134 



announced as articles of scientific belief but also 

 followed in practice. 



It is clear, therefore, that modern methods of obser- 

 vational and experimental science were not founded by 

 the works of Francis Bacon. Before his day, Tycho 

 Brahe had gone to the heavens for his astronomical 

 facts instead of to Greek philosophy, and had earnestly 

 urged his pupil Kepler " to lay a solid foundation for 

 his views by actual observation, and then by ascending 

 from these to strive to reach the causes of things." 

 Leonardo da Vinci had advanced science and engineering 

 in many directions ; and Palissy had collected and 

 studied a large variety of natural things. Gilbert had 

 made his memorable experimental researches on mag- 

 netism, while Galileo had confounded orthodox philo- 

 sophy by his investigations in mechanics and observations 

 of celestial objects. 



Bacon drew up the rules by which he considered 

 Nature should be studied, but he treated almost with 

 contempt all progress accomplished without the use of 

 his prescription, and he persistently rejected the Coper- 

 nican theory, though it formed the best possible example 

 of the application of his own system of collecting obser- 

 vations and arriving at conclusions from them. Few 

 natural philosophers who came after him took heed of his 

 artificial process of discovery ; and there is little evidence 

 that the method assisted in the advance of science 

 in any way. Newton never mentioned Bacon or his 

 system, though he was born and educated after its 

 publication ; and a study of the progress of science fails 

 to furnish sufficient reason for believing that Bacon's 

 Novum Organum has been either a powerful source of 

 inspiration or has provided the formula by which natural 

 knowledge has been increased. 



