The investigations of modern science have borne rich fruit, not only by vastly extending our knowledge of the universe of things around us, but also making us acquainted with the mode in which certain agents act upon our bodily organs, and by revealing, up to a certain point, what may be termed the mechanism of that most wonderful thing—the human mind—or, at least, that part which is immediately concerned in the perceptions of an external world. Of all the physical influences which affect the human mind, those due to light are the most powerful and the most agreeable. One of the most ancient of philosophers says, in the simple words which are appropriate to the expression of an undeniable truth, “Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold the sun.” The impression produced by light alone is a source of pleasure—a cheering influence of the highest order; and there is a special character in the pleasing effects of light, from the circumstance that they do not exhaust the sense so quickly as do even pleasurable impressions on other organs—such as sweet tastes, fragrant odours, or agreeable sounds. Sight is not liable to that satiety which soon overtakes the enjoyment of sensations arising from the other senses; it possesses, therefore, a refinement of quality of which the rest are devoid. Sight converses with its objects at a greater distance than does any other sense, and it furnishes our minds with a greater variety of ideas. Indeed, our mental imagery is most largely made up of reminiscences of visual impressions; for when the idea of anything is brought up in our minds by a word, for example, there arises, in most cases, a more or less vivid presentation of some visible appearance. Our visual impressions are also longer retained in memory or idea than any other class of sensations.

The nature of the impressions we receive through the eye is extremely varied; for we thus perceive not only the difference between light and darkness, but in the sensations of colour we have quite another class of effects, while the lustre and sparkle of polished and brilliant objects add new elements of beauty and variety. We find examples of the latter qualities in the verdant sheen of the smooth leaf, in the splendid reflections of burnished gold, in the bright radiance of glittering gems, and “in gloss of satin and glimmer of pearls.” The eye is also the organ which conveys to our minds the impressions of visible motion, with all those pleasures of exciting spectacle which enter so largely into our enjoyment of life. It likewise discriminates the forms, sizes, and distances of objects; but by a process long misunderstood, and dependent upon a set of perceptions which, although precisely those whence we derive our most fundamental notions of the objects around us, have been completely overlooked in that time-honoured enumeration of the senses which recognizes only five.

If such be the extent to which our minds are dependent upon the wonderful apparatus of the eye, it may easily be imagined what must be the comparative narrowness of mental development in those who have never enjoyed this precious sense, and the feeling of deprivation in those, who, having enjoyed it, have unfortunately lost it. Well may our sublime poet despairingly ask—

—for he himself, in his own person, experienced this deprivation, and he thus touchingly, in his great work, laments his loss:

An organ which is the instrument of so many nice discriminations as is the eye must, of course, present the most delicate adjustment in its parts. So much has in recent times been learnt of the nature of its mechanism; of the relation between the impressions made upon it and the judgments formed by the mind therefrom; of the illusions which its very structure produces; of the defects to which it is liable; and of its wonderfully refined physiological elements—that a branch of science sufficiently extensive to require a large part of a studious lifetime for its complete mastery has grown up under the hands of modern physiologists, physicists, and psychologists. To some of the results of their labour we would invite the reader’s attention; and in order to render the account of them intelligible, we must, to a certain extent, describe “things new and old.”

THE EYE.

The form of the human eye and the general arrangement of its parts may be understood by referring to Fig. 234, which is a section of the eyeball. It has a form nearly globular, and is covered on the outside by a tough firm case, A, named the sclerotic coat, which is, for the most part, white and opaque. This covering it is which forms what is commonly termed the “white of the eye;” but in the front part of the eyeball it loses its opacity, and merges into a transparent substance, termed the cornea, B. The cornea has a greater convexity than the rest of the exterior of the eyeball, so that it causes the front part of the eye to have a somewhat greater projection than would result from its general globular form. This sclerotic coat—with its continuation, the cornea—serves to support and protect the more delicate parts within, and is itself kept in shape by the humours, which fill the whole of the interior. The greater space is occupied by the vitreous humour, C; but the space immediately behind the transparent cornea is filled with the aqueous humour, D. The latter is little else than pure water, and the former is like thin transparent jelly. The cavities containing these two humours are separated by the transparent double convex lens, E, called the crystalline lens, which, in consistence, resembles very thick jelly or soft gristle. The outward surface of this lens has a flatter curvature than the inner surface. Immediately in front of the crystalline lens is found the iris, F, which may be described as a curtain having in the middle a round hole. The iris is the part which varies in colour from one individual to another—being blue, brown, grey, &c.; and the aperture in its centre is the dark circular spot termed the pupil.

The general disposition of the parts of the eye with regard to light will be most easily understood by comparing it with an optical instrument, to which it bears no little resemblance, namely, the camera obscura, so well known in connection with photography. We may picture to ourselves a still more complete resemblance, by imagining that the lens of the camera is single, that we have fixed in front of it a watch-glass, with the convex side outwards, and that we have filled with water the whole of the interior of the camera, including the space between the watch-glass and the lens. The focussing-screen of the camera corresponds with the inner surface of the back of the eyeball, about which we shall presently have more to say. Now, even if the camera had no lens, but were simply a box filled with water, and having in front the watch-glass, fixed in the manner just mentioned, we could obtain the images of objects on the screen, as a consequence of the curvature of the watch-glass. It would, however, in this case, be necessary to have the camera much longer, or, in other words, the rays would be brought to a focus at a greater distance than if we put in the glass lens, which would, thus placed in the water, cause the rays to converge to a focus at a much shorter distance, although its effect when surrounded by water would be less powerful than in the air. There we see the effect of the crystalline lens of the eye in bringing the rays to a focus within a much shorter distance than that which would be required had there been present only the curved cornea, and the aqueous and vitreous humours of the eye, which are but little different from pure water in their optical properties.

If we focus the camera by adjusting the distance between the lens and the screen so as to get a distinct image of a near object, we should find, on directing the instrument to a distant one, that the image would be blurred and indistinct, and the lens would have to be moved nearer to the screen; or we could get the image of the distant object distinct by replacing the lens by another lens in the same position, but having some flatter curvature. It is plain that the same object would be gained if our lens could be made of some elastic material, which, on being pulled out radially at its edges, could be made to assume the required degree of flatness without losing its lenticular form. Now, it is precisely with an automatic adjustment of this kind that the crystalline lens of the eye is provided, for the lens is suspended by an elastic ligament, G, by the tension of which its surfaces are more flattened than they would otherwise be; but when the tension of this ligament is relaxed, by the action of certain delicate muscles which draw it down, the elasticity of the lens causes it to assume a more convex form.

These optical adjustments give, on the inner surface of the coats of the eye, a more or less perfect real image of the objects to which the eye is directed, and it is on the back part of this inner surface that the network of nerves, called the retina, H, is spread out. The sclerotic coat, already spoken of, is lined internally with another, named the choroid, which is composed of delicate blood-vessels, intermingled with a tissue of cells filled with a substance of an intensely black colour. It is upon this last layer that the delicate membrane of the retina is spread out between the choroid and the vitreous humour.

The retina is, in part, an expansion of the fibres of the optic nerve over the back part of the eyeball. If we suppose the globe of this cut vertically into two portions, and so divide the front from the back part of the eye, the retina would be seen spread out on the concave surface of the back part, and in the middle of this part, opposite the crystalline lens, would be seen a spot in which the retina assumes a yellowish colour, and in the centre of this, a little round pit or depression. The spot is called the macula lutea, or yellow spot, and the little central pit, which is of the highest importance in vision, is termed the fovea centralis. A little way from the yellow spot, and nearer the nose, is a point from which a number of fibres are seen to radiate, and this is, in fact, the part at which the optic nerve enters the eyeball, and from which it sends out its ramifications over the retina. This part, for a reason which will shortly appear, is called the blind spot.

When the minute structure of the retina is examined by the microscope, its physiological elements are found to undergo very remarkable modifications at the yellow spot. In the retina, although the total thickness does not exceed the 1
80th part of an inch, no fewer than eight or ten different essential or nervous layers have been distinguished. Fig. 235 rudely represents a section. The lowest stratum, A, which is next the choroid, and forms about a quarter of the total thickness, is formed of a multitude of little rod-shaped bodies, a, ranged side by side, and among these are the conical or bottle-shaped bodies, b. This lowest stratum of the retina is called the layer of rods and cones. At their front extremities the rods and cones pass into very delicate fibres, which, going through an extremely fine layer of fibres, B, are connected with a series of small rounded bodies, which form the layer of nuclei, C, separated by a layer of nervous fibres, D, from a granular layer, E, in front of which is a stratum of still finer granules, F, underlying a layer of ganglionic nerve-cells, G, of a larger size than any of the other elements, and these ganglionic cells send out numerous branching nerve-fibres, forming the layer H. Finally, on the front surface of the retina there is a thin stratum formed of fibres, which issue from the optic nerve, K, Fig. 234, and in fact constitute the expansion of this nerve on the inner surface of the eyeball. The terminations of some, at least, of these nerve-fibres have been traced, and have been found to form junctions with those branching from the ganglionic cells.

Of the part played by each of these delicate structures in exciting visual impressions little is yet known. How light, or the pulsations of ether, if such there be, is ultimately converted into sensation will probably for ever remain a mystery, although it is quite likely that the kind of visual impression which is conveyed by each part of the elaborate structure of the retina may ultimately be distinguished. One curious result of modern investigation is that light falling directly upon fibres of the optic nerve is quite incapable of exciting any sensation whatever. Light has no more effect on this nerve and its fibres than it would have on any other nerve of the body if exposed to its action. The apparatus of rods, cones, and other structures are absolutely essential to enable light to give that stimulus to the optic nerve which, conveyed to the brain, is converted into visual sensations. So if this apparatus were absent in our organs of vision, in vain would the optic nerve proper be spread out over the interior of the eyeball: we should be no more able to see with such eyes than we are able to see with our hands.

We now invite the reader’s careful consideration to the diagram, Fig. 236, which is a section of the retina through the yellow spot. The upper part of the figure is the front, and the deep depression is the little pit already spoken of—the fovea centralis. The lowest dark line represents the basement membrane of the retina, and immediately above is seen the layer of rods and cones, and the various strata already spoken of are represented in their due order in the marginal parts of the diagram. Now observe the remarkable modifications of the nervous structures in the neighbourhood of the fovea centralis, some of which are visible in the diagram. In the first place, the cones are there much longer, more slender, and more closely set, so that there is a far greater number of them on a given surface; but the rods are comparatively few, and are, in fact, not found at all under the floor of the little pit. The layer of nuclei, into which the cones extend, is thinner, and is found almost immediately below the anterior surface, for all the other layers thin out in the fovea in a very curious manner. It is, however on the margin of the fovea that the stratum of ganglionic cells, G, Fig. 235, attains its greatest thickness, for there it is formed by the superposition of eight or ten cells, being here thicker than any other layer, while it is so thinned off towards the margin of the retina that it no longer forms even a continuous stratum. This layer, however, becomes much thinner in the fovea, which contains, in fact, but few superposed cells. The tint of the yellow spot is said to be derived from a colouring matter, which affects all the layers except that of the cones. The centre of the yellow spot, where the fovea centralis is situated, is extremely transparent, and is so delicate that it is very easily ruptured, and has frequently been taken for an aperture.

We should not have risked wearying the reader with these details concerning the little pit in the centre of the retina had it not possessed an extreme importance in the mechanism of the eye, a fact which he will at once appreciate when we say that of the whole surface of the retina, the only spot where the image of an object can produce distinct vision is the fovea centralis. Since this is undoubtedly true, it follows that the physiological elements which we there find are precisely those which are most essential for producing this effect. The case may be exemplified by recurring to the comparison of the eye with a photographer’s camera, by supposing his screen to be of such a nature that only on one very small spot near its centre could a distinct image be possibly obtained of just one point of an object. Such a defect in his camera would render the photographer’s art impossible, and this defect (if it may be so called) in the eye would render it almost equally useless, had not an adjustment, which more than compensates for it, been afforded in the extreme mobility of our organs of vision. This adjustment is so perfect that people in general do not even suspect that the image of each point of an object which they distinctly see must be formed on one particular spot on the retina—a spot about one-tenth of the diameter of an ordinary pin-head! We may venture, without any disrespect to the reader, to assume that the chances are that it is new to him to learn how each letter in the lines beneath his eye must successively, but momentarily, form its image in the very little pit in the centre of his retina; and the chances are at least a hundred to one that, even if aware of this, he has passively received the statement, and that he has not made the least attempt to realize the truth for himself. Yet nothing is easier. Let him request a friend to slowly peruse some printed page, while he meanwhile intently watches his friend’s eyes. He will then perceive that before a single word can be read there is a movement of the eyeballs, which are, quite unconsciously to the person reading, so directed that the image of each letter (for the area of distinct vision is incapable of receiving more than this at once) shall fall upon the only parts of the retinÆ from which a distinct impression can be conveyed along the optic nerve. Thus it is that the eye, without any conscious effort of the observer, is directed in succession to the various points of an object, and it is only by an effort of will in fixing the eyes upon one spot that one becomes aware of the blurred and confused forms of all the rest of the visual picture. Yet so readily do the eyeballs turn to any part of the indistinct picture on which the attention is fixed, that it is not improbable a person unversed in such experiments, wishing to verify our conclusions by looking, say, at one spot on the opposite wall, will be very apt, in thinking of the features of the rest of the picture, to direct his eyes there, and then declare that he, at least, sees no such vague forms. If such be his experience, the correction is easy. He has only to ask some one to watch closely his eyes while he repeats the experiment, and after a few trials he will succeed in maintaining the requisite immobility of the eyeballs—a condition upon which the success of many such experiments depends.

This extreme mobility of the eyeballs more than compensates for the loss of the clear and well-defined picture, for it calls into action one of the most sensitive of all the impressions of which we are capable, and one which possesses in so high a degree the power of uniting with our other sensations, that this sixth sense has been, as already stated, utterly overlooked, except by the more modern students of the nature of our sensations. It is usually termed the muscular sense, and to it are due some of the nicest distinctions of impressions of which we are capable. The muscles of every part of our frame take their part in producing impressions in our minds, and those of the eyeballs have a very large share in furnishing us with ideas of forms and motions. Fig. 237 is a diagram showing the general arrangement of these muscles; and their anatomical designations, which need not much concern us at present, are given beneath the figure. The wonder is, that the sensations arising from the relative conditions of parts so few, should afford us the immense variety of notions referrible for their origin to these muscles only. We take one example in illustration. Suppose we watch the flight of a bird, at such an elevation that no part of the landscape comes into the field of view at all; and that, again, we follow with the eye, under similar circumstances, the path of a rocket. We can unhesitatingly pronounce the motions unlike, and yet in each case there was no visual impression present but that of the object focussed upon the yellow spot. But the movement of the muscles in one case was different from that in the other. Nay more, we can form such a judgment of the motion as to pronounce that the object followed such and such a curve—we may recognize the parabola in one path, and the circle, perhaps, in the other. And this kind of discrimination arises from the fact, that when we have, maybe times without number, previously looked at parabolas and circles, in diagrams perhaps, the muscles of the eyeballs have performed just the same series of movements, as point after point of the line was made to form its image on the yellow spot. This is not the only class of impressions that these muscles are capable of affording; there is, for example, little doubt that they aid us in estimating distance. But space will not permit further discussion of this subject.

Although the blurred and indefinite retinal picture may be compensated, and perhaps more than compensated, by the readiness with which the eyes move, it is, of course, possible that greater precision and delicacy of visual impression over the whole surface of the retina might be consistent with a still greater increase of our powers of perception. There are instances in which the absence of finish, as it may be termed, in all but one little spot in the picture, proves a real inconvenience and a sensible deprivation. Perhaps a friend calls our attention to the fact that a balloon is sailing through the air, or some fine morning, hearing in the fields the blithe song of the sky-lark, we look up and vainly try to bring the small image upon the place of distinct vision. Now, if an image which falls upon any other part of the retina is perceived, even indistinctly, an instant suffices to direct the eyes into the exact position requisite for clear vision—an example of the marvellous precision with which impressions are put in relation to each other by the unconscious action of the brain. But while an image on the fovea, only 1
6000th of an inch diameter, produces a distinct sensation, it is found that if the image falls on the retina at a point some distance from the yellow spot, the image must be 150 times larger in order to produce any impression; and it is in consequence of the image of balloon or bird not having the requisite size to give any impression to the less sensitive portion of the retina, that we grope blindly, as it were, until by chance the image falls near the yellow spot, when the tentative motion of the eyeballs is instantly arrested, and the image fixed. On the other hand, the field of indistinct vision which the eye takes in is extremely wide, for bright objects are thus perceived, even when their direction forms an angle laterally of nearly 90° with the axis of the eye; and, if the object be not only bright, but in motion, its presence is noticed under such circumstances with still greater ease. Thus, an observer scanning the heavens would have a perception of a shooting star anywhere within nearly half the hemisphere. The range is, however, less than 90° in a vertical direction.

We have said that the fibres of the optic nerve, entering the back part of the eyeball, at K, Fig. 234, ramify over the anterior surface of the retina in fibres which form a layer of considerable relative thickness. The light, therefore, first encounters these nerves, and only after traversing their transparent substance does it reach the deeper seated layer of rods and cones, where it excites some action that is capable of stimulating the optic nerve. These rods and cones might naturally be supposed to be merely accessory to the fibres of the optic nerve, had we not the following conclusive evidence that the cones play a necessary part in the action, and that it is only through them that light acts upon the optic nerve:

1. The cones are more developed and more numerous in the spot where vision is most distinct.

2. The “blind spot” is full of fibres of the optic nerve, but is absolutely insensible to light, and is without rods or cones.

3. We can distinguish an image on the fovea, having only 1
6000th of an inch diameter; but on the other parts of the retina the images must have larger dimensions. It is found that the size of the smallest distinguishable images agrees nearly with the diameters of the cones at the respective parts.

To some readers the fact will doubtless be new, that a considerable portion of the eye is quite insensible to light, namely, that portion already designated as the “blind spot.” A simple experiment, made by help of Fig. 238, will prove this. Place the book so that the length of the figure may be parallel to the line joining the eyes, and let the right eye be exactly opposite the white cross, and at a distance from it of about 11 in. If the left eye be now closed, while with the right the cross is steadily viewed so that it is always clear and distinct, the white circle will completely disappear, and the ground will appear of a uniform black colour. In order to insure success, the observer must be careful not to look at the white circle, but at the cross, and some persons find this more difficult than others. The position of the blind spot in the eye has been already mentioned, and its significance in showing the insensibility to light of the fibres of the optic nerve has been pointed out. In the table of the dimensions of some parts of the eye, which, for convenience of reference, is given together below, it will be seen that the diameter of the blind spot is considerable compared with the size of the retina, its greatest diameter being about 8
100 in. The length on the retina of the image of a man at a distance of 6 ft. or 7 ft. is not greater than this, so that in a certain position with regard to the eye a person would, like the white circle, be quite invisible. In like manner, by looking steadily in a certain direction with one eye, the image of the full moon may be made to fall upon the blind spot, and the luminary then becomes invisible, and would be so even if its apparent diameter were eleven times greater; so that if we suppose eleven full moons ranged in a line, the whole would be quite invisible to a person looking towards a certain point of the sky at no great angular distance from them.

The following are the dimensions in English inches of some parts of the eye:

By means of an instrument to be presently described, the ophthalmoscope, it is possible to view directly the whole surface of the retina, and to observe the inverted images of the objects there depicted. It is thus observed that it is only on the parts near the yellow spot that the images are formed with clear and sharp definition. Away from this the definition is less perfect; and besides the diminished sensitiveness of the retina, this circumstance contributes to the vagueness of the visual picture, although the falling off in clearness of vision at a very little distance from the yellow spot is far more marked than the loss of definition in the image there formed.

Until within the last few years it has been most confidently asserted by many authors that the eye, considered as an optical instrument, is absolutely perfect, and entirely free from certain defects to which artificial instruments are liable. Thus Dr. W. B. Carpenter states, in his “Animal Physiology” (1859): “The eye is much more remarkable for its perfection as an optical instrument than we might be led to suppose from the cursory view we have hitherto taken of its functions; for, by the peculiarities of its construction, certain faults and defects are avoided, to which all ordinary optical instruments are liable.” Among the imperfections which are completely corrected in the eye, he names “spherical aberration” and “chromatic aberration”—both of which give rise to certain defects in optical instruments. But by recent careful investigations it has been conclusively shown that the eye is not free from chromatic aberration; that it has defects analogous to spherical aberration; and that there are, besides, certain optical imperfections in its structure, which are avoided in the artificial instruments. Professor Helmholtz, one of the most distinguished of German mathematicians, physicists, and physiologists, whose great work on “Physiological Optics” is the most complete treatise on the subject which has ever appeared, is so far from considering the eye as possessed of all optical perfections that he remarks that, should an optician send him an instrument having like optical defects, he would feel justified in sending it back. The defects which may be traced in the eye, considered as an optical instrument, do not, however, he admits, detract from the excellence of the eye considered as the organ of vision.

When we find that Sir Isaac Newton pointed out the chromatic aberration of the eye two centuries ago—when we find that D’Alembert, in 1767, proved that the lenses of the eye might have as great a dispersive power as glass without the want of achromatism necessarily becoming noticeable—when we find that the celebrated optician Dolland, the inventor of the achromatic lens, showed that the refractions which take place in the eye all tend to bring the violet rays towards the axis more than the red—when we find that Maskelyne the astronomer, Wollaston the physicist, Fraunhofer the optician, and other scarcely less distinguished men of science, have made actual measurements of the distances of the foci in the human eye for the different rays of the spectrum—when we find how these defects have so long ago been observed, examined, and measured as to their amount—the persistence with which writer after writer has asserted the achromatism of the human eye appears so extraordinary, that it can only be accounted for by the prevalence of the preconceived notion that the eye is absolutely perfect—a notion not without its reason and grounds, in the fact of the exquisite adaptation of the organ of sight to the needs of humanity.

Although the want of achromatism in the eye thus escapes ordinary notice, it is, on the other hand, easy to render it evident by simple experiments. If, for example, we view from a certain distance the solar spectrum projected on a white screen, it will be found that, when we see the red end quite distinctly, the violet end will, at the same time, appear vague and confused, and vice versÂ. The author believes that the following very simple experiment will at once convince any person that the fact is as stated. Procure a small piece of blue or violet stained glass, and another piece of red glass, and, having cut out of an opaque screen a rectangular opening, say ½ in. long and ¼ in. wide, place the glasses close to it, so that one-half the opening is covered by the red glass and the other half by the violet glass, the two being placed so that, on looking through the screen, a violet square and a red square are visible. The opaque screen may be made of black paper, cardboard, or tinfoil, and the edges of the opening must be cut perfectly even. On looking through this arrangement, held at a distance of about two feet from the eye, both squares may be seen distinctly by a person of ordinary vision; but, at a distance of five inches from the eye, he will find it impossible to see the squares otherwise than with vague and ill-defined edges. This is because the crystalline lens cannot adapt its curvature so as to bring the rays from the object to a focus on the retina. Now, by trial, the nearest distance at which each of the coloured squares becomes visible may be found, and it will be observed, that the violet square is first sharply defined at a less distance than the red, whereas, if the eye brought the red and violet rays to a focus at the same point, the smallest distance of distinct vision would coincide in both cases.

The reader may observe the same fact for himself, in even a still simpler manner, by turning to Fig. 238, page 461. When the white circle is viewed by one eye, at a distance of about a foot, and an opaque screen, such as a coin, is held close to the eye, so that the pupil is half covered by it, the one side of the white circle will appear bordered by a narrow fringe of blue, and the other side by a narrow fringe of orange. If the opaque screen be shifted from one side of the pupil to the other, the colours will change places, the orange appearing always on the same side of the white circle as the screen is held before the eye. The same appearances are presented in a still more marked degree when the full moon is made the subject of the experiment.

The diagram, Fig. 239, shows the course of the red and violet rays from a luminous point, A, the refraction being supposed to take place at B₁ B₂. The violet rays after refraction form the cone, B₁, E, B₂, and E is their focus; the red rays form the cone, B₁, F, B₂, and have a focus at F. The position of the retina would be intermediate between E and F, and is indicated by C₁, C₂. It will be noticed that the violet rays cross, and are received on the retina in the same circle, G G, so that the colours, then blended, would be separately imperceptible; but the point would produce a diffused circular image of the blended colours.

In viewing an object—the moon, for example—the accommodation of the eye is like that indicated in the diagram. The distinct image due to the red rays would be formed behind the retina, and that due to the violet rays would be in front of it. In the image on the retina the most intense rays—such as the orange, yellow, and green—are those which are blended by the adjustment of the eye, and the red and violet form images more out of focus (to use a common expression), and a very little larger than the more intense image. We might expect that a white disc would therefore appear with a fringe of colour, resulting from a mixture of red and violet; but the fringe is too narrow, and the colour itself too feeble, to become perceptible. When, however, the pupil of the eye is half covered, the red and violet images are displaced in different directions, the position of the retina being too far forward for the one, and too far back for the other. The coincidence therefore ceasing, the colours show themselves at the margins of the image.

The non-perception under ordinary circumstances of the chromatic aberration of the eye is largely due to the greater intensity of the colours which differ least in their refrangibilities. The clearness of our vision does not, therefore, practically suffer from this defect of the eye. Professor Helmholtz constructed lenses which rendered his eyes really achromatic, and looking through these when the pupil was half covered, no coloured fringes were seen at the edges of dark or light objects, or when the objects were looked at with an imperfect accommodation of the eye. He was, however, unable to detect any increase of clearness or distinctness of vision by the correction.

The eye is also subject to other aberrations and irregular refractions, which are special to itself; for example, with moderately illuminated objects the crystalline lens produces images apparently well defined, and nothing is visible to suggest the absence of uniformity in its structure. But when the light is intense, and concentrated in a small object surrounded by a dark field, the irregular structure of the crystalline lens shows itself in the most marked manner. Every one must have noticed the appearance presented by the distant street-lamps on a dark night, and by the stars. The latter we know to be for us mere points of light, and their images produced by perfect lenses would also be mere points; instead of which we see what seem to be rays issuing from the star, an appearance which has given rise to the ordinary representation of a star as a figure having several rays. That no such rays actually do emanate from the real star may be easily proved: first, by concealing the luminous point from view, by means of a small object held up as a screen. If the rays had any existence outside of the eye, they would still be seen; instead of which, the whole of them disappear when the luminous point, or, in the case of the street-lamp, when the flame, is covered by the screen. A second proof that the origin of the phenomenon is in the eye, and not in the object, is afforded by the fact that if, while attentively observing the rays, we incline the head, the rays turn with the eyes, so that when the head is resting on the shoulder the ray which appeared vertical becomes horizontal. The cause of these divergences from the regular image lies in the fact of the crystalline lens being built up of fibres which have refractive powers somewhat different from that of the intermediate substance. These fibres are arranged in layers parallel to the surfaces of the crystalline lens, and the direction of the fibres in each layer is generally from the centre to the circumference; but towards the axis they form, by bending, a kind of six-rayed figure, as shown in Fig. 240, which represents the arrangement of the fibres of the external layers of the lens. In the outermost layers the branches of the star-shaped figure are subdivided into secondary branches, which give rise to more complicated figures. When we view by night a very brilliant but small light, even these subdivisions may be traced in the radiating figure.

The light which enters the eye is partly absorbed by the black pigment of the choroid, and partly sent back by diffused reflection from the retina through the crystalline lens and pupil. The image of a luminous body as depicted on the retina of another person cannot be seen by us under ordinary circumstances, because, by the principle of reversibility already mentioned as of universal application in optics, the rays which issue from the retinal images are refracted on leaving the eye, and follow the same paths by which they entered it, so that they are sent back to the object. An observer cannot see the retinal image of a candle in another person’s eye, unless he allows the rays to enter his own, and this cannot be done directly, because the head of the observer would be interposed between the candle and the eye observed, and the light would then be intercepted. By holding a piece of unsilvered plate glass vertically, we may reflect the light of a candle into the eye of another person, and then the light thrown out from the retinal image of the candle will, on again meeting the surface of the glass, be in part reflected to its source, and in part pass through the glass, on the other side of which it may be received into the eye of an observer. The positions of the observed and observing eye may be described as exactly opposite to and near each other, while the candle is placed to one side in the plane separating the two eyes, and the glass is held so that it forms an angle of 45° with the line joining the pupils. Under these circumstances the observer may see the light at the back of the eye, but he will not be able to distinguish anything clearly, because his own eye cannot accommodate itself so as to bring to a focus the rays coming from the retina of the other, since these rays are refracted by the media through which they emerge. But, by means of suitable lenses interposed between the two eyes, the retina and all its details may be distinctly seen and examined. Such an arrangement of lenses and a reflecting surface constitute the instrument called the ophthalmoscope (?f?a???, the eye) of which there are many forms, but all constructed on the principle just indicated. This principle was first pointed out by Helmholtz, who described the first ophthalmoscope in 1851.

Ruete’s ophthalmoscope is represented in Fig. 241. The parts of the instrument are supported on a stand, C, and about the vertical axis of this the column, D, and the arms, H and K, can turn freely and independently; E is a concave metallic mirror, about 3 in. in diameter, and having an aperture in its centre through which the observer, B, looks. The arm, H, merely carries a black opaque screen, which serves to shield the eye of B from the light of the lamp, and to reduce, if required, the amount of light passing through the aperture in the mirror. The arm, K, which is about a foot in length, carries two uprights which slide along it, and in each of these slides a rod bearing a lens, which can thus be adjusted into any required position. The instrument is used in an apartment where all light but that of the lamp can be excluded. In the instrument just described an inverted image is obtained, which is sufficient for ordinary medical purposes, but this construction does not allow of the examination of retinal images, which is best performed with an instrument having a plane mirror.

The appearance presented by the back of the eye when viewed in the ophthalmoscope is represented in Fig. 242. The retina appears red, except at the place where the optic nerve enters, which is white. On the reddish ground the retinal blood-vessels can be distinguished; A, A, A, branches of the retinal artery, have a brighter red colour, and more strongly reflect the light than the branches, B, B, B, of the retinal vein. Among these, and especially towards the margin, are seen, more or less distinctly, the broader vessels of the choroid. Above the optic nerve and a little to the right may be observed the fovea centralis.

Fig. 242.