p. 94 | Objections answered

Publishing Committee · Rochester, N. Y. · Oct 14, 1852

Objections answered.

Obj. I.—It is objected by some, that the aurora borealis has been but a common event in all ages of the world, and of course wholly unsuitable as a latter day signal sign of the judgment at hand.

To this objection, I reply, that it is certainly a human assertion and not capable of proof from history, either sacred or profane. And as authentic proof of what I now say, all my readers will bear witness that the Bible contains no history of the early occurrence of this wonderful phenomena, although the prophets foretell it as belonging only to the last days. Again, there is much proof aside from the Bible, which alone is sufficient, that the Aurora is but of recent origin. Such as the following.

A lady, by the name of Willard, resided in Saybrook, Ct., from infancy to old age, informed me at her dwelling, not long since, that her grandmother had often stated in her hearing, that the first of this phenomenon in that place, was in the year 1730, and as understood, the inhabitants of the town had no knowledge of their previous occurrence. The precise date of the fearful sight, the old lady recollected from the memorable fact, that a Mr. Abiel Lord was to have been married on the evening of this alarming appearance in the heavens, and that the wedding was broken

up by the fright of the guests and parties on the occasion, the ceremony being performed the next day, when the sight was past, and their apprehensions of the judgment day just upon them, had abated.

It is recorded however, in some of the writings of the venerable Noah Webster, LLD., of New Haven Ct., recently deceased, that the first appearance of the Northern lights in America, was some ten or twelve years earlier than as attested above; and be it so, they both agree, in the very modern exhibition of this phenomenon in America, so far as is known.

Again, I have of late found an ancient American book, filled with this very subject, which also settles the question that this phenomenon is modern, rather than ancient, so far as witnessed in our country especially. It is a small volume of five sermons on the text—"Fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven." Luke xxi, 11. Its spelling, type and all, show it as among the earliest printed books of America, and dated on two title pages, as published at Boston, 1680. These sermons were delivered by the far known Increase Mather, D. D., then a Congregational minister, and father of the celebrated Dr. Cotten Mather, both of Boston, Mass., and believers in Christ’s Second Advent at hand. In these sermons throughout, the writer adheres closely to his text, and attempts to show, even without the Northern lights, that the foretold "Fearful Sights" &c., had then already been witnessed in the heavens, as a premonition of the judgment at hand, when the Lord would "come down with a long besom of destruction to sweep away a world of sinners before it." And as appears in his work, he had searched over the histories of all ages, and so far as then to be found, he could find nothing answering to the Northern lights, which lights, as we have seen, did not appear in America until some thirty or forty years after that date. And yet, he had found in history, accounts of several blazing stars, which he supposed had sufficiently the appearance at times, of "blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke" in the heavens, to render them the fulfilling of such prophetic signs of the great day at hand. One of those fiery comets was blazing in the heavens at the time of, and occasioned his last discourse, which discourse, he called, "HEAVEN’S ALARM TO THE WORLD." But,

It is further objected, and said, that there is abundant proof from history, that the Aurora Borealis is really ancient, and a distinguished Professor has publicly answered, when inquiry was made of him, that Mairan, a French writer, gives a detailed account of them, from the earliest ages."

I answer, that this work and others written even since the Aurora first appeared in America, is not satisfactory testimony, because it really proves the antiquity of this phenomenon, no more than any present printed declarations could do it, unless some more anciently written work authorizing it, can be presented.—And here it may be stated, that it is nearly four years since I have called publicly on the opponents of my position, to bring forward the real ancient book, of some two hundred years old, recording the previous occurrence of this phenomenon, or tell us where we may find it; and yet the thing is not done; which greatly strengthens my former presumption that they know indeed, of no such books.

The most anciently published history of this phenomenon which I have yet seen, is contained in a large one volume 8vo. "DICTIONARY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES," published in London, just about eighty years ago. This, like others published since, gives a full account of the first occurrence of this phenomenon at London, in March, 1716, and states expressly, that the oldest inhabitant there, at that time, had never seen, nor heard of the like before. The writer, after giving some six or eight pages on the subject, concludes his account by giving a list of writings he had found, concerning it, the oldest of which was a magazine in London for the above year of 1716, and the next were files of the same paper for ten years following; with other works written afterward. We sometimes receive as an answer to our argument, seemingly for want of a better, that there being no really anciently published history of these phenomena, is no proof after all, against their antiquity; because, as it is said, they could have appeared in all ages, without being recorded in history, till in modern times. But we see, that in 1716, and ever since, the moment any such wonder is seen in the heavens, it becomes the subject of interesting remark and history, certainly among the learned and curious, which wonder, from the same propensity of such men, would naturally have been equally noticed, and published, before 1716, in London, had it been previously witnessed there.

THE OBJECTION against our position, drawn from the alleged great antiquity of the Aurora Borealis, will now be further met, by an appeal to some of our very modern and most popular writers on the subject, on whom our objectors mainly rely, though we consider them incompetent to testify, if they would, to the great antiquity of the phenomenon. Having examined several of these writers in Encyclopedias and other books, and finding them substantially agreed on the point at issue, I would quote now, fairly, and briefly, as follows:

"The most unaccountable of all the circumstances respecting the Aurora Borealis is, that it is not much more than a century since this phenomenon has been observed with any degree of frequency in our latitudes. We find, indeed, a few atmospheric phenomena recorded by the ancients, which may be regarded as examples of this meteor. But with trifling exceptions, the whole of antiquity is absolutely silent on this subject.

"Dr. Halley informs us that he had begun to despair of witnessing this beautiful phenomenon, when the remarkable Aurora of 1716, made its appearance. This philosopher has given us a historical detail of the several observations of this meteor, in which he says the first of it on record in an English work, is a book entitled, ‘A Description of Meteors, by W. F., D. D.’ reprinted at London in 1654, which speaks of burning spears being seen Jan. 30th, 1560. The next appearance of a like kind is recorded by Stow, and occurred in Oct. 7, 1564. In 1574, according to Stow and Camden, an Aurora was seen for two successive nights, viz: the 14th, and 15th of November. The same phenomenon was twice seen in Brabant, in 1575 on the 13th of Feb. and the 28th of Sept., and the circumstances accompanying it were described by Cornelius Gemma, who compares them to spears, fortified cities, and armies fighting in the air. In 1580 and 1581, this phenomenon was repeatedly observed at Backrange, in the county of Wirtemberg, in Germany. But from this till 1621, we have no such phenomenon on record, when it was seen all over France on Sept. 2, and is particularly described by Gassendi in his Physics, under the title of Aurora Borealis.

"In Nov., 1623, another was seen all over Germany, and is particularly described by Kepler. Since that time, for more than eighty years, we have no account of any such phenomenon being observed. In 1707 Mr. Neve observed one of short continuance in Ireland, and in the same year, a similar appearance was seen by Romer at Copenhagen, while during an interval of eighteen months, in the years 1707 and 1708, this sort of light had been seen no less than five times.

"The Aurora of 1716, which Dr. Halley particularly describes, was remarkably brilliant. It was also visible over a prodigious tract of country, being seen from the West of Ireland to the confines of Russia and the East of Poland, extending nearly thirty degrees of longitude, and from the fiftieth degree of north latitude, over almost all the north of Europe; and in all places exhibiting, at the same time, appearances similar to those observed in London.

"It appears then to be certainly established that the Aurora was of rare occurrence in our latitudes till about a century ago; for it cannot be supposed that so beautiful and striking a phenomenon would have passed unnoticed and unrecorded during the two preceding centuries, while men of science, and particularly astronomers, were so busily employed in examining every remarkable appearance of the heavens or that the philosophers of Greece and Rome, would have remained silent concerning so beautiful a meteor, had it been in any degree familiarly known to them. It is in vain to account for their silence by saying that they inhabited latitudes which are scarcely ever visited by these appearances, for the Romans not only visited but long resided in the north of Germany and in Britain, where the Aurora is now frequently seen in great splendor.

"The Aurora is by no means confined to the northern hemisphere. In the high southern latitudes it was long ago observed that there is a similar phenomenon; (see Phil. Trans. No. 461, and Vol. 54, No. 53;) and if the existence of the Aurora Australis was in some measure doubtful, it has been fully ascertained by the second voyage around the world, of Capt. Cooke. On Feb. 17, 1773, says Mr. Foster, who accompanied Capt. Cooke in the capacity of Naturalist, in 50 degrees of south latitude, a beautiful phenomenon was observed during the preceding night, which appeared again this, and several following nights.—It consisted of long columns of clear, white light shooting up from the horizon to the eastward, almost to the zenith, and gradually spreading over the whole southern part of the sky." Edinburg Encyclopedia.

Admitting the correctness of the above historic statements concerning these wonderful and "fearful sights," it is at once apparent that they are but of modern origin, and as at present exhibited, not to be traced back further than to 1716.

And admitting that Dr. Halley found an "English work," "Entitled, a description of Meteors, by F. W., D. D.," reprinted at London, 1654, which speaks of burning spears, &c., "Jan. 30, 1560," the reader will see that it says nothing of our present "Wonders" of "blood," "fire," and "smoke," now very falsely called the "Northern Lights." And let it be noticed, also, that Dr. Halley is not here said to have found any other printed book touching any phenomena except that of the "spears" and meteors. And again, it should be noticed, that the "wonders" now under consideration, are not "Northern Lights," any more than Southern; for they are now seen in all points of the compass, and by Capt. Cooke and crew in 50 degrees south latitude. So that if Northern Lights, or white streaks of light, had been seen around the North Pole, a hundred years sooner, as I have no occasion to dispute, it is another thing altogether, and there is, after all, even no alleged proof in these extracts against considering these "wonders in the heavens," as having their origin within less than a century and a half, past.