Four fine Messier open clusters and a slight mystery

[John]

I've been having a look at the fine open star clusters in Auriga with my ED120 refractor. These Auriga clusters are Messiers 36, 37 and 38.  To complete the "set" I also dropped down to neaby Gemini to pick up the even finer and larger Messier 35.

These clusters each have their own individual characteristics varying in extent, richness, the brightness and colour of their stars etc. M35 is the largest in extent by quite a margin and the brightest at magnitude 5.3 compared to the 3 Auriga M's mags which range from 6.2 to 7.4.  All make fine sights through a small scope at low power

Looking into the discoveries of these clusters I can't quite understand, given the above information, why the 3 fainter clusters were apparently discovered in or a bit before 1645 by Giovani Hodiema whereas the larger and somewhat brighter M35, not far away from the aforementioned Auriga trio, was not discovered for another 91 years until Phillipe Loys De Cheseaux found it

I'm sure there is a good reason for this - more research by myself into these historic observers needed I think 

If anyone knows more, I'll be very interested to hear about it

[John]

A quick footnote to this report:

Messier 35 could possibly have first been recorded by the English astronomer John Bevis before De Cheseaux also found it. Bevis was the original discoverer of Messier 1, the Crab Nebula as well as being one of only 2 people who are recorded as having observed Halleys Comet during it's first predicted return in 1759.

Apparently John Bevis died on November 6th 1771 aged 76 years from injuries sustained when he fell from his telescope.

Apologies for this relative trivia but, for me, it adds a great deal of interest to the hobby

 

[Louis D]

If I had to hazard a guess, the early catalogers were looking for comets and cataloging anything that definitely wasn't a comet.  Since M35 is significantly larger than the others, I'm guessing they were probably aware of it, but not worried anyone would mistake it for a comet.  Of course, so are several other open clusters (M7 & M45 among them), but those have been known since ancient times, so maybe they felt they had to include those.  There are also many fine objects like the double cluster that somehow escaped detection by the early catalogers all together, so maybe M35 just took a while to get noticed.

[John]

I believe Messier concentrated on the parts of the sky which comets were more likely to be seen in so missed some obvious objects elsewhere. From what I've read, a number of other promiment observers were also primarily interested in comets so could have similarly spent most of their time on selective areas of the sky.

Comets were obviously the "big thing" to look for back then

 

[Tim]

1 hour ago, John said:

Apparently John Bevis died on November 6th 1771 aged 76 years from injuries sustained when he fell from his telescope.

This is one of my fears when we are out with big dobs requiring ladders, that somebody will slip and land on their noggin!

[John]

8 minutes ago, Tim said:

This is one of my fears when we are out with big dobs requiring ladders, that somebody will slip and land on their noggin!

I've "liked" your post Tim but I don't want it to happen, if you see what I mean

What could possibly go wrong ?:

 

[Tim]

Exactly John. I spent 15 years window cleaning and know how easy it is to fall off a ladder, and that's in daylight :s

 

[Hayduke27]

@John How big is the scope in that pic??

[Louis D]

2 hours ago, Hayduke27 said:

@John How big is the scope in that pic??

Steve Swayze 40" (1994)

[Hayduke27]

15 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Steve Swayze 40" (1994)

WOW!  I would love to have a look through such an instrument.  Awesome! 

[Louis D]

Here's Steve Swayze's photo gallery with descriptions of his various scopes.

Note that the "finder" scope on that 40" is a 12.5" f/5 scope in its own right.

[Alan White]

6 hours ago, Louis D said:

Here's Steve Swayze's photo gallery with descriptions of his various scopes.

Note that the "finder" scope on that 40" is a 12.5" f/5 scope in its own right.

I noted the finder was a fair size, but 12.5" finder, wow.

[alan potts]

Interesting trivia John thanks for sharing.