and 1883 were projected on the screen. Attention was called to the equatorial extension seen in the photograph taken in 1878, and to the suggestion which had been put forward that this peculiar character was connected with the then comparative state of inactivity of the sun's surface, at a period of minimum sun-spot action, especially as an equatorial extension was observed in 1867.]
It is now time that something should be said of the probable nature of the corona.
Six hypotheses have been suggested:
1. That the corona consists of a gaseous atmosphere resting upon the sun's surface and carried round with it.
2. That the corona is made up, wholly or in part, of gaseous and finely divided matter which has been ejected from the sun, and is in motion about the sun from the forces of ejection, of the sun's rotation, and of gravity—and possibly of a repulsion of some kind.
3. That the corona resembles the rings of Saturn, and consists of swarms of meteoric particles revolving with sufficient velocity to prevent their falling into the sun.
4. That the corona is the appearance presented to us by the unceasing falling into the sun of meteoric matter and the débris of comets' tails.
5. That the coronal rays and streamers are, at least in part, meteoric streams strongly illuminated by their near approach to the sun, neither revolving about nor falling into the sun, but permanent in position and varying only in richness of meteoric matter, which are parts of eccentric comet orbits. This view has been supported by Mr. Proctor, on the ground that there must be such streams crowding richly together in the sun's neighborhood.
6. The view of the corona suggested by Sir William Siemens in his solar theory.
It has been suggested, even, that the corona is so complex a phenomenon that there may be an element of truth in every one of these hypotheses. Anyway, this enumeration of hypotheses, more or less mutually destructive, shows how great is the difficulty of explaining the appearances which present themselves at a total solar eclipse, and how little we really know about the corona.
An American philosopher, Professor Hastings, has revived a prior and altogether revolutionary question: Has the corona an objective existence? Is it anything more than an optical appearance depending upon diffraction? Professor Hastings has based his revival of this long-discarded negative theory upon the behavior of a coronal line which he saw, in his spectroscope, change in length east and west of the sun during the progress of the eclipse at Caroline Island. His view appears to rest on the negative foundation that Fresnel's theory of diffraction may not apply in the case of a total eclipse, and that at such great distances there is a possibility that the interior of the
