400. To fully test his conclusions, Rendu required the accurate measurement of glacier motion. Had he added to his other endowments the practical skill of a land-surveyor, he would now be regarded as the prince of glacialists. As it was he was obliged to be content with imperfect measurements. In one of his excursions he examined the guides regarding the successive positions of a vast rock which he found upon the ice close to the side of the glacier. The mean of five years gave him a motion for this block of 40 feet a year.
401. Another block, the transport of which he subsequently measured more accurately, gave him a velocity of 400 feet a year. Note his explanation of this discrepancy:—"The enormous difference of these two observations arises from the fact that one block stood near the centre of the glacier, which moves most rapidly, while the other stood near the side, where the ice is held back by friction." So clear and definite were Rendu's ideas of the plastic motion of glaciers, that had the question of curvature occurred to him, I entertain no doubt that he would have enunciated beforehand the shifting of the point of maximum motion from side to side across the axis of the glacier ([§ 25]).
402. It is right that you should know that scientific men do not always agree in their estimates of the comparative value of facts and ideas; and it is especially right that you should know that your present tutor attaches a very high value to ideas when they spring from the profound and persistent pondering of superior minds, and are not, as is too often the case, thrown out without the warrant of either deep thought or natural capacity. It is because I believe Rendu's labours fulfil this condition, that I ascribe to them so high a value. But when you become older and better informed, you may differ from me; and I write these words lest you should too readily accept my opinion of Rendu. Judge me, if you care to do so, when your knowledge is matured. I certainly shall not fear your verdict.
403. But, much as I prize the prompting idea, and thoroughly as I believe that often in it the force of genius mainly lies, it would, in my opinion, be an error of omission of the gravest kind, and which, if habitual, would ensure the ultimate decay of natural knowledge, to neglect verifying our ideas, and giving them outward reality and substance when the means of doing so are at hand. In science thought, as far as possible, ought to be wedded to fact. This was attempted by Rendu, and in part accomplished by Agassiz and Forbes.
[§ 60.] Viscous Theory.
404. Here indeed the merits of the distinguished glacialist last named rise conspicuously to view. From the able and earnest advocacy of Professor Forbes, the public knowledge of this doctrine of glacial plasticity is almost wholly derived. He gave the doctrine a more distinctive form; he first applied the term viscous to glacier ice, and sought to found upon precise measurements a "Viscous Theory" of glacier motion.
405. I am here obliged to state facts in their historic sequence. Professor Forbes when he began his investigations was acquainted with the labours of Rendu. In his earliest work upon the Alps he refers to those labours in terms of flattering recognition. But though as a matter of fact Rendu's ideas were there to prompt him, it would be too much to say that he needed their inspiration. Had Rendu not preceded him, he might none the less have grasped the idea of viscosity, executing his measurements and applying his knowledge to maintain it. Be that as it may, the appearance of Professor Forbes on the Unteraar glacier in 1841, and on the Mer de Glace in 1842, and his labours then and subsequently, have given him a name not to be forgotten in the scientific history of glaciers.
406. The theory advocated by Professor Forbes was enunciated by himself in these words:—"A glacier is an imperfect fluid, or viscous body, which is urged down slopes of certain inclination by the natural pressure of its parts." In 1773 Bordier wrote thus:—"As the glaciers always advance upon the plain, and never disappear, it is absolutely essential that new ice shall perpetually take the place of that which is melted: it must therefore be pressed forward from above. One can hardly refuse then to accept the astonishing truth, that this vast extent of hard and solid ice moves as a single piece downwards." In the passage already quoted he speaks of the ice being pressed as a fluid from above. These constitute, I believe, Bordier's contributions to this subject. The quotations show his sagacity at an early date; but, in point of completeness, his views are not to be compared with those of Rendu and Forbes.
407. I must not omit to state here that though the idea of viscosity has not been espoused by M. Agassiz, his measurements, and maps of measurements, on the Unteraar glacier have been recently cited as the most clear and conclusive illustrations of a quality which, at all events, closely resembles viscosity.