For centuries, the greatest unsolved problem in science and technology was not about stars or atoms or the nature of matter. It was about knowing where you are. Specifically: knowing your longitude at sea.
Latitude (your north-south position) is relatively easy to determine. Measure the angle of the Sun above the horizon at noon, or the angle of the Pole Star above the horizon at night, and a simple calculation gives your latitude. Sailors had been doing this since antiquity.
Longitude (your east-west position) is a completely different problem. There is no fixed reference point in the sky that tells you how far east or west you are. The stars rise and set at the same angles regardless of longitude. The Sun crosses the meridian at noon everywhere on Earth. Without an independent method of determining longitude, a ship at sea could know how far north or south it was but had no reliable way of knowing how far east or west it had traveled.
The consequences were catastrophic. Ships missed their destinations by hundreds of miles. Fleets ran aground on coastlines they did not know they were near. In 1707, a squadron of British warships under Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovell misjudged their longitude and struck the rocks of the Scilly Isles, off the southwest tip of England. Four ships sank, and nearly 2,000 sailors drowned. It was one of the worst maritime disasters in British history, and it happened within sight of home.
The Theoretical Solution
The theoretical solution to the longitude problem had been known since the sixteenth century. Longitude is equivalent to time difference. The Earth rotates 360 degrees in 24 hours, which means it rotates 15 degrees per hour. If you know the local time (from the Sun’s position) and the time at a reference meridian (such as Greenwich), the difference between the two times, multiplied by 15, gives your longitude in degrees.
For example, if your local noon occurs three hours after noon at Greenwich, you are 45 degrees west of Greenwich. If it occurs two hours before Greenwich noon, you are 30 degrees east. The calculation is trivial. The problem is knowing what time it is at Greenwich when you are in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Two approaches were proposed. The astronomical method used the positions of celestial bodies (particularly the Moon) as a natural clock visible from anywhere on Earth. If you could predict the Moon’s position relative to certain stars at every hour of Greenwich time, and then observe the Moon’s actual position from your ship, you could work backward to determine what time it was at Greenwich. The mechanical method used a portable clock set to Greenwich time and carried aboard the ship. If the clock kept accurate time throughout the voyage, comparing it with local time would give the longitude directly.
The Longitude Prize
In 1714, the British Parliament established the Board of Longitude and offered a prize of £20,000 (roughly equivalent to several million pounds today) for a method of determining longitude at sea to within half a degree (about 30 nautical miles at the equator). Smaller prizes were offered for less accurate methods. The prize attracted proposals from across Europe, ranging from brilliant to absurd.
The astronomical community, led by the Astronomer Royal Nevil Maskelyne, favored the lunar distance method. This required extremely accurate tables of the Moon’s position, which in turn required solving the mathematically formidable three-body problem (the gravitational interaction of the Earth, Moon, and Sun). The necessary tables were eventually produced by the German astronomer Tobias Mayer in the 1750s and refined by Maskelyne, who published them as the Nautical Almanac beginning in 1767.
The mechanical approach was dismissed by most scientists. No clock of the era could keep time accurately enough. A pendulum clock, the most accurate timekeeper available, was useless at sea: the rolling and pitching of the ship disrupted the pendulum’s swing. Spring-driven watches were affected by temperature changes, humidity, and the corrosive salt air. The scientific establishment considered the idea of a sea-going clock a fantasy.
John Harrison
John Harrison was born in 1693 in Foulby, Yorkshire, the son of a carpenter. He had almost no formal education. He learned woodworking from his father, taught himself clockmaking from a book, and by his early twenties was building clocks of remarkable precision using wooden components. His longcase clocks incorporated innovations that compensated for temperature changes (the “gridiron pendulum,” made of alternating rods of brass and steel whose different rates of thermal expansion cancelled each other) and eliminated the need for oil lubrication (using tropical hardwood for the moving parts). By the 1720s, Harrison’s clocks were among the most accurate in England.
In 1730, Harrison traveled to London and presented his plan for a marine timekeeper to Edmond Halley (the Astronomer Royal and the man who had funded Newton’s Principia). Halley sent him to George Graham, the leading London clockmaker, who was so impressed that he loaned Harrison money to build his first marine clock.
The result, completed in 1735 and known as H1, was an extraordinary machine. It weighed 34 kilograms, stood about 60 centimeters tall, and used a pair of interconnected balance arms (rather than a pendulum) to keep time on a moving ship. It was tested on a voyage to Lisbon in 1736 and performed well, correcting the ship’s dead-reckoning longitude by over a degree.
But Harrison was not satisfied. He knew H1 could be improved. He spent the next nineteen years building three more marine timekeepers, each more refined than the last:
- H2 (completed 1741): Larger than H1, with improvements to the balance mechanism. Never tested at sea.
- H3 (completed 1759): Incorporated a bimetallic strip for temperature compensation and a new anti-friction device. After seventeen years of work, Harrison concluded that the approach of large, heavy marine clocks was fundamentally limited.
- H4 (completed 1759): A radical departure. Instead of a large clock, Harrison built a watch. H4 was just 13 centimeters in diameter and weighed 1.45 kilograms. It looked like an oversized pocket watch. And it was the most accurate portable timekeeper ever made.
The Watch That Changed Navigation
H4 was tested on a voyage to Jamaica in 1761 and 1762. Harrison’s son William carried the watch aboard HMS Deptford. After 81 days at sea, the watch had lost only 5.1 seconds, corresponding to a longitude error of less than one nautical mile. This was vastly better than the Longitude Prize requirement of half a degree (30 nautical miles). No astronomical method could approach this accuracy in practice.
A second test in 1764 confirmed the result. H4 was accurate to within 39.2 seconds over a voyage of 47 days, well within the prize criteria. By any objective standard, Harrison had solved the longitude problem.
But the Board of Longitude, dominated by astronomers who favored the lunar distance method, refused to award the full prize. Maskelyne, who became Astronomer Royal in 1765, was particularly hostile. He argued that the success of H4 might be a fluke, that the watch was too difficult to reproduce, and that the astronomical method was more practical for the Royal Navy. The Board demanded more tests, imposed new conditions, and required Harrison to disclose the inner workings of his watch so that copies could be made.
Harrison, by now in his seventies, was furious. He had spent his entire adult life on the longitude problem. His watch had passed every test. And the Board kept moving the goalposts. He appealed directly to King George III, who tested H4 personally at his private observatory and found it accurate to within one-third of a second per day. The King was outraged at Harrison’s treatment and pressured Parliament to pay him. In 1773, at the age of eighty, Harrison finally received £8,750 from Parliament (not the full prize of £20,000, which was never formally awarded to anyone).
Victory by Adoption
Despite the Board’s obstructionism, the marine chronometer (as Harrison’s type of timekeeper came to be called) won the practical argument. Larcum Kendall, a London watchmaker, built a copy of H4 (called K1) that sailed with Captain James Cook on his second and third voyages (1772 and 1776). Cook called it “our trusty friend” and “our never-failing guide.” It performed superbly.
By the early nineteenth century, marine chronometers were standard equipment on naval and merchant vessels. They were mass-produced by skilled watchmakers in London, Liverpool, and Paris. The price dropped from thousands of pounds to tens of pounds. Every ship carried at least one, and well-equipped vessels carried three (to cross-check each other and detect errors).
The lunar distance method remained in use as a backup (it required no delicate instrument, only a sextant and a set of tables) but was gradually displaced by the chronometer. Harrison’s approach, dismissed by the scientific establishment as impractical, became the universal solution. It remained so until the mid-twentieth century, when electronic timekeeping and eventually GPS satellites made mechanical chronometers obsolete for navigation, though some are still carried as emergency backups.
What the Story Teaches
The longitude story is often told as a David-and-Goliath tale: the self-taught craftsman against the scientific establishment. This narrative is partially true. Harrison was an outsider. The Board of Longitude was biased toward the astronomical method. Maskelyne’s treatment of Harrison was unfair.
But the story is also more complicated than the simple version suggests. The astronomical method was not foolish. It worked, and it had the advantage of requiring no delicate instrument. The Board’s concern about the reproducibility of H4 was legitimate: a single hand-built watch, however brilliant, does not constitute a practical solution for an entire navy. The solution became practical only when other watchmakers learned to reproduce Harrison’s innovations at scale.
The deeper lesson is about the relationship between theory and craft. The astronomers had the theory. Harrison had the craft. In the end, both were needed. The theory explained why the longitude problem was equivalent to a timekeeping problem. The craft produced a timekeeper that could survive a transatlantic voyage. Neither alone was sufficient. This interplay between mathematical understanding and practical skill is a recurring theme in the history of science and technology, and the longitude story is one of its most vivid illustrations.
John Harrison died in London on March 24, 1776, his eightieth birthday. His marine chronometers H1 through H4 are preserved at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, where they can still be seen ticking. They are, by any standard, among the most important instruments in the history of navigation and among the finest achievements of human craftsmanship.
No products in the cart. 