Chapter 7

1. Of greater Moment in the Investigation of the Nature of Colours is the Controversie, Whether those of the Rain-bow, and those that are often seen in Clouds, before the Rising, or after the Setting of the Sun; and in a word, Whether those other Colours, that are wont to be call'd Emphatical, ought or ought not to be accounted True Colours. I need not tell you that the Negative is the Common Opinion, especially in the Schools, as may appear by that Vulgar distinction of Colours, whereby these under Consideration are term'd Apparent, by way of Opposition to those that in the other Member of the Distinction are call'd True or Genuine. This question I say seems to me of Importance, upon this Account, that it being commonly Granted, (or however, easie enough to be Prov'd) that Emphatical Colours are Light it self Modify'd by Refractions chiefly, with a concurrence sometimes of Reflections, and perhaps some other Accidents depending on these two; if these Emphatical Colours be resolv'd to be Genuine, it will seem consequent, that Colours, or at least divers of them, are but Diversify'd Light, and not such Real and Inherent qualities as they are commonly thought to be.

2. Now since we are wont to esteem the Echoes and other Sounds of Bodies, to be True Sounds, all their Odours to be True Odours, and (to be short) since we judge other Sensible Qualities to be True ones, because they are the proper Objects of some or other of our Senses, I see not why Emphatical Colours, being the proper and peculiar Objects of the Organ of Sight, and capable to Affect it as Truly and as Powerfully as other Colours, should be reputed but Imaginary ones.

And if we have (which perchance you'l allow) formerly evinc'd Colour, (when the word is taken in its more Proper sense) to be but Modify'd Light, there will be small Reason to deny these to be true Colours, which more manifestly than others disclose themselves to be produc'd by Diversifications of the Light.

3. There is indeed taken notice of a Difference betwixt these Apparent colours, and those that are wont to be esteem'd Genuine, as to the Duration, which has induc'd some Learned Men to call the former rather Evanid than Fantastical. But as the Ingenious _Gassendus_ does somewhere Judiciously observe, if this way of Arguing were Good, the Greeness of a Leaf ought to pass for Apparent, because, soon Fading into a Yellow, it Scarce lasts at all, in comparison of the Greeness of an Emerauld. I shall add, that if the Sun-beams be in a convenient manner trajected through a Glass-prism, and thrown upon some well-shaded Object within a Room, the Rain-bow thereby Painted on the Surface of the Body that Terminates the Beams, may oftentimes last longer than Some Colours I have produc'd in certain Bodies, which would justly, and without scruple be accounted Genuine Colours, and yet suddenly Degenerate, and lose their Nature.

4. A greater Disparity betwixt Emphatical Colours, and others, may perhaps be taken from this, that Genuine Colours seem to be produc'd in Opacous Bodies by Reflection, but Apparent ones in Diaphanous Bodies, and principally by Refraction, I say Principally rather than Solely, because in some cases Reflection also may concurr, but still this seems not to conclude these Latter Colours not to be True ones. Nor must what has been newly said of the Differences of True and Apparent Colours, be interpreted in too Unlimited a Sense, and therefore it may perhaps somewhat Assist you, both to Reflect upon the two fore-going Objections, and to judge of some other Passages which you'l meet with in this Tract, if I take this Occasion to observe to you, that if Water be Agitated into Froth, it exhibits you know a White colour, which soon after it Loses upon the Resolution of the Bubbles into Air and Water, now in this case either the Whiteness of the Froth is a True Colour or not, if it be, then True Colours, supposing the Water pure and free from Mixtures of any thing Tenacious, may be as Short-liv'd as those of the Rain-bow; also the Matter, wherein the Whiteness did Reside, may in a few moments perfectly Lose all foot-steps or remains of it. And besides, even Diaphanous Bodies may be capable of exhibiting True Colours by Reflection, for that Whiteness is so produc'd, we shall anon make it probable. But if on the other side it be said, that the Whiteness of Froth is an Emphatical Colour, then it must no longer be said, that Fantastical Colours require a certain Position of the Luminary and the Eye, and must be Vary'd or Destroy'd by the Change thereof, since Froth appears White, whether the Sun be Rising or Setting, or in the Meridian, or any where between it and the Horizon, and from what (Neighbouring) place soever the Beholders Eye looks upon it. And since by making a Liquor Tenacious enough, yet without Destroying its Transparency, or Staining it with any Colour, you may give the Little Films, whereof the Bubbles consist, such a Texture, as may make the Froth last very many Hours, if not some Days, or even Weeks, it will render it somewhat Improper to assign Duration for the Distinguishing Character to Discriminate Genuine from Fantastical Colours. For such Froth may much outlast the Undoubtedly true Colours of some of Nature's Productions, as in that Gaudy Plant not undeservedly call'd the Mervail of _Peru_, the Flowers do often Fade, the same Day they are Blown; And I have often seen a _Virginian_ Flower, which usually Withers within the compass of a Day; and I am credibly Inform'd, that not far from hence a curious Herborist has a Plant, whose Flowers perish in about an Hour. But if the Whiteness of Water turn'd into Froth must therefore be reputed Emphatical, because it appears not that the Nature of the Body is Alter'd, but only that the Disposition of its Parts in reference to the Incident Light is Chang'd, why may not the Whiteness be accounted Emphatical too, which I shall shew anon to be Producible, barely by such another change in Black Horn? and yet this so easily acquir'd Whiteness seems to be as truly its Colour as the Blackness was before, and at least is more Permanent than the Greenness of Leaves, the Redness of Roses, and, in short, than the Genuine Colours of the most part of Nature's Productions. It may indeed be further Objected, that according as the Sun or other Luminous Body changes place, these Emphatical Colours alter or vanish. But not to repeat what I have just now said, I shall add, that if a piece of Cloath in a Drapers Shop (in such the Light being seldome Primary) be variously Folded, it will appear of differing Colours, as the Parts happen to be more Illuminated or more Shaded, and if you stretch it Flat, it will commonly exhibit some one Uniform Colour, and yet these are not wont to be reputed Emphatical, so that the Difference seems to be chiefly this, that in the Case of the Rain-bow, and the like, the Position of the Luminary Varies the Colour, and in the Cloath I have been mentioning, the Position of the Object does it. Nor am I forward to allow that in all Cases the Apparition of Emphatical Colours requires a Determinate position of the Eye, for if Men will have the Whiteness of Froth Emphatical, you know what we have already Inferr'd from thence. Besides, the Sun-beams trajected through a Triangular Glass, after the manner lately mention'd, will, upon the Body that Terminates them, Paint a Rain-bow, that may be seen whether the Eye be plac'd on the Right Hand of it or the Left, or Above or Beneath it, or Before or Behind it; and though there may appear some Little Variation in the Colours of the Rain-bow, beheld from Differing parts of the Room, yet such a Diversity may be also observ'd by an Attentive Eye in Real Colours, look'd upon under the like Circumstances, Nor will it follow, that because there remains no Footsteps of the Colour upon the Object, when the Prism is Remov'd, that therefore the Colour was not Real, since the Light was truly Modify'd by the Refraction and Reflection it Suffer'd in its Trajection through the Prism; and the Object in our case serv'd for a Specular Body, to Reflect that Colour to the Eye. And that you may not be Startled, _Pyrophilus_, that I should Venture to say, that a Rough and Coiour'd Object may serve for a _Speculum_ to Reflect the Artificial Rain-bow I have been mentioning, consider what usually happens in Darkned Rooms, where a Wall, or other Body conveniently Situated within, may so Reflect the Colours of Bodies, without the Room, that they may very clearly be Discern'd and Distinguish'd, and yet 'tis taken for granted, that the Colours seen in a Darkned Room, though they leave no Traces of themselves upon the Wall or Body that Receives them, are the True Colours of the External Objects, together with which the Colours of the Images are Mov'd or do Rest. And the Errour is not in the Eye, whose Office is only to perceive the Appearances of things, and which does Truly so, but in the Judging or Estimative faculty, which Mistakingly concludes that Colour to belong to the Wall, which does indeed belong to the Object, because the Wall is that from whence the Beams of Light that carry the Visible _Species_, do come in Straight Lines directly to the Eye, as for the same Reason we are wont at a certain Distance from Concave Sphærical Glasses, to perswade our Selves that we see the Image come forth to Meet us, and Hang in the Air betwixt the Glass and Us, because the Reflected Beams that Compose the image cross in that place, where the Image seems to be, and thence, and not from the Glass, do in Direct Lines take their Course to the Eye, and upon the like Cause it is, that divers Deceptions in Sounds and other Sensible Objects do depend, as we elsewhere declare.

5. I know not, whether I need add, that I have purposely Try'd, (as you'l find some Pages hence, and will perhaps think somewhat strange) that Colours that are call'd Emphatical, because not Inherent in, the Bodies in which they Appear, may be Compounded with one another, as those that are confessedly Genuine may. But when all this is said, _Pyrophilus_, I must Advertise you, that it is but Problematically Spoken, and that though I think the Opinion I have endeavour'd to fortifie Probable, yet a great part of our Discourse concerning Colours may be True, whether that Opinion be so or not.

* * * * *

CHAP. V.

1. There are you know, _Pyrophilus_, besides those Obsolete Opinions about Colours which have been long since Rejected, very Various Theories that have each of them, even at this day, Eminent Men for its Abetters; for the Peripatetick Schools, though they dispute amongst themselves divers particulars concerning Colours, yet in this they seem Unanimously enough to Agree, that Colours are Inherent and Real Qualities, which the Light doth but Disclose, and not concurr to Produce. Besides there are _Moderns_, who with a slight Variation adopt the Opinion of _Plato_, and as he would have Colour to be nothing but a Kind of Flame consisting of Minute Corpuscles as it were Darted by the Object against the Eye, to whose Pores their Littleness and Figure made them congruous, so these would have Colour to be an Internal Light of the more Lucid parts of the Object, Darkned and consequently Alter'd by the Various Mixtures of the less Luminous parts. There are also others, who in imitation of some of the Ancient _Atomists_, make Colour not to be Lucid steam, but yet a Corporeal _Effluvium_ issuing out of the Colour'd Body, but the Knowingst of these have of late Reform'd their Hypothesis, by acknowledging and adding that some External Light is necessary to Excite, and as _they_ speak, Sollicit these Corpuscles of Colour as _they_ call them, and Bring them to the Eye. Another and more principal Opinion of the _Modern_ Philosophers, to which this last nam'd may by a Favourable explication be reconcil'd, is that which derives Colours from the Mixture of Light and Darkness, or rather Light and Shadows. And as for the _Chymists_ 'tis known, that the generality of them ascribes the Origine of Colours to the Sulphureous Principle in Bodies, though I find, as I elsewhere largely shew, that some of the Chiefest of them derive Colours rather from Salt than Sulphur, and others, from the third Hypostatical Principle, _Mercury_. And as for the _Cartesians_ I need not tell you, that they, supposing the Sensation of Light to bee produc'd by the Impulse made upon the Organs of Sight, by certain extremely Minute and Solid Globules, to which the Pores of the Air and other Diaphanous bodies are pervious, endeavour to derive the Varieties of Colours from the Various Proportion of the Direct Progress or Motion of these Globules to their Circumvolution or Motion about their own Centre, by which Varying Proportion they are by this Hypothesis suppos'd qualify'd to strike the Optick Nerve after several Distinct manners, so to produce the perception of Differing Colours.

2. Besides these six principal Hypotheses, _Pyrophilus_, there may be some others, which though Less known, may perhaps as well as thesc deserve to be taken into consideration by you; but that I should copiously debate any of them at present, I presume you will not expect, if you consider the Scope of these Papers, and the Brevity I have design'd in them, and therefore I shall at this time only take notice to you in the general of two or three things that do more peculiarly concern the Treatise you have now in your hands.

3. And first, though the Embracers of the Several Hypotheses I have been naming to you, by undertaking each Sect of them to explicate Colours indefinitely, by the particular Hypotheses they maintain, seem to hold it forth as the only Needful Theory about that Subject, yet for my part I doubt whether any one of all these Hypotheses have a right to be admitted Exclusively to all others, for I think it Probable, that Whiteness and Blackness may be explicated by Reflection alone without Refraction, as you'l find endeavour'd in the Discourse you'l meet with e're long Of the Origine of Whiteness and Blackness, and on the other side, since I have not found that by any Mixture of White and True Black, (for there is a Blewish Black which many mistake for a Genuine) there can be a Blew, a Yellow, or a Red, to name no other Colours, produced, and since we do find that these Colours may be produc'd in the Glass-prism and other Transparent bodies, by the help of Refractions, it seems that Refraction is to be taken in into the Explication of some Colours, to whose Generation they seem to concurr, either by making a further or other Commixture of Shades with the Refracted Light, or by some other way not now to be discours'd. And as it seems not improbable, that in case the Pores of the Air, and other Diaphanous bodies be every where almost fill'd with such _Globuli_ as the _Cartesians_ suppose, the Various kind of Motion of these _Globuli_, may in many cases have no small stroak in Varying our Perception of Colour, so without the Supposition of these _Globuli_, which 'tis not so easie to evince, I think we may probably enough conceive in general, that the Eye may be Variously affected, not only by the Entire Beams of Light that fall upon it as they are such, but by the Order, and by the Degree of Swiftness, and in a word by the Manner according to which the Particles that compose each Particular Beam arrive at the Sensory, so that whatever be the Figure of the Little Corpuscles, of which the Beams of Light consist, not only the Celerity or Slowness of their Revolution or Rotation in reference to their Progressive Motion, but their more Absolute Celerity, their Direct or Undulating Motion, and other Accidents, which may attend their Appulse to the Eye, may fit them to make Differing Impressions on it.

4. Secondly, For these and the like Considerations, _Pyrophilus_, I must desire that you would look upon this little Treatise, not as a Discourse written Principally to maintain any of the fore-mention'd Theories, Exclusively to all others, or substitute a New one of my Own, but as the beginning of a History of Colours, upon which, when you and your Ingenious friends shall have Enrich'd it, a Solid Theory may be safely built. But yet because this History is not meant barely for a Register of the things recorded in it, but for an _Apparatus_ to a sound and comprehensitive Hypothesis, I thought fit, so to temper the whole Discourse, as to make it as conducible, as conveniently I can to that End, and therefore I have not scrupled to let you see that I was willing, as to save you the labour of Cultivating some Theories that I thought would never enable you to reach the Ends you aim at, so to contract your Enquiries into a Narrow compass, for both which purposes I thought it requisite to do these two things, the _One_, to set down some Experiments which by the help of the Reflections and Insinuations that attend them, may assist you to discover the Infirmness and Insufficiency both of the common Peripatetick Doctrine, and of the now more applauded Theory of the _Chymists_ about Colour, because those two Doctrines having Possess'd themselves, the one of the most part of the Schools, and the other of the Esteem of the Generality ef Physicians and other Learned Men, whose Professions and Ways of Study do not exact that they should Scrupulously examine the very First and Simplest Principles of Nature, I fear'd it would be to little purpose, without doing something to discover the Insufficiency of these Hypotheses, that I should, (which was the _Other_ thing I thought requisite for me to do) set down among my other Experiments those in the greatest Number, that may let you see, that, till I shall be Better Inform'd, I encline to take Colour to be a Modification of Light, and would invite you chiefly to Cultivate that Hypothesis, and Improve it to the making out of the Generation of Particular Colours, as I have Endeavour'd to apply it to the Explication of Whiteness and Blackness.

5. Thirdly. But, _Pyrophilus_, though this be at present the Hypothesis I preferr, yet I propose it but in a General Sense, teaching only that the Beams of Light, Modify'd by the Bodies whence they are sent (Reflected or Refracted) to the Eye, produce there that Kind of Sensation, Men commonly call Colour; But whether I think this Modification of the Light to be perform'd by Mixing it with Shades, or by Varying the Proportion of the Progress and Rotation of the _Cartesian Globuli Cælestes_, or by some other way which I am not now to mention, I pretend not here to Declare. Much less do I pretend to Determine, or scarce so much as to Hope to know all that were requisite to be Known, to give You, or even my Self, a perfect account of the Theory of Vision and Colours, for in Order to such an undertaking I would first Know what Light is, and if it be a Body (as a Body or the Motion of a Body it seems to be) what Kind of Corpuscles for Size and Shape it consists of, with what Swiftness they move Forwards, and Whirl about their own Centres. Then I would Know the Nature of Refraction, which I take to be one of the Abstrusest things (not to explicate Plausibly, but to explicate Satisfactorily) that I have met with in Physicks; I would further Know what Kind and what Degree of Commixture of Darkness or Shades is made by Refractions or Reflections, or both, in the Superficial particles of those Bodies, that being Shin'd upon, constantly exhibit the one, for Instance, a Blew, the other a Yellow, the third a Red Colour; I would further Know why this Contemperation of Light and Shade, that is made, for Example, by the Skin of a Ripe Cherry, should exhibit a Red, and not a Green, and the Leaf of the same Tree should exhibit a Green rather than a Red; and indeed, Lastly, why since the Light that is Modify'd into these Colours consists but of Corpuscles moved against the _Retina_ or Pith of the Optick Nerve, it should there not barely give a Stroak, but produce a Colour, whereas a Needle wounding likewise the Eye, would not produce Colour but Pain. These, and perhaps other things I should think requisite to be Known, before I should judge my Self to have fully Comprehended the True and Whole Nature of Colours; and therefore, though by making the Experiments and Reflections deliver'd in this Paper, I have endeavour'd somewhat to Lessen my Ignorance in this Matter, and think it far more Desireable to discover a Little, than to discover Nothing, yet I pretend but to make it Probable by the Experiments I mention, that some Colours may be Plausibly enough Explicated in the General by the Doctrine here propos'd; For whensoever I would Descend to the Minute and Accurate Explication of Particulars, I find my Self very Sensible of the great Obscurity of things, without excepting those which we never see but when they are Enlightned, and confess with _Scaliger_[5], _Latet natura hæc_, (says he, Speaking of that of Colour) _& sicut aliarum rerum species in profundissima caligine inscitiæ humanæ._

[5] Exercitat. 325 Parag. 4

* * * * *

_THE_ _EXPERIMENTAL HISTORY_ _OF COLOURS._

* * * * *

PART. II.

_Of the Nature of Whiteness and_ _Blackness._

CHAP. I.

1. Though after what I have acknowledged, _Pyrophilus_, of the Abstruse Nature of Colours in _particular_, you will easily believe, that I pretend not to give you a Satisfactory account of Whiteness and Blackness; Yet not wholly to frustrate your Expectation of my offering something by way of Specimen towards the Explication of some Colours in particular, I shall make choice of These as the most Simple Ones, (and by reason of their mutual Opposition the Least hardly explicable) about which to present you my Thoughts, upon condition you will take them at most to be my Conjectures, not my Opinions.