Oct. I, 1874J 



NATURE 



437 



will be a structure, as we have already said, that advan- 

 cing science will periodically overthrow. The ruin, how- 

 ever, will not be deplorable, because not only not irre- 

 parable, but certain to be succeeded by a new edifice 

 which will in all probability be better and more useful 

 than its predecessor. J. M. D. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 



[ The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 

 by his eorrespondents. No notice is taken of anonymous 

 communications .] 



The Education of Women 



In your excellent aitide (vol. x. p. 395) on this subject, you 

 forcibly point out that custom and prejudice have established for 

 boys and girls a curriculum of studies which seems to have but 

 little reason to justify it. You particularly mention that whereas 

 music is, in England, but rarely taught to boys, it is " almost 

 compulsory on girls, whether they have the talent for it or not.'' 



This monopoly of music for girls, supposing our system of 

 education to be founded on reason, should imply, amongst other 

 considerations, that females possess peculiar aptitudes for thii 

 branch of art, and that instructing them in it is more likely tn 

 produce favourable results in their case than in that of males. I 

 do not say that this is the only probable jiistilication for our 

 practice, but it should certainly be one strong ground for it. 



But how does the matter really stand? It is a most remark- 

 able fact that in the highest walk of musical achievement, com- 

 position, women are positively nowhere. I believe I am safe in 

 saying that not a single opera, or oratorio, for instance, the 

 work of a woman, has ever maintained even brief popularity ; 

 ncr has the sex furnished us with one representative worthy of 

 being placed hy the side of Bach, Handel, Mozart, Beethoven, 

 Rossini, Mendelssohn, and a host of other great male com- 

 posers who could be named. 



In almost every other department of art and knowledge 

 eminent women have been found — in literature, both prose and 

 poetic, in mathematics, science, painting, sculpture, medicine : 

 but not a solitary great female musical composer can be named. 



I do not point out this fact for the purpose of disparaging the 

 female intellect, of which I have the highest admiration, but for 

 the purpose of reinforcing with it the arguments put forward by 

 yourself and other friends of female education in favour of a 

 revision of the subjects appropriated by unreasoning'custom to 

 the two sexes. 



Considering, however, that the doctrine of chances might 

 have been expected to give us at least one female musician of 

 the highest order out of the myriads «ho devote a large portion 

 of their existence to the cultivation of the art, the striking fact 

 that it is not so is one well calculated to excite speculation. Is the 

 power of producing new and acceptable music distinguishable in 

 any way from other art power — that for instance of producing a 

 fine painting, statue, or poem ? There does seem to me to be this 

 pecuiiarity belonging to music. The subjects of a painting, statue, 

 or poem, may, and generally are, suggested by some event, 

 person, tradition, or thing already existing. The suggestions of 

 colour, form, light, and shade, furnished by nature, are endless, 

 and capable of infinite diversification — they often, no doubt, act 

 on the mind of the artist unconsciously — but, whether he is 

 conscious of it or not, their influence is always at work — and 

 though he produces something which we feel to be truly original, 

 yet he is probably indebted for the first germ of the idea and for 

 the greater part of the machinery by means of which it has been 

 realised, to sources and materials previously existing, some of 

 which have indeed generally left their traces on the work. 



Can anything like this be said of music? What can have 

 suggested some of the simple melodies to which we are never 

 tired of listening, and which are so complete, so consistent, so 

 satisfying, that we accept them almost like works of nature which 

 we do not dream of altering ? That there are associations of 

 ideas between musical sounds nnd visible things, and even moral 

 sentiments, may be true, but such relations must be vagueness 

 and mistiness itself, compared with the relations on which other 

 arts are dependent. So slight, so remote, so intangible are the 

 sources of original music, that it has al«-.ays seemed to me that 

 the faculty uf musical composition of the highest order a|iproacIies 

 more nearly to inspiration than any other faciJty with which 

 mankind is endowed. 



How can the apparent absence of this faculty in women be 

 explained? Alex. Strange 



London, Sept. 22 



Double Rainbow 



O.N the nth, at 5.40 r.M., this comparatively rare pheno- 

 menon was well seen here by the crowd assembled at the Ladies' 

 Golf Match. The accompanying sketch, by T. Hodge, Esq., 

 gives a thoroughly artistic view of the scene. 



Unfortunately the estuary of the Eden, whose quiet water 

 furnished the rellected sunlight, is considerably north of the 

 observer's station. Hence the necessary incompleteness of the 

 second bow. I cannot learn whether any spectator was fortunate 

 enough to observe the phenomenon from a point a mile or two 

 north, whence it would probably have been seen entire. 



As seen from stations to the eastward of St. Andrews, the 

 second bow, there due to light reflected from the rougher water 

 ot the bay, was considerably broader than the first ; so much so 



.a. 



at the upper end of the visible portion as to give, even to intel- 

 ligent spectators, the impression that it was convex instead of 

 concave to the point opposite the rellected sun. 



It was not possible to ascertain whether the light of the por- 

 tions of the two bows visible below the horizon was that coming 

 from the rain-drops directly, or that subsequently reflected from 

 the sea ; though (face Dr. Tyndall) probably the latter was at 

 least a considerable agent. B. G. Tait 



St. Andrews, N.B., Sept. 15 



B.S. In my note on " Bright Meteors " (Nature, vol. x. 305) 

 I find I have inadvertently written Saturday in place of Sunday. 

 Perhaps, with this correction, Mr. Waller may be able to iden- 

 tify both meteors in a satisfactory manner. 



This is the phenomenon observed by Dr. Halley, Aug. 6, 

 169S, at Chester. The second bow was formed by the sun's 

 light reflected from the river Dec. See " Brewster's Optics," 

 p. 3S0. 



Of the parts of the two bows below the horizon, the outer is a 

 continuation of the primary bow, and is formed principally by 

 direct sunlight striking the drops between the observer and the 

 sea and reflected in the ordin.ary manner. 



It may derive a slight increase of brightness from light first 

 reflected .at the sea, then by rain-drops, and lastly by the sea 

 arrain. The inner part is produced by one reflection from the sea 

 and one reflection from rain-drops. The brightness will be the 

 same whichever reflection comes first, provided the smooth 

 sea, the rain-drops, and the sunlight are present. 



J. Clerk-Maxwell 



Curious Rainbow 



I DO not sec that the rainbow described by Mr. Swettenham 

 (NATi'i;ir, vol. X. p. 39S) was different from an ordinary rainbow 

 of moderate brightness, except in there being a slight interval 

 between the two series of colours, which generally blend into 



