August 28, 1903.] 



SCIENCE. 



279 



der a slightly different heading and with the 

 statement, 'First printed in the Philosophical 

 Transactions, No. XIV., p. 256, for Monday, 

 July 2, 1660.' 



It is, however, when we turn to Robert 

 Boyle's correspondence that the most interest- 

 ing evidence on the subject is found. 



1. In a letter by Robert Boyle to Mr. Henry 

 Oldenburg, secretary of the Royal Society, 

 dated March 19, 1665 (Vol. V., p. 250), he 

 says : < * * * And to answer the former first, 

 I wonder not there should be a mistake in the 

 barometrical paper I sent you, the haste I 

 was in having kept me from reading it over.' 

 This letter doubtless refers to the paper pre- 

 sented to the Royal Society on March 24, 1665. 

 This is, so far as I can find, the earliest use 

 of the word by Boyle himself. It would seem 

 from the context that it had been used before. 



2. This conclusion is supported by letters 

 to Robert Boyle. Thus (Vol. V., p. 471) Mr. 

 John Beal, a fellow of the Royal Society, 

 writes to R. B. on February 6, 1665, as follows : 

 ' Persons of no ordinary capacities do find 

 your three discourses of thermometers and 

 baroscopes difficult.' 



3. Mr. Henry Oldenburg writes on October 

 27, 1664 (Vol. v., p. 314) : ' I did enquire at 

 Gresham about the station of the barometer 

 and was informed * * * .' This would seem 

 to be in response to a request from Robert 

 Boyle wherein he may have used the same 

 term. (This letter of R. B.'s, if it exists, is 

 not given.) 



4. The person from whom Mr. Oldenburg 

 in all likelihood made his ' enquiry ' was 

 Robert Hooke, who at this time was a resi- 

 dent of Gresham College and much inter- 

 ested in barometric work. In one of his 

 letters to Robert Boyle I find the earliest use 

 of the term under discussion. On October 6, 

 1664, he writes (Vol. V., p. 537) : ' I have also, 

 since my settling at Gresham College, which 

 has been now full five weeks, constantly ob- 

 served the baroscopical index (the contrivance, 

 I suppose, you may remember, which shows 

 the small variations of the air).' That the 

 term is new to him is evidenced by his letter 

 of September 15, 1664 (Vol. V., p. 536), in 



which he uses the term ' Torricellian ' where 

 ' barometrical ' might have been used, also by 

 his return to the older usage in his letter of 

 December 13, 1664 (Vol. V., p. 542), wherein 

 he says : ' I have lately observed many cir- 

 cumstances in the height of the mercurial 

 cylinder * * * .' 



To sum up : we find during the fall of 

 1664 a renewed interest and experimental 

 activity in barometrical experiments. Asso- 

 ciated in this work were Robert Boyle, 

 Henry Oldenburg, Robert Hooke and others; 

 thus H. 0. writes to R. B. on September 

 1, 1664, as follows (Vol. V., p. 307): 

 " On Monday last a club of our philosophers 

 went to Paul's to make experiments of falling 

 bodies, and of pendulums ; there were Sir R. 

 Moray, Dr. Wilkins, Dr. Goddard, Mr. Palmer, 

 Mr. Hill, Mr. Hook; and some of them went 

 to the top of the steeple and let down a 

 pendulum of 200 foot long, with an appendant 

 weight of — ft., and found two vibrations 

 thereof made in 15". Time would not then 

 give leave to proceed to the other experiments 

 that were designed; among which will also 

 ,be the Torricellian; but they will be set upon 

 within two or three days." Robert Hooke's 

 letters show the same activity. In the letters 

 of this period we find three persons, and per- 

 haps four, using the term as follows : Robert 

 Hooke, October 6, 1664; Henry Oldenburg, 

 October 27, 1664; John Beal, February 6, 

 1665; Robert Boyle, March 19, 1665. All 

 these gentlemen had the requisite linguistic 

 knowledge to coin the new word. 



I am much inclined to thinlc that the letter 

 of John Beal given as of date February 6, 

 1665, should read '1666.' I thus conclude, 

 first from the order of the letter, preceded as 

 it is by one of date November 9, 1665, and 

 followed by one of date March 31, 1666, and 

 second, from references in the letter to Boyle's 

 papers on thermometers and baroscopes, which 

 papers must have been tbose presented or 

 published during 1665, as I find no earlier 

 date given for any of them. It is to be re- 

 gretted that no letters from Robert Boyle are 

 given from October, 1664, to March, 1665. 

 Indeed the discussion of the question is in- 



