518

HISTORY OF PHYSICAL ASTRONOMY.

assign to the invention, one of them, his son, fixing it in the year 1590;while the other witness, his sister, brings it down to 1011 or 1619. Theother three witnesses declared that Lipperhey was the original inventor ,one of them asserting that he made telescopes before the year 1605, whilethe other two fix the invention in the year 1009 or 1610. The deposi-tions of these persons are so imperfect and contradictory, that little or noreliance can be placed on them.

The testimony of Boreel is more deserving of attention. He men-tions, in his letter, that he knew Zacharias Jansen personally, and hadoften heard that he and bis father were the real inventors of the micro-scope. When he was in England, in the year 1019, he saw in the handsof Cornelius Drebbel, his friend , the very microscope which had beengiven by them to the Archduke Albert of Austria . Boreel then con-tinues :—“ But long after, in 1010, after much research, these individualsinvented, in Middleburg, the long sidereal telescope with which we gazeat the moon and planets, and presented one of them to Prince Maurice,who deemed it prudent to conceal the invention in order to make use ofit in military operations. While rumours were abroad regarding theinvention, a stranger came to Middleburg, and having asked for aspectacle maker, was shown by mistake into Lipperhey ’s shop. From thequestions put by the stranger, Lipperhey , being a shrewd man, wasenabled to detect the construction of the instrument, and having suc-ceeded by this means in making telescopes, he was generally consideredthe real inventor of them. However, the mistake was soon discovered,for Drebbel , upon his return to Holland, proceeded with Adrian Metiusto Jansen ’s shop, and purchased telescopes of him.”

It follows, then, from Boreel’s letter, that Jansen invented, first themicroscope, and, after the lapse of several years, the telescope. Thisaccount tends in some degree to reconcile the conflicting statements ofthe two witnesses who deposed in favour of that individual: but indeedthe whole evidence contained in Boreel’s book is of so meagre and un-satisfactory a character, as to leave the question relative to the actualinventor of the telescope, still open to dispute.

In the first volume of the “Journal of the Royal Institution,” publishedin 1831, there appeared an interesting communication from Dr. Moll, ofUtrecht , relating to the invention of the telescope. The materials of thispaper are due to the researches of Van Swinden , who had succeeded indiscovering some authentic records, which serve to remove much of theobscurity that has hitherto prevailed respecting the real author of theinvention.

In the library of the University of Leyden there exists, among themanuscripts of Huyghens , an original copy of a petition sent to theStates General by Jacob Andrianzoon, the person whom Descartes callsJames Metius. This petition is dated October 17, 1608. The object ofit is to obtain the exclusive right of selling an instrument he had in-vented, by means of which distant bodies appeared larger and moredistinct. He declares that the idea of the instrument occurred to himaccidentally, while he was engaged in making other experiments ; that heafterwards bestowed much attention on the subject, and had succeeded sofar in bringing the invention to maturity, as to make objects appear asvisible aud distinct by his instrument, as could be done with the one whichhad been lately offered to the States by a citizen and sjiectacle maker of Mid-dlebury. Metius was exhorted to bring his instrument to greater perfec-tion, when his petition for a privilege would be taken into consideration.