Benjamin Franklin and the First Balloons
Edition facts
Abbott Lawrence Rotch’s 1907 monograph reprints five letters Benjamin Franklin wrote to Sir Joseph Banks during the autumn of 1783, when Paris was captivated by the first manned balloon flights. Rotch, a meteorologist and balloon enthusiast, obtained the press-copies from a Viennese collection and notes that they contain corrections in Franklin’s own hand. The letters do not appear in Sparks’ edition of Franklin’s works, and even the later collections by Bigelow and Smyth contain inaccuracies. Rotch’s editorial introduction foregrounds the textual history: he compares the press-copies with drafts at the University of Pennsylvania, points out missing capital letters and old spelling in Bigelow, and identifies one letter—dated November 30—that had never been printed before.
Franklin’s Eye for Mechanical Detail
Franklin’s descriptions of the balloons are remarkably precise. In the letter of December 1, 1783, he notes that the original plan hung the car from the neck of the globe, but the constructors “threw a Net over it, fix’d to a Hoop which went round its Middle, and to hang the Car to that Hoop.” He sketches two configurations in the margin, labeling them A and B. He also records the altitude in toises (roughly 3–400), the horizontal motion observed through a pocket glass, and the moment when the balloon shrank to the size of a walnut. These details are not mere curiosities; they show Franklin reasoning about aerostatic principles even as he watches. He wonders whether the adventurers had “perfect Command of their Carriage, descending as they pleas’d by letting some of the inflammable Air escape, and rising again by discharging some Sand.” The letters thus function as a real-time experiment log, blending measurement with speculation.
The Crowd and the Spectacle
Franklin’s account of the launch on December 1 is as much a report on public reaction as on the machine itself. He writes that “all Eyes were gratified with seeing it rise majestically from among the Trees, and ascend gradually above the Buildings, a most beautiful Spectacle!” The crowd’s applause, the waving of a white pennant from the car, and the long dispersal afterward are all recorded. Franklin’s own anxiety is palpable: he worries about the lack of experience and the means of descent, confessing “I am the more anxious for the Event, because I am not well inform’d of the Means provided for letting themselves gently down.” The next morning’s relief—the adventurers landed safely near l’Isle Adam—is conveyed with equal directness. This oscillation between scientific detachment and personal concern gives the letters a human texture that a purely technical report would lack.
Textual Transmission and Editorial Choices
Rotch’s edition is itself a document of scholarly method. He explains that the press-copies were made on thin paper using a rotary copying press—possibly one invented by Franklin himself. The letters bear Franklin’s signature in ink, except one, and are “quite legible” apart from a few words. Rotch collates the press-copies against the drafts at the University of Pennsylvania and against the printed versions in Bigelow and Smyth, specifying where those editions diverge. For instance, he notes that Bigelow omits paragraphs, capital letters, and old spelling, while Smyth follows the originals more closely. By printing the letters “exactly according to the press-copies,” Rotch aims to restore the orthographic and textual features that earlier editors had smoothed over. This attention to the materiality of the source—the paper, the ink, the copying process—anchors the edition in a specific archival practice.
The Unpublished Letter and Its Context
The letter dated November 30, 1783, is the one Rotch claims had never been printed before. Its contents are not given in the excerpt, but its existence alone alters the known corpus of Franklin’s aeronautical correspondence. Rotch’s introduction also mentions that the American owners of the copies did not allow them to be transcribed, forcing Smyth to rely on Rotch’s copy for one letter. This behind-the-scenes negotiation over access and permission highlights the fragility of manuscript transmission. The letters were purchased by Rotch from Dodd, Mead & Co. in 1905, having previously belonged to G. M. Williamson, who had acquired them in Vienna. The chain of custody—from Franklin’s press-copies to a Viennese collection to an American bookseller to a meteorologist—traces a path that is as interesting as the letters themselves.
Readers approaching this edition should attend to the interplay between Franklin’s observational prose and Rotch’s editorial apparatus. The letters are not polished essays; they are hurried, vivid dispatches written between diplomatic duties. Rotch’s footnotes and collations invite comparison with the drafts and later printed versions, revealing how Franklin’s words were altered by subsequent editors. For those interested in the history of science, the letters offer a firsthand account of a transformative technology. For those interested in textual criticism, they provide a case study in how a manuscript becomes a printed document.