318 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. YOL. XLVII. No. 1213 



remarkable text-books. The first in point of 

 date is Walter Libby's " Introduction to the 

 History of Science" (Boston, Houghton 

 Mifflin), a very well written and interesting 

 account of some of the most typical conquests 

 of science throughout the ages. The second 

 is Sedgwick and Tyler's " Short History of 

 Science" (New York, Macmillan), whose more 

 ambitious purpose is to outline the whole of 

 its development. The authors have been teach- 

 ing the history of science for a great many 

 years at the Massachusetts Institute of Tech- 

 nology. They have taken great pains to make 

 their book as serviceable as possible to the 

 student. It contains a large number of rele- 

 vant quotations, and some longer extracts from 

 Hippocrates, Eoger Bacon, Copernicus, Har- 

 vey, Galileo, Newton, Jenner, Lyell; also notes 

 on the main inventions of the last two cen- 

 turies, and chronological and bibliographical 

 summaries. 



With books like these, the American teach- 

 ers will have no excuse for not knowing at 

 least something on the subject. It is not un- 

 likely that now that such convenient text- 

 books are provided, courses based upon them 

 will grow like mushrooms; those giving them 

 will gradually become acquainted with the his- 

 tory of science, and some of them will wish 

 to know more of it. That is also a beginning. 



The reader shoidd not be left under the 

 impression that no real research work has been 

 undertaken in this country. It will be enough 

 to remind him of the two beautiful studies 

 contained in the eleventh volume of the Hu- 

 manistic Series of the University of Michigan. 

 The first is an admirable edition of Robert of 

 Chester's Latin translation of the "Algebra" 

 of Al-Khowarizmi, with an introduction, trans- 

 lation, and notes by Ch. L. Karpinski (1915). 

 The second, an English version of Nieolaus 

 Steno's " Prodromus," with notes by J. Gr. 

 Winter (1916). This volume is to be com- 

 pleted by an essay on the " Vesuvius in An- 

 tiquity," contributed by the editor of the 

 series, Francis W. Kelsey. 



I believe that no greater service can be 

 rendered to the history of science, at this 

 juncture, than by relentlessly insisting upon 



the necessity of raising the standard of 

 scholarship as high as possible. It will grad- 

 ually dawn upon the people that inaccurate 

 historical facts are as worthless as inaccurate 

 scientific facts. It is true, historical errors 

 are less obvious. At least they are not auto- 

 matically detected, as is the case in the posi- 

 tive sciences, where most errors lead sooner 

 or later to inconsistencies. But does the fact 

 that there is no material check of our accuracy 

 in historical matters not increase — rather 

 than decrease — our duty to be accurate? 



The Past can not rise up and arrest the 

 historian, crying out : " You inconsiderate 

 tattler, you liar, how dare you. ... ?" The 

 historian is a judge. Upon his shoidders rest 

 the immense responsibilities of a judge. And 

 those upon whom he sits in judgment have 

 been silenced forever. 



It is not always easy to appreciate the merit 

 of a contemporary, because we can not justly 

 estimate the value of a discovery until we 

 have got far ahead of it, and tasted a great 

 many of its fruits. And so it happens all 

 the time that some people enjoy a very high 

 reputation, which they do not deserve, while 

 others traverse life unrewarded and unnoticed. 



From the idealistic point of view, this does 

 not matter much, because, sooner or later, 

 justice is done. That is the historian's trust. 

 If he be unfaithful to it — if he says for in- 

 stance that the air pump was discovered by 

 Eobert Boyle instead of by Otto von Guericke 

 — this is not a mere trifle. It is a protracted 

 injustice; the supreme crime. 



But the ultimate purpose of those who are 

 now fighting under the banner of the history 

 of science — only a few to-day but legion to- 

 morrow — is even higher. To put it briefly, 

 their purpose is to reconcile knowledge and 

 idealism. We need both equally. I do not 

 know which is worst, knowledge without ideal- 

 ism or idealism without knowledge, and yet 

 our whole system of education is leading to 

 their growing estrangement. 



It would be foolish to imagine that scien- 

 tists and literary people, the so-called human- 

 ists, will come together spontaneously. Such 

 a miracle will not come to pass, unless we 



