Letters on Natural Magic; Addressed to Sir Walter Scott, Bart. David Sir Brewster

instrument been known to the ancients, it would doubtless have formed a powerful engine of delusion in their temples, and might have been more effective than the optical means which they seem to have employed for producing the apparitions of their gods.

      In certain diseased conditions of the eye, effects of a very remarkable kind are produced. The faculty of seeing objects double is too common to be noticed as remarkable; and though it may take place with only one eye, yet, as it generally arises from a transient inability to direct the axis of both eyes to the same point, it excites little notice. That state of the eye, however, in which we lose sight of half of every object at which we look, is more alarming and more likely to be ascribed to the disappearance of part of the object than to a defect of sight. Dr. Wollaston, who experienced this defect twice, informs us that, after taking violent exercise, he “suddenly found that he could see but half of a man whom he met, and that on attempting to read the name of JOHNSON over a door, he saw only SON, the commencement of the name being wholly obliterated from his view.” In this instance, the part of the object which disappeared was towards his left; but on a second occurrence of the same affection, the part which disappeared was towards his right. There are many occasions on which this defect of the eye might alarm the person who witnessed it for the first time. At certain distances from the eye one of two persons would necessarily disappear; and by a slight change of position either in the observer or the person observed, the person that vanished would reappear, while the other would disappear in his turn. The circumstances under which these evanescences would take place could not be supposed to occur to an ordinary observer, even if he should be aware that the cause had its origin in himself. When a phenomenon so strange is seen by a person in perfect health, as it generally is, and who has never had occasion to distrust the testimony of his senses, he can scarcely refer it to any other cause than a supernatural one.

      Among the affections of the eye which not only deceive the person who is subject to them, but those also who witness their operation, may be enumerated the insensibility of the eye to particular colours. This defect is not accompanied with any imperfection of vision, or connected with any disease either of a local or a general nature, and it has hitherto been observed in persons who possess a strong and a sharp sight. Mr. Huddart has described the case of one Harris, a shoemaker at Maryport in Cumberland, who was subject to this defect in a very remarkable degree. He seems to have been insensible to every colour, and to have been capable of recognizing only the two opposite tints of black and white. “His first suspicion of this defect arose when he was about four years old. Having by accident found in the street a child’s stocking, he carried it to a neighbouring house to inquire for the owner. He observed the people call it a red stocking, though he did not understand why they gave it that denomination, as he himself thought it completely described by being called a stocking. The circumstance, however, remained in his memory, and, with other subsequent observations, led him to the knowledge of his defect. He observed also, that when young, other children could discern cherries on a tree by some pretended difference of colour, though he could only distinguish them from the leaves by their difference of size and shape. He observed also, that by means of this difference of colour, they could see the cherries at a greater distance than he could, though he could see other objects at as great a distance as they, that is, where the sight was not assisted by the colour.” Harris had two brothers, whose perception of colours was nearly as defective as his own. One of these, whom Mr. Huddart examined, constantly mistook light green for yellow, and orange for grass green.

      Mr. Scott has described, in the Philosophical Transactions, his own defect in perceiving colours. He states that he does not know any green in the world; that a pink colour and a pale blue are perfectly alike; that he has often thought a full red and a full green a good match; that he is sometimes baffled in distinguishing a full purple from a deep blue, but that he knows light, dark, and middle yellows, and all degrees of blue except sky-blue. “I married my daughter to a genteel, worthy man, a few years ago; the day before the marriage, he came to my house dressed in a new suit of fine cloth clothes. I was much displeased that he should come, as I supposed, in black, and said that he should go back to change his colour. But my daughter said, No, no; the colour is very genteel; that it was my eyes that deceived me. He was a gentleman of the law, in a fine, rich, claret-coloured dress, which is as much black to my eyes as any black that ever was dyed.” Mr. Scott’s father, his maternal uncle, one of his sisters, and her two sons, had all the same imperfection. Dr. Nichol has recorded a case where a naval officer purchased a blue uniform coat and waistcoat with red breeches to match the blue, and Mr. Harvey describes the case of a tailor at Plymouth, who on one occasion repaired an article of dress with crimson in place of black silk, and on another patched the elbow of a blue coat with a piece of crimson cloth. It deserves to be remarked that our celebrated countrymen, the late Mr. Dugald Stewart, Mr. Dalton, and Mr. Troughton, have a similar difficulty in distinguishing colours. Mr. Stewart discovered this defect when one of his family was admiring the beauty of a Siberian crab-apple, which he could not distinguish from the leaves but by its form and size. Mr. Dalton cannot distinguish blue from pink, and the solar spectrum consists only of two colours, yellow and blue. Mr. Troughton regards red ruddy pinks, and brilliant oranges, as yellows, and greens as blues, so that he is capable only of appreciating blue and yellow colours.

      In all those cases which have been carefully studied, at least in three of them, in which I have had the advantage of making personal observations, namely, those of Mr. Troughton, Mr. Dalton, and Mr. Liston, the eye is capable of seeing the whole of the prismatic spectrum, the red space appearing to be yellow. If the red space consisted of homogeneous or simple red rays, we should be led to infer that the eyes in question were not insensible to red light, but were merely incapable of discriminating between the impressions of red and yellow light. I have lately shown, however, that the prismatic spectrum consists of three equal and coincident spectra of red, yellow, and blue light, and consequently, that much yellow and a small portion of blue light exist in the red space; and hence it follows, that those eyes which see only two colours, viz. yellow and blue, in the spectrum, are really insensible to the red light of the spectrum, and see only the yellow with the small portion of blue with which the red is mixed. The faintness of the yellow light which is thus seen in the red space, confirms the opinion that the retina has not appreciated the influence of the simple red rays.

      If one of the two travellers who, in the fable of the chameleon, are made to quarrel about the colour of that singular animal, had happened to possess this defect of sight, they would have encountered at every step of their journey, new grounds of dissension, without the chance of finding an umpire who could pronounce a satisfactory decision. Under certain circumstances, indeed, the arbiter might set aside the opinions of both the disputants, and render it necessary to appeal to some higher authority,

      ---- to beg he’d tell them if he knew

      Whether the thing was red or blue.

      Fig. 2.

      In the course of writing the preceding observations an ocular illusion occurred to myself of so extraordinary a nature, that I am convinced it never was seen before, and I think it far from probable that it will ever be seen again. Upon directing my eyes to the candles that were standing before me, I was surprised to observe, apparently among my hair, and nearly straight above my head, and far without the range of vision, a distinct image of one of the candles inclined about 45° to the horizon, as shown at A in Fig. 2. The image was as distinct and perfect as if it had been formed by reflection from a piece of mirror glass, though of course much less brilliant, and the position of the image proved that it must be formed by reflection from a perfectly flat and highly polished surface. But where such a surface could be placed, and how, even if it were fixed, it could reflect the image of the candle up through my head, were difficulties not a little perplexing. Thinking that it might be something lodged in the eyebrow, I covered it up from the light, but the image still retained its place. I then examined the eyelashes with as little success, and was driven to the extreme supposition that a crystallization was taking place in some part of the aqueous