our feelings [of joy at the news of Herschel's safe arrival at the Cape]." Caroline also communicated John's safe arrival to a local paper, which in turn was picked up by the London Times. On Friday 27 June 1834, almost six months after the Herschels arrived in Cape Colony, the Times ran the following: The Hamburg Correspondent ... has the following from Hanover, dated the 14th ... "The friends of astronomy will be pleased to learn that Sir John Herschel has written from the Cape of Good Hope to his aunt, Miss Caroline Herschel, resident here. He has already fixed his astronomical instruments, especially his 20 foot telescope, and ere now has begun his observations. His last letter is dated the 28th of March. He alludes again to his prosperous voyage, and to his safe conveyance of his valuable instruments: he resides in the country, about five miles from Cape-town, near the Table Mountain, in an enchanting valley; lofty trees, rare and beautiful shrubs and flowering plants surround his dwelling; his eye gazes upon clear and cloudless skies, studded with those innumerable stars that are the objects of his elevated pursuits. He is sanguine in his hopes of making important discoveries. 49 Here the image of "Sir John Herschel," renowned British man of science, ensconced in a distant, wild, and romantic landscape, is already being communicated to the public. Both of these short notices imply an extension of science and civilization and the acquisition of new natural knowledge. The exotic and beautiful paradise that Herschel is said to inhabit contrasted the familiar and domestic with the imperial and adventurous. During the period when Herschel was at the Cape, David Bunn has argued that for "an increasingly jaded urban [British] audience, colonial landscapes, and the South African landscape in particular, came to be perceived .as repositories of romantic subject matter." Thus such verbal images of Herschel and his telescopes at the Cape, as those that were printed in the Times, evoked romantic assumptions about colonialism and imperialism, and would have contextualized Herschel in light of these assumptions back home in

Ibid. In Mrs John Herschel (Mary Cornwallis Herschel), Memoir and Correspondence of Caroline Herschel (London: John Murray, 1879),265. 49 London Times, Friday 27 June 1834,3 c. 47

48

Appropriating Astronomy

89

England. so And the report of a famous Herschel telescope operating under southern skies must also have evoked in the British a sense of preemptive national propriety over his impending "important discoveries."sl

"Tea and Stars ": The Cape Public Astronomical Fascination Herschel's arrival in the Cape colony was eagerly anticipated. On 15 January 1834 Herschel's ship, the Mountstuart Elphinstone, anchored off Cape Town in Table Bay. The next day the passengers came ashore. According to the Cape of Good Hope Literary Gazette, on the morning of 17 January, "the streets were lined with the military-colours were everywhere flying, and the Artillery fired a salute. Besides the public demonstrations, the whole popUlation of Cape Town, had turned out in the streets, or were at the windows or tops of the Houses."s2 Alas, these public demonstrations were not for Herschel but for the new Governor, D'Urban, who had also disembarked from the Mountstuart Elphinstone. Nevertheless, Herschel's appearance at the Cape aroused considerable public interest. Eight months earlier, in a prior article in the Cape of Good Hope Literary Gazette, we find an indication of the esteem in which Herschel was held, and the pride that the colony felt at his impending arrival. It also indicates something of the colony's interest in astronomy. On I June 1833 the Gazette reported as follows: The last year, 1832, was distinguished in Europe by the predicted appearance of two comets, the most remarkable of which have yet fallen under the notice of astronomers. These are what are commonly called the comets Encke and Biela. Many persons in England considered that neither of these comets had been observed in 1832, but it is a fact, that Sir John Herschel saw that of Biela, and Mr. [Thomas] Henderson [Maclear's predecessor], of the Cape Observatory observed Encke ' s comet. Neither body, it must be remarked, is visible to the naked eye. S3

so David Bunn, "'Our Wattled Cot,' : Mercantile and Domestic Space in Thomas Pringle's African Landscapes," in W. J. T. Mitchell, Landscape and Power (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, (994), 127-73; quotation 128-9. SI A preliminary account of Herschel's astronomical discoveries in the southern hemisphere was reported to the British public from a printed letter he had sent to William Rowan Hamilton. See "Sixth Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science," Athenaeum (1836), 627-8. S2 Anonymous, "Arrival of His Excellency Sir Ben. D'Urban," Cape o/Good Hope Literary Gazette 4, no. 1 (January 1834), 15. S3 Anonymous, "Royal Observatory," Cape o/Good Hope Literary Gazette 3, no. 6 (June 1833), 96. That Cape colony pride, and not scientific memoranda, was the object here is indicated by this notice published in a later volume of the Gazette : "Thankful as we are for many Scientific Communications, we must remind our Correspondents of the existence of 'The South African Quarterly Journal of Science' as more suited to several well written papers, which have been forwarded to us." Notice is under "Additions," Cape o/Good Hope Literary Gazette 4, no. 3 (March 1834), back cover. See also the brief discussion in Donald

90

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

Three things can be read into this, and all address the colony's self-esteem. First, a sense of colonial pride in that only an astronomer already in Cape Town, and one whose arrival there was imminent, were said to be able to observe these comets. Second, that Herschel's arrival was indeed anticipated, for certainly his presence would bring added dignity and prestige to the colony. And third, that astronomy mattered to the residents of the Cape, especially as it indicated that their society was on a par with its English and European counterparts. Once Herschel arrived he was sought out by many. As has been indicated, however, during the course of his stay he maintained a degree of solitude commensurate with his intentions of a "private" scientific voyage. This is not to imply that he was a recluse. Rather, he often was not rude enough, even if he wanted to be, to turn away the locals whose interest in him and his giant telescope (perhaps seen poking enticingly through the treetops) got the best of their curiosity. Interest in Herschel was at a peak, however, during one of the world's most popular astronomical events then and now: Halley's comet. In Cape Town the appearance of Halley's comet in 1835 was heralded in the local papers. On 28 October, the same day Herschel first sighted the comet from the sand flats east of Cape Town, the South African Commercial Advertiser published the following comet-tracking guide (taken from the London Times) for the benefit of the colony's residents and visitors: Halley's Comet.-Oct. 10 to 18 will be in the Serpent, from whence it will proceed to Scorpion, where it will be about Nov. II; it will then move slowly between A and B Scorpio by 21 51 of December; from whence it will advance towards the shoulder of Centaurius, till Feb. 7, 1836, after which it will disappear. Best time to see it is October. -Times, Aug. 10, 1835. This comet may be seen from the Parade, at 7 o'clock P.M. between the Signal Posts and Lion's Head 54

Another, much longer and very theological announcement of the comet, appeared in the Cape of Good Hope Literary Gazette. This two-page, three-column article also provided a chronological locating guide that enabled the colonists to track the comet across the sky during the months in which it was visible. But the article also provided a religious lesson; the comet occasioned speculation on the creation and mechanics of the universe, which led in turn to speculation on the divine:

K. Yeomans, Comets : A Chronological History of Observation, Science, Myth, and Folklore (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1991), 182-3. 54 Anonymous, South African Commercial Advertiser 12 (28 October 1835), I.

Appropriating Astronomy

91

The celestial machinery is created for eternity. Nothing can destroy the least part of it, but that Almighty fiat which first created it ... Human science is so far from discovering any defect in [the heavens, and all works of God], that the further it advances, the more it is startled at its own weakness and insufficiency. 55 True as this may have been for nineteenth-century religious sensibilities, the local residents of the Cape were nevertheless willing to suffer their weaknesses and insufficiencies for a better look at the magnificent comet. Herschel's 20-foot telescope, they piously reasoned, would help them to do just that. And so it was that the combination of Herschel's prestige, his giant telescope, and the once-in-alifetime opportunity to see Halley's comet, brought a number of Cape colonists to Feldhausen. Such occasional visits to Feldhausen to look through his telescope became known, as Herschel quaintly put it, as "tea and stars. ,,56 Herschel first sighted the comet on 28 October; it had been seen in Cape Town on the 24th, and Herschel's own servants had seen it (without bothering to tell him) as early as the 22nd. 57 Soon afterwards the visitors came. On 31 October Herschel showed the comet to the Colonial Secretary, John Bell, and his wife Catherine. 58 The following night a large party consisting of eight local residents specified by name, along with an unspecified number of "young dutch ladies," came to Feldhausen to view the comet. Unfortunately, at least for Herschel, they were not as excited about it as he was. He recorded in his diary: "They viewed it for the most part with indifference only Eckstein [a local resident] seemed interested.,,59 Herschel was undoubtedly enthusiastic about the comet, perhaps to the point where others' interest may have seemed like apathy. He wrote to his brother-inlaw, James Calder Stewart, that "[w]e have been all staring our Eyes out at

55 Anonymous, "The Comet of 1835," Cape of Good Hope Literary Gazette 5, (January, 1835), 9. Comets have long been the source of different kinds of speculation, both religious and scientific. See Nigel Calder, Comets: Speculation and Discovery (New York: Dover Publications, 1994). See also Lisa Jardine, "Signs of the Times," chapter I in Ingenious Pursuits: Building the Scientific Revolution (New York: Anchor Books, 2000), 11-41. 56 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 9 January 1837, 275 . Years later, Thomas Maclear, reflecting back on the Herschel's hospitality at Feldhausen, wrote: "The occasional gatherings at 'Feldhausen' consisted of the elite of the Cape ... " Sir Thomas Maclear, "Sir John Herschel at the Cape," (obituary of John Herschel) The Cape Monthly Magazine (September, 1871), 131-2. Such visits were familiar to John, whose father had endured the same thing. William Herschel, as a sort of personal astronomer to King George III, constantly entertained either his own or the King' s guests with his telescopes. Those guests included foreign royalty, men of science, political figures, and many other types besides, including the United States President John Adams. So the visits by member of Cape society to see the stars may have bothered John Herschel very little. 57 John Herschel, Cape Results, 393. 58 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 31 October 1835, 195. 59 Ibid., I November 1835, 195.

92

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Halley's Comet.,,60 And he wrote to his aunt Caroline, herself famous as a discover of comets, in March 1836: "[t]his Comet has been a Great interruption to my sweeps and I hope and fear it will yet be visible another month.,,61 Happily for him it was; his last sight of the comet was on 5 May. "Tea and comets" no doubt continued until the comet disappeared ; Herschel's last mention of comet-curious visitors was on II March, when he showed the comet to a certain Lieutenant Henning. 62 The phenomenon of "tea and stars," however, was a common enough occurrence at Feldhausen for the duration of the Herschel's time at the Cape. Before, during, and after the appearance of Halley' s comet, visitors to Feldhausen were treated to a glimpse into the eyepiece of one or both of the telescopes, and were thus transported into the heavens. 63 The importance of Herschel ' s years at the Cape to the colony's self esteem is underscored by the thesis of Robert Ross's Status and Respectability in the Cape Colony, 1750-1870: A Tragedy of Manners. This thesis in part proposes that "[d]uring the course of the nineteenth century" the notion of respectability in the Cape colony derived from "the power of ideas of the social order deriving from Great Britain ... ideas [that] entailed the imposition of British ideas of respectability onto the Colony . .. ,,64 Herschel's status in England brought some of those "British ideas of respectability" to the Cape, a respectability that the residents of the colony were eager to make use of. This appropriation of Herschel's status for colonial respectability may have been primarily an English one, however; many Dutch inhabitants of the Cape colony wanted little to do with the new British government (which fact, however, bothered the English colonists very little).65 But Herschel, according to Ross, was (or at least attempted to be) above the conflicts between the Cape English and Dutch; Ross locates Herschel as a proponent of "Cape liberalism,,,66 implying at the very least that Herschel tried to remain above nationalist politics. This was demonstrated in the fact that both English and Dutch colonists were welcome visitors to Feldhausen.

60

Ibid., 200.

61 Ibid., 220. 62 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, II March 1836, 222. For a brief discussion of Herschel's observation of Halley's comet, see Yeomans, Comets, 256-8.

63 For instances of "tea and stars" see the following entries to Herschel's diary (in Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape): 3 January 1835, 131 ; 18 December 1835, 203-4; 9 January 1837, 275; 11 December 1837, 331; and I February 1838, 341. 64 Robert Ross, Status and Respectability in the Cape Colony, 1750- 1870: A Tragedy of Manners (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1999), 4. 65 Ibid., chapter 3, "English and Dutch," 40-69. 66 Ibid., 91-3.

Appropriating Astronomy

Figure 3.1 Herschel's Memorial Obelisk at the Cape

93

94

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

Herschel endeared himself to the colony in many other ways than as an astronomer. He reformed the colony's education system,67 and he served as a member of various committees and societies. After his departure he was remembered for all of these. But above all his place in the colony's memory was as an astronomer. A few years after his departure in 1838, a stone obelisk (figure 3.1) was raised on the site where the 20-foot reflecting telescope had stood. It was a monument not only to Herschel, but also to the colony itself, which for over four years played host to "the most justly celebrated astronomer and philosopher of modem times.,,68 The Moon "Hoax": The American Astronomical Imagination Overextended Astronomical expeditions are different from other, strictly terrestrial, expeditions in one crucial way. As Alex Pang has noted: "[t]or natural historians, geologists, and others the 'field' was both the site and the subject of their work. Astronomers separated the two. The subject was the sky, but the 'field' was the space in which work was conducted, a space that had to be disciplined and controlled.,,69 This separation of site and subject could be problematic when an astronomical expedition was of interest to the public imagination. Terrestrial expeditions already had a notorious history of loose ties to reality when it came to accounts of exotic and distant lands; Marco Polo's infamous report of dog-headed islanders in the Indian Ocean is but one example. 70 Marco Polo, as it turned out, was solely responsible for this fantasy. Herschel's own voyage to an exotic and distant land, however, became the subject of a similar fantasy, but one of which he was not the author. This was what has been called "The Great Moon Hoax." It was an elaborate, farcical satire in an American newspaper about Herschel's discovery of intelligent life on the moon. And it was, apparently, believed by almost everyone in the United States, and perhaps just as many in Europe. In the seventeenth century the idea of extraterrestrial life was considered plausible (though in no way certain) by Galileo, Kepler, and Newton. During the 67 See Ross, Status and Respectability in the Cape Colony 1750-1870, 57; W. T. Ferguson

and R. F. M. Immelman, Sir John Herschel and Education at the Cape, 1834-1840 (Cape Town: Oxford University Press, 1961); E. G. Pells, "Sir John Herschel's Contribution to Educational Developments at the Cape of Good Hope," South African Public Library Quarterly Bulletin 12:2 (December 1957), 58-65; and P. E. Spargo, "Foundations Strong and Lasting-Herschel's Work in Education at the Cape" in Brian Warner, ed., John Herschel 1792-1992: Bicentennial Symposium (Royal Society of South Africa, 1994), 103-15. 68 Maclear, "Sir John Herschel at the Cape," 129. 69 Alex Pang, "The Social Event of the Season: Solar eclipse Expeditions and Victorian Culture," Isis 84 (1993), 255--6. 70 Marco Polo, "Of the Island of Angaman," in The Travels of Marco Polo (UK: Wordsworth Editions Limited, 1997[1818]),223: "The inhabitants ... are a most brutish and savage race, having heads, eyes, and teeth resembling those of the canine species."

Appropriating Astronomy

95

eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the idea of extraterrestrial life obtained prestigious backing-not only from the philosophers Immanuel Kant and August Comte, but also from the European and American scientific communities. The most prominent astronomers of the eighteenth century, including Pierre Simon Laplace and William Herschel, all expressed belief in the existence of extraterrestrials. 71 In fact, some of William Herschel's own astronomical researches were carried out with the goal of discovering extraterrestrial life.72 The testimony of such eminent men gave support to belief in the existence of extraterrestrials. In spite of the complete lack of empirical evidence, the existence of beings on other planets, and even the sun and the moon, was popularly believed to be fact . Scientific authority and popular imagination filled in the gap left by evidence. In the nineteenth-century popular imagination, it was not a question of extraterrestrials existing; rather it was a question of how many, where, and what kind. John Herschel himself advocated the existence of extraterrestrials73 prior to his Cape voyage in his Treatise on Astronomy (1833). In this work he called the planets of our solar system "habitable worlds," and other stars "centres of life and light to myriads of unseen worlds ... ,,74 He further speculated that life on the moon might be detected by improved telescopes; however, he also suggested that lunar conditions mitigated against "any form of life analogous to those on earth ... ,,75 This particular skepticism, however, would soon be forgotten. In August of 1835, far away from Cape Town, Herschel was an unknowing participant in a fantastic "hoax." On 25 August a small newspaper in New York, the Sun, ran a front page story with the headline "GREAT ASTRONOMICAL DISCOVERIES Lately Made By Sir John Herschel, LL D., F.R.S., &c, At the Cape of Good Hope.,,76 The story went on to claim that it had learned from the most recent issue of the Edinburgh Journal of Science 77 that John Herschel had discovered life on the moon. Over the course of a few days, in installments, the Sun reported that John had found (with the aid of a fictitiously large telescope) an amazing variety of plant and animal life on our satellite. After four days the story culminated with the revelation that Herschel had observed rational beings on the moon-small humanoid creatures with bat-like wings-who demonstrated an ability to communicate, as well as other social tendencies. 71 Michael J. Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, /750-1900: The Idea of a Plurality of Worlds from Kant to Lowell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 16 I.

72 Ibid., "Sir William Herschel: 'Promise not to call me a Lunatic' ," 59-70. 73 For good general discussion of John Herschel's view on the existence of extraterrestrials, see ibid., 2 I 6-21. 74 John Herschel, Treatise on Astronomy (London, 1833), 2. 75 Ibid., 230. 76 Michael J. Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate /750-1900, 210. 77 The Edinburgh Journal of Science, although once an actual publication, had gone out of print by the time the Sun made reference to it.

96

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

As they ran the daily reports the Sun's circulation became greater than that of any other American paper; copies were snatched up in a frenzy of excitement. The reading public seemed unanimously convinced of the authenticity of the account. One clergyman even told his parishioners that he would consider taking up a collection to send Bibles to the lunar inhabitants. 78 This was not, however, mass delusion. For many people in America the existence of extraterrestrial life was considered highly probable, if not certain. Thomas Paine had taken extraterrestrial life for granted in his Age of Reason, 79 a book that resonated strongly with literate Americans. Rational beings were generally assumed to exist not only on the other planets of our solar system, but also on our moon and perhaps even the sun. John Herschel's speculations on extraterrestrial life in his Treatise on Astronomy undoubtedly contributed to this susceptibility; the book had enjoyed considerable popularity in America It therefore came as no surprise to the readers of the Sun that there was life on the moon, and that it was John Herschel who made the discovery. Who else should do it? Soon after the last installment on 31 August, the story was revealed to be a satirical piece crafted to demonstrate the gullibility of Americans on the extraterrestrial life issue (and to boost the Sun's circulation). The author, Richard Adams Locke, had effectively mocked the assumption long held by many that intelligent life was certain to exist on other planets. The fact that nearly everyone in the major American cities believed the piece has wrongly elevated the whole episode to the level of "hoax;" it is now referred to as "The Great Moon Hoax." But, as Locke himself pointed out about his story, "it is quite evident that it is an abortive satire '" ,,80 It was never intended to be a hoax. Yet in its tremendous success as news it failed as satire; everyone realized they had been taken in, but this had been by their own gullibility and not by Locke himself. 81 Edgar Allen Poe recalled, "Not one person in ten discredited it ... A grave professor of mathematics in a Virginia college told me seriously that he had no doubt of the truth of the whole affair!,,82

78 Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750-/900, 213. 79Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, (New York: Prometheus Books, 1984[1793]). Paine wonders how any reasonable person could maintain "the solitary and strange conceit that the Almighty, who had millions of worlds equally dependent on his protection, should quit the care of all the rest, and come and die in our world, because, they say, one man and one woman had eaten an apple? And, on the other hand, are we to suppose that every world in the boundless creation had an Eve, an apple, a serpent, and a redeemer? In this case, the person who is irreverently called the Son of God, and sometimes God himself, would have nothing else to do than to travel from world to world, in a endless succession of deaths, with scarcely a momentary interval of life ... " The Age of Reason, 59-60. 80 Michael 1. Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate /750- /900,214. 81 The argument that Locke's articles did not comprise a hoax but were in fact satire is made in a more substantial way by Crowe in The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, 213-15. 82 As quoted in Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, 213.

Appropriating Astronomy

97

When Herschel heard about the story he at first had little to say. He was not pleased at the way he had been used, but only really regretted the flurry of letters that he received from those who had either not heard that the story was a fabrication or simply wanted his opinion on the matter. He commented on the situation in a letter to his Aunt Caroline: "I have been pestered from all quarters with that ridiculous hoax about the Moon-in English French Italian & German!!,,83 Margaret also commented on the affair, again in a letter to Caroline: Have you seen a very clever piece of imagination in an American Newspaper, giving an account of Herschel's voyage to the Cape with an Instrument [omitted] feet in length, & of his wonderful lunar discoveries Birds, beasts & fishes of strange shape, landscapes of every colouring, extraordinary scenes of lunar vegetation, & groups of the reasonable inhabitants of the Moon with wings at their backs, all pass in review before his & his companions' astonished gaze 84_ The whole description is so well clenched with minute details of workmanship & names of individuals boldly referred to, that the New Yorkists were not to be blamed for actually believing it as they did for forty eight hours- It is only a great pity that it is not true, but if grandsons85 stride on as grandfathers have done, as wonderful things may yet be accomplished ... 86 But these were private comments. Herschel's frustration was made public in the

Athenaeum. In an open letter to the Parisian astronomer Franyois Arago, Herschel thanked the Frenchman for his attempts at "undeceiving" the "people silly enough to believe every extravagant tale which is set before them.,,87 The Athenaeum had earlier published a brief notice decrying the "absurd accounts .. . about some extraordinary discoveries made by Sir John HerscheL,,88 Nevertheless, many continued to believe in the truth of Herschel's supposed discoveries. On 2 I August 1836 Herschel wrote a letter that revealed his intended public opinion of the "Moon Hoax." This letter, recently discovered in the private archives of Herschel's descendants, was written to the editor of the Athenaeum. It was, however, never sent from Cape Town to London; it was not published in the Athenaeum. This letter, though never made public, provides interesting and entertaining insight into Herschel's opinion on the "Moon Hoax." It is at least a testament not only to one of the more ignominious events in the life of John Herschel, but also to his ability to keep his sense of humor: 83 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 282. 84 In Locke's satire Herschel was supposed to have a certain number of scientific friends with him who shared in the discovery of life on the moon, adding to its authenticity. 85 Margaret is referring to her and John's sons. 86 Evans, et aI., Herschel at the Cape, 236-7. 87 John Herschel, "Extracts of a Letter to M. Arago," Athenaeum 478 (24 December 1836), 908. Athenaeum 440 (2 April 1836), 244.

88

98

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

As I perceive by an Advertisement in one of the London Newspapers now before me that the nonsense alluded to in the heading of this letter after running the round of the American and French journals has at last found a London Editor, it appears to me high time to disclaim all knowledge of or participation in the incoherent ravings under the name of discoveries which have been attributed to me. I feel confident that you will oblige me therefore by inserting this my disclaimer in your widely circulated and well conducted paper, not because I have the smallest fear that any person possessing the first elements of optical Science (to say nothing of Common Sense) could for a moment be misled into believing such extravagancies, but because I consider the precedent a bad one that the absurdity of a story should ensure its freedom from contradiction when universally repeated in so many quarters and in such a variety of forms . D'. Johnson Indeed used to say that there was nothing, however absurd or impossible which if seriously told a man every morning at breakfast for 365 days he would not end in believing-and it was a maxim of Napoleon that the most effective figure in Rhetoric is Repetition. Now I should be sorry, for my own sake as well as for that of truth, that the world or even the most credulous part of it, should be brought to believe in my personal acquaintance with the man in the moon-well knowing that I should soon be pestered to death for private anecdotes of himself and his family, and having little intention and less inclination to humour the hoax, should come to be looked on as a very morose and uncommunicative sort of person when it was found that I could or would say no more about him than what is already known to all the world-vis that he "drinks claret" "Eats powdered beef turnip & carrot" and that "a cup of old Malaya Sack" "Will fire the pack at his back.,,89 From Locke's perspective, Herschel was one of the few astronomers whose name could give credibility to the "Moon Hoax"-and, because he was so far away, Herschel could not immediately deny its truth. But these are not the only reasons that the story came out while Herschel was at the Cape. Being in a distant and exotic location enabled the public imagination to stretch further than usual; what more appropriate place than the farthest point on the mysterious continent of

89 These quotations come most probably from nursery rhymes or verse ballads. As to the first, reference has been found on the web to an "English Moon Ballad" that runs, in part, "Our man in the moon drinks claret, / With powder beef, turnep, and carrel. / If he doth so, why should not you / Drink until the sky looks blew?" As to the second quotation, presumably about sherry, no reference has been located. This letter is in the private family archives of John Herschel-Shorland (JHS), and was recently republished in Steven Ruskin, "A Newly Discovered Letter of J. F. W. Herschel Concerning the 'Great Moon Hoax,'" Journalfor the History of Astronomy 33 (February 2002), 71-4.

Appropriating Astronomy

99

Africa to discover extra-terrestrial life? Perhaps for this same reason the purported discovery of life on the moon was believed by many in Europe for years after 1835. In 1842, Herschel's friend, the mathematician Augustus de Morgan, wrote to him that many people still believed in the veracity of the Moon Hoax. 90 In fact, depictions of the supposed environment of the moon published in popular periodicals were suspiciously similar to contemporary depictions of the Cape colony, with lush flora, exotic fauna, and free-spirited, primitive, and potentially pagan inhabitants. Simon Schaffer has noted that within the British empire the representation of the distant and exotic was not in fact "limited to the texts of naturalists and explorers. ,,91 During the 1780s and 1790s the astronomical observations of William Herschel "prompted pointed comparisons with the achievements of the terrestrial empire.,,92 Comparisons were made between Captain Cook and William Herschel; the former navigated the seas and returned with all manner of terrestrial curiosities, the latter navigated the stars and returned with catalogs of nebulae, and developed a celestial taxonomy. In fact, the discoveries of Sir William were seen by some in the empire to offer consolation for the loss of the American colonies. Matthew Turner, a chemist and contemporary of William, wrote that "it was true that we had lost the terra firma of the thirteen colonies in America, but we ought to be satisfied with having gained in return, by the generalship of Dr. Herschel, a terra incognita of much greater extent in nubibus.,,93 William Herschel had not only discovered the planet Uranus in 1781, just as the war of American revolution came to a close, but was opening up the whole of the universe to the eyes of Britain, and in the rest of Europe as well. Thus, writes Schaffer, when it came to the issue of extra-terrestrial life, William Herschel's "announcements that the sun and planets were habitable were greeted in the same way as reports of exotic Polynesians.,,94 Both terrestrial and celestial races seemed to be within the reach of the British empire; the two separate realms were both subsumed under the control of one imperial power. Edward Young's Night Thoughts (c . 1741), quoted as well by Schaffer, illustrates the parallels made in the popular mind between the terrestrial and celestial realms:

Augustus de Morgan to John Herschel, 30 December 1842 (RS.HS 6. 188/CCJH 5343). Simon Schaffer, "Visions of Empire: Afterward," in Visions of Empire: Voyages, Botany, and Representations of Nature, David Philip Miller and Peter Hanns Reill, eds, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 341. 92 1bid. 93 As quoted in Schaffer, "Visions of Empire: Afterward," 341. 94 Ibid., 342. 90

91

100

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage Canst thou not figure it, an isle, almost Too small for notice in the vast ofbcing; Sever'd by mighty seas of un built space From other realms; from ample continents Of higher life, where nobler natives dwel1. 95

Who else, then, but John Herschel to make the discovery on the Moon? And where else, than from Africa?96 And what else but the British empire to be the political entity capable of bringing extraterrestrials within their dominion? Yet, as Young seems to imply, perhaps our world is the island, and all its peoples, the British empire included, are the savages in the periphery waiting for "nobler natives" to come. Regardless of where extraterrestrials stood in the nineteenthcentury imperial hierarchy, it is significant that the use of John Herschel as the discoverer of life on the moon, and the Cape as the locality of such a discovery, gave credibility to the whole affair. Thus Herschel's Cape voyage and observations also had a place in the American astronomical imagination. Even after the furor of the Moon Hoax subsided, he remained high in American public opinion. For Americans, the British empire was on the forefront of scientific exploration; something that Americans were then emulating on their own continent. For societies on both sides of the Atlantic, the extension of civilization was a major cultural theme. Herschel represented this extension for Americans as well as the British: he was a universal scientific explorer. In the 1871 obituary in the Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, Herschel's Cape voyage is perceived, from an American point of view, as an important voyage of scientific exploration: "Like the sources of the Nile to the untraveled geographer, or the ice-cliffs of Greenland to the student of arctic voyages, [Herschel] knew well what a personal inspection [of the southern heavens] would place before him, and though the civilized world rang with applause at his sacrifice of home and its comforts, and country and its honors, for the sake of science, yet true philosophers knew that the compensation, present and future, far outweighed the loss. ,,97 America saw in Herschel's Cape voyage not only the fantastic potential of astronomical observation and scientific exploration, but also a victory for the "civilized world," in which the United States was always eager to assert its membership.

As quoted in Schaffer, "Visions of Empire: Afterward," 342. According to Beau Riffenburgh: "By the early nineteenth century, Africa and the Arctic were regarded as exotic backgrounds for adventure stories, closer to fiction than reality." The Myth of the Explorer (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 14. Riffenburgh also discusses the result of the New York Sun's sensationalist account of the Moon hoax: "The Sun 's circulation rocketed, and even after the series was exposed as deception, the paper retained much of its new readership." Ibid., 20. 97 N. S. Dodge, "Memoir of Sir John Frederick William Herschel," Annual Report of the Board of Regents ofthe Smithsonian Institution (1871), 115. 95 96

Appropriating Astronomy

101

Conclusion This chapter has not so much argued a specific point, as demonstrated a general phenomenon: John Herschel's Cape voyage and his astronomical observations-real or imagined-were appropriated differently in different cultural contexts. In Britain, Herschel's voyage fueled the public imperial imagination. In the Cape colony, Herschel's presence was seen as a way to promote colonial selfesteem; he and his family at Feldhausen were also a model of British colonial domesticity.98 And in America, his voyage was used to expose a cultural susceptibility, as well perhaps as to provide a rallying point for American notions of the extension of civilization in uncivilized areas. Even Thomas Hardy utilized the link Herschel had made between astronomy and southern Africa in his novel Two on a Tower (1882). In this story a young astronomer goes to the Cape to escape his romantic problems, where he completed observations that had been only "partially treated by the younger Herschel."99 This novel (which is discussed at greater length at the end of this book) attests to the impact Herschel's voyage had on popular culture, both in Britain and elsewhere. In any popular imagination, the romance of a voyage of scientific exploration like Herschel's went well beyond what was discovered; it represented what might yet be, or what was hoped to be, discovered. When John's celestial observations were eventually published as the Cape Results, reviews were highly laudatory. Almost every scientist who reviewed the work was impressed. But the work was praised by non-scientists as well. John Ruskin, the Victorian art critic and moralist, wrote to Herschel that he was "aesthetically inspired" by the drawings found in the Cape Results. Ruskin would later make reference to solar spots in his essay "The Lance of Pallas," an astronomical topic treated in the last chapter ofthe Cape Results. 100 From these examples, it is clear that Herschel's voyage, and his observations, were used by different cultures and individuals in ways that suited their purposes. 98 As Thomas Maclear wrote, "Sir John Herschel, during his residence at the Cape, was President of the South African Literary and Scientific Institution. When he was about to leave the Colony ... a gold medal was presented ... The feelings excited on that interesting occasion strongly evinced how much the members regretted the loss of the President, and their admiration of one whose talents place him so far above ordinary men, and whose private life was a pattern of every domestic virtue. " As quoted in 1. L. E. Dreyer and H. H. Turner, History of the Royal Astronomical Society 1820- /920, (London: Royal Astronomical Society, 1923), 106. 99 Thomas Hardy, Two on a Tower (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1907[1882]), 311-12. 100 Ruskin used solar spots as a metaphor to describe humanity's relationship to God' s creation. He may have learned about solar spots from one of Herschel's popular works on astronomy, or even from the work of another astronomer. But there is no doubt that Ruskin, like other Victorians, borrowed much from Herschel and his stature as the pious pinnacle of Victorian science.

102

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

In every case, the remoteness of the Cape, and the private nature of Herschel's voyage, enabled such appropriations to occur. Public imaginations, after all, are easier to capture the further they are removed from reality. One might agree with the words of Simon Schaffer, when applied to Herschel's astronomical observations at the Cape, that they demonstrated that "bucolic epistemology [that] accompanies the view that social withdrawal is a precondition of access to universal truths.,,101 To that, however, would have to be added something about the imposition of subjective use. Whatever Herschel's private astronomical labors revealed in the southern heavens, the public appropriation of those observations served a variety of purposes. The cultural use of scientific exploration and discovery is often as interesting as its natural revelations.

101 Simon Schaffer, "Physics Laboratories and the Victorian Country House," 149.

PART II THE PRODUCTION OF THE CAPE RESULTS

Chapter 4

The Cape Results: Preparation and Publication

Such a job for heavy monotonous work I never undertook before or ever please God will again. - John Herschel, 24 March 1844 (while preparing his Cape observations for publication)

The "New" History of the Book

This chapter, and the next, have as their focus the production ofthe Cape Results: the preparation, publication, distribution, and reception of the book. I It is therefore germane to begin with an historiographical discussion of the recent or "new" history of the book, in particular the production of scientific books. In 1979 Elizabeth Eisenstein published The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in early Modern Europe. 2 She argued that the printing press was an agent of cultural change in early modern Europe by virtue of its ability to disseminate standardized texts, including scientific texts, thereby fixing knowledge among readers. Thus a new "print culture,,,3 based on general access to identical texts, was born, enabling a "permanent Renaissance.,,4

I For an excellent collection of studies on the "authorship, production, distribution and reception" of scientific books throughout history, see Marina Frasca-Spada and Nick Jardine, eds, Books and the Sciences in History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). 2 Elizabeth Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe, vols. 1 & 2 (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1979). The shortened and more concise version is Eisenstein, The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, England : Cambridge University Press, 1983). 3 Ibid., "Defining the Initial Shift: Some Features of Print Culture," 43-159. See in particular the sections on dissemination ("A Closer Look at Wide Dissemination: Increased Output and Altered Intake," 71-80) and standardization ("Considering Some Effects Produced by Standardization," 80-88). 4 Ibid., 181.

106

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

Recently, however, Adrian Johns has disputed Eisenstein's fundamental claim that "fixity" is a hallmark of the printing press in the early modem period. "Fixity" is Johns' term for Eisenstein ' s claim that the printing press produced invariably identical texts, thereby ensuring dissemination of standardized knowledge.5 Johns thus attacks the very foundation upon which Eisenstein had built her concept of "print culture." Analyzing many printed versions of Galileo's Siderius nuncius from 1610-83 as but one example, Johns argues that significant differences among these supposedly identical texts indicate that there was in fact none of the supposed identicality among these texts, even though each edition was produced mechanically.6 Furthermore, this lack of identicality was known among early modem readers, and was openly considered to be one of the knowledge hazards of mass production that printing presses and their operators had engendered in Europe. "Early modem fears [of partially or wholly inauthentic texts] would then begin to appear not as incidental lapses . .. but as credible statements of experience.,,7 Thus the keys to understanding a "print culture," argues Johns, are the concepts of "trust" and "credit."8 Galileo, along with all early modem authors, publishers, booksellers, and readers, had to convince or be convinced that a text-and the knowledge it purported to convey-was authentic and uncorrupted.9 Trust and credibility within this network of authors, publishers, booksellers, and readers are fundamental concepts for Johns, who builds his discussion of them on the work of Steven Shapin.1O For Shapin, trust is the "moral bond between the individual [the one in whom knowledge was supposed to reside] and other members of the community."·· Thus for Shapin as well as Johns, knowledge generally, and book production in particular, are collective processes. When studying the production of a particular book, especially a scientific one, we should

Adrian Johns, The Nature of the Book: Print and Knowledge in the Making (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998), 10. See also Adrian Johns, "History, Science, and the History of the Book: The Making of Natural Philosophy in early Modern England," Publishing History 30 (1991), 5-30. 6 Ibid., 20-24. 7 Ibid., 28. 8 Ibid., 28-40. 9 Johns has been strongly criticized by John Henry ("Trusting Print/Making Natural Philosophy," Metascience 10 (March 2001), 5-14) for "never com[ing] close to substantiating" (p. 8) these very claims throughout his lengthy book. Henry suggests that Johns never gets beyond merely implying that issues of trust and credibility, or, more materially, printing piracy, had significant impact on natural knowledge in the early modem roriod. Johns responds at length to Henry in "Author's Response," (ibid., 14-22). o Steven Shapin, A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994). •• Ibid., 7. 5

The Cape Results: Preparation and Publication

107

therefore consider this process in its entirety. This, in Jonathan Topham's words, is "the new discipline ofthe history of the book ... ,,12 The spirit ofthis "new discipline" is well captured in the words of Johns: "Any printed book is ... both the product of one complex set of social and technological processes and also the starting point for another ... [A] large number of people, machines, and materials must converge and act together for it to come into existence at all .. . In that sense a book is the material embodiment of ... a collective consent ... But the story of a book ... does not end with its creation. How it is then put to use, by whom, in what circumstances, and to what effect are all equally complex issues. Each is worthy of attention in its own right.,,13 Such an approach is Topham's as well. Borrowing from Robert Darnton the idea of a "circuit of communication,,,14 Topham suggests that historians of science can learn much by following "a circuit running from the author, through publishers, printers, binders, distributors, booksellers, and libraries, to the readers themselves and, thus, back to the author ... The objective is thus to provide an analysis of the contexts and practices of both book production and reading.,,15 It is therefore apparent that what is "new" about historical studies of scientific books is the consideration of these books not as immutable and unidirectional purveyors of natural knowledge, but rather as being but one plastic component in the process of creating and diffusing natural knowledge. According to this "new discipline," in order to be properly studied a book must be understood as part of a negotiation process in which it is informed at every stage by those with whom it comes into contact. We are therefore to analyze books as moving within a social network, not as traveling down a one-way street from author directly to reader. We are also to consider the knowledge transferred by books as differently interpreted at various points in that network. In Topham's words, this affords us the opportunity to "move beyond the familiar top-down notion of 'popular science' [or, just as readily, 'scientific knowledge'] .. . to a historiography that recognizes the agency of all those involved in the communication circuit,,,16 because, after all, "books are far too important to be treated merely as texts ... ,,17 Taking a somewhat different and more focused approach than Topham, Darnton, and Johns is James Secord. His recent Victorian Sensation: The

12 Jonathan R. Topham, "Beyond the 'Common Context:' The Production and Reading of the Bridgewater Treatises," Isis 89 (1998), 233-62. I3 Johns, The Nature of the Book, 3. 14 Robert Darnton, "What is the History of Books?", The Kiss of Lamourette: Reflections on Cultural History (London: Faber & Faber, 1990), 107-35. 15 Topham, "Beyond the 'Common Context'," 235. See also Jonathan R. Topham, "Scientific Publishing and the Reading of Science in Nineteenth-Century Britain: A Historiographical Survey and Guide to Sources," Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 31A (December 2000), 559-612. 16 Ibid., 261 . 17 Ibid., 262.

108

John Herschel 's Cape Voyage

Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation concentrates primarily on book readership.18 In this exhaustive work Secord examines the ways in which Robert Chamber's Vestiges was read and interpreted by readers across classes, professions, and genders. Indeed, while Secord also touches upon the role of the book's author, publisher, printers, and booksellers, it is the readers (from Royal to radical) who are his real concern. By demonstrating, according to reviewer Ryan MacPherson, "that individuals constructed their own meanings when reading Vestiges,,,19 Secord uses the reading of Vestiges to provide a cultural portrait of a country and its overlapping social, political, and scientific circles. Such is the strength of this "new" discipline of the history of the book: it provides more than a history of a text; it can provide a comprehensive socio-cultural history as well. It is the object of this and the following chapter to consider the production of Herschel's Cape Results in the light of this new discipline of the history of the book. The production of the Cape Results involved its own "circuit of communication," different, of course, from the "circuits" described by studies like those of Topham and Secord. The work of Topham in particular informs this study. This does not mean, however, that he provides a model that is rigorously followed. On the contrary, the subjects of his study (the Bridgewater Treatises) differ significantly from the Cape Results. As such, Topham and the discipline of the "new" history of the book provide only a compass, and not a map, in this corner of historical territory.

Preparing the Cape Observations for Publication A Preview of the Cape Results It will be beneficial here to begin with the end-to provide a preview of the finished product before discussing how that product came into being. Initially, Herschel planned on publishing his southern hemisphere astronomical observations as a series of distinct papers in various scientific journals. But a grant from Hugh Percy, the third Duke of Northumberland, enabled the observations to be published together in one volume. Thus when the mass of observations were finally published as the Cape Results in 1847 the situation was as follows: the publisher was Smith, Elder and Co., of Cornhill, London; the printer was Stewart and

18 James A. Secord, Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). 19 Ryan Cameron MacPherson, " When Evolution Became Conversation: Vestiges of Creation, its Readers, and its Respondents in Victorian Britain," Journal of the History of Biology 34 (200 I), 566.

The Cape Results: Preparation and Publication

109

Murray, of Old Bailey, London; and the final cost of publication came to £1011.l2s, of which £1000 was covered by Percy's grant (which at that point was provided by Hugh Percy's successor and younger brother, Algernon). The book was in print in June of 1847.20 Its full title is Results of Astronomical Observations Made During the Years 1834, 5, 6, 7, 8, at the Cape of Good Hope; Being the Completion of a Telescopic Survey of the Whole Surface of the Visible Heavens, Commenced in 1825. It is a large quarto volume (approximately 12.5" x 10.5"), 452 pages in length (xx, plus appendices, errata, additions, and corrections), and has numerous elaborate illustrations, primarily in the form of plates fixed at the back. It has seven chapters:

Chapter I Chapter II Chapter III Chapter IV Chapter V Chapter VI Chapter VII

Of the Nebulae of the Southern Hemisphere Of the Double Stars of the Southern Hemisphere Of Astrometry, or the Numerical Expression of the Apparent Magnitudes of the Stars Of the Distribution of Stars, and of the Constitution of the Galaxy in the Southern Hemisphere Observations of Halley's Comet, with Remarks on its Physical Condition, and that of Comets in General Observations of the Satellites of Saturn Observations of the Solar Spots

It is largely an empirical work. Most of the chapters contain tables of data of positions and descriptions of celestial objects, which give the work the definite feel of a catalog of astronomical data, by an astronomer for other astronomers. The first four chapters, which comprise more than four-fifths of the book, consist almost entirely of such tables. The last three chapters are relatively short, and are more descriptive (as with chapter VI) or descriptive and theoretical (as with chapters V and VII). Throughout the book Herschel presents his observations in one of two general ways: first (and less common) are short written descriptions (as when he describes certain important nebulae); second (and more common) are tables. These tables provide positions and coded descriptions of nebulae and double stars, the apparent magnitudes of stars, and other numerical data reduced from his observations. Also included in each chapter are brief descriptions of Herschel ' s techniques, his idiosyncratic notations, and the instruments he employed. As a whole, the book provides a tremendous amount of astronomical information on the heavens of the southern hemisphere, as well as on his methods of observation and reduction. With

20 By the end of June, 1847, the first 14 copies of the Cape Results were sent to the bookbinder. William Smith Williams to John Herschel, 29 June 1847 (RAS :JH 10-3.l!CCJH 7086).

110

John Herschel's Cape Voyage

this data other astronomers would be able to locate the objects he had cataloged, and would thereby be able to repeat his observations, The distribution and use of his observations by other astronomers were Herschel's primary goals; many of these observations were represented visually in the illustrations. Herschel, an artist of considerable talent, had drawn them himself. It is impossible to describe them verbally; they must be seen to be properly appreciated. Some of the more interesting plates include multiple views of Halley's comet, the Orion nebula, the Milky Way as seen from the southern hemisphere, and the two Magellanic clouds. 500 copies of the Cape Results (figure 4.1) were printed. 350 of these were given away gratis by Herschel and Algernon Percy; 150 were allotted to Smith, Elder and Co. for public sale. The first and only edition of the book began to roll off the presses in June, 1847. Interestingly, the entire edition was not, apparently, published at one time. Although all 500 copies may have been printed at once, they were bound at different times, then distributed or sold according to the differing agendas of Herschel, Percy, and Smith, Elder and Co. It appears, however, that the 150 copies allotted to Smith, Elder and Co. for public sale were not bound (or possibly even printed) until October 1847, months after the first copies were published. Additionally, in order to do this they had to get Herschel's permission. On 28 September 1847 William Smith Williams wrote to Herschel on behalf of Smith, Elder and Co. to "beg to enquire if we may now publish the work ... " 21 Given that many copies of the Cape Results had already been distributed, it appears that Smith, Elder and Co. were not permitted to publish their 150 copies for public sale until Herschel allowed them to. Presumably, Herschel wanted to wait until most of the gratis copies had been sent off. Herschel gave Smith, Elder and Co. his consent, and on I October 1847 Williams wrote, "[w]e are much gratified by your permission to publish your work, for which we have several orders already; and we trust that the sale will exceed your anticipations.,m

21 William Smith Williams to John Herschel, 28 September 1847 (RAS :JH 10-3.12/ CCJH 7238). 22 William Smith Williams to John Herschel, 1 October 1847 (RAS:JH 10-3.13/ CCJH 7249).

III

The Cape Results: Preparation and Publication

HESULTS "'

ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS )IADE DURIN(; THE YEARS 111.14, b, 6, " R,

AT THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE HEINO THE COMPLETION OF A TEI.ESCOI'J(' SURVEY OP TII}-:

WHOLE SURFACE OF THE VISIBLE HEAVENS. l'O~DIENCED

1:-; 11I:l5.

11\

Sin JOHN F. W. HERSCHEL, ~I ..\

.•

o.c.L.; f.R.R , I.

K.H.

BART.,

II< ~: .: IIn~.~I . R . J ..\ .; I'.IL\):.: .·.GS .. ~I.C.U.P'~'I

1'''.

IO • • IK ••Q~III"S" u_ un",oa" • ., ..\0 ..... n .. I,.P".IA' • • n,..U. ':"III) "ATIOW~L AC.-""" ••• ." "' __ U'I". " (.II 'II:.II~_ ... l1 ......... (Q.aHM"to.s. 1Il0000UrG.!'I, ~,. A ... .,.At ... U,. ..~ (tl. " ". NOPl:fliA. " \ ....... , " •••• , ..'kYl .... uow., n ' al:'llo. A!'Iotlo ...... Ntl'(O'l'01'f (, ..... ):

'·.O. _l'OC'.

tN.

'""II'TII

".I".' . ...

Tilt&. It'.,,,,, .. ,.0(0 " •• \,."('" ,.ocalETf,Q,: 4(:.-.0I;M." , 1:M"1'ITU'T.... nco or AI .",'11(1" t~ . Ill.), IWILfKj~". C'AT4l"1'IA tcI1Ir ..... ." ' ),

'AU:."" .•

,

nun'. I. "' ....... , ...

..... AI'IT. . . r",Dl1A . nWk tllJKI La": ...:'I ) ..... 'Il.1I (ATIU .... . t .. ). ':-;*1 " " " ; ' '"lUI. "NILcuu.ntl r 1lIK'11fT\ ntl" ....... 1.; ''"'I.~''I t'" !'IoMI"" Qr .~~"'\I Ln._",a'" ..,:ltD PHILoIiIOPIUt' .'*. 2iutU:TT (c. 0., II .): ",,111;&.,,1'· A .~D tU .. fna.C,&L 1MK"11i1"'l 0' Qnlt!,. :

"'.n ,"

Hlll"Oau'·,u.

"ott..,· ...

n,

sew \oa .. C.... III.);

".'''bl.

aOY 4t. WIlDICO.ClllauaaICAL .aotun". ' .... D 1 .... "l'.. TC"TIO~ 0 .. en' lI . • "'onl'l.t:lLJII , LO,DO' , ,.I.GoP. ,"lnC4t. . 0('11£1"" or •• aLI"' ,j "...-.... t .... n)lu· .r, A:SD M&TIf).OLOOICAL