Greatest of the Greats. But then the whole history of science would require a volume for its understanding; and that the same may be comprehended in a small compass, I will confine myself to the mention of some points only of a general nature; that will serve to give some notion of a very obscure science. First, they say that the discovery of the circulation of the blood was not originally owing to Harvey’s discovery of the _pulsatio cordis_, or _beat, brevis, extinctus_, but to a simple phenomenon discovered by another man, _viz._ “The breathing pulse;” which though obvious to all that have experienced the pulses and breathings of warm bodies, (as in a hot bath), could not be explained. Next, that the discovery of fermentation is not owing to the famous Hildenbrand, or Agricola, but to some one else. Again, that the discovery of the laws of optics is not owing to such great men as Diogenes, Iccius, and Plinius, the Roman _Physicus_, but to the ingenious Dr. Turner. On which, though it be so, we cannot help smiling, nor is it altogether wonderful, for the ancients (to say the truth) paid little attention to optics, and knew no more of it than we do of alchymy. Next, they say, that to the inventor of a new instrument or apparatus of science we ought not to attribute the discovery of any discovery that may be made thereby; for the reason, they say, that the discovery is really made by the observer; which, however, I think will not be granted by all that are not very ignorant in these matters; as that which we have noticed before, _viz._ “that the existence of the soul was discovered, not by Alexander but by Socrates.” Nor will I go farther with the ancients; but I shall only beg leave to offer this general remark, that if all the experiments and observations of nature are to be denied to others as due to themselves, they will very much lessen, if not entirely take away, the merit of any one who, for example, having himself made a discovery, and thereby acquired some peculiar knowledge of nature, applies and adapts it to common use; but at the same time we ought to consider that the merit is not his, but that of the man that is to use it, who by observing and applying it with diligence to the improvement of his knowledge, in time discovers the cause that produced it. This is to make it evident that it is not the discoverers themselves that are the discoverers; for they discover not by any miraculous faculty, but by their proper natural power of observation and experiment; which if he have not, he can never, in our sense, be said to be a discoverer. §. 35. And though we give credit to men for the discoveries they make in natural philosophy, we cannot but doubt of their being of an entire and ready disposition, so as to be able to execute what they have found out; for a natural philosopher is (they say) one of the most ungrateful men in the world, and is always apt to think what his own labour has cost him, or what return his art is likely to get him. Whereupon it comes to pass that of so many ingenious and learned men that have made this their study, there are not so many hands to bring a discovery to perfection. Nay, some are so modest and low-spirited, as to keep that knowledge to themselves; and some are so rash and presumptuous as to discover it to every body, and are not so content to have been thought to have discovered any thing themselves, but they will be sure to have the whole honour; the consequence whereof is plain, that the reputation of a natural philosopher, which is really to be attributed to the cause of learning and ingenious research, gets more fame by those who do little or nothing than by the inventor himself. And therefore it is that we are told, “that at Rome there were, not long since, a score of learned men that had been employed for above twenty years about such a discovery in chemistry, and had spent above two millions sterling upon the improvement of it; yet so ignorant were they of what was done by any one, that in one and the same month, two of them made different experiments of the same thing.”[2] Which of course was very little to the benefit of mankind; or if to any good, it was little to the good of themselves, of whom we have said before, that the greatest discoverers are as generally the least rewarded for their pains and industry. We may observe the same thing among other ingenious men too, in mechanics: such as men of great abilities, who are very ungrateful to their own workmen, as if the work should ascribe to them, and not to him who set the workmen to work, the whole credit of the invention. Wherefore there is no reason for wonder, that we have so few contrivers and inventors among us, who are of such a temper, as to be able both to plan the work, and bring it to perfection, and yet are very indifferent about the praises of the inventors; and that we never find in the history of inventions that the merit of the contriver exceeds that of the mechanic. For besides the unthankfulness of the inventors, which is a sufficient hindrance of their doing any thing for mankind, they can in nowise make advantage of their own inventions, by any additions that they can invent or procure; which is no more than to leave their effects to the benefit of those that receive them: as if there were not always men left that will take the labour and cost on themselves. As for any greater pains that the inventor himself takes in performing his invention, I cannot consider that as due to him, as he takes them before; for the invention is not his own, but before his time it was his own, and he made it his own by making it public, and therefore makes it not his own by making it a common property. The invention of the compass was first made public, and is the common property of all: so that in all useful inventions made public we have the inventor’s property made common; but this common use of the invention does not give the inventor any further right or property therein, but only hinders others that would appropriate to themselves. I am afraid that if we consider this property of the invention made common to others, we shall have to grant that those who deserve best to share in this world’s goods are the inventors and discoverers; for they have not only so put the rest in their debt, but have in their own persons so much advanced the value of those goods. For in what thing do we know more to the advantage of mankind than inventors do? And if they have not so much to do in this world as some think they have, it is much to be wondered that they do not make haste to get over to that other, which they are so eager for the benefit of their fellows to enter upon, by the quickest way they can find; and it is more to be wondered at that mankind have not a better inclination for them, considering how much it is their own interest to encourage and advance inventors and discoverers. For this is the only way that mankind have left for the getting more out of the earth, and a much more easy way of getting it into the earth, than any other way they have to do it. §. 36. Upon this ground therefore I say, that it would have been as great an advantage to mankind, if they had never had such knowledge of the nature and properties of things, nor had so much knowledge of our own actions. For as it would have been an advantage to them not to have discovered themselves to be born, so it would have been an advantage to them not to have discovered their birth, death, and resurrection, in the use of metals, drugs, plants, herbs, and fruits. As for their inventions, there is one way for men to have obtained their profit from them, without being obliged to the inventors, and that is, if they would have set down in writing all the experiments that had been made in their discovery, for the improvement of others, in so short a time; for which reason I have been told that when Sir Isaac Newton had a notion of the nature of gravitation, he showed it to few men, but by those means perfected it, and laid it as a foundation to his hypothesis. For it is easy to foresee that in sciences (where there are any difficulties) men shall not be much the wiser for what they see; but the benefit must be reaped by the rest of mankind, when those difficulties are cleared. For this end I have said that learning is not to be got by reading books, but observing; and I believe there are more men that cannot find out any one experiment, than can find out any one new experiment that never was known; and yet to the great astonishment of men, they may sometimes give credit to a man that seems to be able and good for all things, only for his skill in discovering that one thing. But herein comes in the great use of letters, whereunto men’s industry is properly directed, which is to discover those experiments that are wanting, as well as to learn those experiments that are common; wherein we may observe the great use of letters in the discoveries of arts and sciences; for when men came to write in a language, they found a great deal of things written before them, which they were not able to find out out of themselves; whereas it could not be expected they