The telescope was one of the central instruments of what has
been called the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth
century. It revealed hitherto unsuspected phenomena in the
heavens and had a profound influence on the controversy between
followers of the traditional
geocentric
astronomy and cosmology and those who favored the
heliocentric
system of
Copernicus. It was the first extension of one of man's
senses, and demonstrated that ordinary observers could see
things that the great Aristotle had not dreamed of. It therefore
helped shift authority in the observation of nature from men to
instruments. In short, it was the prototype of modern scientific
instruments. But the telescope was not the invention of
scientists; rather, it was the product of craftsmen. For that
reason, much of its origin is inaccessible to us since craftsmen
were by and large illiterate and therefore historically often
invisible.
Although the magnifying and diminishing properties of convex and
concave transparent objects was known in Antiquity, lenses as we
know them were introduced in the West
at the end of the thirteenth century. Glass of reasonable
quality had become relatively cheap and in the major
glass-making centers of Venice and Florence techniques for
grinding and polishing glass had reached a high state of
development. Now one of the perennial problems faced by aging
scholars could be solved. With age, the eye progressively loses
its power to accommodate, that is to change its focus from
faraway objects to nearby ones. This condition, known as
presbyopia, becomes noticeable for most people in
their forties, when they can no longer focus on letters held at
a comfortable distance from the eye. Magnifying glasses became
common in the thirteenth century, but these are cumbersome,
especially when one is writing. Craftsmen in Venice began making
small disks of glass, convex on both sides, that could be worn
in a frame--spectacles. Because these little disks were shaped
like lentils, they became known as "lentils of glass," or (from
the Latin) lenses. The earliest illustrations of
spectacles date from about 1350, and spectacles soon came to be
symbols of learning.
These spectacles were, then, reading glasses. When one had
trouble reading, one went to a spectacle-maker's shop or a
peddler of spectacles (see
Figure 2 and
Figure 3) and found a suitable pair by trial and
error. They were, by and large, glasses for the old. spectacles
for the young, concave lenses
that correct the refractive error known as
myopia,
were first made (again in Italy) in the middle of the fifteenth
century. So by about 1450 the ingredients for making a telescope
were there. The telescopic effect can be achieved by several
combinations of concave and convex mirrors and lenses. Why was
the telescope not invented in the fifteenth century? There is no
good answer to this question, except perhaps that lenses and
mirrors of the appropriate strengths were not available until
later.
In the literature of white magic, so popular in the sixteenth
century, there are several tantalizing references to devices
that would allow one to see one's enemies or count coins from a
great distance. But these allusions were cast in obscure
language and were accompanied by fantastic claims; the
telescope, when it came, was a very humble and simple device. It
is possible that in the 1570s Leonard and Thomas Digges in
England actually made an instrument consisting of a convex lens
and a mirror, but if this proves to be the case, it was an
experimental setup that was never translated into a
mass-produced device.
The telescope was unveiled in the Netherlands. In October 1608,
the States General (the national government) in The Hague
discussed the patent applications first of
Hans Lipperhey of Middelburg, and then
of Jacob Metius of Alkmaar, on a device for "seeing faraway
things as though nearby." It consisted of a convex and concave
lens in a tube, and the combination magnified three or four
times.
The gentlemen found the device too easy to copy to award the
patent, but it voted a small award to Metius and employed
Lipperhey to make several binocular versions, for which he was
paid handsomely. It appears that another citizen of Middelburg,
Sacharias Janssen had a telescope at about the same time but was
at the Frankfurt Fair where he tried to sell it.
The news of this new invention spread rapidly through Europe,
and the device itself quickly followed. By April 1609
three-powered spyglasses could be bought in spectacle-maker's
shops on the Pont Neuf in Paris, and four months later there
were several in Italy. (
Figure 4) We know that
Thomas Harriot observed the
Moon with a six-powered instrument
early in August 1609. But it was Galileo who made the instrument
famous. He constructed his first three-powered spyglass in June
or July 1609, presented an eight-powered instrument to the
Venetian Senate in August, and turned a twenty-powered
instrument to the heavens in October or November. With this
instrument (
Figure 5) he observed the Moon,
discovered four
satellites of
Jupiter, and resolved nebular patches into stars. He
published
Sidereus Nuncius in March 1610.
Verifying Galileo's discoveries was initially difficult. In the
spring of 1610 no one had telescopes of sufficient quality and
power to see the satellites of Jupiter, although many had weaker
instruments with which they could see some of the lunar detail
Galileo had described in
Sidereus Nuncius.
Galileo's lead was one of practice, not theory, and it took
about six months before others could make or obtain instruments
good enough to see Jupiter's moons. With the verification of the
phases of Venus by others, in the first half of 1611, Galileo's
lead in telescope-making had more or less evaporated. The next
discovery, that of
sunspots, was
made by several observers, including Galileo, independently.
A typical Galilean telescope with which Jupiter's moons could be
observed was configured as follows. It had a plano-convex
objective (the lens toward the object) with a focal length of
about 30-40 inches., and a plano-concave ocular with a focal
length of about 2 inches. The ocular was in a little tube that
could be adjusted for focusing. The objective lens was stopped
down to an aperture of 0.5 to 1 inch. , and the field of view
was about 15 arc-minutes (about 15 inches in 100 yards). The
instrument's magnification was 15-20. The glass was full of
little bubbles and had a greenish tinge (caused by the iron
content of the glass); the shape of the lenses was reasonable
good near their centers but poor near the periphery (hence the
restricted aperture); the polish was rather poor. The limiting
factor of this type of instrument was its small field of
view--about 15 arc-minutes--which meant that only a quarter of
the full Moon could be accommodated in the field. Over the next
several decades, lens-grinding and polishing techniques improved
gradually, as a specialized craft of telescope makers slowly
developed. But although Galilean telescopes of higher
magnifications were certainly made, they were almost useless
because of the concomitant shrinking of the field.
As mentioned above, the telescopic effect can be achieved with
different combinations of lenses and mirrors. As early as 1611,
in his
Dioptrice,
Johannes
Kepler had shown that a telescope could also be made by
combining a convex objective and a convex ocular. He pointed out
that such a combination would produce an inverted image but
showed that the addition of yet a third convex lens would make
the image erect again. This suggestion was not immediately taken
up by astronomers, however, and it was not until
Christoph Scheiner published his
Rosa
Ursina in 1630 that this form of telescope began to
spread. In his study of sunspots, Scheiner had experimented with
telescopes with convex oculars in order to make the image of the
Sun projected through the telescope erect.
But when he happened to view an object directly through such an
instrument, he found that, although the image was inverted, it
was much brighter and the field of view much larger than in a
Galilean telescope. Since for astronomical observations an
inverted image is no problem, the advantages of what became
known as the astronomical telescope led to its general
acceptance in the astronomical community by the middle of the
century.
The Galilean telescope could be used for terrestrial and
celestial purposes interchangeably. This was not true for the
astronomical telescope with its inverted image. Astronomers
eschewed the third convex lens (the erector lens) necessary for
re-inverting the image because the more lenses the more optical
defects multiplied. In the second half of the seventeenth
century, therefore, the Galilean telescope was replaced for
terrestrial purposes by the "terrestrial telescope," which had
four convex lenses: objective, ocular, erector lens, and a field
lens (which enlarged the field of view even further).
With the acceptance of the astronomical telescope, the limit on
magnification caused by the small field of view of the Galilean
telescope was temporarily lifted, and a "telescope race"
developed. Because of optical defects, the curvature of lenses
had to be minimized, and therefore (since the magnification of a
simple telescope is given roughly by the ratio of the focal
lengths of the objective and ocular) increased magnification had
to be achieved by increasing the focal length of the
objective. Beginning in the 1640s, the length of telescopes
began to increase. From the typical Galilean telescope of 5 or 6
feet in length, astronomical telescopes rose to lengths of 15 or
20 feet by the middle of the century. A typical astronomical
telescope is the one made by Christiaan Huygens, in 1656. It was
23 feet long; its objective had an aperture of several inches,
it magnified about 100 times, and its field of view was 17
arc-minutes.
Telescopes had now again reached the point where further
increases in magnification would restrict the field of view of
the instrument too much. This time another optical device, the
field lens came to the rescue. Adding a third convex lens--of
appropriate focal length, and in the right place--increased the
field significantly, thus allowing higher magnifications. The
telescope race therefore continued unabated and lengths
increased exponentially. By the early 1670s, Johannes Hevelius
had built a 140-foot telescope.
But such long telescopes were useless for observation: it was
almost impossible to keep the lenses aligned and any wind would
make the instrument flutter. After about 1675, therefore,
astronomers did away with the telescope tube. The objective was
mounted on a building or pole by means of a ball-joint and aimed
by means of a string; the image was found by trial and error;
and the compound eyepiece (field lens and ocular), on a little
stand, was then positioned to receive the image cast by the
objective. Such instruments were called aerial
telescopes.
Although some discoveries were made with these very long
instruments, this form of telescope had reached its limits. By
the beginning of the eighteenth century very long telescopes
were rarely mounted any more, and further increases of power
came, beginning in the 1730s, from a new form of telescope, the
reflecting telescope.
Since it was known that the telescopic effect could be achieved
using a variety of combinations of lenses and mirrors, a number
of scientists speculated on combinations involving mirrors. Much
of this speculation was fueled by the increasingly refined
theoretical study of the telescope. In his
Dioptrique, appended to his
Discourse on
Method of 1637, Renè Descartes addressed the
problem of spherical aberration, already pointed out by
others. In a thin spherical lens, not all rays from
infinity--incident parallel to the optical axis--are united at
one point. Those farther from the optical axis come to a focus
closer to the back of the lens than those nearer the optical
axis. Descartes had either learned the sine law of refraction
from Willebrord Snell (Snell's Law)
or had discovered it independently, and this allowed him to
quantify spherical aberration. In order to eliminate it, he
showed, lens curvature had to be either plano-hyperboloidal or
spherico-ellipsoidal. His demonstration led many to attempt to
make plano-hyperboloidal objectives,
an effort which was doomed to failure by the state of the art of
lens-grinding. Others began considering the virtues of a concave
paraboloidal mirror as primary receptor: it had been known since
Antiquity that such a mirror would bring parallel incident rays
to a focus at one point.
A second theoretical development came in 1672, when Isaac Newton
published his celebrated paper on light and colors. Newton
showed that white light is a mixture of colored light of
different refrangibility: every color had its own degree of
refraction. The result was that any curved lens would decompose
white light into the colors of the spectrum, each of which comes
to a focus at a different point on the optical axis. This
effect, which became known as chromatic aberration, resulted in
a central image of, e.g., a planet, being surrounded by circles
of different colors. Newton had developed his theory of light
several years before publishing his paper, when he had turned
his mind to the improvement of the telescope, and he had
despaired of ever ridding the objective of this defect. He
therefore decided to try a mirror, but unlike his predecessors
he was able to put his idea into practice. He cast a two-inch
mirror blank of speculum metal (basically copper with some tin)
and ground it into spherical curvature. He placed it in the
bottom of a tube and caught the reflected rays on a 45°
secondary mirror which reflected the image into a convex ocular
lens outside the tube (see
Figure 8). He sent this
little instrument to the Royal Society, where it caused a
sensation; it was the first working reflecting telescope. But
the effort ended there. Others were unable to grind mirrors of
regular curvature, and to add to the problem, the mirror
tarnished and had to be repolished every few months, with the
attending danger of damage to the curvature.
The reflecting telescope therefore remained a curiosity for
decades. In second and third decades of the eighteenth century,
however, the reflecting telescope became a reality in the hands
of first James Hadley and then others. By the middle of the
century, reflecting telescopes with primary mirrors up to six
inches in diameter had been made. It was found that for large
aperture ratios (the ratio of focal length of the primary to its
aperture, as the f-ratio in modern cameras for instance), f/10
or more, the difference between spherical and paraboloidal
mirrors was negligible in the performance of the telescope. In
the second half of the eighteenth century, in the hands of James
Short and then William Herschel, the reflecting telescope with
parabolically ground mirrors came into its own.
References-
Edward Rosen. (1956). The Invention of Eyeglasses. [For the invention of spectacles]. Journal for the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 11, 13-46, 183-218.
-
Vincent Ilardi. (1976). Eyeglasses and Concave Lenses in Fifteenth-Century Florence and Milan: New Documents. [The appearance of spectacles with concave lenses is discussed]. Renaissance Quarterly, 29, 341-360.
-
Albert van Helden. (1977). The Invention of the Telescope. [The entire problem of the invention of the telescope is discussed]. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 67(4),
-
Albert van Helden. (1976). The `Astronomical Telescope,' 1611-165. [see also for discussion of the problem of the invention of the telescope]. Annali dell'Istituto e Museo di Storia della Scienza di Firenze, 1(2), 13-36.
-
Albert van Helden. (1977). The Development of Compound Eyepieces, 1640-1670. [see also for discussion of the problem of the invention of the telescope]. Journal for the History of Astronomy, 8, 26-37.
-
Henry King. (1955). The History of the Telescope. [The most convenient source for information on the general development of the telescope]. London: Griffin.