pdf - Roger Gaskell Rare Books

4to: a4 (–a1) b–c4 B–2B4 c1, 108 of 109 leaves, pp. [22 of 24], 193 (i.e.
191, 185–6 omitted) [3] (errata on last leaf, verso blank). lacking
the imprimatur leaf a1. Titlepages to books II (on M3) and III
(on V4) dated 1663, divisional title ‘Subterraneous experiments, or,
Observations about cole­mines’ on Z2. Small woodcuts on pp. 13 and
39, full page woodcut on p. 173 and a half page woodcut on p. 175.
1 folding engraved plate (bound as a throwout at the end).
194 x 150mm. Titlepage soiled; light browning and staining in the
upper margins throughout.
Binding: Eighteenth­century half calf over marbled boards. Rebacked
and corners repaired. Plate soiled and a tear repaired on the verso.
Provenance: Errata corrected in a contemporary hand. An eighteenthcentury
owner, one John Ross, has experimented rather clumsily with
the calligraphy of his name and written some words of shorthand and
a rudimentary diagram on pp. 168–171.
First edition. The imprimatur leaf, lacking in this copy, is dated 5 August
1663. Wing P3099; ESTC R19395.
The Wrst English work on microscopy. The Wrst and largest book is taken
up with the descriptions (but only two rudimentary illustrations) of the
microscopic appearance of plants, insects and anatomical structures. The
second book is on ‘mercurial experiments’ that is experiments with the
vacuum tube, conWrming Boyle’s work and reporting Townley’s experiments;
and the third book is on magnetism. A brief appendix on experiments
conducted in mines is followed by an essay on the new philosophy where
he writes: ‘This is the Age wherein (me­thinks) Philosophy comes in with a
spring­tide... I see how all the old Rubbish must be thrown away’ (p. 192).
An early member of the Royal Society (elected in 1661), Power was thus
promoting its programme of experimental reseach, both through his example
and by his rhetoric.
When Hooke’s Micrographia was published in the following year, its
astonishing images diverted attention from Power’s work. Yet Hooke had
been worried that he might have been pre­empted by Power. He wrote
in the introduction to Micrographia: ‘After I had almost compleated these
Pictures and Observations... I was inform’d that the Ingenious Physitian Dr.
Henry Power had made several Microscopical Observations, which had I not
afterwards, upon our interchangable viewing each other’s Papers, found that
they were for the most part diVering from mine, either in the Subject it self,
or in the particulars taken notice of; and that his design was only to print
Observations without Pictures, I had even then suppressed what I had so far
proceeded in’ (g2v).
‘It was the Wrst book in English on microscopy and the Wrst in any language
to describe (along with Xora and fauna) the nature of various metals as seen
through a microscope. Power’s test of Boyle’s “spring of the air” hypothesis
show that he understood the need for precise instruments and that he
could conduct meticulously controlled experiments. Although his work on
microscopy was shortly eclipsed by that of Hooke and Swammerdam, Power
remains important as one who helped materially to realize the principles and
set the standards of inquiry and exposition formulated by the progenitors