In attempting to estimate this book, it is necessary to avoid first impressions, for what strikes one on opening its pages is its dullness. It is edited by his son, who, in a Personal Sketch, gives certain facts about his father without succeeding in being graphic or interesting in any way. There is too much detail of an unexciting quality, e.g., p. 272 (1867): “There was the usual visit to Playford in January. In April there was a short run to Alnwick and the neighbourhood in company with Mr and Mrs Routh. From 27th June to 4th July he was in Wales with his two eldest (sic) sons, visiting Uriconium, etc., on his return. From 8th August to 7th September he spent a holiday in Scotland and the Lake District of Cumberland with his daughter Christabel, visiting the Langtons at Barrow House, near Keswick, and Isaac Fletcher at Tarn Bank.” When this kind of thing occurs often it is intolerably wearisome.

The same criticism applies to the extracts from Sir George Airy’s diary, which his son publishes. For instance, p. 172 (1845): “On 29th January I went with my wife on a visit to my uncle, George Biddell, at Bradfield St George, near Bury. On 9th June I went into the mining district of Cornwall with George Arthur Biddell. From 25th August to 26th September I was travelling in France with my sister and my wife’s sister, Georgiana Smith. I was well introduced and the journey was interesting. On 29th October my son Osmond was born. Mr F. Baily bequeathed to me £500, which realised £450.”

This is a class of facts which a man may like to record, but their publication when so often repeated is surely unnecessary. There is, however, this to be said—that minute accuracy was a marked feature in Airy’s character, and must therefore be made prominent; and it may be argued that the right degree of prominence can only be given by avoiding all suppression. I cannot think that this is so in the case of an editor. Nor can I believe that Airy would have approved of one detail in his son’s method of printing the book, namely, that the diary is enclosed in inverted commas throughout, while the editor’s occasional remarks are without them. It would surely have been simpler to say once for all that what is printed is an accurate copy of the diary, and to have given the editor’s remarks within square brackets.

George Biddell Airy was born at Alnwick on 27th July 1801. He seems to have belonged to a Westmoreland family, but his forbears for several generations were small farmers in Lincolnshire. His father, William Airy, was clearly a person of energy and forethought, who laid by his summer’s earnings “in order to educate himself in winter.” He gave up farming as a young man and found employment in the excise, a profession not without danger in those early days when contraband trade was common. He is said to have had many fights with smugglers, but did not suffer the fate of the gauger in Guy Mannering, for Dirck Hatteraicks were not so common as youthful readers might desire.

In 1810 William Airy was transferred to Colchester, where, if there were fewer smugglers, there was more opportunity for education; and George was sent to a school in a street bearing the attractive name of Sir Isaac’s Walk. Four years later Airy went to the Colchester Grammar School, where he remained until 1819, when he entered Trinity College, Cambridge. The only point of interest connected with his school life is the record (in his own words) of Airy’s remarkable verbal memory. “It was the custom for each boy once a week to repeat a number of lines of Latin or Greek poetry, the number depending very much on his own choice. I determined on repeating 100 every week. . . . It was no distress to me, and great enjoyment. At Michaelmas 1816 I repeated 2394 lines, probably without missing a word.”

On 18th October 1819 he went to Cambridge “on the top of the coach,” and was installed in lodgings in Bridge Street. A reputation for mathematics had preceded him, and he was kindly received by Mr Peacock [164] and Professor Sedgwick. It will be remembered that some twenty years later both these personages interested themselves in another Cambridge undergraduate—Charles Darwin.

Airy (p. 23) showed Mr Peacock a manuscript book containing “a number of original Propositions” which he had investigated. This increased his reputation in the University, but he was destined to be eminent in quite another direction. On the recommendation of Clarkson—who, as the chief Abolitionist, ought to have been more revolutionary—he followed the rule almost universally neglected—that undergraduates should wear drab knee breeches. Though Airy must soon have discovered that the reign of breeches was over, he continued, like the careful youth he was, to wear them for three terms.

In the winter of his freshman’s year, he did some original research in mathematics. This praiseworthy undertaking was characteristically treated by two of his advisers: Mr Peacock encouraged him to work out his problems; but his tutor (who bore the appropriate name of Hustler) disapproved of Airy’s employing his time on such speculations.

He describes with characteristic precision his way of life as an undergraduate. He never failed to keep the four statutory morning chapels. Then came breakfast, and College lectures occupied him from nine till eleven. He then went back to his rooms, and instead of at once getting to his mathematics, he wrote a piece of Latin prose. At two o’clock he “went out for a long walk, usually 4 or 5 miles, into the country: sometimes if I found companions I rowed on the Cam (a practice acquired rather later)”; College Hall was at four, after which he “lounged” until it was time to go to evening chapel (five-thirty). About six he had tea, and then “read quietly, usually a classical subject, till eleven; and I never, even in the times when I might seem most severely pressed, sat up later.”

In his second year he was asked to coach one Rosser, a man of his own year, for which he was paid at the rate of £14 per term. “This occupied two hours every day, and I felt that I was now completely earning my own living. I never received a penny from my friends after this time.”

His undergraduate life ended triumphantly in his being Senior Wrangler. He refers (p. 39) to the hardships of the examination: “The season was a cold one, and no fire was allowed in the Senate House, where the examination was carried on . . . and altogether it was a severe time.” His reference to the ceremonial of degree-taking has a little self-glorification which is not characteristic of him:—“I, as Senior Wrangler, was led up first to receive the degree, and rarely has the Senate House rung with such applause as then filled it.”

In January 1823 he came back to Cambridge and started business as a coach with four pupils, each of whom paid him twenty guineas a term. [166] By this time the great series of his published papers had begun—indeed No. 1, “On the use of Silvered Glass for the mirrors of Reflecting Telescopes,” had already been published in 1822, by the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

It was in 1824 that “came one of the most important occurrences” of his life, namely, meeting the beautiful girl Richarda Smith, who was to become his wife. They were engaged in 1824 and married six years later. I venture the guess that her health was never very strong, for she seems not to have been much with Airy in his holiday wanderings. Wilfrid Airy speaks of “their deep respect and affection for one another.”

On 1st October 1824, in his twenty-third year, he was elected to a Trinity fellowship. Macaulay, who was elected the same day, speaks somewhere of the especial value he placed on this most pleasant honour, but he was thinking of the life of a resident Fellow, and Airy at once told his tutor of his intention of going out into the world. He began, however, in the October term to give mathematical lectures in Trinity. The reader is not surprised to find that Airy now gave up the custom which he “had followed with such regularity for five years, namely, that of daily writing Latin.” I wonder what other Senior Wrangler wrote Latin prose while reading for the Tripos?

We have seen that the great stream of his original work had been established. In 1822 he wrote one paper, in 1824 three, in 1825 two, in 1826 three, and in 1827 five; and this stream was to flow for sixty-five years, i.e., until 1887!

On December 1826 he was elected to the Lucasian professorship, and thus became a successor of Sir Isaac Newton. The salary when Airy was elected was but £99 a year; the present holder is more adequately paid, and receives £850 annually. His prospects in 1827 were, however, not very good. He had to resign his tutorship when he became a professor, and thus lost £51 of income. As he would not take orders, his fellowship, according to the atrocious system of the day, would come to an end in seven years. But he surely judged wisely in accepting the poorly paid office. He had to lecture in a room, not intended for the purpose, in the old Botanic Gardens. This region is now occupied by science buildings, but bears a memory of its former history in the great Sophora tree flourishing there.

He was soon to obtain better paid work, for in 1828 he was elected Plumian professor, and giving up his college rooms he moved into the Observatory, where his official career as an astronomer began. During the following years, up to 1834, he was busy with professorial work and his duties at the Cambridge Observatory. He began to receive public acknowledgments of his character and his work. In 1835 he was elected a correspondent of the French Academy. In the same year Sir Robert Peel (p. 106) offered him a pension of £300 per annum, with no terms of any kind, and allowing it to be settled, “if I should think fit, on my wife.”

On 11th June 1835 the First Lord of the Admiralty wrote offering Airy the office of Astronomer Royal, which was accepted. Another honour—that of Knighthood—he declined in the same year. In 1863 the same honour was again offered and declined with dignity, on the ground that fees of “about £30” were demanded. Finally, in 1872 he was offered the K.C.B. and knighted by the Queen at Osborne. In reply to the congratulations of a friend, Airy wrote: “The real charm of these public compliments seems to be, that they excite the sympathies and elicit the kind expressions of private friends or of official superiors as well as subordinates. In every way I have derived pleasure from these.”

With regard to other honours, it is pleasant to discover that Airy, one of the most accurate of men, could make minute mistakes. Thus in 1863 he speaks (p. 254) of the academical degree of D.C.L. held by him in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. But at Cambridge the degree in question is known as LL.D.

It may be well to give here, irrespective of dates, some of the other honours received by Airy.

In 1867 he (in company with Connop Thirlwall) was elected to the newly instituted Honorary Fellowships of Trinity—a distinction which seems to have given him especial pleasure.

In 1872 he was chosen as “Foreign Associate of the Institut de France” (p. 297), and wrote a strongly worded letter of thanks to Elie de Beaumont and J. B. Dumas, the Perpetual Secretaries. In the same year he wrote (p. 299) to the Emperor of Brazil in acknowledgment of the Grand Cross of the Rose of Brazil.

In 1851 he was President of the British Association at Ipswich. He showed his sense of duty in a characteristic way (p. 207). “Prince Albert was present, as [a] guest of Sir William Middleton; I was engaged to meet him at dinner, but when I found that the dinner day was one of the principal soirÉe days, I broke off the engagement.” In 1871 Airy was chosen President of the Royal Society. He wrote to a friend (p. 293): “The election . . . is flattering, and has brought to me the friendly remembrance of many persons; but in its material and laborious connections, I could well have dispensed with it, and should have done so but for the respectful way in which it was pressed on me.” He resigned the Presidency in 1873 (p. 303), giving his reasons as follows:—“The severity of official duties, which seem to increase, while vigour to discharge them does not increase; and the distance of my residence. . . . Another reason is a difficulty of hearing, which unfits me for effective action as Chairman of the Council.”

It is quite beyond my powers to estimate the value of Airy’s work as Astronomer Royal; I therefore quote from Schuster and Shipley’s Britain’s Heritage of Science, p. 165:—“In astronomy he proved himself to be equally eminent as an administrator and investigator. He introduced revolutionary reforms in the practice of observatories by insisting on a rapid reduction and publication of all observations. After his appointment as Astronomer Royal, he set to work at once to reduce the series of observations of planets which had accumulated during eighty years without any use having been made of them. This was followed up by a similar reduction of 8000 lunar observations. He was equally energetic in adding to the instrumental equipment. When Greenwich was first founded, the longitude determination at sea depended to a great extent on measuring the distance between stars and the moon. Hence accurate tables of the position of the moon were essential, and the preparation of these tables has always been considered to be the chief care of Greenwich. The observations were made with a transit telescope which could only be used when the moon was passing the meridian, until Airy in 1843 persuaded the Board of Visitors to take steps for constructing a new instrument which would enable him to observe the moon in any position. In 1847 this instrument was at work, and other important additions to the equipment were made as occasion arose. . . .

“Among his theoretical investigations in pure astronomy, one of the most important resulted in the discovery of a new inequality in the motions of Venus and the earth due to their mutual attraction, and this led to an improvement in the solar tables.”

Nor should it be forgotten that Airy “originated the automatic system by which the Greenwich time signals are transmitted each day throughout the country.”

With regard to the celebrated case of the planet Neptune, “which Adams predicted would be found—as it was found by the Berlin observer Galle, to whom Leverrier indicated its position,” Messrs Schuster and Shipley “cannot absolve either Airy or Challis [the Cambridge Astronomer] from blame.”

Airy writes (p. 181): “The engrossing subject of this year [1846] was the discovery of Neptune. As I have said (1845), I obtained no answer from Adams to a letter of enquiry. Beginning with June 26th of 1846, I had correspondence of a satisfactory character with Leverrier, who had taken up the subject of the disturbance of Uranus, and arrived at conclusions not very different from those of Adams. I wrote from Ely on July 9th to Challis, begging him, as in possession of the largest telescope in England, to sweep for the planet and suggesting a plan. I received information of its recognition by Galle, when I was visiting Hansen at Gotha. For further official history, see my communications to the Royal Astronomical Society, and for private history see the papers in the Royal Observatory. I was abused most savagely both by English and French.”

Having been Astronomer Royal from 1835, Airy, being eighty years of age, resigned his post in 1881, receiving (p. 340) a “retired allowance of £1100 per annum.”

His son writes (p. 346), “On the 16th of August 1881 Airy left the Observatory,” which had been his home “for nearly 46 years, and removed to the White House. Whatever his feeling may have been at the severing of his old associations he carefully kept them to himself, and entered upon his new life with the cheerful composure and steadiness of temper which he possessed in a remarkable degree.”

His son continues (p. 347): “The work to which he chiefly devoted himself in his retirement was the completion of his Numerical Lunar Theory. This was a vast work, involving the subtlest considerations of principle, very long and elaborate mathematical investigations of a high order, and an enormous amount of arithmetical computation.” Of this work Airy wrote, p. 349 (apparently in 1886): “The critical trial depends on the great mass of computations in Section ii. These have been made in duplicate, with all the care for accuracy that anxiety could supply. Still I cannot but fear that the error which is the source of discordance must be on my part.” The work was continued until October 1888, but without success.

He continued to show his characteristic fearlessness in what he considers to be his duty. Thus in 1883 (p. 355) he refused to sign a memorial in favour of the burial of Mr Spottiswoode in Westminster Abbey, on the ground that he had not conferred “great and durable” benefits on society. In 1883 he wrote (p. 356) to the Vicar of Greenwich protesting against choral service in the church. I shall quote his words as almost a solitary example of his use of picturesque English:—“For a venerable persuasion there is substituted a rude irreverential confusion of voices; for an earnest acceptance of the form offered by the Priest there is substituted—in my feeling at least—a weary waiting for the end of an unmeaning form.”

In 1887 his son records (p. 361) that Airy’s private accounts gave him much trouble. It had been his custom to keep them by double entry in very perfect order. “But he now began to make mistakes and to grow confused, and this distressed him greatly . . . and so he struggled with his accounts as he did with his Lunar Theory till his powers absolutely failed.”

In 1889 he had the satisfaction of knowing that his system of compass correction in iron ships had been universally adopted. Whether the Admiralty ought to be proud of the fact that fifty years had elapsed since Airy’s discovery was made known is another question.

Sir George Airy died 2nd January 1892. It is recorded that before the end came he had been lying quietly for several days “reciting the English poetry with which his memory was stored.”