Autobiography of Sir George Biddell Airy | Page 7

thoroughly versed in the practical working of an Observatory. The
result of this was immediately seen in the improved methods which he
introduced at Greenwich, and which were speedily imitated at other
Observatories. Optics and the Undulatory Theory of Light had been
very favourite subjects with him, and he had written and lectured
frequently upon them. In the construction of the new and powerful
telescopes and other optical instruments required from time to time this
knowledge was very essential, for in its instrumental equipment the
Greenwich Observatory was entirely remodelled during his tenure of
office. And in many of the matters referred to him, as for instance that
of the Lighthouses, a thorough knowledge of Optics was most valuable.
He had made a great study of the theory and construction of clocks, and
this knowledge was invaluable to him at Greenwich in the
establishment of new and more accurate astronomical clocks, and
especially in the improvement of chronometers. He had carefully
studied the theory of pendulums, and had learned how to use them in
his experiments in the Cornish mines. This knowledge he afterwards
utilized very effectively at the Harton Pit in comparing the density of
the Earth's crust with its mean density; and it was very useful to him in

connection with geodetic surveys and experiments on which he was
consulted. And his mechanical knowledge was useful in almost
everything.
The subjects (outside those required for his professional work) in which
he took most interest were Poetry, History, Theology, Antiquities,
Architecture, and Engineering. He was well acquainted with standard
English poetry, and had committed large quantities to memory, which
he frequently referred to as a most valuable acquisition and an
ever-present relief and comfort to his mind. History and theology he
had studied as opportunity offered, and without being widely read in
them he was much at home with them, and his powerful memory made
the most of what he did read. Antiquities and architecture were very
favourite subjects with him. He had visited most of the camps and
castles in the United Kingdom and was never tired of tracing their
connection with ancient military events: and he wrote several papers on
this subject, especially those relating to the Roman invasions of Britain.
Ecclesiastical architecture he was very fond of: he had visited nearly all
the cathedrals and principal churches in England, and many on the
Continent, and was most enthusiastic on their different styles and
merits: his letters abound in critical remarks on them. He was
extremely well versed in mechanics, and in the principles and theory of
construction, and took the greatest interest in large engineering works.
This led to much communication with Stephenson, Brunel, and other
engineers, who consulted him freely on the subject of great works on
which they were engaged: in particular he rendered much assistance in
connection with the construction of the Britannia Bridge over the
Menai Straits. There were various other subjects which he read with
much interest (Geology in particular), but he made no study of Natural
History, and knew very little about it beyond detached facts. His
industry was untiring, and in going over his books one by one it was
very noticeable how large a number of them were feathered with his
paper "marks," shewing how carefully he had read them and referred to
them. His nature was essentially cheerful, and literature of a witty and
humourous character had a great charm for him. He was very fond of
music and knew a great number of songs; and he was well acquainted
with the theory of music: but he was no performer. He did not sketch

freehand but made excellent drawings with his Camera Lucida.
At the time when he took his degree (1823) and for many years
afterwards there was very great activity of scientific investigation and
astronomical enterprise in England. And, as in the times of Flamsteed
and Halley, the earnest zeal of men of science occasionally led to much
controversy and bitterness amongst them. Airy was by no means
exempt from such controversies. He was a man of keen sensitiveness,
though it was combined with great steadiness of temper, and he never
hesitated to attack theories and methods that he considered to be
scientifically wrong. This led to differences with Ivory, Challis, South,
Cayley, Archibald Smith, and others; but however much he might
differ from them he was always personally courteous, and the disputes
generally went no farther than as regarded the special matter in
question. Almost all these controversial discussions were carried on
openly, and were published in the Athenaeum, the Philosophical
Magazine, or elsewhere; for he printed nearly everything that he wrote,
and was very careful in the selection of the most suitable channels for
publication. He regarded it as a duty to popularize as much