Stuk 13 - Letter from Joseph Dalton Hooker to Brian Houghton Hodgson

1 letter

Darjeeling Febry 13 1849

My dear H

Many thanks for your long and kind letter I am getting on well with my packing [8?] cases are full and I shall have nearly as many more to put [up/out?] for which the materials are nearly ready. Still the Kinchin plants are not nearly dry - I have just been up looking at them. If I cannot [reduce?] them and was to bring some undried down with they will be spoiled. [Sykes?] letter is a very good one indeed too Ethnographical for me not for my wishes for indeed I shall never be grateful enough if you can only drive some Ethnology into my addled head. It is a study to which I should become passionately fond had I time and opportunity to do but with me it would be indeed a matter of time, having no turn for Languages at all and much technical matter to get [up?] Col. Sykes is partly right in what he says about the [?] but I should think wrong as far as he applies his meaning to the [Libellus?] that is to be intended for all and to contain such information only as can be conveyed in the Language of the country with the interjection of as few newly coined words as possible - is it not so? On the other hand he may mean what he says for a delicate caution against making the book too learned. An education, to be liberal must embrace the subjects of the [maps?] is it not so? It's no use now dwelling longer on the subject, please lay the letter where we may find it easily again. Thank him, so much when you write for the message he sends me and say that we have had no lack of Barometers and attained a greater perfection of results than can often be shown I do like coming to a nicety with Barometers on this account the measuring heights by the B is a purely scientific and philosophical process and every step towards accuracy is not valuable to me because it makes the measured height a few feet or so nearer the truth, but because it is a [rejected?] appreciation of the disturbing atmospherical elements. In the application of the Barom there is nothing [?] or empirical. The proportion between the depression of the column of mercury and ascent was not the first measured by [angling?] or carrying the Bars. up miles. It was [inductively?] sought and found. Every element in the calculations required were determined at home by persons who never required to see the Instrument. It is one of the most beautiful applications of pure science to practical purposes that ever emanated from the brain of man and just as I after [reducing?] a plant to its Nat. Ord., seek further to reduce its every structural and functional peculiarity to the type of the order to which it belongs so I seek to know every anomaly in Barometric operation. In Trig. operations the case is wholly different. Your Instrument, Eye and Arithmetical powers are all brought up into play, but hardly your head any further. It is no thanks to the observer that his instrument is perfect very little that it is well adjusted the calculations require no profundity of learning, nor if they did do they give any play to the mental powers. If in error, the cause must be in the Instrument or observer and gives me no pain or trouble now a Barometer error does, for it is done in about all cases to atmospheric fluctuations which I seek to appreciate locating angles is hence a bore, but Barometers a real pleasure, for every one worked (if by the head and not by rote) teaches something. The boiling point ranks in this respect with the Bar. but unfortunately the instrumental errors are so great the laws regulating its use so vaguely defined and the conditions under which it must be observed so difficult in fulfillment that you can never tell whether the observer instrument or philosopher are in fault. We have just been trying 5 thermometers any of which would be pronounced by myself as a very good instrument. They give Darjeeling elevations varying 3000ft (three thousand feet). The three best were made by Newman for me with extreme care. 2 agree perfectly, the third only 300ft from the others! an error due to the Barometer being lower when the latter Thermom. was made. The height of the Barom is registered on all these three at the time they were made and by this I reduce the error of these two from 300 to 100ft. Provided Strachey's therms really did boil (and it requires a deal of boiling for good results. Sykes says 1/4 hour at least) or there be no material error in his instrument. You may assume his elevations as too low: for which I can give intelligible reasons, whether the true or no general positions I will go over with you - if these be not 500ft between them I will not mind for it is of no consequence for us to know the elevation higher (though it is [necessary?]) for me with whom the Barometer is an index of atmospheric phenom. to work out my [?] [?]. What can Thomson know of the country N. of the Lakes? Except the other Strachey has been there too - all the Strachey papers describe the plateau as a plain with the Mts rising from it, as Land from Sea and I doubt not it is so however much many parts may be continuously rugged and unthinking observer in one case do not see it or careless ones, as Thurman, do not recognise our meaning of a plain. Any extended surface from which Mt. ranges rise, there dividing area of nearly equal elevation and tolerably flat must be philosophically regarded as a plain, having great the predominance of the Mt. masses be. What is the plain of Quito - of Patagonia of the country [8th?] of the [?] Mts. of Australia? as you say, it may become a dispute of words, as I still think that dispute of the Snowline is against Humboldt's term "Himalayan Thibet" is if not a plateau what is it? Certainly not a valley, equally sure not a Mt. chain - The very fact of Thomson's getting on a plain at 17,000 is conclusive of the country being ["Stepbe"?]. I therefore quite add my humble [?] to your conclusions. No observations Thomson's on the lowest part of Thibet (10,000) and where most cut up by rivers of great volume or to compare with Strachey's made [towards?] the Lakes or all our information collected here and in Nepal - The Country N. of Kinchin to [?] Subtrop is a dead level. K. rises out of a plain. The top of [Jiminoo?] is just seen from [Daptil?] over a land margin. The Thibetan wants a telescope to see objects just rising above the [horizon?] he thinks it raises the object which really is below the horizon, above it. "He cannot see the head of a man on the horizon with naked eye but can with Telescope: this is not due he says to the T. magnifying but to its raising a man's head which should be below the horizon above it! I used the term" height I realised by way of trying to be explicit - not seeing (as I do now) it's ambiguity, it refers to Mt. [Kang?] the top of which I did not reach but towards which top I ascended to 15,746ft. I was then still 2 hours from the top ([fid] the guide) it opens to East and as at Wallanchoon when on top you see nought but a terrible valley in front, they say and you cross 2 other ridges before [debauching?] on the Maidan of Thibet. The ridges beyond both passes are oblique spurs from the great ranges. I was on top of Walanchoon 16,643ft [" a gene coon"] I very much underrated the height of these at the time. Yamgma village is 13,700 inhabited all the year round [Cosmos] was my only authority which says cult of grain on S. side 9900ft (English) or North 13,200ft I speak with great hesitation about the P.S. I was ever fearful of exaggerating my elevations and gave too little to the paper still I do not think myself 200ft out in giving 14,000ft as the lower limit and certainly there is no oak or other tree of any kind above 11,000ft - I have seen no Oak above 10,000ft or at it yet in N.W. tall Oaks reach 11,300, there are masses of anomalies man and grain going up here, and the snow coming down to meet them. Still these are only marvellous local phenom. and in no way whatever affect our arrangement of Himal Regions [Meridianal] or Latitudinal. No snow on Kinchin top requires much modific. and 7 nights of brown study with Segars and Tea to match. I said little or no snow unadvisedly there are not the bed and accumulations I expected but thereby hangs a long enquiry into the fall at above 20,000ft which must be very trifling indeed if my theory is good of the Met. Phenom of the Sikkim seasons and wind and [?] I must have the sea all over and up to the P.S. nothing else will do and the glacial beds of Yangma prove it were there no Thibet and Falconer to back it, or rather be backed by it. I saw no trace of volc. rocks Granite has been the agent and strong enough for ten times more. I will not forget the Hindu writer I see the Baboo going up (meet him or overtake him) I have no idea that he resides in the house he was not there this morning, I will see about it [Barnes?] writes [?] about Elephants he has sold all his to raise the wind and [Perry?] is gone on a tour I write to the latter [?]. Shall I speak to the Baboo? I will leave a splendid watchdog at the house and a Lepcha Sirdar if you think proper or tell Bishop to send [Birkiadans]
Feb 16
Your house is well guarded the 3 Cs keep good watch - walking in turns all night. The Baboo certainly never sleeps in the house. The Hin. writer says without being asked that he is to go down with me and I pretend I know nothing - I do hope to be down next week for certain. Rainy wretched weather.
Ever yr. affectionate

Jos. D. Hooker