ed by that of Variations, by Euler
and Lagrange, and by the method of Derivative Functions, by Lagrange, in
1772.

But it was not only in Italy, in Germany, in England, in France, that
this great movement in mathematics was witnessed; Scotland had added a
new gem to the intellectual diadem with which her brow is encircled,
by the grand invention of Logarithms, by Napier of Merchiston. It is
impossible to give any adequate conception of the scientific importance
of this incomparable invention. The modern physicist and astronomer
will most cordially agree with Briggs, the Professor of Mathematics in
Gresham College, in his exclamation: "I never saw a book that pleased
me better, and that made I me more wonder!" Not without reason did the
immortal Kepler regard Napier "to be the greatest man of his age, in the
department to which he had applied his abilities." Napier died in 1617.
It is no exaggeration to say that this invention, by shortening the
labors, doubled the life of the astronomer.

But here I must check myself. I must remember that my present purpose is
not to give the history of mathematics, but to consider what science has
done for the advancement of human civilization. And now, at once, recurs
the question, How is it that the Church produced no geometer in her
autocratic reign of twelve hundred years?

With respect to pure mathematics this remark may be made: Its
cultivation does not demand appliances that are beyond the reach of
most individuals. Astronomy must have its observatory, chemistry its
laboratory; but mathematics asks only personal disposition and a
few books. No great expenditures are called for, nor the services
of assistants. One would think that nothing could be more congenial,
nothing more delightful, even in the retirement of monastic life.

Shall we answer with Eusebius, "It is through contempt of such useless
labor that we think so little of these matters; we turn our souls to
the exercise of better things?" Better things! What can be better than
absolute truth? Are mysteries, miracles, lying impostures, better? It
was these that stood in the way!

The ecclesiastical authorities had recognized, from the outset of this
scientific invasion, that the principles it was disseminating were
absolutely irreconcilable with the current theology. Directly and
indirectly, they struggled against it. So great was their detestation
of experimental science, that they thought they had gained a great
a