The Pluto System After New Horizons Illustrated

S Alan Stern download

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-pluto-system-after-new-
horizons-illustrated-s-alan-stern-34268396

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

New Horizons Reconnaissance Of The Plutocharon System And The Kuiper

Belt 1st Edition C T Russell Auth

https://ebookbell.com/product/new-horizons-reconnaissance-of-the-
plutocharon-system-and-the-kuiper-belt-1st-edition-c-t-russell-
auth-1254562

Solar System 8 The Pluto Debacle Brandon Q Morris

https://ebookbell.com/product/solar-system-8-the-pluto-debacle-
brandon-q-morris-231468958

Solar System Series 08 The Pluto Debacle Brandon Q Morris

https://ebookbell.com/product/solar-system-series-08-the-pluto-
debacle-brandon-q-morris-60736600

Solar System Series 08 The Pluto Debacle Morris Brandon Q

https://ebookbell.com/product/solar-system-series-08-the-pluto-
debacle-morris-brandon-q-60736602
Moving Against The System The 1968 Congress Of Black Writers And The
Making Of Global Black Consciousness Paperback David Austin Alvin
Poussaint C L R James Robert Hill Walter Rodney Richard B Moore
Richard Small Harry Edwards James Forman Kwame Ture Stokely Carmichael
Michael Smith Rosie Douglas
https://ebookbell.com/product/moving-against-the-system-
the-1968-congress-of-black-writers-and-the-making-of-global-black-
consciousness-paperback-david-austin-alvin-poussaint-c-l-r-james-
robert-hill-walter-rodney-richard-b-moore-richard-small-harry-edwards-
james-forman-kwame-ture-stokely-carmichael-michael-smith-rosie-
douglas-23309708
Beyond Pluto Exploring The Outer Limits Of The Solar System John
Davies

https://ebookbell.com/product/beyond-pluto-exploring-the-outer-limits-
of-the-solar-system-john-davies-898458

The Big Backyard The Solar System Beyond Pluto Ron Miller

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-big-backyard-the-solar-system-
beyond-pluto-ron-miller-51213630

Discovering Pluto Exploration At The Edge Of The Solar System 1st

Edition Dale P Cruikshank

https://ebookbell.com/product/discovering-pluto-exploration-at-the-
edge-of-the-solar-system-1st-edition-dale-p-cruikshank-7049816

Pluto Sentinel Of The Outer Solar System Jones Barrie William

https://ebookbell.com/product/pluto-sentinel-of-the-outer-solar-
system-jones-barrie-william-11730334
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA SPACE SCIENCE SERIES
Richard P. Binzel, General Editor

The Pluto System After New Horizons

S. A. Stern, J. M. Moore, W. M. Grundy, L. A. Young,
and R. P. Binzel, editors, 2021, 663 pages

Planetary Astrobiology
V. S. Meadows, G. N. Arney, B. E. Schmidt, and
D. J. Des Marais, editors, 2020, 534 pages

Enceladus and the Icy Moons of Saturn

P. M. Schenk, R. N. Clark, C. J. A. Howett, A. J. Verbiscer, and
J. H. Waite, editors, 2018, 475 pages

Asteroids IV
P. Michel, F. E. DeMeo, and W. F. Bottke, editors, 2015, 895 pages

Protostars and Planets VI

Henrik Beuther, Ralf S. Klessen, Cornelis P. Dullemond, and
Thomas Henning, editors, 2014, 914 pages

Comparative Climatology of Terrestrial Planets

Stephen J. Mackwell, Amy A. Simon-Miller, Jerald W. Harder,
and Mark A. Bullock, editors, 2013, 610 pages

Exoplanets
S. Seager, editor, 2010, 526 pages

Europa
Robert T. Pappalardo, William B. McKinnon,
and Krishan K. Khurana, editors, 2009, 727 pages

The Solar System Beyond Neptune

M. Antonietta Barucci, Hermann Boehnhardt, Dale P. Cruikshank,
and Alessandro Morbidelli, editors, 2008, 592 pages

Protostars and Planets V

Bo Reipurth, David Jewitt, and Klaus Keil, editors, 2007, 951 pages

Meteorites and the Early Solar System II

D. S. Lauretta and H. Y. McSween, editors, 2006, 943 pages

Comets II
M. C. Festou, H. U. Keller,
and H. A. Weaver, editors, 2004, 745 pages

Asteroids III
William F. Bottke Jr., Alberto Cellino, Paolo Paolicchi,
and Richard P. Binzel, editors, 2002, 785 pages
 Tom Gehrels, General Editor

Origin of the Earth and Moon

R. M. Canup and K. Righter, editors, 2000, 555 pages

Protostars and Planets IV

Vincent Mannings, Alan P. Boss,
and Sara S. Russell, editors, 2000, 1422 pages

Pluto and Charon

S. Alan Stern and David J. Tholen, editors, 1997, 728 pages

Venus II—Geology, Geophysics, Atmosphere,

and Solar Wind Environment
S. W. Bougher, D. M. Hunten,
and R. J. Phillips, editors, 1997, 1376 pages

Cosmic Winds and the Heliosphere

J. R. Jokipii, C. P. Sonett,
and M. S. Giampapa, editors, 1997, 1013 pages

Neptune and Triton

Dale P. Cruikshank, editor, 1995, 1249 pages

Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids

Tom Gehrels, editor, 1994, 1300 pages

Resources of Near-Earth Space

John S. Lewis, Mildred S. Matthews,
and Mary L. Guerrieri, editors, 1993, 977 pages

Protostars and Planets III

Eugene H. Levy and Jonathan I. Lunine, editors, 1993, 1596 pages

Mars
Hugh H. Kieffer, Bruce M. Jakosky, Conway W. Snyder,
and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1992, 1498 pages

Solar Interior and Atmosphere

A. N. Cox, W. C. Livingston,
and M. S. Matthews, editors, 1991, 1416 pages

The Sun in Time

C. P. Sonett, M. S. Giampapa,
and M. S. Matthews, editors, 1991, 990 pages

Uranus
Jay T. Bergstralh, Ellis D. Miner,
and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1991, 1076 pages
 Asteroids II
Richard P. Binzel, Tom Gehrels,
and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1989, 1258 pages

Origin and Evolution of Planetary and Satellite Atmospheres

S. K. Atreya, J. B. Pollack,
and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1989, 1269 pages

Mercury
Faith Vilas, Clark R. Chapman,
and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1988, 794 pages

Meteorites and the Early Solar System

John F. Kerridge and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1988, 1269 pages

The Galaxy and the Solar System

Roman Smoluchowski, John N. Bahcall,
and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1986, 483 pages

Satellites
Joseph A. Burns and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1986, 1021 pages

Protostars and Planets II

David C. Black and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1985, 1293 pages

Planetary Rings
Richard Greenberg and André Brahic, editors, 1984, 784 pages

Saturn
Tom Gehrels and Mildred S. Matthews, editors, 1984, 968 pages

Venus
D. M. Hunten, L. Colin, T. M. Donahue,
and V. I. Moroz, editors, 1983, 1143 pages

Satellites of Jupiter
David Morrison, editor, 1982, 972 pages

Comets
Laurel L. Wilkening, editor, 1982, 766 pages

Asteroids
Tom Gehrels, editor, 1979, 1181 pages

Protostars and Planets

Tom Gehrels, editor, 1978, 756 pages

Planetary Satellites
Joseph A. Burns, editor, 1977, 598 pages
 Jupiter
Tom Gehrels, editor, 1976, 1254 pages

Planets, Stars and Nebulae, Studied with Photopolarimetry

Tom Gehrels, editor, 1974, 1133 pages
 The Pluto System
After New Horizons
 The Pluto System
After New Horizons
Edited by

S. Alan Stern, Jeffrey M. Moore,

William M. Grundy, Leslie A. Young,
and Richard P. Binzel

With the assistance of

Renée Dotson

With 74 collaborating authors

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA PRESS

Tucson

in collaboration with

LUNAR AND PLANETARY INSTITUTE

Houston
About the front cover:

Pluto and Charon as imaged by NASA’s New Horizons mission. This enhanced color composite was created from individual New
Horizons color images of Pluto and Charon taken on July 14, 2015. The color here is both stretched and was also enhanced through
use of wavelengths from 400 to 970 nm, extending beyond the 400- to 700-nm range visible to the human eye. The approximate
resolution of these images as presented here is ~10 km/pixel. In contrast, the best New Horizons imaging of each body (although
localized, not global) was about 100-fold higher resolution. The Pluto-Charon binary planet can be seen to be a highly dichotomous
pair, as had been inferred from earlier datasets, with Pluto’s surface being significantly higher in albedo and significantly more
variegated than Charon’s. For scale, Pluto’s diameter is 2376 km; the rotational north poles of both bodies are at the top of each
body as shown in this image. The system’s four smaller moons are not depicted here.

About the back cover:

Shown here are the less well-resolved, non-encounter (i.e., the so-called “farside”) hemispheres of Pluto and Charon in
panchromatic, visible light at a pivot wavelength of 606 nm. Even at this resolution, it can be seen that there are dramatic
differences in the appearance of Pluto and the distribution of terrain types between its close approach and farside hemispheres.
Whereas the image on the front cover is both several times higher in resolution and also is surpassed by still ~100× higher-
resolution imagery of each body, these two images represent the best views of the farsides of Pluto and Charon that are likely
to be available until an orbiter arrives for more detailed global reconnaissance. The editors of this volume look forward to new
exploration revealing these farside hemispheres and their implications for better understanding the origin and evolution of these
complex and fascinating worlds, as well as for understanding their kin among the other planets of the Kuiper belt.

The Lunar and Planetary Institute is operated by the Universities Space Research Association under a cooperative agreement with the
Science Mission Directorate of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recom-
mendations expressed in this volume are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.

Original photographs appearing in the Epilogue © 2021 Michael Soluri and any use requires permission of Mr. Soluri or his estate.

The University of Arizona Press

in collaboration with the Lunar and Planetary Institute
© 2021 The Arizona Board of Regents
All rights reserved
∞ This book is printed on acid-free, archival-quality paper.
Manufactured in the United States of America

26 25 24 23 22 21 6 5 4 3 2 1

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Stern, Alan, 1957– editor. | Moore, J. (Jeff), editor. |
Grundy, William M., editor. | Young, Leslie A., editor. |
Binzel, Richard P., editor.
Title: The Pluto System After New Horizons / edited by S. Alan Stern, Jeffrey M. Moore, William M. Grundy,
Leslie A. Young, Richard P. Binzel ; with the assistance of Renee Dotson.
Other titles: University of Arizona space science series.
Description: Tucson : University of Arizona Press, 2021. | Series: The University of Arizona Space science series | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020022869 | ISBN 9780816540945 (hardcover)
Subjects: LCSH: Pluto (Dwarf planet) | Pluto (Dwarf planet)—Exploration.
Classification: LCC QB701 .P586 2021 | DDC 523.49/22—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020022869
This volume and the results herein are dedicated to the entire New Horizons team —
all those individuals at every institution who took part in its design, build, launch,
and voyage, enabling the first exploration of the Pluto system and the Kuiper belt.

ix
x
 Contents
List of Contributing Authors ............................................................................................................................................ xiii

Scientific Organizing Committee and Acknowledgment of Reviewers ........................................................................... xiv

Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................................. xv

Preface ............................................................................................................................................................................. xvii

PART 1: SYSTEM BACKGROUND

The Discoveries of Pluto and the Kuiper Belt

R. P. Binzel and K. Schindler . ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Early Pluto Science, the Imperative for Exploration, and New Horizons
J. I. Lunine, S. A. Stern, L. A. Young, M. J. Neufeld, and R. P. Binzel ............................................................................ 9

The Transneptunian Objects as the Context for Pluto: An Astronomical Perspective

M. A. Barucci, C. M. Dalle Ore, and S. Fornasier . ....................................................................................................... 21

PART 2: PLUTO

The Geology of Pluto

O. L. White, J. M. Moore, A. D. Howard, P. M. Schenk, K. N. Singer, D. A. Williams,
and R. M. C. Lopes .......................................................................................................................................................... 55

Geodynamics of Pluto
F. Nimmo and W. B. McKinnon ....................................................................................................................................... 89

The Landscapes of Pluto as Witness to Climate Evolution

J. M. Moore and A. D. Howard ..................................................................................................................................... 105

Impact Craters on Pluto and Charon and Terrain Age Estimates

K. N. Singer, S. Greenstreet, P. M. Schenk, S. J. Robbins, and V. J. Bray.................................................................... 121

Colors and Photometric Properties of Pluto

C. B. Olkin, C. J. A. Howett, S. Protopapa, W. M. Grundy, A. J. Verbiscer,
and M. W. Buie . ............................................................................................................................................................. 147

Surface Composition of Pluto

D. P. Cruikshank, W. M. Grundy, S. Protopapa, B. Schmitt, and I. R. Linscott .......................................................... 165

Rheological and Thermophysical Properties and Some Processes Involving

Common Volatile Materials Found on Pluto’s Surface
O. M. Umurhan, C. J. Ahrens, and V. F. Chevrier . ...................................................................................................... 195

Composition and Structure of Pluto’s Atmosphere

M. E. Summers, L. A. Young, G. R. Gladstone, and M. J. Person ............................................................................... 257

Photochemistry and Haze Formation

K. E. Mandt, A. Luspay-Kuti, A. Cheng, K.-L. Jessup, and P. Gao............................................................................... 279

Dynamics of Pluto’s Atmosphere

F. Forget, T. Bertrand, D. Hinson, and A. Toigo .......................................................................................................... 297
xi
Pluto’s Volatile and Climate Cycles on Short and Long Timescales
L. A. Young, T. Bertrand, L. M. Trafton, F. Forget, A. M. Earle, and B. Sicardy ....................................................... 321

Atmospheric Escape
D. F. Strobel ................................................................................................................................................................... 363

Solar Wind Interaction with the Pluto System

F. Bagenal, D. J. McComas, H. A. Elliott, E. J. Zirnstein, R. L. McNutt Jr., C. M. Lisse,
P. Kollmann, P. A. Delamere, and N. P. Barnes............................................................................................................. 379

PART 3: CHARON AND PLUTO’S SMALL SATELLITES

The Geology and Geophysics of Charon

J. Spencer, R. A. Beyer, S. J. Robbins, K. N. Singer, and F. Nimmo ............................................................................ 395

Charon: Colors and Photometric Properties

C. J. A. Howett, C. B. Olkin, S. Protopapa, W. M. Grundy,
A. J. Verbiscer, and B. J. Buratti ................................................................................................................................... 413

Surface Composition of Charon

S. Protopapa, J. C. Cook, W. M. Grundy, D. P. Cruikshank, C. M. Dalle Ore,
and R. A. Beyer................................................................................................................................................................ 433

The Small Satellites of Pluto

S. B. Porter, A. J. Verbiscer, H. A. Weaver, J. C. Cook, and W. M. Grundy ................................................................ 457

PART 4: ORIGINS, INTERIORS, AND THE BIG PICTURE

On the Origin of the Pluto System

R. M. Canup, K. M. Kratter, and M. Neveu .................................................................................................................. 475

Formation, Composition, and History of the Pluto System: A Post-New Horizons Synthesis
W. B. McKinnon, C. R. Glein, T. Bertrand, and A. R. Rhoden ..................................................................................... 507

Transneptunian Space and the Post-Pluto Paradigm

A. H. Parker ................................................................................................................................................................... 545

Future Exploration of the Pluto System

M. W. Buie, J. D. Hofgartner, V. J. Bray, and E. Lellouch .......................................................................................... 569

The Exploration of the Primordial Kuiper Belt Object Arrokoth (2014 MU69) by New Horizons
S. A. Stern, J. R. Spencer, H. A. Weaver, and C. B. Olkin ............................................................................................ 587

Epilogue: New Horizons: An Abbreviated Photographic Journal

M. Soluri ......................................................................................................................................................................... 603

Appendix A: Pluto and Charon Nomenclature

R. A. Beyer and M. Showalter ....................................................................................................................................... 627

Appendix B: The New Horizons Instrument Suite

H. A. Weaver ................................................................................................................................................................... 641

Index ............................................................................................................................................................................... 645

xii
 List of Contributing Authors

C. J. Ahrens 195 D. Hinson 297 A. R. Rhoden 507

F. Bagenal 379 J. D. Hofgartner 569 S. J. Robbins 121, 395
N. P. Barnes 379 A. D. Howard 55, 105 P. M. Schenk 55, 121
M. A. Barucci 21 C. J. A. Howett 147, 413 K. Schindler 3
T. Bertrand 297, 321, 507 K.-L. Jessup 279 B. Schmitt 165
R. A. Beyer 395, 433, 627 P. Kollmann 379 M. Showalter 627
R. P. Binzel 3, 9 K. M. Kratter 475 B. Sicardy 321
V. J. Bray 121, 569 E. Lellouch 569 K. N. Singer 55, 121, 395
M. W. Buie 147, 569 I. R. Linscott 165 M. Soluri 603
B. J. Buratti 413 C. M. Lisse 379 J. R. Spencer 395, 587
R. M. Canup 475 R. M. C. Lopes 55 S. A. Stern 9, 587
A. Cheng 279 J. I. Lunine 9 D. F. Strobel 363
V. F. Chevrier 195 A. Luspay-Kuti 279 M. E. Summers 257
J. C. Cook 433, 457 K. E. Mandt 279 A. Toigo 297
D. P. Cruikshank 165, 433 D. J. McComas 379 L. M. Trafton 321
C. M. Dalle-Ore 21, 433 W. B. McKinnon 89, 507 O. M. Umurhan 195
P. A. Delamere 379 R. L. McNutt Jr. 379 A. J. Verbiscer 147, 413, 457
A. M. Earle 321 J. M. Moore 55, 105 H. A. Weaver 457, 587, 641
H. A. Elliott 379 M. J. Neufeld 9 O. L. White 55
F. Forget 297, 321 M. Neveu 475 D. A. Williams 55
S. Fornasier 21 F. Nimmo 89, 395 L. A. Young 9, 257, 321
P. Gao 279 C. B. Olkin 147, 413, 587 E. J. Zirnstein 379
G. R. Gladstone 257 A. H. Parker 545
C. R. Glein 507 M. J. Person 257
S. Greenstreet 121 S. B. Porter 457
W. M. Grundy 147, 165, 413, S. Protopapa 147, 165,
433, 457 413, 433

xiii
 Scientific Organizing Committee

Richard Binzel (chair and co-editor) Jeffrey Moore (co-editor)

S. Alan Stern (lead editor) Silvia Protopapa
Amanda Bosh Jani Radebaugh
Will Grundy (co-editor) Leslie Young (co-editor)
Carey Lisse

Acknowledgment of Reviewers
The editors gratefully acknowledge the following individuals, as well as several anonymous
reviewers, for their time and effort in reviewing chapters in this volume:

Erik Asphaug Gianrico Filacchione David Nesvorný

Fran Bagenal Scott D. Guzewich Francis Nimmo
Nadine Barlow Candice Hansen Jani Radebaugh
Jason W. Barnes Alexander G. Hayes Darin Ragozzine
M. A. Barucci Bryan J. Holler Alyssa Rhoden
Chloe B. Beddingfield Alan Howard C T Russell
Susan Benecchi Carly J. A. Howett Paul Schenk
Bonnie Buratti Andrew P. Ingersoll Kevin Schindler
Morgan L. Cable Ross Irwin Kelsi N. Singer
Richard J. Cartwright Ralf Jaumann Katrin Stephan
Andrew F. Cheng David Jewitt Michael E. Summers
Geoffrey Collins J J Kavelaars Audrey Thirouin
Tom Cravens James T. Keane Henry Throop
Tilmann Denk Michelle Kirchoff Steven D. Vance
Steve Desch Tommi T. Koskinen H. A. Weaver
Luke Dones Vladimir Krasnopolsky Don Wilhelms
Martin Duncan Stamatios Krimigis Sharon A. Wilson
Justin Erwin Jian-Yang Li
Caleb Fassett William McKinnon

xiv
Foreword
This volume is the fruit of the historic New Horizons Pluto flyby of July 2015 — the joyous,
frantic, fraught few days in which knowledge of the last of the classically known planets leapt from
nearly complete ignorance to in-depth knowledge with more than six gigabytes of data.

Every spacecraft mission embodies the dreams and efforts of large teams of scientists and engineers
over years of planning and building, but New Horizons experienced decades of political battles
and endured more than the usual share of setbacks, cancellations, new starts, frustrations, and near
catastrophes en route to the successful achievement of its goals.

Soon after New Horizons lifted off from Earth in January 2006, astronomers redefined the word
“planet” to exclude Pluto. Although this decision had no effect on the spacecraft’s trajectory over
the course of its nine-year journey, the mission’s primary destination shifted in the eyes of many —
from the ninth planet to the first world of the outer solar system’s vast, unexplored expanse. And
yet, when Pluto finally appeared in the high-resolution approach images, first as a dot dancing with
its smaller companion, Charon, and then resolving into a variegated heart-encrusted sphere, there
was no word more suitable than “planet” to describe what we were seeing.

On July 4, 2015, less than two weeks before the historic encounter with Pluto, the radio signal from
New Horizons suddenly disappeared. The team at The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory
(APL) quickly regained contact, only to face a new glitch: The computer reboot that had caused
the loss of signal had also erased all the commands needed to execute the encounter. As the
spacecraft barreled on toward Pluto at approximately 50,000 kilometers per hour, dozens of team
members raced to restore the erased software. The few remaining days before flyby left them no
time to sleep and no margin for error, but they succeeded in setting everything to rights with only
hours to spare before the encounter began.

A flyby encounter, unlike an orbiter or lander mission, typically entails long anticipation, followed
by a sudden burst of revelation, then off again into the distance. And a first flyby often feels like
a preliminary scout for other missions soon to follow. But this encounter, so long in coming, so
vitally threatened at its most crucial stage, assumed an air of triumph. This visit to the last of the
classically known planets, so unlikely to be repeated within our lifetimes, gained an aura of finality,
of completion of a goal sought for a generation.

The encounter itself sparked a joyous congregation of more than 2000 scientists, engineers, space
enthusiasts, journalists, and even a few celebrities, all of whom gathered to anticipate, observe,
and celebrate the event. Together they watched the little spacecraft, about the size of a baby grand
piano, packed with scientific instruments and infused with human ingenuity and curiosity, approach
and then pass the farthest world yet reached. The event presented a rare and brief opportunity for
the people and activities of the planetary science community to become highly visible. The women
and men on the New Horizons teams were applauded, interviewed, and fêted — not just at APL but
around the world on social media. The ability to share instantaneous word of their success, along
with the first high-resolution pictures as proof, created a new, twenty-first century type of global
scientific event.

xv
After the news crews packed up and the crowds dispersed, the New Horizons team caught up (just
a little) on sleep and got to work on the data. The camera-ready quick releases and off-the-cuff
reactions they had needed to provide at encounter press conferences gave way to deeper analyses.
Between then and now, the team and their colleagues in the planetary science community have
digested and interpreted the deluge of images and data. This book represents the resultant state of
knowledge about the Pluto system in 2020 — worlds newly unveiled, mapped, modeled, and now,
to some degree, understood.

Future papers and reviews will be written with new ideas and insights about the Pluto system.
Eventually we’ll go back. New spacecraft will return to orbit and land there. When that happens,
we’ll finally see the other side of Pluto in high resolution and monitor the atmosphere with new
instruments. Then we’ll also see what has changed — how the surface and atmosphere have
evolved over the intervening decades. But the chapters in this volume will stand forever as a
record of what the planetary science community learned and surmised from the Pluto system on
humanity’s first foray into the Kuiper belt.

David Grinspoon and Dava Sobel

July 2020

Editor’s note: A photographic journal of the journey of New Horizons and its team has been kept
by photographer Michael Soluri. Some of his images from this journal are captured in the Epilogue
to this volume.
Preface
This is the second Space Science Series volume on the Pluto system. At the time of the publication
of the first such volume, Pluto and Charon, in 1997, the limitations of our Earth-bound perch for
the study of the Pluto system were already well appreciated. It was also clear then that no true
picture of Pluto and its then only known moon, Charon, could be achieved without a space mission
to reconnoiter them up close. While that previous book was being assembled, a NASA-appointed
Science Definition Team was already specifying the goals for such a mission. After many failed
directed-mission new start attempts across the 1990s, NASA finally called for principal-investigator-
led mission proposals from the scientific community on January 19, 2001, and on November 29 of
that same year selected the New Horizons team to carry out the mission.

Over the four years and two months from its selection in November 2001 to its launch in January
2006, New Horizons overcame pernicious funding battles, incredibly challenging nuclear launch
approval schedules, the development and NASA certification of a new launch vehicle, and the
challenge of creating a Voyager-like mission on a budget five times smaller. New Horizons
succeeded at all of this, and successfully entered flight on January 19, 2006 — five years to the day
after NASA’s call for mission proposals.

The NASA call for proposals that catalyzed New Horizons required intermediate-resolution
panchromatic and color imaging, atmospheric ultraviolet and radio science profiling, and infrared
composition mapping, with at least 2 gigabits of data storage. New Horizons exceeded those
requirements by including much-higher-resolution panchromatic imaging capability, two plasma
sensors to enhance atmospheric studies, a significantly higher infrared spectral mapping resolution
than NASA required, and 128 gigabits of spacecraft data storage. After a flawless launch in 2006
and flyby of Jupiter in 2007, followed by an essentially textbook cruise across the middle solar
system where the giant planets orbit, New Horizons reached closest approach to Pluto and its system
of five moons on July 14, 2015.

In many respects, the 1997 Pluto and Charon volume played a large role in creating the scientific
foundation for sending New Horizons on its journey. A new picture of the Pluto system was
emerging as Pluto and Charon became resolved as separate bodies thanks to the use of mutual
events, the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), and advancements in groundbased astronomical
instrumentation such as adaptive optics. For Pluto, the mutual events that took place a decade
before that book had yielded maps showing high-contrast albedo features on the sub-Charon
hemisphere. Then in the mid-1990s, HST was able to observe over all longitudes, and Pluto’s major
albedo units were resolved.

But mysteries continued to arise. As one example, stellar occultations surprisingly showed Pluto’s
atmospheric pressure was increasing, in spite of Pluto receding from the Sun after having passed
perihelion in 1989. Even more puzzling was how long Pluto’s atmosphere would hold against
collapse on the outbound leg of its orbit. In the midst of these and other tantalizing realizations
of how dynamic this distant world might be, the entire Pluto system expanded in its population
and complexity. The discovery of Nix and Hydra in 2005 was followed by the discoveries of Styx
and Kerberos in 2011 and 2012, each made by New Horizons team members using HST. These
discoveries brought about the realization that in going to Pluto, we would not just be exploring a
planet, or even a double planet, but a complete system of objects more akin to the giant planets in
its satellite compliment than the terrestrial planets.

xvii
Many of the questions that inspired and directed the design of New Horizons only deepened as the
spacecraft approached the Pluto system in the first half of 2015. Pluto’s previously deduced extreme
albedo contrasts implied a wide range of terrains, which were seen in increasingly improved detail
as New Horizons drew closer and closer. But the resolution necessary for geologic interpretation
was impossible until the final few days before the spacecraft’s closest approach. And although
groundbased visible and infrared spectra had already detected many of the species that were later
mapped across Pluto’s surface, high-spatial-resolution spectral maps by New Horizons proved
crucial to understanding how geology, composition, and surface-atmosphere interactions interplay
on Pluto. Pluto’s atmosphere was the subject of speculation, conjecture, and only poorly constrained
modeling before the flyby; until then, its understanding was noticeably hampered by the lack of
knowledge of the nature of the lower atmosphere, the presence of hazes, lower atmospheric thermal
structure, and such basic quantities as the surface radius and surface pressure. Charon, which
appeared bland from Earth-bound telescopes, began to reveal a complex history of its own as New
Horizons approached, as well as fascinating landforms and a completely unique dark polar cap.
New Horizons once proved, as past first missions to planets had decades before, that nothing we
could do from Earth or space observatories with current technology substitutes for the advantage of
close-up scientific reconnaissance.

Data from the mid-2015 Pluto system flyby were spooled back to Earth over the succeeding
16 months. Then in late December 2018 and early January 2019, New Horizons went on, as part
of its Decadal Survey-prescribed mission — to explore the Kuiper belt and Kuiper belt objects
(KBOs) — to reconnoiter the first KBO observed at close range, Arrokoth.

The scientific discoveries made by New Horizons in these two landmark first flybys of bodies in the
Kuiper belt, the third zone of the solar system, are chronicled and reviewed in this book, going to
press just five and a half years after the Pluto flyby.

And what did we find? The hundreds of pages of this volume contain that story. In brief, among
other things, we found that even a small, cold, isolated planet can be extraordinarily active, with
deep implications for other Kuiper belt planets like Eris and Makemake. We also learned that such
a world can be as complex as much larger ones, like Earth and Mars. We also found the largest
glacier in the solar system, a spectacular convecting N2-ice sheet known as Sputnik Planitia, as
well as both ancient, middle-aged, and young terrains, and multiple lines of evidence pointing
to a liquid H2O ocean in the planet’s interior. A wide range of processes are now known to have
sculpted Pluto’s surface, including glacial flows, a global or quasi-global ridge-trough system, stress
fractures, constructional and erosional volatile processes, cryovolcanism, haze fallout, winds, and
dunes. The structure of the lower atmosphere was seen to depend on location and time of day, with
prominent hazes, and an upper atmosphere that was much colder and escaping far more slowly
than expected. Moreover, Pluto’s system of satellites also was found to be diverse and fascinating.
Among the small satellites, New Horizons found irregular shapes, ammoniated surfaces, complex
rotational dynamics, and more. At Charon, New Horizons found evidence for a former liquid water
ocean in the interior, unusual landforms, purely ancient surfaces, and no atmosphere whatsoever,
although its dark polar cap appears to be sourced by atmospheric transfer from Pluto.

Four years to the day after New Horizons’ closest approach, on July 14, 2019, scientists convened
at The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory’s Kossiakoff Center where the spacecraft was
built and later operated from, for the “Pluto System After New Horizons” conference. Over
the course of four days of scientific talks and wide-ranging discussions, nearly 200 scientists
shared results from the analysis and interpretation of New Horizons data, as well as from other
xviii
observational, modeling, and laboratory studies. Information from diverse subdisciplines of
planetary science was brought together to synthesize a much more comprehensive picture of the
Pluto system. Most notable was the framing of the Pluto system in the broader context of the
outer solar system to a greater extent than had ever been previously possible. Those findings are
described in this new volume, The Pluto System After New Horizons (PSANH).

This book is broadly organized by the objects within the Pluto system, beginning with review
chapters on Pluto itself, followed by review chapters on Charon, and then a review of what we
know of Pluto’s small satellites. But before any of that, the book opens with three chapters on early
observations and studies of the Pluto system, as well as mission studies to reconnoiter it, and a
chapter on the Pluto system’s context within the Kuiper belt. This is followed by the objects within
the Pluto system, beginning with review chapters on Pluto itself; then review chapters on its largest
moon, Charon; and then a review of what we know of Pluto’s four small satellites. In the final
section of this volume are review chapters covering the origin, interior, and big picture of Pluto and
its place in the Kuiper belt in the post-New Horizons era.

The central section of this volume focuses on Pluto itself, starting with a keystone chapter detailing
the geological observations and inferences of the planet, including placing features and processes in
a time-stratigraphic setting. This chapter is followed by ones covering geodynamics, the geological
evidence for climate-driven evolution of the surface, cratering studies (including chronology), color
and photometry, composition, and the rheology of the major ices on Pluto’s surface. Next there
are chapters covering atmospheric structure, atmospheric photochemistry and haze, atmospheric
dynamics, climate cycles, atmospheric escape, and a chapter on the interaction of the solar wind
with the environment of the Pluto system. The Charon section follows in an analogous order,
starting with the geology of the satellite, followed by color and photometry, and then ending with
Charon’s atmospheric composition. A chapter covering the four small satellites follows the Charon
chapters and concludes this section. As noted above, PSANH rounds out with a section of big-
picture topics, beginning with a chapter on the system’s origin, a geophysical synthesis, which
includes the deep interior and its evolution, and a review of light shed on other KBO dwarf planets
by our new understanding of the Pluto system. PSANH closes with two final chapters, a look at
the future of Pluto system observations, including new mission concepts to follow New Horizons,
and then finally one covering the results of the New Horizons flyby of the cold classical KBO,
named Arrokoth.

No volume on this topic could have occurred without the historic contributions of Lowell
Observatory’s founder Percival Lowell, Pluto’s (and by extension the Kuiper belt’s and third zone’s)
discoverer Clyde Tombaugh, and Charon’s discoverers Jim Christy and Robert Harrington.

The editors would like to thank the authors of all the chapters and appendixes in this book for
their well-written contributions, and the many chapter referees for their important work to improve
the elements of this book. We also thank David Grinspoon and Dava Sobel for their brilliant
and heartfelt foreword to this book. We are also thankful to Ms. Cindy Conrad of the Southwest
Research Institute for her immense help to the editors throughout the entire development of this
book, and want to thank Alissa Earle for the outstanding job she did with the formidable task
of indexing this entire volume. And we are especially grateful to Renée Dotson at the Lunar
and Planetary Institute in Houston, along with her colleagues Heidi Lavelle, Kevin Portillo,
Linda Chappell, and Mercedes Garcia, for their tireless and painstaking efforts in the editing,
formatting, and production of this book.

xix
The exploration of Pluto required numerous battles to be fought, and we gratefully acknowledge the
historic and pivotal contributions of the following individuals from those battles: the late planetary
science giant Michael Belton, who chaired the first planetary decadal survey that recommended
a flyby of Pluto as the highest priority; accomplished space physicist Stamatios “Tom” Krimigis,
who led The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory’s space department through the mission’s
proposal and main development; former U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski, who spearheaded difficult
but ultimately successful funding efforts for the mission; and former NASA Administrator Mike
Griffin, who approved the mission’s launch despite nuanced launch vehicle concerns. We also thank
the many people at NASA and in the planetary science community, as well as the working staff
and leadership teams of the Southwest Research Institute and The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics
Laboratory, who worked so very long and so very diligently to see New Horizons flown to Pluto
and the Kuiper belt, so that the amazing scientific results presented here could be achieved.

Thus, we dedicate this book to the estimated 2500+ men and women of New Horizons, whose work
and dedication made these results possible.

S. Alan Stern, Jeffrey M. Moore, William M. Grundy,

Leslie A. Young, and Richard P. Binzel,
July 2020
 Part 1:

System Background
 Binzel R. P. and Schindler K. (2021) The discoveries of Pluto and Kuiper belt. In The Pluto System After New Horizons
(S. A. Stern, J. M. Moore, W. M. Grundy, L. A. Young, and R. P. Binzel, eds.), pp. 3–8. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson,
DOI: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816540945-ch001.

The Discoveries of Pluto and the Kuiper Belt

Richard P. Binzel
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Kevin Schindler
Lowell Observatory

The discoveries of Pluto and the Kuiper belt draw many parallels to earlier epochs of
planetary discovery. In this introductory chapter, we follow common threads in the history
of planetary searches, not to retell the story in detail, but to place the discovery of Pluto and
the Kuiper belt population in a broad context, creating the imperatives for exploration of the
“third zone” of our solar system.

1. PLANETARY DISCOVERY PROLOGUE good enough to reveal a non-stellar disk, were the key tech-
nological advancement enabling the on-the-spot discovery
If fortune favors the bold, then discovery favors the from his backyard garden, which may still be visited today.
diligent. While this holds true across broad areas of science, Herschel’s discovery of Uranus rekindled a curiosity
it may apply most aptly to planetary astronomers. The his- about the regular spacing of the planets traceable back to
tory of telescopic astronomy began unfolding in 1609 with Kepler (1596), who considered there had to be something
Galileo’s examination of the Moon and planets, most notably between Jupiter and Mars: Inter Jovem et Martem interposui
with the discovery of the moons of Jupiter, now known as planetem. Johann Daniel Titius had worked out in 1766 a
the Galilean satellites. Galileo approached his observations simple numerical series (communicated by Johann Elert
with the open-mindedness of a modern scientist, realizing Bode) that matched the spacing of the known planets but
that the application of “new technology” could reveal what with the same incongruity that rankled Kepler: No known
was previously unseen and heretofore unknown. The ob- planet existed in the Mars-Jupiter gap. For the Titius-Bode
servations themselves were allowed to rank as the ultimate “law” this was the series value corresponding to 2.8 AU. The
authority, which Galileo dutifully recorded in his notebooks fact that Uranus’ orbital distance fit the value “predicted” if
for subsequent interpretation. Deducing that the motions of one extended the Titius-Bode numerical series beyond Saturn
the “Medician Stars” (Galileo’s name for the satellites, hon- gave credence to the idea that the “missing planet” between
oring his benefactors) were centered around Jupiter, rather Mars and Jupiter must be real. As detailed by Cunningham
than Earth, proved to be a staunch challenge to the then- (1988), great confidence for a missing world was held by
longstanding concept of a purely geocentric universe. It later Baron Franz Xaver von Zach, director of the observatory
fell to Isaac Newton, born within a year of Galileo’s death, at Gotha, Germany. Von Zach attempted predictions and
to deduce the underlying physics of gravity as the central conducted observational searches for the missing planet as
force holding satellites and planets in their orbital paths. early as 1785. After a decade of fruitless searches, von Zach
Discovery also requires recognition that what one is organized conferences in 1796 and 1800 with the outcome
seeing is something new or different than expected or being a coordinated search by a group of astronomers call-
predicted. Galileo himself, it seems, actually sighted and ing themselves the “Celestial Police.” Each was assigned
recorded Neptune during its conjunction with Jupiter in responsibility for searching a one-hour section of the zodiac.
1612 (Kowal and Drake, 1980), pre-dating its “discovery” Among those invited to participate in the search was
by 234 years. To be fair, everything (including the multitude Giuseppe Piazzi, an Italian clergyman serving as direc-
of faint background stars) that Galileo was observing and tor of the Palermo Observatory. However, according to
recording was new. Thus it is not surprising that Neptune an archive search reported by Foderà-Serio et al. (2002),
slipping past Jupiter could go unrecognized as being both there is no record of the Italian mail ever delivering the
new and extraordinary. Such was not the case on March 13, invitation. Thus unaware, Piazzi made a true discovery on
1781, when a musician turned astronomer, William Herschel, the night of January 1, 1801, recording the position of a
immediately recognized the new and unusual nature of a star that had not previously been noted in the star catalog
“large” star in Gemini, at a location that we note is just he was compiling. The moment of realization came the fol-
a few degrees away from where Pluto would be unveiled lowing night, when diligent confirmation of the added star
another century-and-a-half later. Herschel’s optics, being revealed that it had moved. While Piazzi first supposed he

3
4   Pluto System After New Horizons

had discovered a comet, its lack of nebulosity and rate of fruit. Independently and unknowingly in France, Urbain Jean
motion consistent with an orbital distance between Mars and Joseph Le Verrier was simultaneously tackling the problem
Jupiter led him to surmise he had found something better of the perturbing planet, reaching similar but quite specific
than a comet (letter from G. Piazzi to B. Oriani, 24 January, solutions for the new planet’s ephemeris in the 1845–1846
1801; Foderà-Serio et al., 2002). The discovery of Ceres, timeframe. Analogous to the reception Adams received,
it seemed, solved the problem of the missing planet. While none of Le Verrier’s compatriot astronomers seemed to be
Piazzi announced his findings in publications of the Palermo convinced that this prediction merited verification — per-
Observatory, the broadest announcement came fittingly haps the possibility of such precision seemed hopelessly
(perhaps ironically) through von Zach (1801), as editor of optimistic. With his patience exhausted, Le Verrier wrote
the Monatliche Correspondenz. to Johann Galle at the Berlin Observatory who set to work
Still more surprises, and discoveries, followed in rapid the very night of the letter’s receipt: September 23, 1846.
succession, with Heinrich Olbers noting on March 28, 1802 Neptune was discovered within 1° of its predicted position.
a second moving object (Pallas) in the same vicinity of Mathematical astronomers did not rejoice for long, as
the sky as Ceres. It was Herschel (1802) who noted these shortly after Neptune was recognized as the eighth member
bodies had star-like (aster-like) appearances, coining the of the planetary family, some scientists analyzing its orbit
term “asteroids.” That the Mars-Jupiter space was a zone suggested its apparent mass didn’t seem to account for all
comprised by a multitude of bodies became fully apparent the irregularities in Uranus’ orbit. Ergo, another planet must
within just a few years with the discoveries of Juno (1804) still be out there somewhere, tugging at Uranus. Le Verrier
and Vesta (1807). himself spent varying amounts of time on the problem as did
others, including Canadian-American astronomer/mathema-
2. PLANETARY DISCOVERY THROUGH tician Simon Newcomb of the U.S. Naval Observatory and
PREDICTION AND SEARCH later Johns Hopkins University and American astronomer
David Peck Todd, who spent most of his career at Amherst
It is little recognized that were it not for Carl Friedrich College. French astronomer Camille Flammarion — later a
Gauss, the discovery of Ceres might have ended badly for friend of Percival Lowell’s — also played a role, although
the Celestial Police. The urgency for how to predict where his reasons for believing a ninth planet existed centered
this telescopic planet could be found many months later led around the apparent relationship between planetary orbits
Gauss to invent the methodology of least-squares to fit the and a seemingly non-random distribution in the heliocentric
available data and develop the fundamental methods of orbit longitude distribution of comets (Cruikshank and Sheehan,
solution (Gauss, 1809) still in use today. Gauss’ method, 2018). Most of these efforts petered out. Thus, at the open-
and prediction (accurate to within 0.5°) for the ephemeris ing of the twentieth century, the majority of astronomers
location of Ceres, enabled Olbers to definitively spot it doubted the reality of a planet beyond Neptune.
again on what turned out to be its one-year anniversary of
discovery, January 1, 1802. 2.1. Percival Lowell and the Search for Pluto
One can perceive that mathematically-minded astrono-
mers became emboldened by the success with Ceres. Con- Entering the scene at the turn of the century was Per-
temporaneous with Ceres and the discovery of a brood of cival Lowell, who in 1894 established his own private
asteroids was growing concern that something was askew observatory initially to prove the existence of intelligent
with the motion of Uranus. Pre-discovery observations of life on Mars. Over the first decade of work at his Flagstaff,
Uranus (unwittingly measured as a fixed star) dating at Arizona facility, Lowell expanded his research to include
least to 1690 by the first Astronomer Royal, John Flam- characterization of other bodies of the solar system, leading
steed, could not be fit with the current measured motion. to his development of the concept of planetary evolution
Restricting the analysis to “post-discovery” measurements that he called “planetology.” Not timid to share his ideas
from 1781 forward also yielded unsatisfactory orbit solu- and not shy of self-promotion, Lowell summarized his early
tions, leading to some speculations that a planet beyond comparative studies of the planets in a series of public lec-
Uranus could be exerting a disturbing gravitational force. tures in 1902 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
John Couch Adams was born into this era, where in 1841 (MIT). His engaging style and provocative ideas motivated
(at the young age of 22) he began to consider the problem the publisher Houghton, Mifflin and Company to compile
of the purported irregularities in Uranus’ orbit. He reached and print the lectures in a diminutive book titled The Solar
a conclusion for a predicted location for the unseen planet System (Lowell, 1903). Of significance toward unraveling the
as early as 1845. As described by the astronomer and structure of the outer solar system are two passages in which
historian Patrick Moore (Tombaugh and Moore, 1980), a he suggests the possibility of a new outer planet. In the
sequence of mishaps and arrogant disregard for the young first, Lowell postulates that specific planets to some degree
scientist led to his prediction being ignored by his fellow gravitationally control specific meteor showers. Connecting
Englishmen. Krajnović (2016) proposes that it was owing the Andromedids with Jupiter and the Leonids with Uranus,
to Adams’ predictions being imprecise that his compatriots he boldly expounded that the Perseids and Lyrids “go out
remained unconvinced that an extensive search would bear to meet the unknown planet which circles at a distance of
 Binzel and Schindler: The Discoveries of Pluto and the Kuiper Belt  5

about forty-five astronomical units from the Sun.” (Italics different telescopes, trying to photograph candidate areas
added.) In typical Lowell pomp, he concludes, “It may seem of the sky. Lowell’s own search effort began in 1905 and
to you strange to speak thus confidently of what no mortal faded out in 1909, but the following year he reinvigorated
eye has seen, but the finger of the sign-board of phenomena the search upon learning that a former colleague-turned
points so clearly as to justify the definite article. The eye of rival, William Pickering at Harvard, was jumping into the
analysis has already suspected the invisible.” It seems inter- planet-search fray. Lowell redoubled his efforts not to be
esting that Lowell chose to focus on a distance near 45 AU scooped by a competitor by using a suite of new instru-
even though Comet Swift-Tuttle (parent of the Perseids) and ments and assistants, doggedly continuing the search until
Comet C/1861 G1 (Thatcher; parent of the Lyrids) have his death in late 1916.
aphelion distances of 51 and 110 AU, respectively. In what Lowell’s brother Abbott Lawrence Lowell called
While in these initial musings Lowell pointed to these Percival’s biggest disappointment in life, Percival did not
apparent relationships between planets with meteor showers discover a planet (A. L. Lowell, 1935). Ironically, however,
and comets as evidence for a previously undetected planet, in a sense Lowell did spot Pluto: One of Percival’s assistants,
he quickly changed focus to evaluating the least-squares of Thomas Gill, unknowingly photographed Pluto twice in
residuals of the orbit of Uranus. This method was reliant 1915 — on March 19 and April 7 (Schindler and Grundy,
on accurate measurements of the position of Uranus as well 2018). Thus came an end to this self-taught astronomer’s life
as sound theoretical estimates. By the time he published and career, as well as his personal search for a new world.
his magnum opus on the subject (Memoirs on a Trans-
Neptunian Planet) in 1915, his estimated distance fell in 2.2. Clyde Tombaugh’s Discovery of Pluto
the 40–50-AU range. Thus Lowell ultimately set 45 AU as
the most likely number (Lowell, 1915; also see discussion in With persistence as a family trait, in 1927 Percival’s
Cruikshank and Sheehan, 2018). Lowell was not completely nephew, Roger Lowell Putnam, assumed the reins as sole
sold on his own estimates, as indicated by his statement, trustee of Lowell Observatory and decided to recommence
“Owing to the inexactitude of our data, then, we cannot the search for what Percival had long called “Planet X.”
regard our results with the complacency of completeness Observatory director V. M. Slipher formulated a plan for
we should like” (Lowell, 1915). the search, building on the earlier efforts of Lowell but
Later in his book, and in similar fashion as his good instituting a much more systematic approach. In late 1928,
friend Flammarion, Lowell likewise connects the orbits of while a new 13-inch astrograph was being constructed at the
comets to planets, with clusters of comets linked to Jupiter, observatory for use in the search, Slipher received a letter
Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Lowell did not stop with the from a 23-year-old Kansas farmer and amateur astronomer,
known planets, going on to say he could recognize more Clyde Tombaugh, who had aspirations as a professional
comet clusters appearing to clump further from the Sun. astronomer (Tombaugh and Moore, 1980).
Lowell summarizes: “This can hardly be an accident; and Thus began an exchange of correspondence that soon
if not chance, it means a planet out there as yet unseen by led to Slipher offering Tombaugh a job at the observatory
man, but certain sometime to be detected and added to the to help with the planet search. Tombaugh arrived at Lowell
others. Thus not only are comets a part of our solar system on January 15, 1929, and several weeks later, on Febru-
now recognized, but they act as finger-posts to planets not yet ary 11, the primary lens for the 13-inch instrument arrived.
known.” Lowell’s finger pointing based on the orbital distri- Slipher, Tombaugh, and other observatory staff then spent
bution of known objects in the outer solar system presages several months installing and testing the astrograph, work-
detective work in the current epoch still looking for traces ing through problems such as plate fogging and warping.
of a massive planet beyond Neptune (Trujillo and Sheppard, Commissioning complete, they began the planet search on
2014; Brown and Batygin, 2016; Batygin et al., 2019). April 6. Initially, Tombaugh took the plates and the senior
In 1905, two years after publication of The Solar System, astronomers at Lowell then examined them, but they all
Lowell went from theorizing to searching, quietly begin- were also occupied with other duties. Consequently, within
ning what he referred to as “The Invariable Plane Search” a few months the young Tombaugh took over the grueling
(Schindler and Grundy, 2018). He tried to mathematically task of plate examination. In a typical plate of the search
pinpoint the location of the purported planet — with the area, Tombaugh took one-hour exposures and captured an
help of a small team of human “computers.” Their objective average of 300,000 star images. During the day, he pains-
was to see if adding a perturbing mass could be effective takingly examined pairs of these plates that captured the
in reducing the residuals of Uranus and Neptune. By this same portion of the sky but which were taken a few days
time Lowell had realized the connection of planets to comets apart. The challenge of systematically analyzing this sheer
and meteor showers was tenuous and thus, in the spirit of number of stellar images was compounded by the appear-
Adams and Le Verrier, focused on the apparent unaccounted ance of numerous asteroids, whose motion as captured on
irregularities in Uranus’ orbit, which meant the planet he the plates closely resembled that of the expected planet. For
was looking for was massive enough to tug noticeably Tombaugh this reinforced the importance of photographing
on Uranus. Meanwhile, Lowell and his team of observers specific areas of the sky only when they were at opposition,
began an actual search, experimenting with a number of when the apparent motion of those interlopers would be
6   Pluto System After New Horizons

maximized and their distance easily measured to ensure they vancing physical studies of Pluto. Fittingly for this volume,
were not a more distant planet (Hoyt, 1980; Tombaugh and with Pluto no longer being a single planetary body, the era
Moore, 1980). The work was tedious and required patience of studying the Pluto system was born.
and diligence, traits that Tombaugh had learned growing
up on the farm. On February 18, 1930, just 10 months af- 2.4. Revealing the Kuiper Belt: Discovery by
ter commencing the search, Tombaugh fulfilled the vision David Jewitt and Jane Luu
of his fellow self-taught astronomer, Percival Lowell, and
discovered emerging “out of the darkness, the planet Pluto.” When Lowell Observatory announced Pluto’s discovery
In their book bearing this title, Tombaugh and Moore (1980) on March 13, 1930 — coinciding with the 149th anniversary
thoroughly detail the events of the day and following weeks of Herschel’s discovery of Uranus and what would have
leading to the naming and formal announcement of this been Percival Lowell’s 75th birthday — Clyde Tombaugh
newly discovered world. found himself in a very unaccustomed light. Rather than the
solitude of diligently photographing the sky or the tedium
2.3. James Christy’s Discovery of Charon of examining the resulting plates, as he had regularly done
for the past year, Tombaugh found himself in the spotlight
While Tombaugh’s discovery of Pluto is a story of persis- speaking with media, answering fan mail, and otherwise
tence and diligence toward a deliberate search, Jim Christy’s taking care of discovery-related requests. Astronomers from
discovery of Charon is not unlike that of Herschel or Piazzi, around the world wanted details about the new planet’s
where dedication to the task at hand and open-minded per- position so they could determine its orbit, while the public
ception proved to be the key ingredients. Under this recipe, just wanted to know what to call this new world, the first
what one might think is “accidental” is no accident at all. planet discovered in the United States. Quite logically, a
Making routine astrometric measurements to track follow-on question was being asked by scientists and the
Pluto’s orbital motion was one of the duties assigned to public alike: Are there other planets like this new one out
James W. Christy, an astronomer at the U.S. Naval Observa- there, waiting to be discovered? By May 1930, the demands
tory’s headquarters in Washington, DC. As part of this task in on Tombaugh’s time and attention had been resolved and
updating Pluto’s ephemeris, Christy had asked astronomers he was finally able to get back to research, allowing him
at the Naval Observatory’s Flagstaff Station (NOFS) — lo- to begin working on the answer to the follow-on question
cated just 4 miles west of where Clyde Tombaugh discovered in the most logical way possible: by resuming the search.
Pluto — to take several images of Pluto using the facility’s Thus as a tribute to the finest sense of pure scientific inquiry,
61-inch telescope. NOFS astronomer Anthony Hewitt took Tombaugh continued the systematic search of the skies for
the requested images on April 13 and May 12, 1978 and the ensuing 13 years. (His only significant time away was to
then sent them to Christy in Washington, DC. Using a high- earn his undergraduate degree at the University of Kansas.)
precision measuring machine on June 22, Christy began During that stretch, Tombaugh and colleagues who occasion-
measuring these and other Pluto plates from 1965, 1970, ally helped him surveyed about 75% of the sky down to a
and 1971. Examining these plates under magnification, it magnitude as faint as 18. All together they captured some
seemed many of them were of poor quality because Pluto 90 million stellar images and recorded about 4000 asteroids,
appeared out-of-round and distinctly asymmetrical, with a nearly 30,000 extra-galactic nebulae, and 1800 variable stars
bulge in the north-south orientation. Rather than cast the (Giclas, 1997; Hoyt, 1980). Adding to the scorecard was
April and May plates aside and ask for new ones, Christy one comet, one globular cluster, and five open star clusters.
took a broader look at everything the plates had to offer and Nevertheless, as Tombaugh wound down his survey
came to an astounding realization: Background stars on in 1943, Irish-born military officer, electrical engineer,
each plate were in fact perfectly round (as they should be) economist, and amateur astronomer Kenneth Edgeworth
and didn’t exhibit the same lopsidedness as the neighboring speculated that comets or other bodies could be expected
Pluto images. Elongation of all the plate images — both in the region beyond Neptune. This was the first suggestion
Pluto and the stars — would have been easily explained [or among the first suggestions; see Davies et al. (2008)]
as poorly tracked and smeared or out-of-focus images. But of the existence of what later became known as the Kuiper
with the images revealing that only Pluto itself was appear- belt. Even though Edgeworth expanded on this idea in
ing elongated, the answer had to be something intrinsic to 1949, neither of his papers drew much attention (Edge-
Pluto itself. That something was presumably the presence worth, 1943, 1949). Much more well-known Dutch-born
of a large satellite, soon to be named Charon (Smith et al., astronomer Gerard Kuiper and others subsequently began
1978; Christy and Harrington, 1980). Any doubts that the considering the possibility of a ring of icy bodies beyond
photographic anomalies were due to a satellite were removed Neptune (Kuiper, 1951).
in 1985 when mutual transits and occultations revealed So why didn’t Tombaugh’s painstaking survey find an-
themselves in time-resolved photometric monitoring of the other planet or, for that matter, any other body at or beyond
Pluto system (Binzel et al., 1985). As detailed in the chapter Pluto’s distance? The detection limits of the photographic
in this volume by Lunine et al., Charon’s discovery unlocked plate/blink comparator technology simply weren’t good
the mystery of Pluto’s mass and paved the way for the ad- enough to detect any but the largest and closest members of
 Binzel and Schindler: The Discoveries of Pluto and the Kuiper Belt  7

any transneptunian population. Pluto’s large size and high the photographic part of the search was abandoned largely
albedo on an inbound trajectory toward perihelion were the due to the physical and mechanical burden of dealing with
combination of factors needed for bringing an outer solar photographic plates, both in acquiring the images but also
system discovery within the grasp of the technology avail- in adequately scanning them. In essence, this proved to be
able in the early twentieth century. the transition from the Tombaugh era and mechanical blink
The transformative technical revolution in astronomy (in- comparators to the modern digital era of comparing images
cluding planetary searches) emerged in the 1980s when the using computer software.
astronomical community broadly adopted the use of digital Over the next five years, up to 1992, Jewitt and Luu
imaging arrays, specifically charge-coupled devices (CCDs). progressively employed larger-sized CCDs as they became
Rather than a typical photographic plate having a detection available and migrated to the University of Hawaii enabling
efficiency of about 10% for recording an arriving photon, more frequent access to larger-aperture telescopes. On the
the peak efficiency of a CCD surpasses 90%. The trade-off night of August 30, 1992, using the largest CCD they had
for search strategy, however, was substantial. CCD detec- access to up to that point, they detected a 23rd-magnitude
tors were literally postage-stamp-sized or smaller, whereas object just beyond the orbit of Neptune (Jewitt and Luu,
photographic plates covered substantially greater areas in the 1993). Computer processing of the succession of four im-
focal plane. (For example, the Palomar Schmidt telescope ages at the telescope allowed them to realize in real time
utilized glass plates covering 14 × 14 square inches.) that they had a potential discovery, with their eyes spotting
One of the astronomers who quickly embraced the emerg- on the screen an object having the correct rate of motion
ing capability of CCD imaging was British-born David Jew- and expected apparent magnitude. For Jewitt and Luu, their
itt. Jewitt made his mark in 1982 by using this cutting-edge moment of discovery paralleled Herschel, Galle, and Piazzi,
detection capability in recovering the nucleus of Comet 1P/ who as visual observers naturally made their realizations in
Halley on its inbound trajectory toward its 1986 perihelion real time. Designated 1992 QB1 (later designated 15760 Al-
(Jewitt and Danielson, 1984). Around the same time, he bion), the SMO Survey had a long enough track record that
began wondering whether the outer solar system was really reasonable statistics could be projected even from a sample
empty, or just had not been surveyed thoroughly enough to of one; finding 1992 QB1 meant that thousands of similar
faint enough limits. There was only one way to find out, and objects almost certainly had to be there.
that was to look. In some ways this was a bolder step than Ignited by the discovery by Jewitt and Luu, additional
von Zach (Ceres), Galle (Neptune), or Tombaugh (Pluto) discoveries beyond Neptune followed and increasing recog-
as there was no specific prediction on where to point. Most nition began being cast back to the writings of Edgeworth,
nearly, it paralleled the dogged determination that Tombaugh Kuiper, and others (Davies, 2008). A new “third zone” of
had shown 50 years earlier in extending his own survey our solar system had been discovered, with Pluto being its
another 13 years after the accomplishment of its presumed largest known member. As evidenced by the spawning of this
objective. These explorers were rather straightforwardly new field in planetary science and its growing to the point
asking: “What’s out there?” of filling its own volume in this book series (Barucci et al.,
New graduate student Jane Luu arrived at Jewitt’s MIT 2008), finding 1992 QB1 was a game changer in driving the
office at an auspicious time (1986) when Jewitt’s curiosity imperative for exploration of the Pluto system. As detailed
and available technology were at a point of convergence. in the chapter by Lunine et al., exploration of the Kuiper
As recounted by Jewitt (2010), the pair commenced a two- belt and Pluto became the top priority for understanding
pronged approach using large-area-format photographic the newly recognizable structure of the outer solar system.
plates (limiting magnitude ~20, two or more magnitudes Thus, by the time New Horizons emerged as a candidate
fainter than Tombaugh) to search broadly and postage-stamp- mission, its objectives as an explorer of both the Kuiper belt
sized CCDs to search tiny patches more deeply (magnitude and Pluto were quite clear. Those objectives were realized
limit ~24). The searchers concentrated on the slowest- by the 2015 Pluto system encounter and the 2019 encounter
moving objects, assuring themselves of finding objects in of 2014 MU69 (486958 Arrokoth). In each case, the time
the outermost reaches of our solar system without being span from discovery to in situ spacecraft investigation was
distracted by bodies closer in, such as main-belt asteroids. the shortest in the history of space exploration.
The first of the intermediate objects known as Centaurs,
extending beyond the orbit of Saturn, had been detected by REFERENCES
Kowal in 1977 (Kowal et al., 1979; Kowal, 1989). While
new Centaurs would be major discoveries, Jewitt and Luu Barucci M. A., Boehnardt H., Cruikshank D. P., and Morbidelli A., eds.
(2008) The Solar System Beyond Neptune. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson.
set their determined gaze at Neptune’s distance and beyond, 592 pp.
aptly naming their project the Slow Moving Object (SMO) Batygin K., Adams F., Brown M. E., and Becker J. C. (2019) The planet
Survey (Luu and Jewitt, 1988). Contemporary dynamical nine hypothesis. Phys. Rept., 805, 1–53.
Binzel R. P., Tholen D. J., Tedesco E. F., Buratti B. J., and Nelson
analysis (Duncan et al., 1988) as well as work by Fernández R. M. (1985) The detection of eclipses in the Pluto-Charon system.
(1980) pointing to a source region for short-period comets Science, 228, 1193–1195.
just beyond Neptune gave affirming rationale for optimizing Brown M. E. and Batygin K. (2016) Observational constraints on the
orbit and location of planet nine in the outer solar system. Astrophys.
their survey strategy toward this region. After a year or so, J. Lett., 824, L23.
8   Pluto System After New Horizons

Christy J. W. and Harrington R. S. (1980) The discovery and orbit of orbium celestium deque causis coelorum numeri, magnitudinis,
Charon. Icarus, 44, 38–40. motuumque periodicorum genuinis et propiis, demonstratum
Cruikshank D. P. and Sheehan W. (2018) Discovering Pluto: per quinque regularia corpora geometrica. Excudebat Georgius
Exploration at the Edge of the Solar System. Univ. of Arizona, Gruppenbachius, Tubingae. Translated by Duncan A. M. (1981) The
Tucson. 475 pp. Secret of the Universe. Abaris, New York. 267 pp.
Cunningham C. J. (1988) Introduction to Asteroids. Willmann-Bell, Kowal C. T. (1989) A solar system survey. Icarus, 77, 118–123.
Richmond. 208 pp. Kowal C. T. and Drake S. (1980) Galileo’s observations of Neptune.
Davies J. K., McFarland J., Bailey M. E., and Marsden B. G. (2008) Nature, 287, 311–313.
The early development of ideas concerning the transneptunian Kowal C. T., Liller W., and Marsden B. G. (1979) The discovery and
region. In The Solar System Beyond Neptune (M. A. Barucci et al., orbit of (2060) Chiron. In Dynamics of the Solar System (R. L.
eds.), pp. 11–23. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson. Duncombe. ed.), pp. 245–250. IAU Symp. 81, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Duncan M., Quinn T., and Tremaine S. (1988) The origin of short-period Krajnovic D. (2016) The contrivance of Neptune. Astron. Geophys., 57,
comets. Astrophys. J. Lett., 328, L69. 28–34.
Edgeworth K. (1943) The evolution of our planetary system. J. Br. Kuiper G. P. (1951) On the origin of the solar system. In Astrophysics:
Astron. Assoc., 53, 181–188. A Topical Symposium Commemorating the Fiftieth Anniversary
Edgeworth K. (1949) The origin and evolution of the solar system. Mon. of the Yerkes Observatory and a Half Century of Progress in
Not. R. Astron. Soc., 109, 600–609. Astrophysics (J. A. Hynek, ed.), pp. 357–414. McGraw-Hill, New
Fernandez J. A. (1980) On the existence of a comet belt beyond York.
Neptune. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 192, 481–491. Lowell A. L. (1935) Biography of Percival Lowell. Macmillan, New
Foderà-Serio G., Manara A., and Sicoli P. (2002) Giuseppe Piazzi and York. 212 pp.
the discovery of Ceres. In Asteroids III (W. F. Bottke Jr. et al., eds.), Lowell P. (1903) The Solar System. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. 134 pp.
pp. 17–24. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson. Lowell P. (1915) Memoir on a Trans-Neptunian Planet. T. P. Nichols
Gauss C. F. (1809) Theoria Motus Corporum Coelestium in Sectionibus and Son, Lynn. 105 pp.
Conicis Solem Ambientium. F. Perthes and I. H. Besser, Hamburg. Luu J. X. and Jewitt D. (1988) A two-part search for slow-moving
228 pp. objects. Astron. J., 95, 1256–1262.
Giclas H. L. (1997) The 13-inch Pluto Discovery Telescope. Lowell Schindler K. and Grundy W. (2018) Pluto and Lowell Observatory: A
Observatory, Flagstaff. 17 pp. History of Discovery at Flagstaff. History Press, Charleston. 174 pp.
Herschel W. (1802) Observations on the two lately discovered celestial Smith J. C., Christy J. W., and Graham J. A. (1978) 1978 P 1. IAU
bodies. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, 2, 213–232. Circular 3241.
Hoyt W. G. (1980) Planets X and Pluto. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson. Tombaugh C. W. and Moore P. (1980) Out of the Darkness: The Planet
302 pp. Pluto. Stackpole, Harrisburg. 221 pp.
Jewitt D. (2010) The discovery of the Kuiper belt. Astron. Beat, 48, 1–5. Trujillo C. A. and Sheppard S. S. (2014) A Sedna-like body with a
Jewitt D. and Danielson G. E. (1984) Charge-coupled device photometry perihelion of 80 astronomical units. Nature, 507, 471–474.
of comet P/Halley. Icarus, 60, 435–444. Von Zach F. X. (1801) Über einen zwischen Mars und Jupiter längst
Jewitt D. and Luu J. (1993) Discovery of the candidate Kuiper belt vermuteten, nun wohnscheinlich entdeckten neuen Hauptplaneten
object 1992 QB1. Nature, 362, 730–732. unseres Sonnen Systems. Monatliche Correspondenz zur
Kepler J. (1596) Prodromus dissertationum cosmographicarum Beforderung der Erd- und Himmelskunde, 3, 592–623.
continens mysterium cosmographicum de admirabili proportione
 Lunine J. I., Stern S. A., Young L. A., Neufeld M. J., and Binzel R. P. (2021) Early Pluto science, the imperative for exploration, and
New Horizons. In The Pluto System After New Horizons (S. A. Stern, J. M. Moore, W. M. Grundy, L. A. Young, and R. P. Binzel, eds.),
pp. 9–20. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, DOI: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816540945-ch002.

Early Pluto Science, the Imperative for Exploration, and New Horizons
Jonathan I. Lunine
Cornell University

S. Alan Stern and Leslie A. Young

Southwest Research Institute

Michael J. Neufeld
National Air and Space Museum

Richard P. Binzel
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Like a number of other great discoveries, that of distant Pluto was based upon a miscon-
ception, in this case that the orbital motion of Neptune was being influenced by a large, more
distant, “Planet X.” Nevertheless, Clyde Tombaugh’s remarkable discovery launched decades of
efforts to push telescopic techniques to the limit, and theoretical speculations as to why the solar
system’s last planetary outpost should be so small. Those speculations were answered beginning
in 1992 with the discovery of the Kuiper belt, of which Pluto is a part. The idea of Pluto as the
last planetary frontier galvanized the space science community into pushing for a mission to
explore what would turn out to be a body with a wealth of geologic and atmospheric processes
and a rich system of satellites. The long odyssey to make the New Horizons mission a reality
was the capstone to an era in which the mode of planning planetary exploration was transformed.

1. BEFORE 1930: THE HISTORICAL Tombaugh was the first to identify it, in his inexhaustibly
ASTRONOMICAL CONTEXT OF diligent blink comparator analysis of plates taken in 1930
PLUTO’S DISCOVERY at Lowell Observatory (Slipher, 1930).
Although the discovery of Pluto was celebrated at the
By the end of the 1920s the United States had become time as another triumph of American astronomy, it was
preeminent in the field of observational cosmology, with much fainter than expected and — thanks to the discovery of
prominent astronomers such as Milton Humason, Edwin Charon four decades later (Christy and Harrington, 1978) —
Hubble, Henrietta Leavitt, and Vesto M. Slipher demon- eventually shown to have a mass much too small to have
strating the true scale of the cosmos and establishing em- been responsible for the perturbations of Uranus’s orbit that
pirically the relationship between distance and recessional began the hunt decades before. With the analysis by Standish
velocities of galaxies. One of those pioneering American (1993) that the apparent residuals in Uranus’ orbit were the
astronomers, Slipher, did his work at Lowell Observatory, result of the use of an erroneous mass for Neptune, it became
whose founder, Percival Lowell, began the first — and only clear that the discovery of the ninth planet was due to hard
systematic — search for a planet beyond Neptune in 1905 work by Tombaugh and Lowell’s persistence (including
(Reaves, 1997, and references therein). Lowell’s multiyear bequeathing funds for a new telescope after his passing),
search, and briefer searches by others, were stimulated by but not due to Lowell’s theoretical prediction.
the conclusions of Herschel that the residuals in the orbital One might ask how the history of solar system astronomy
elements of Uranus could not be accounted for entirely might have changed had the search for Pluto failed, or if the
by Neptune (Herschel, 1867), and then by the analyses search were not mounted in the first place (if, e.g., spurious
of Pickering (1909) and ultimately of Lowell himself residuals for Uranus’ position had not been obtained). Pluto
(Lowell, 1915). Because such a planet was expected to be would very likely have been discovered serendipitously be-
massive and hence bright, the much-fainter Pluto escaped fore the 1992 discovery of the first small Kuiper belt object
detection, although it was later “precovered” in Lowell’s (KBO), labeled 1992 QB1 (and now called 15760 Albion)
archival photographic plates of 1915 (Lampland, 1933), and (Jewitt and Luu, 1993), but plausibly after the first paper pre-
those of Humason in 1919 (Nicholson and Mayall, 1931). dicting a belt of material beyond Neptune (Edgeworth, 1943).
9
10   Pluto System After New Horizons

In his model for the origin of the solar system, Edgeworth numerical integrations that Pluto and Neptune were locked
(1949) regarded Pluto as an escaped satellite of Neptune, and in a precise 2:3 mean-motion resonance that librates about
hence not a constraint on the distribution of material in his a center point relative to Neptune. The longitudinal phas-
planet-forming “annulus.” Kuiper (1951), on the other hand, ing of these two bodies in resonance is such that the two
explicitly considered Pluto’s eccentric orbit in proposing that objects can never approach closely and the escaped moon
the solar nebula (and proto-Neptune’s orbit) extended out idea is implausible. The libration of the resonance angle
to 50 AU. However, his nebular model is only of historical prohibits close approaches between Neptune and Pluto; the
interest today. Perhaps the best answer to whether planetary conjunctions occur near Pluto’s aphelion and the strength
astronomy might have changed in the absence of Pluto’s of the resonance stabilizes Pluto’s orbit (cf. Malhotra and
discovery until decades later is “not much in the long run,” Williams, 1997). The properties of this resonance would
because the need to explain the injection of long period eventually lead to the realization that Pluto was almost cer-
comets into the Oort cloud (Oort, 1950) and the planar tainly formed, and remained in, a belt of primordial bodies
distribution of short-period comets (Duncan et al., 1987) beyond the realm of the giant planets.
would each have spurred on searches for objects in a belt The physical properties of Pluto, and after its discovery,
beyond Neptune in any case, and would have eventually of Pluto’s large satellite Charon, were an active area of
resulted in Pluto’s discovery as well as the discovery of the research in the decades up to 1990. By mid-century photo-
Kuiper belt and Pluto’s cohort of Kuiper belt dwarf planets. metric observations determined the rotation period of Pluto
(Walker and Hardie, 1955), but it was not until the 1970s
2. 1930–1992: THE NINTH PLANET BEFORE that Pluto’s large obliquity was inferred from improved and
THE KUIPER BELT extended photometry (Andersson and Fix, 1973). With the
discovery of Charon (Christy and Harrington, 1978), the
system mass of just over 1025 g was roughly determined.
2.1. Speculations and Science This was crucial, because it established that Pluto was not
a massive object. Although its faintness in discovery im-
The history of Pluto studies prior to the discovery of the ages had ruled out Pluto as the source of the apparent (and
next discovered Kuiper belt object, 1992 QB1, is long and ultimately artefactual) residuals in Uranus’ orbital motion,
complex (e.g., Marcialis, 1997; Stern and Mitton, 1998, considerable controversy remained for decades over just
DeVorkin, 2013). Some of the scientific breakthroughs up exactly how small Pluto might be.
to the discovery of the Kuiper belt are tabulated in Table 1 Duncombe and Seidelman (1980) tabulated estimates of
and are briefly described below. Pluto’s mass, and one can identify three “epochs” between
Soon after Pluto’s discovery (see the chapter by Binzel each that the mass declines by an order of magnitude. Pre-
and Schindler), its orbit was determined to be unusually discovery, planet “X” was on the order of 10 M⊕; from 1930
eccentric and inclined relative to that of the other planets to 1955, Pluto is on the order of 1 M⊕, and from 1968 to
(Leonard, 1930). Pluto’s dip inward of Neptune led to the 1978, Pluto steadily declines from 0.1 M⊕ to a final value,
idea that the ninth planet might be an escaped moon of given by Charon’s discovery, some 50 times smaller. Indeed,
Neptune [cf. Marcialis (1997) for the complex story of who a tongue-in-cheek treatment of this history by Dessler and
first proposed this], but some 35 years after the orbit of Pluto Russell (1980) predicted a massless Pluto by 1984, by
was determined, Cohen and Hubbard (1965) established by drawing a best-fit line through all the points. However, it

TABLE 1. Partial list of Pluto/Charon discoveries through 1992.

Year Discovery Reference

1930 Pluto discovered; orbit determined Bower and Whipple (1930)
1955 Rotation period of 6.4 days determined Walker and Hardie (1955)
1965 Neptune-Pluto 2:3 orbit resonance found Cohen and Hubbard (1965)
1973 Extreme obliquity of Pluto discovered Andersson and Fix (1973)
1976 Discovery of methane ice on Pluto Cruikshank et al. (1976)
1978 Charon discovered; system mass measured Christy and Harrington (1978)
1985–1990 First maps of Pluto Buie and Tholen (1989)
1986 First reliable radii of Pluto and Charon Dunbar and Tedesco (1986)
1987 Discovery of water ice on Charon Marcialis et al. (1987)
1988 Stellar occultation sees Pluto’s atmosphere Elliot et al. (1989)
1991–1993 Pluto-Charon mass ratio Young et al. (1994)
1992 Atmospheric methane Young et al. (1997)
1992 Discovery of N2 and CO ice on Pluto Owen et al. (1993)

From Lunine et al. (1995) and Stern and Mitton (1998). Not all references to a given discovery are listed.
 Lunine et al.: Early Pluto Science   11

is the clustering of the data points, in contrast to a smooth occultation from a possible atmosphere required a larger size
trend, that reveals the underlying cause of the decline: The for the moon. In the end, as Voyager 2 sped toward Neptune,
pre-discovery mass was required to explain the residuals it became clear that the speckle observations were seeing a
in Uranus’ motion, while in the two decades after Pluto’s bright polar cap and not the darker annulus around it. Tri-
discovery, improved measurements of the motion of Uranus ton’s numbers from Voyager 2 were a radius of 1353 km, a
and Neptune reduced the required mass of Pluto assuming mass of 2.1 × 1025 kg, and a density of 2.05 g cm–3 (Lodders
it was the perturber. Even more precise measurements in and Fegley, 1998).
the 1960s and 1970s further reduced Pluto’s mass, but were Although the details are different, the parallels between
overtaken by the definitive mass given by the orbital periods these Pluto and Triton stories are striking: Both bodies had
and separations of Pluto and Charon. That mass eliminated incorrect bulk parameters thanks to inaccurate observations
Pluto once and for all as the cause of any residuals in the ice of Uranus and/or Neptune; both bodies were initially thought
giant orbital motions, which finally were proved erroneous to be much bigger than they are, and then began to shrink.
as noted above with the analysis of Standish (1993). However, while Pluto’s mass and radius values were settled
As ultimately incorrect as they were, the inflated masses thanks to the discovery of Charon, Triton’s required a space-
of Pluto up through the mid-1960s combined with imprecise craft mission — Voyager — a mission that would presage a
estimates of radii contributed to a science-fictionesque mys- remarkable voyage of exploration through the Pluto-Charon
tique of the ninth planet. Typical values of the density ob- system by New Horizons a quarter of a century later.
tained were as large as or much larger than Earth (Marcialis, Crucial to the eventual interest in Pluto as a target of
1997). Was this a new kind of ultradense planet, Mars-sized spacecraft exploration was its multiple-component icy
but made of exotic material? Might it be larger, perhaps surface and the presence of an atmosphere. Cruikshank
Earth-sized after all? Gerard Kuiper instead dismissed the and colleagues discovered methane by carefully selecting
masses as overestimates, and on the basis of B-V colors two narrow band filters in the 1–2-µm wavelength region
presciently imagined a smaller body with an ice-covered (Cruikshank et al., 1976), concluding it was a surface ice
surface (Kuiper, 1950), an idea that was confirmed a quarter based in part on the absence of a water ice signature. A
century later in a paper led by one of his former students decade later, water ice was discovered — but on Pluto’s
(Cruikshank et al., 1976). However, it would not be until companion Charon (Marcialis et al., 1987; Buie et al.,
the fortuitous set of “mutual events” [transits of Charon in 1987). The conclusion that the methane signature was
front of Pluto and occultations of Charon behind Pluto, first from the surface (Buie and Fink, 1987; Spencer et al.,
detected by Binzel et al. (1985)] that highly accurate radii 1990) would be confirmed years later (Stern et al., 1993).
could be obtained (Buie et al., 1992; Young and Binzel, A stellar occultation by Pluto was observed in 1988,
1993) showing Pluto to be 70% the radius of Earth’s Moon. definitively establishing the presence of an atmosphere
Together with the mass given by the orbital separation with (Elliot et al., 1989; Hubbard et al., 1988). Analysis of
Charon and the orbital period, Pluto turned out to have a airborne and groundbased occultation data combined
density approximately close to twice that of water ice — and with consideration of the energy balance in the tenuous
to be a small rock/ice world at the edge of the solar system. atmosphere led to the conclusion that this atmosphere
An interesting perspective regarding the problem of could not be mostly methane, but rather dominated by a
Pluto’s bulk properties comes from the history of obser- heavier molecule (Yelle and Lunine, 1989), as suggested
vations of Neptune’s moon, Triton, which orbits the Sun some years earlier (Trafton, 1981). A few years later,
roughly as far as Pluto’s perihelion and is just 14% larger nitrogen and carbon monoxide ices were detected in the
in diameter. Discovered in 1846 by William Lassell, Triton 2.1–2.4-µm part of the near infrared spectrum of Pluto,
is difficult to observe because it is small and close in angle with N2 dominating over CO (Owen et al., 1993). Thus,
to a larger brighter object, Neptune. Early observations because N2 is also the most volatile of the three detected
suggested Triton was massive enough to perturb Neptune, ices, Pluto’s atmosphere — like that of Earth, Titan, and
and Alden (1940) obtained a value of 1.3 × 1026 g: almost Triton — turns out to be mostly molecular nitrogen. The
twice the mass of Earth’s Moon and six times Voyager 2’s main differences of Pluto from Triton known by 1992
accurate mass determination in 1989. Visible and infrared were the absence of both CO2 and detectable H2O ice
observations led to an upper limit for the radius of 2600 km from Pluto’s surface (Brown et al., 1995; Cruikshank et
(Cruikshank et al., 1979). Combining the two leads to a al., 1997) and different insolation patterns thanks to Pluto’s
density of 1.8 g cm–3, fortuitously close to Triton’s actual large obliquity and orbital eccentricity. Indeed, as Pluto
density and perfectly reasonable for a body with roughly retreats from the Sun, its atmosphere may begin to thin
equal amounts of rock and ice. However, subsequent obser- or even collapse (not settled, even today!), with uncertain
vations shrank Triton until speckle studies produced a radius timing thanks to the inertial effects of surface ices (Stern
between 1037 and 1250 km (Bonneau and Foy, 1986). Such and Trafton, 1984; see also the chapter in this volume by
a value threw the mass determination out because it led to Young et al.). Because chemical and physical processes
an unphysical density, and it also caused considerable angst in an ultracold atmosphere are of keen scientific interest,
among planners for the Voyager 2 encounter with Neptune this in turn would provide another imperative for exploring
because the ability to obtain both a UV solar and Earth radio Pluto before its orbit took it too far from the Sun.
12   Pluto System After New Horizons

Mapping of what would turn out to be a composition- which also precluded going onward to Pluto. So neither
ally and spatially complex surface began with the 1985 trajectory allowed a trip to the vicinity of Pluto. Once
mutual events (Buie et al., 1992; Young and Binzel, Voyager 1 was successful, Voyager 2’s trajectory was
1993), which showed stark albedo contrasts later con- reshaped to allow it to reach Uranus and then Neptune
firmed by Hubble imaging (Stern et al., 1997). These from Saturn, again precluding a trip to Pluto. Voyager 1’s
contrasts, combined with the knowledge that Pluto has trajectory through the Saturn system could have been
an atmosphere, made it clear that Pluto could be a very redirected to allow a Pluto encounter, completing the
dynamic world for volatile transport (Hansen and Paige, original grand tour goals. However, one of the most
1996). By the early 1990s Pluto had become known as important moons of Saturn, Titan, was known since the
an intriguing ice-rich world much like its slightly larger 1940s to have an atmosphere with methane as a minor
cousin Triton — with volatile ices and a thin atmosphere, or major component, and a 1978 conference on the Sat-
bound not to a giant planet but rather to a moon within urn system made the case for Titan as a scientifically
an order of magnitude the same mass. Like Earth and important target in its own right (Hunten and Morrison,
Venus, Uranus and Neptune, or Ganymede and Callisto, 1978). Furthermore, the haziness of the atmosphere made
Triton appeared to have a near twin in terms of bulk it impossible to determine Titan’s true size, but the extent
properties and surface composition, but in a very dif- of the haze layers suggested it might well be the largest
ferent dynamical configuration. The scientific impetus moon in the solar system.
for spacecraft exploration of Pluto became strong. The Thus, the decision was made to direct Voyager 1 to-
discovery of the Kuiper belt dwarf planet cohort a few ward an extremely close flyby of Titan, allowing a radio
years later made that strong impetus become compelling occultation measurement of its atmosphere and physical
(National Research Council, 2003). size, and potentially detailed views of the surface from
the TV cameras. While the high optical thickness of the
2.2. Missed Opportunities to Explore Pluto atmosphere precluded such views, the other measure-
by Spacecraft ments were successful — revealing a body just slightly
smaller than Ganymede (which earned the title of largest
Just four years after the first successful planetary flyby moon), with a dense and mostly nitrogen atmosphere that
by Mariner 2 at Venus, Gary Flandro of the California at Titan’s surface is four times denser than sea level air
Institute of Technology’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory on Earth. The greenhouse-warmed surface temperature
(JPL) showed that an upcoming alignment of all the of 94 K and presence in the atmosphere of methane sug-
giant planets would allow a spacecraft launched in the gested methane seas, or even a global ocean of liquid
1975–1980 timeframe to use Jupiter’s gravitational field ethane and methane (cf. Coustenis and Taylor, 2008).
to explore them all (Flandro, 1966). Among the sample The scientific interest generated by Titan’s large size and
missions he calculated were a 1978 launch to fly past nitrogen atmosphere, with the possibility of surface seas,
Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and a 1977 launch helped to propel NASA and the European Space Agency
to visit Jupiter and Pluto. JPL quickly proposed a “grand to jointly agree to a Saturn orbiter with Titan probe, a
tour” robotic mission to exploit Flandro’s trajectories. In mission that would come to be called Cassini-Huygens
the years after Apollo, steeply declining space program when it was authorized in 1989. The most ambitious
budgets doomed this and other ambitious robotic mis- planetary mission to date, Cassini-Huygens discovered
sions, but did allow for a scaled back “Mariner Jupiter- over its 13 years of flying within the Saturn system a
Saturn” twin-spacecraft mission to be launched in 1977 methane hydrologic cycle on Titan’s variegated surface,
as Voyagers 1 and 2 (Schurmeier, 1974). (Earlier, NASA with lakes, seas, and methane rivers, and convincingly
had launched a scientifically less ambitious pair of Ames established the presence of a liquid water ocean beneath
Research Center probes, Pioneers 10 and 11, to Jupiter in Titan’s crust (Hayes et al., 2018).
1972 and 1973.) Of the four spacecraft, two went beyond While the scientific payoff of the decision to send
their original targets: After its 1974 Jupiter flyby, Pio- Voyager 1 to Titan was inarguably stupendous, it pre-
neer 11 also encountered Saturn in 1979; after its 1981 vented Voyager 1 from being sent to Pluto, and ultimately
Saturn flyby, Voyager 2 completed the giant planet part delayed a mission to Pluto by roughly a quarter of a
of the grand tour by also visiting Uranus in 1986 and century. It also necessitated a heroic effort on the part
Neptune in 1989. of a dedicated group of planetary scientists to make such
However, in all of this, Pluto was missing. The Pio- a mission — New Horizons — ultimately happen. It is
neer remote sensing payload was not built to operate at quite possible, as we show below, that the effort might
Pluto’s distance from the Sun, although in the end the have failed. However, improvement in instrument tech-
two spacecraft did send back space plasma physics data nology between the 1970s and the late 1990s (instrument
from distances even beyond Pluto’s orbit. Pioneer 10’s technologies are frozen a decade before launch) allowed
trajectory was designed conservatively to avoid exces- a much richer dataset at Pluto than Voyager could have
sive radiation during the Jupiter flyby, preventing a Pluto provided, as (in just one example of many) one can see
flyby, and Pioneer 11’s was designed to get it to Saturn, by comparing the Voyager 2 vidicon images of Triton
 Lunine et al.: Early Pluto Science   13

with the New Horizons solid-state detector images of and with several other large Kuiper belt dwarf planets. The
Pluto and Charon. ill wisdom of such a designation, and its somewhat awk-
ward definition (dwarf planets are round but not massive
3. 1992–2006: KUIPER BELT, PLUTONIAN enough to fully clear planetesimals from their vicinity),
RECLASSIFICATION BY ASTRONOMERS, has been and will continue to be debated (DeVorkin, 2013).
AND NEW HORIZONS The reassignment, however, was irrelevant to the success
of the New Horizons mission, which had launched to its
target eight months before. In the end, Pluto by itself and
3.1. Discovery of the Kuiper Belt, and Implications with its system of satellites would turn out to be every bit
for Pluto as interesting as any larger planet, and the discovery of the
Kuiper belt provided the cosmogonic context that made its
With the demise of the escaped satellite model for Pluto’s exploration of fundamental importance.
origin, the ninth planet became an enigmatic outpost in a
solar system that had otherwise seemed so well organized 3.2. The 1990s: Attempts to Explore Pluto and the
into an inner realm of rocky planets and a much vaster outer Kuiper Belt
solar system of giant planets and their extensive satellite
systems. It was perhaps surprising, then, that more atten- Much of what is described in this section comes from the
tion was not paid to the possibility that Pluto might not be accounts by Stern (2008) and Neufeld (2014a, 2016). The
unique. Edgeworth’s (1949) and Kuiper’s (1950) papers story of the first mission to Pluto really begins at the end of
were considered highly speculative, while Oort (1950) and the grand tour mission — with Voyager 2’s flyby of Neptune
Whipple (1951, 1964) focused more on the question of the and Triton in 1989. One of the authors of this review, S.A.S.,
source region of comets. However, spurred by dynamical then completing his doctorate at the University of Colorado
considerations, searches for a transneptunian belt of mate- Boulder, had already become an advocate for a Pluto mis-
rial became more frequent and more sensitive through the sion, proposing it on behalf of an informal scientific interest
1980s, culminating in the discovery of a 100-km-sized body, group (aka the “Pluto Underground”) in a May 4 meeting
1992 QB1 (Jewitt and Luu, 1993). From there, the pace of that year to the NASA Solar System Exploration Director
discoveries picked up, with tens, then hundreds, then even at the time, Geoffrey Briggs.
more bodies found in the Kuiper belt [see the review by The context then for planetary exploration was grim.
Jewitt (1999) and the chapter in this volume by Barucci et Voyager 2 was a legacy of the program of the 1960s, when
al.]. Further into the period 2002–2005, a number of bod- large missions such as Viking were thought to be the only
ies with diameters between 1000 km and 2300 km were mode of business. These missions, costing hundreds of
discovered (Brown et al., 2005). The last of these, Eris, is millions in then-year dollars (which today well exceeds
practically the same size as Pluto and, based on the orbit of $1 billion), have come to be known as Flagship missions
its moon Dysnomia, is about 25% more massive than Pluto (although they were not called so at the time). However,
(and 29% less massive than Triton). the declining space budgets of the 1970s, along with the
Because of both its retrograde orbit and Neptune’s lack delays to the Galileo mission caused by the 1986 loss of
of a regular satellite system, even before the discovery of the space shuttle Challenger, had put the planetary program
other large objects in the Kuiper belt, Triton was shown in crisis. At the time of the August 1989 Voyager 2 flyby of
to be a captured body formerly in heliocentric orbit (e.g., Neptune, NASA had launched only one planetary mission
Goldreich et al., 1989). While Pluto is in a 2:3 orbital reso- in the preceding 11 years — Magellan to Venus that same
nance with Neptune, Eris is part of the “scattered disk” of May. In that year, however, Briggs initiated studies within
Kuiper belt objects without any dynamical relationship to the Solar System Exploration Division on smaller, cheaper
Neptune. Triton, Pluto, and Eris all have surface ices more missions, akin to NASA’s Astrophysics Explorers. Stamatios
volatile than water ice (Tegler et al., 2010, 2012), at least “Tom” Krimigis of the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL)
the first two likely have atmospheres continuously around of the Johns Hopkins University was a strong advocate for
their orbit, and all are the same size and (within a factor of smaller spacecraft, and APL had developed a rendezvous
1.6) the same mass. Remarkably, these seem to be versions mission to an asteroid under the short-lived Planetary Ob-
of the same type of body sitting in dynamically distinct server program. In late 1989 Briggs proposed the Discovery
environments. Numerous workers made arguments for program for small planetary missions. His successor, Wesley
declaring a third solar system class of “ice dwarf” planets Huntress, ultimately succeeded in getting the Discovery
[beginning with Stern (1991)] like the terrestrial and giant program funded in 1993 (Neufeld, 2014b).
planets, some of which (e.g., Triton) have been lost from Under the then-nascent 1990 Discovery program, Briggs
solar orbit due to interactions with Neptune. However, asked Robert Farquhar of Goddard Spaceflight Center, an
rather than accommodate this, the International Astronomical expert in celestial mechanics, to conduct a study of an inex-
Union (IAU) voted in August 2006 to move Pluto from the pensive mission to Pluto; Stern was appointed study scientist.
category of planet to that of dwarf planet, which it shares Called Pluto350 for the proposed spacecraft dry mass in
in the view of the IAU with the asteroid Ceres, with Eris, kilograms, the intent was to fly past Pluto and Charon with a
14   Pluto System After New Horizons

minimal payload. Meanwhile, since the early 1980s JPL had in the later 1990s necessitated a direct launch to Pluto. That
been advancing a concept for a new class of outer solar sys- fall, Congress provided money for two Discovery missions,
tem Flagship missions called Mariner Mark II (Neugebauer, APL’s Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) mission and
1983). These would be highly capable spacecraft, larger and JPL’s Mars Pathfinder, but did so over the wishes of Goldin.
heavier than the Voyagers and capable of executing a number Caught between a fatally expensive dual heavy-lift launch for
of different missions in the outer solar system, including the PFF, the need for a replacement Mars orbiter for Observer,
potential exploration of Pluto-Charon. Ultimately, only one of and Goldin’s very negative reaction to the extra Discovery
these would be built and flown — the Cassini Saturn orbit- mission, Huntress — by then the Associate Administrator for
er — by which point the concept of a series of spacecraft had Space Science — terminated the idea of bringing forward
evaporated. But in application to Pluto, the Mariner Mark II PFF as a new start.
would require a very heavy and expensive launch vehicle, Efforts by the Pluto Underground then shifted to the
the Air Force’s Titan IV Centaur, which NASA would have possibility of an international launch provider, to remove
to pay for. In this incarnation, which NASA favored in 1991, the substantial costs of a U.S. vehicle. One of us (S.A.S.)
a Pluto mission would have a major impact on the agency’s took advantage of a major new initiative in 1993 between
solar system exploration budget. the U.S. and Russia to cooperate in space, and met with the
Another issue also reared its head at the time. If the nation director of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Space Research
were to send a highly capable and complex spacecraft all Institute (IKI), Albert Galeev, to gauge interest in providing
the way across the solar system, why not send it to a giant the launch vehicles. As a scientist, Galeev was interested, if
planet system? Triton — as large and chemically complex IKI could have a significant scientific role in the mission.
as Pluto — was only briefly explored by Voyager 2. And This led to a proposed Russian-built atmospheric probe for
detailed exploration of Neptune could be part of the pack- Pluto. The advocacy group the Planetary Society delivered its
age. But this would leave Pluto out in the cold — again. The own version of a Pluto collaboration with Russia to Huntress
Pluto Underground lobbied for Pluto based not only on the in early 1994, which helped to force an initially reluctant
novelty of the science — Pluto was to be the last planet to NASA Headquarters to pursue the possibility.
be explored — but also because of the progressive loss of But momentum was diffused yet again when Huntress
surface illumination over the southern hemisphere and the went to Moscow with a much broader palette of coopera-
possible dramatic loss of the atmosphere as Pluto retreated tion: Mars exploration, a close-approach solar mission (Solar
from the Sun [the latter turned out not to happen, probably Probe), and the PFF. The Russian scientists seemed more
due to nitrogen-ice-covered Sputnik Planitia (Meza et al., interested in Solar Probe, but by drawing on Farquhar’s
2019)]. In other words, time was believed to be of the es- earlier proposal to use similar spacecraft and Jupiter flyby
sence. trajectories, the two missions could be packaged as a “Fire
The idea of sending a Mariner Mark II to the outermost and Ice” program. But after multiple scientific and techni-
solar system was short-lived, however, as the first two cal meetings and conferences in Russia, Germany, and the
planned missions of that line, Cassini and Comet Rendez- U.S., it was clear that whether these missions would go
vous/Asteroid Flyby (CRAF), proved to be too expensive ahead depended ultimately on the Russian Space Agency’s
in the budget environment of the early 1990s. NASA soon willingness to provide Proton launch vehicles for free. By
cancelled CRAF and ordered Cassini descoped by removing 1996 it was evident they were not. This and the upper stage
a scan platform and making other cuts. failure of a Russian Proton rocket in late 1996, leading to the
Pluto advocates shifted their attention back to a Pluto350- complete loss of the IKI-led Mars 96 mission, made Russian
like mission, but this was displaced by an even more radical collaboration in a Pluto launch no longer viable.
concept that JPL engineers Robert Staehle and Stacy Wein- Meanwhile, PFF went through multiple design changes
stein called Pluto Fast Flyby (PFF). Conceived to have a and iterations as NASA Administrator Goldin kept mov-
spacecraft wet mass (with propellant) of only 160 kg, the ing the goalposts on cost and mass as he sought to make
design required an extremely limited scientific payload, but the mission a poster child for his “better, faster, cheaper”
piqued the interest of new NASA Administrator Dan Goldin. (BFC) approach. The failure of two BFC Mars missions in
By mid-1992, this JPL concept included two spacecraft 1999 would ultimately hobble Goldin’s campaign, but that
for redundancy and to provide complete coverage of both was years in the future. The scientific community, JPL, and
hemispheres of Pluto and Charon. Although the mission cost Huntress at NASA Headquarters all thought they were ready
was less than half the billion dollars proposed for a single to end trade studies for PFF in 1994, but Goldin insisted on
Mariner Mark II, the added launch costs for two spacecraft another two years of technology work. At the end of the
were too formidable to afford. year, PFF became Pluto Express, the novelty of which was
Several events in 1993 conspired to doom a new start to design the spacecraft architecture around the science. This
for PFF. First, Mars Observer was lost to a propellant line “sciencecraft” concept was small enough to allow launch on
explosion as it neared Mars in August. Then that same month a single large booster, but the low overall spacecraft weight
Goldin told the PFF team that he could not afford to budget was extremely demanding technologically.
for two Titan IV Centaur launch vehicles, which were re- Although a well-attended scientific workshop took place
quired because the lack of Jupiter gravity-assist opportunities in July 1993 in Flagstaff, leading to the previous Pluto sys-
 Lunine et al.: Early Pluto Science   15

tem book in this Space Science Series (Stern and Tholen, Over the next two years, the magnetometer onboard the
1997), NASA’s Pluto mission did not then have the universal Galileo spacecraft provided compelling evidence for a salty,
support of the science community. The National Academy liquid-water ocean beneath the ice crust of Jupiter’s moon
of Science’s Committee on Lunar and Planetary Exploration Europa (Kivelson et al., 2000). The close juxtaposition of
(COMPLEX) gave short shrift to Pluto in a 1994 report, these events boosted interest in the search for life, and as
and without an overarching once-a-decade strategy like the a result suddenly Europa was competing with Pluto for a
Academy’s Decadal Survey in Astronomy and Astrophysics, new mission opportunity.
the planetary community had a difficult time arriving at a Capitalizing on public excitement and Congressional
consensus set of priorities. Nevertheless, after community interest, Goldin and Huntress got a new start in 1998 for
urging, NASA convened a Pluto Express Science Definition an Outer Planets/Solar Probe program, wrapping together a
Team (SDT) in 1995 under the chairmanship of one of us Europa orbiter with the now renamed Pluto-Kuiper Express
(J.I.L.) in an effort to pull together the science case for the (PKE), plus a Solar Probe. The project office was estab-
mission, both in the context of what was known of Pluto lished at JPL (Neufeld, 2014a). Like Fire and Ice, a com-
and the increasing pace of discoveries of KBOs and Pluto’s mon spacecraft was planned, ostensibly because all three
relationship to them. missions had to go to Jupiter, but the other requirements
By that point, the following was known about the Kui- for each were quite different. A harsh radiation environment
per belt: (1) The count of transneptunian bodies exceeding was the huge challenge for Europa Orbiter, which had to
100 km in diameter that had been directly observed from remain deep within the jovian magnetosphere, while PKE
groundbased telescopes had reached 28 (Jewitt and Luu, and Solar Probe simply did fast flybys through the Jupiter
1995). (2) Like Pluto-Charon, the orbits of many KBOs system. Nonetheless, all three missions were saddled with
cluster near the 2:3 mean-motion resonance with Neptune the radiation-hardening requirements of Europa Orbiter, and
at a = 39 AU, with these orbits stabilized by the resonance. JPL tied the missions to an effort to develop radiation-hard
Other objects were found in other mean-motion resonant electronics in a program called X-2000. Furthermore, it
relationships with Neptune, such as the 3:4 resonance. was stipulated that Europa Orbiter would go first in 2003,
(3) The idea that the Kuiper belt is likely a remnant of the followed by PKE in 2004 and then Solar Probe in 2007,
much more extensive (and long gone) protoplanetary disk to the significant dismay of both Pluto supporters and the
of gas and dust from which the solid objects of the solar space physics community.
system formed was strengthened by then-new dynamical The requirements imposed by the environment around
simulations (Duncan et al., 1995). (4) The inferred spatial Europa, plus difficulties reaching the radiation-hardening
density of KBOs was known to be sufficiently high to goals set by the X-2000 program, led to significant mass
make it highly likely that Pluto Express could be redirected and hence cost growth in all three spacecraft. Complicating
to pass by at least one other KBO after flying through the matters further was the departure from NASA Headquarters
Pluto-Charon system. of Associate Administrator Huntress, who had been so
The SDT report (Lunine et al., 1995) cited the unique- intimately involved in and supportive of the discussions
ness of several aspects of Pluto, including its atmospheric surrounding international cooperation on a Pluto mission.
energy balance, a possible comet-like interaction with the In his place as Associate Administrator stepped Edward
solar wind, and binary planet nature of Pluto and Charon. Weiler, an astronomer who had been chief scientist of
The data at hand then also hinted that overall the physical Hubble Space Telescope before ascending the ranks at
and chemical processes on Pluto are complex and hence NASA Headquarters. Much of Weiler’s career had been
demand close up exploration. The SDT report concluded spent at NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center, in contrast to
that the opportunity to visit one or more KBO’s beyond Huntress, who had been at JPL prior to moving to NASA
Pluto, in context with the exploration of the Pluto/Charon headquarters in Washington DC. Furthermore, Weiler’s first
system itself, would be of keen scientific interest and years as Associate Administrator saw the inflight loss of
exciting to the public. In sum, the presentations to the two JPL Mars probes, victims of Goldin’s “better, faster,
SDT and consequently the ensuing SDT report made a cheaper” philosophy, which Weiler had not been party to.
compelling case that a mission to Pluto and beyond could Thus, he had every reason to be suspicious of JPL, and was
be done at low cost and yet have extremely high scientific also wary of programs that posed a danger of exceeding
and public interest value. the available funding.
As compelling as the Pluto and Kuiper belt science As the combined costs of Europa Orbiter and PKE
were, events once again conspired to overtake the mis- exceeded $1.4 billion and continued to climb, Weiler’s
sion. In 1995, Mayor and Queloz (1995) detected the first relationship with JPL became adversarial as he pressured
extrasolar planet, and the following year NASA announced the Laboratory to reign in costs. A positive development
evidence of former biologic activity in a meteorite from was the formation of Science Definition Teams and An-
Mars (McKay et al., 1996). Although the latter discovery nouncements of Opportunity for Europa Orbiter and
was soon rejected by most in the scientific community, the PKE instruments. Regardless, the concept of a common
two events stimulated a presidential statement and repackag- spacecraft was unraveling through 1999 owing to the cost
ing of NASA funds into the newly named Origins program. increases it resulted in, as well as delays in the availability
16   Pluto System After New Horizons

of radioisotopic power and uncertainties in launch vehicle 3.3. After the Millennium: Origin and Development
costs. Moreover, NASA’s space science program was now of New Horizons
under pressure from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), which saw the program as out of control. With the In the wake of DPS, Planetary Society, public, and SSES
growth of astrobiology research at NASA, Congress and protests against the cancellation of PKE, Weiler approached
the OMB saw the science that might be done at Europa to space scientist Tom Krimigis, then head of the APL Space
assess its ocean’s suitability for life as the higher priority. Department, about the feasibility of a competitive, relatively
PKE’s planetary formation focus, plus its “last planet yet to low-cost Pluto program. With the success of APL’s low-cost
be explored” public appeal, were seen as less important. On NEAR Discovery-class spacecraft, then orbiting the asteroid
September 12, 2000, Weiler, with OMB backing, told JPL Eros, Krimigis was in a position to do a quick study show-
to stop work on PKE — canceling the mission. ing how such a spacecraft could be based on NEAR and
PKE’s cancellation fractured the outer planets com- another APL Discovery spacecraft then in development, the
munity. Anticipating cancellation, the Planetary Society ill-fated COmet Nucleus TOUR (CONTOUR). Following
began a campaign in July to highlight Pluto as a key plan- optimism resulting from the APL study Krimigis led, and
etary target. Nine days after cancellation, the Division for with Goldin’s assent, Weiler had his Solar System Explora-
Planetary Sciences of the American Astronomical Society tion Division Director Colleen Hartman quickly put together
(DPS), the professional organization of planetary scien- an Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for a competitively
tists, issued a press release highlighting the imperative bid Pluto mission, similar to but on a larger scale than the
of reaching Pluto before the collapse of the atmosphere. PI-led Discovery missions.
NASA’s Solar System Exploration Subcommittee (SSES), NASA released the AO on the last day of the Clinton
then chaired by the University of Arizona’s Michael Drake, administration, January 19, 2001. Several teams formed
met in Pasadena at the end of October 2000, with the to respond with proposals, but the Bush administration’s
Pluto cancellation as a centerpiece topic on its agenda. OMB canceled the Pluto mission the next month — forcing
Two of the authors of this chapter (S.A.S. and J.I.L.) gave NASA to suspend the AO. The issue was not only budget-
presentations on the value of Pluto science, based on the ary; OMB still favored Europa Orbiter. APL was, however,
findings of the 1995 Science Definition Team report and in Maryland, and Krimigis called upon the powerful NASA
subsequent research developments. The importance of the Appropriations Committee member Barbara Mikulski to
Kuiper belt for understanding planet formation was em- intervene. The resulting letter from her office instructed
phasized, specifically that the presence of large numbers NASA to restart the AO process. Ultimately, five propos-
of icy bodies created in the outer regions of new systems, als were received in early April 2001. NASA ranked and
subsequently disturbed by the migration of the orbits downselected to two proposals in June 2001: the APL New
of the major planets, presented a new picture of planet Horizons proposal, with one of the authors as PI (S.A.S.),
formation that begged for investigation by spacecraft. and a JPL proposal called POSSE led by Larry Esposito
JPL’s presentation to the committee made it clear that, by of the University of Colorado. Each submitted second-step
stipulating a common spacecraft bus, the design of PKE proposals in September 2001, and on November 29, NASA
had been compromised and its costs driven up in order to selected New Horizons for development.
satisfy the radiation parts selection and heavy shielding Details of the differences between the proposals are left
requirements of Europa Orbiter. to the other reviews cited in this chapter, but the innova-
The net result of the meeting was a letter of strong tive payload, low-cost approach, and the PI’s community
SSES support to NASA for a Pluto mission and skepti- leadership in pushing for a Pluto mission for over a decade
cism about the Europa Orbiter. As the costs of the latter were surely positive factors. However, despite its win, the
soared due to the technological challenge of Jupiter’s harsh odds remained against New Horizons — the budget profile
radiation environment, Weiler cancelled it in 2003, in part provided by NASA and the overall budget cap were ex-
because Congress kept appropriating funds for Pluto. That tremely challenging, the availability of nuclear fuel for the
in turn set off a 12-year-long odyssey through a variety of radioisotopic power sources was extremely limited thanks to
mission concepts until Congress stipulated a new start for the cessation of its production by the Federal government,
Europa Clipper. (Although this Outer Planets/Solar Probe the timetable to make the necessary Jupiter gravity assist
program never came to fruition, New Horizons did launch flyby was very tight, and the lower-cost booster that would
to Pluto in 2006. Parker Solar Probe followed in 2018; and launch the mission was only just becoming available. Within
Europa Clipper is planned for launch by the mid 2020s.) the new administration, the mission was politically radioac-
The rancor of the Pluto-Europa debate would be reflected tive; having had the mission rammed down its throat by a
in conflicts between astrobiology and planetary science powerful senator, the OMB eventually threatened publicly
goals in the outer solar system, some up to the present. to withdraw support for the planetary program in general,
But at the close of the millennium, as Cassini-Huygens and then left the mission out of the 2003 President’s budget.
was sailing toward Saturn, the immediate effect was that While Senator Mikulski worked to get the project funded
the U.S. planetary program had no follow-on mission again through the Congress, the prospect of year-to-year
anywhere in the outer solar system. political heroics to sustain it cast a deep shadow over its
 Lunine et al.: Early Pluto Science   17

viability. Two events pushed the mission back from its load’s highest-resolution sensors, and the inclusion of two
abyss to reality. First, the inaugural planetary Decadal 64-GB solid-state flight recorders, allowed the mission to
Survey came out in 2003 with its community consensus far exceed the baseline scientific objectives of both the
prioritization, ranking a Pluto mission at the very top of SDT and the NASA AO (01-OSS-01) that called for flyby
the medium-class (0.5–1 billion dollars) mission list, spe- mission proposals to Pluto and the Kuiper belt.
cifically emphasizing the value of the mission as a Kuiper The enhanced payload and spacecraft capabilities of
belt explorer as the Pluto Express SDT had done eight New Horizons, combined with a very highly optimized
years before. This was especially pivotal to the resuscita- flyby observing plan at the Pluto system, allowed New
tion of the mission, because it gave Mikulski a powerful Horizons to make numerous groundbreaking discoveries
scientific rationale for her efforts to get the mission funded. about Pluto and its satellites, as this Space Science Series
And second, Hartmann had crafted within her Solar System volume details at length. Among the most significant find-
Exploration Division and successfully sold to upper man- ings from this exploration are the following: Pluto is far
agement at NASA a proposed new line of PI-led missions, more complex than similar-sized icy satellites explored by
with a cap twice that of Discovery, called New Frontiers. other missions and it remains intensely geologically active
Unlike Discovery’s wide-open landscape for proposing any 4.5 b.y. after its formation. The planet displays evidence
mission within its cost cap, New Frontiers PIs would be for all of the following: geologic activity even to the recent
given a limited list of high-priority targets; this program past or today; extensive tectonics and true polar wander,
and the Decadal’s Pluto Kuiper belt recommendation made and strong evidence for cryovolcanism; a global internal
it natural to combine Pluto and Kuiper belt on the list and liquid water ocean; a water ice crust; several styles of
designate New Horizons as the first New Frontiers mission. putative volcanism; ancient terrains that date back close to
The only remaining political hurdle was to convince Weiler the planet’s formation epoch; a haze-filled atmosphere with
and Hartmann that the APL team could bring the mission a rich hydrocarbon and nitrile minor species composition
to launch readiness by the beginning of 2006, when the accompanying the major gas, molecular nitrogen; strong
next Jupiter gravity assist was possible. This having been mega-seasonal cycles and epochs of much higher atmo-
accomplished — although not without many interesting spheric pressure than the current epoch, owing to obliquity
wrinkles and numerous developmental challenges (Neufeld, cycles; and a lack of newly detected satellites or rings.
2014a; see also Stern and Grinspoon, 2018) — the mission Pluto’s giant satellite Charon, the other object in the
was finally put on solid political and programmatic ground. binary planet pair, displays evidence for a former liquid
That enabled a very challenging but ultimately successful water ocean in its interior, early epoch tectonics, an age
spacecraft development, leading to a successful launch on as great as Pluto’s, a lower bulk density than Pluto, sev-
January 19, 2006, just five years to the day after the pro- eral kinds of unique geological expressions not yet seen
posal AO was released. elsewhere, and a lack of detectable atmosphere at a level
orders of magnitude below Earth-based limits. Pluto’s four
4. 2006–PRESENT: THE SUCCESS OF NEW small satellites, which orbit the binary pair, were found to
HORIZONS AND THE FUTURE each be irregular in shape, to be complex in their rotational
dynamics, and to have surface ages (where observed) as
old as Pluto and Charon’s oldest terrains, as well as surface
4.1. New Horizons in Flight compositions that include both water ice and ammonia
or ammoniated species. Additionally, a major advance
After its launch, New Horizons made a 9.5-year cross- in understanding of the small-diameter size-frequency
ing of the solar system, which included a gravity assist, distribution of KBOs was made using crater statistics on
flight test, and scientific flyby of Jupiter in February and both Pluto and Charon.
March 2007. It then explored the Pluto system in early and The flyby exploration of Arrokoth also yielded numer-
mid-2015, reaching closest approach to the planet and all ous discoveries (see the chapter in this volume by Stern
of its satellites on July 14, 2015; data transmission from et al.). In brief, these include discovering that the object
that flyby was completed in October 2016. Meanwhile, in is a contact binary with unexpectedly flattened lobes that
late 2015, New Horizons targeted its first KBO flyby, to formed near one another, very likely in a local pebble
explore a small (~36-km-long) cold classical KBO desig- collapse cloud, then became an orbiting pair and then
nated 2014 MU69 Arrokoth (formerly Ultima Thule). That gently merged into the contact binary configuration; it also
flyby culminated in a closest approach on January 1, 2019; displays discrete geological units and significant albedo
data from that flyby are still being transmitted to Earth as of heterogeneity, but only small color variegation and spec-
this writing and are not expected to be complete until 2021. troscopic evidence for methanol on its surface. The paucity
The New Horizons spacecraft carries a payload that of detected craters on Arrokoth implies a relative dearth of
significantly broadened the minimum mission scientific KBOs <1 km in diameter and collisionally benign ancient
objectives over those specified by the Pluto Kuiper Express and present-day Kuiper belt environments. No satellites,
SDT (Lunine et al., 1995). This, along with spacecraft orbiting rings/dust structures, or evidence of atmosphere
pointing and other capabilities that well matched the pay- were found to accompany this fascinating object.
18   Pluto System After New Horizons

4.2. The Contextual Successes of New Horizons and hence the resurrection of the mission. It also impelled
the creation of the New Frontiers line, expanding competi-
Results from the New Horizons mission are detailed tive missions. The decadal process now reigns more or less
in the chapters in this volume on geology (White et al. supreme in prioritization, and competition remains central
and Spencer et al.), color (Olkin et al. and Howett et al.), outside of Flagship missions. The fight over a mission to
surface composition (Cruikshank et al. and Protopapa et Pluto may therefore have been one of the most consequen-
al.), atmospheric structure (Summers et al.), and plasma tial episodes in the history of planetary science policy in
environment (Bagenal et al.), and in the chapter on its small the last 30 years.
satellites (Porter et al.).
As a first mission to both a previously unexplored planet 4.3. Where Do We Go from Here in the
and two new types of body (the ice dwarf planets and KBOs Post-New Horizons Era?
of the outer solar system), New Horizons very much falls
in context with the earliest Mariners, Pioneers, and Voyag- In a broad sense, the era of the initial reconnaissance of
ers, which each undertook similarly groundbreaking first all the planets and the major types of solar system objects
reconnaissance of closer planets. However, in large measure known at the dawn of the Space Age came to a close with
because the New Horizons spacecraft and its instrument New Horizons. That said, the exploration of the solar system
payload were based on advanced technologies not available in general and Pluto and the Kuiper belt in particular all
to those much earlier missions, the scientific return from the remain very far from complete.
first flybys New Horizons conducted of the Pluto system and Going forward, much more detailed exploration of the
Arrokoth generated much larger datasets and accomplished bodies of our solar system lies ahead. Such exploration is
the collection of dataset resolutions and types (e.g., surface already yielding a wide variety of orbital, surface, and even
composition mapping) that predecessor first flyby missions subsurface robotic exploration of increasing diversity and
could not. For example, if one compares the New Horizons capability. Similarly, we are now also seeing the beginnings
Pluto flyby datasets to the exploration of Mars, it can fairly of sample return from many more bodies than simply Earth’s
be said that New Horizons took the Pluto system to a state of Moon, and plans for new human exploration of the Moon
knowledge crudely equivalent to Mars after about a genera- and the first human explorations of Mars are now underway.
tion of spacecraft exploration from the 1960s to the 1990s. As to Pluto and the Kuiper belt, there is little debate
New Horizons demonstrated that the reconnaissance that further exploration is necessary (see the chapter in this
exploration of planets and smaller bodies in the Kuiper volume by Buie et al.). This is likely to come in at least two
belt need not incur the multi-billion-dollar cost (adjusted to forms in the next few decades, including the flyby reconnais-
today’s dollars) of Voyagers 1 and 2 despite yielding simi- sance of more (current and former if one includes Centaur
larly spectacular results. New Horizons also demonstrated missions) KBOs and a wider variety of dwarf planets, and
the viability of the New Frontiers class of PI-led missions, to more indepth studies of the Pluto system with an orbiter
roughly twice the cost of the Discovery missions with a bringing time domain, complete mapping, and new kinds
commensurately higher science return. This in turn not only of investigations New Horizons could not (or did not know
opened the door to further exploration of the Kuiper belt and to) bring.
its planets with such missions, but also a variety of other
targets throughout the solar system. Acknowledgments. We thank Fran Bagenal and Kevin
The long battle for a Pluto mission accelerated a change Schindler for careful reviews. S.A.S., L.A.Y., and R.P.B. thank
around the year 2000 in how planetary missions were ad- NASA for funding support via the New Horizons project.
vocated and selected (Neufeld, 2014a). Previously, NASA
Headquarters, usually the Associate Administrator for Space REFERENCES
Science in cooperation with the Director of Solar System
Exploration (the division’s name at the time), routinely as-
Alden H. L. (1940) The mass of the satellite of Neptune. Astron. J., 49,
signed missions to JPL. But Goldin’s “faster, better, cheaper” 71–72.
approach and the rise of competed missions in the Discovery Andersson L. E. and Fix J. D. (1973) Pluto: New photometry and a
Program opened up the planetary mission selection process determination of the axis of rotation. Icarus, 20, 279–283.
Binzel R. P., Tholen D. J., Tedesco E. F., Buratti B. J., and Nelson
to a larger number of actors. Notably, it made APL and later R. M. (1985) The detection of eclipses in the Pluto-Charon system.
Goddard Spaceflight Center into viable competitors with JPL Science, 228, 1193–1195.
for planetary missions, which in turn encouraged political Bonneau D. and Foy R. (1986) First direct measurements of the
diameters of the large satellites of Uranus and Neptune. Astron.
intervention by the Maryland congressional delegation, espe- Astrophys., 161, L12–L13.
cially Mikulski. Around the same time, the planetary science Bower E. C. and Whipple F. (1930) The orbit of Pluto. Publ. Astron.
community made its advocacy voice much more effective Soc. Pac., 42, 236–240.
Brown M., Trujillo C. A., and Rabinowitz D. L. (2005) Discovery of
through the DPS and the National Academy of Science’s a planetary-sized object in the scattered Kuiper belt. Astrophys. J.
Decadal Survey process. The fight over New Horizons sped Lett., 635, L97–L100.
the 2002 to 2003 decadal process toward prioritizing Pluto Brown R. H., Cruikshank D. P., Veverka J., Helfenstein P., and
 Lunine et al.: Early Pluto Science   19

Eluszkiewicz J. (1995) Surface composition and photometric 1340–1343.

properties of Triton. In Neptune and Triton (D. P. Cruikshank, ed.), Kuiper G. P. (1950) The diameter of Pluto. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac., 62,
pp. 991–1030. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson. 133–137.
Buie M. W. and Fink U. (1987) Methane absorption variations in the Kuiper G. P. (1951) On the origin of the solar system. Proc. Natl. Acad.
spectrum of Pluto. Icarus, 70, 483–498. Sci. U.S.A., 37, 1–14.
Buie M. W. and Tholen D. J. (1989) The surface albedo distribution of Lampland C. O. (1933) Lowell’s photographic observations of Pluto in
Pluto. Icarus, 79, 23–37. 1915, 1929 and 1930. Publ. Am. Astron. Soc., 7, 7–8.
Buie M. W., Cruikshank D. P., Lebofsky L. A., and Tedesco E. F. (1987) Leonard F. C. (1930) The new planet Pluto. Astron Soc. Pac. Leaflet, 30,
Water frost on Charon. Nature, 329, 522–523. 121–124.
Buie M. W., Tholen D. J., and Horne K. (1992) Albedo maps of Pluto Lodders K. and Fegley B. Jr. (1998) The Planetary Scientist’s
and Charon: Initial mutual event results. Icarus, 97, 211–227. Companion. Oxford, New York. 400 pp.
Christy J. W. and Harrington R. S. (1978) The satellite of Pluto. Lowell P. (1915) Memoir on a trans-neptunian planet. Mem. Lowell
Astrophys. J., 93, 1005–1008. Obs., 1, 1.
Cohen C. J. and Hubbard E. C. (1965) Libration of the close approaches Lunine J. I., Cruikshank D., Galeev A. A., Jennings D., Jewitt D., Linkin
of Pluto to Neptune. Astron. J., 70, 10–13. S., McNutt R., Neubauer F., Soderblom L., Stern S. A., Terrile R.,
Coustenis A. and Taylor F. W. (2008) Titan: Exploring an Earthlike Tholen D., Tyler L., and Yelle R. V. (1995) Pluto Express: Report of
World. World Scientific, Singapore. 412 pp. the Science Definition Team. NASA, Washington, DC.
Cruikshank D. P., Plicher C. B., and Morrison D. (1976) Pluto: Malhotra R. and Williams J. G. (1997) Pluto’s heliocentric orbit. In
Evidence for methane frost. Science, 194, 835–837. Pluto and Charon (S. A. Stern and D. J. Tholen, eds.), pp. 127–157.
Cruikshank D. P., Stockton A., Dyck H. M., Becklin E. E., and Macy Univ. of Arizona, Tucson.
W. Jr. (1979) The diameter and reflectance of Triton. Icarus, 40, Marcialis R. L. (1997) The first 50 years of Pluto-Charon research. In
104–114. Pluto and Charon (S. A. Stern and D. J. Tholen, eds.), pp. 27–83.
Cruikshank D. P., Roush T. L., Moore J. M., Sykes M. V., Owen T. C., Univ. of Arizona, Tucson.
Bartholomew M. J., Brown R. H., and Tryka K. A. (1997) The Marcialis R. L., Rieke G. H., and Lebofsky L. A. (1987) The surface
surfaces of Pluto and Charon. In Pluto and Charon (S. A. Stern and composition of Charon: Tentative identification of water ice.
D. J. Tholen, eds.), pp. 221–267. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson. Science, 237, 1349–1351.
Dessler A. J. and Russell C. T. (1980) From the ridiculous to the Mayor M. and Queloz D. (1995) A Jupiter-mass companion to a solar-
sublime: The pending disappearance of Pluto. Eos Trans. AGU, 61, type star. Nature, 378, 355–359.
690. McKay D., Gibson E. K. Jr., Thomas Keprta K. L., Vali H., Romanek
DeVorkin D. H. (2013) Pluto: The problem planet and its scientists. In C. S., Clemett S. J., Chillier D. F., Maechling C. R., and Zare R. N.
Exploring the Solar System: The History and Science of Planetary (1996) Search for past life on Mars: Possible relic biogenic activity
Exploration (R. D. Launius, ed.), pp. 323–362. Palgrave Macmillan, in martian meteorite ALH84001. Science, 273, 924–930.
New York. Meza E. and 150 colleagues (2019) Pluto’s lower atmosphere and
Dunbar R. S. and Tedesco E. F. (1986) Modeling Pluto-Charon mutual pressure evolution from ground-based stellar occultations, 1988–
eclipse events. I. First order models. Astron. J., 92, 1201–1209. 2019. Astron. Astrophys., 625, A42.
Duncan M., Quinn T., and Tremaine S. (1987) The formation and extent National Research Council (2003) New Frontiers in the Solar System:
of the solar system comet cloud. Astron. J., 94, 1330–1338. An Integrated Exploration Strategy. National Academies Press,
Duncan M. J., Levison H. F., and Budd S. M. (1995) The dynamical Washington, DC (e-Book), DOI: 10.17226/10432.
structure of the Kuiper belt. Astron. J., 110, 3073–3081. Neufeld M. J. (2014a) First mission to Pluto: Policy, politics, science,
Duncombe R. L. and Seidelmann P. K. (1980) A history of the and technology in the origins of New Horizons, 1989–2003. Hist.
determination of Pluto’s mass. Icarus, 44, 12–18. Stud. Nat. Sci., 44, 234–276.
Edgeworth K. E. (1943) The evolution of our planetary system. J. Neufeld M. J. (2014b) Transforming solar system exploration: The
British Astron. Assoc., 53, 181–188. origins of the Discovery program, 1989–1993. Space Policy, 30,
Edgeworth K. E. (1949) The origin and evolution of the solar system. 5–12.
Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 109, 600–609. Neufeld M. J. (2016) The difficult birth of NASA’s Pluto mission. Phys.
Elliot J. L., Dunham E. W., Bosh A. S., Slivan S. M., Young L. A., Today, 69, 40–47.
Wasserman L. H., and Millis R. L. (1989) Pluto’s atmosphere. Neugebauer M. (1983) Mariner Mark II and the exploration of the solar
Icarus, 77, 148–170. system. Science, 219, 443–449.
Flandro G. (1966) Fast reconnaissance missions to the outer solar system Nicholson S. B. and Mayall N. U. (1931) Positions, orbit and mass of
utilizing energy derived from the gravitational field of Jupiter. Acta Pluto. Astrophys. J., 73, 1–12.
Astronaut., 12, 329–337. Oort J. H. (1950) The structure of the cloud of comets surrounding the
Goldreich P., Murray N., Longaretti P. Y., and Banfield P. (1989) solar system and a hypothesis concerning its origin. Bull. Astron.
Neptune’s story. Science, 245, 500–504. Inst. Netherlands, 11, 91–110.
Hansen C. J. and Paige D. A. (1996) Seasonal nitrogen cycles on Pluto. Owen T. C., Roush T. L., Cruikshank D. P., Elliot J. L., Young L. A.,
Icarus, 120, 247–265. de Bergh C., Schmitt B., Brown R. H., and Bartholomew M. J.
Hayes A. G., Lorenz R. D., and Lunine J. I. (2018) A post-Cassini view (1993) Surface ices and atmospheric composition of Pluto. Science,
of Titan’s methane-based hydrologic cycle. Nature Geosci., 11, 261, 745–748.
306–313. Pickering W. H. (1909) A search for a planet beyond Neptune. Ann.
Herschel J. F. W. (1867) Outlines of Astronomy, 10th edition. Blanchard Harvard College Obs., 61, 113–162.
and Lea, Philadelphia. Reaves G. (1997) The predictions and discoveries of Pluto and Charon.
Hubbard W. B., Hunten D. M., Dieters S. W., Hill K. M., and Watson In Pluto and Charon (S. A. Stern and D. J. Tholen, eds.), pp. 3–25.
R. D. (1988) Occultation evidence for an atmosphere on Pluto. Univ. of Arizona, Tucson.
Nature, 336, 452–454. Schurmeier H. M. (1974) The Mariner Jupiter/Saturn 1977 mission.
Hunten D. M. and Morrison D., eds. (1978) The Saturn System. NASA Space Congress Proc., 4, 28–41.
Conf. Publ. 2068, Washington, DC. 447 pp. Slipher V. M. (1930) Lowell Obs. Observation Circ., May 1.
Jewitt D. J. (1999) Kuiper belt objects. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., Spencer J. R., Buie M. W., and Bjoraker G. L. (1990) Solid methane on
27, 287–312. Triton and Pluto: 3–4 μm spectrophotometry. Icarus, 88, 491–496.
Jewitt D. J. and Luu J. (1993) Discovery of the candidate Kuiper belt Standish E. M. Jr. (1993) Planet X: No dynamical evidence in the
object 1992 QB1. Nature, 362, 730–732. optical observations. Astron. J., 105, 2000–2006.
Jewitt D. J. and Luu J. (1995) The solar system beyond Neptune. Astron. Stern S. A. (1991) On the number of planets in the outer solar system:
J., 109, 1867–1876. Evidence of a substantial population of 1000-km bodies. Icarus, 90,
Kivelson M., Khurana K. K., Russell C. T., Volwerk M., Walker R. J., 271–281.
and Zimmer C. (2000) Galileo magnetometer measurements: A Stern S. A. (2008) The New Horizons Pluto Kuiper belt mission: An
stronger case for a subsurface ocean at Europa. Science, 289, overview with historical context. Space Sci. Rev., 140, 3–21.
20   Pluto System After New Horizons

Stern S. A. and Grinspoon D. (2018) Chasing New Horizons: Inside the 751, 76.
Epic First Mission to Pluto. Picador, London. 320 pp. Trafton L. M. (1981) Pluto’s atmospheric bulk near perihelion. Adv.
Stern S. A. and Mitton J. (1998) Pluto and Charon: Ice Worlds on the Space Res., 1, 93–97.
Ragged Edge of the Solar System. Wiley, New York. 216 pp. Walker M. F. and Hardie R. H. (1955) A photometric determination of
Stern S. A. and Tholen D. J., eds. (1997) Pluto and Charon. Univ. of the rotational period of Pluto. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac., 67, 224–231.
Arizona, Tucson. 728 pp. Whipple F. L. (1951) A comet model. I. The acceleration of comet
Stern S. A. and Trafton L. (1984) Constraints on bulk composition, Encke. Astrophys. J., 111, 375–394.
seasonal variation, and global dynamics of Pluto’s atmosphere. Whipple F. L. (1964) Evidence for a comet belt beyond Neptune. Proc.
Icarus, 57, 231–240. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 51, 711–718.
Stern S. A., Weintraub D. A., and Festou M. C. (1993) Evidence for Yelle R. V. and Lunine J. I. (1989) Evidence for a molecule heavier than
a low surface temperature on Pluto from millimeter-wave thermal methane in Pluto’s atmosphere. Nature, 339, 288–290.
emission measurements. Science, 261, 1713–1716. Young E. F. and Binzel R. P. (1993) Comparative mapping of Pluto’s
Stern S. A., Buie M. W., and Trafton L. M. (1997) HST high-resolution sub-Charon hemisphere: Three least squares models based on
images and maps of Pluto. Astron. J., 113, 827–843. mutual event lightcurves. Icarus, 102, 134–139.
Tegler S. C., Cornelison D. M., Grundy W. M., Romanishin W., Young L. A., Olkin C. B., Elliot J. L., Tholen D. J., and Buie M. W.
Abernathy M. R., Bovyn M. J., Burt J. A., Evans D. E., Maleszewski (1994) The Charon-Pluto mass ratio from MKO astrometry. Icarus,
C. K., Thompson Z., and Vilas F. (2010) Methane and nitrogen 108, 186–199.
abundances on Pluto and Eris. Astrophys. J., 725, 1296–1305. Young L. A., Elliot J. L., Tokunaga A., de Bergh C., and Owen T.
Tegler S. C., Grundy W. M., Olkin C. B., Young L. A., Romanishin W., (1997) Detection of gaseous methane on Pluto. Icarus, 127, 258–
Cornelison D. M., and Khodadadkouchaki R. (2012) Ice mineralogy 262.
across and into the surfaces of Pluto, Triton, and Eris. Astrophys. J.,
 Barucci M. A., Dalle Ore C., and Fornasier S. (2021) The transneptunian objects as the context for Pluto. In The Pluto System
After New Horizons (S. A. Stern, J. M. Moore, W. M. Grundy, L. A. Young, and R. P. Binzel, eds.), pp. 21–52.
Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, DOI: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816540945-ch003.

The Transneptunian Objects as the Context for Pluto:

An Astronomical Perspective
M. A. Barucci
LESIA, Observatoire de Paris, Université PSL, CNRS, Université de Paris, Sorbonne Université

C. M. Dalle Ore
NASA Ames Research Center and SETI Institute

S. Fornasier
LESIA, Observatoire de Paris, Université PSL, CNRS, Université de Paris,
Sorbonne Université, Institut Universitaire de France

A detailed study of transneptunian objects (TNOs) is essential in understanding the processes

that occurred in our solar nebula at large heliocentric distance as well as in other planetary
systems. Although TNOs are challenging objects, often at the limit of observability by ground-
based telescopes, they show high heterogeneity in albedos, colors, compositions, densities, and
satellite system architectures. An overview of the state of the art of the physical properties and
surface composition of these faint and distant objects as acquired from Earth-based astronomi-
cal assets is presented. In particular, we will discuss how the TNOs provide context for Pluto
and, conversely, how the Pluto observations from New Horizons help to better understand the
TNO population, particularly the larger objects. Overall the results from New Horizons pro-
vide feedback for testing many groundbased techniques even though ground results often lack
precision. The lessons learned will help to better characterize our continuing investigations of
other bodies in the outer regions of the solar system.

1. INTRODUCTION tem. In particular, TNOs give information on the accretion

and evolutionary processes that sculpted the present outer
The region of the solar system beyond Neptune is popu- solar system. Thanks to the continuous observation of the
lated by a vast quantity of objects called transneptunians or transneptunian region, the science of the solar system beyond
Kuiper belt objects (TNOs or KBOs; in this paper we refer Neptune evolved rapidly and a completely new view of our
to them as TNOs). (134340) Pluto belongs to this population. system has been revealed, allowing the development of new
These objects formed in the external part of our planetary models of formation and evolution of our and other planetary
system where planetary nebular density was too low to allow systems. Thus, the entire population of TNOs must be the
objects to grow into larger planets. In this region beyond the foundational starting point for understanding Pluto and its
planets, accretion proceeded at least up to the size of about context in our solar system.
2700 km in diameter, limited by local dynamical properties. Based on their dynamical properties (Elliot et al., 2005;
Neptune’s moon, Triton, believed to be an escaped TNO Gladman et al., 2008), the population has been divided into
captured by Neptune (McKinnon et al., 1995, Agnor and several groups: classical, resonant, scattering (or scattered)
Hamilton, 2006), is the largest of these objects. disk, and detached objects. Gladman et al. (2008) also des-
After the discovery of Pluto in 1930 by Clyde Tombaugh, ignated objects with orbits a >2000 AU as part of the inner
followed only in 1992 by that of another object of the same Oort cloud. The objects with semimajor axes and perihelia
population, (15670) Albion (previously unnamed and called between the orbits of Jupiter and Neptune are part of another
1992 QB1; Jewitt and Luu, 1992), the finding of TNOs (with population called Centaurs expected to be escaped TNOs or
distinct orbital and physical properties) increased rapidly. collisional remnants of TNOs (Levison and Duncan, 1997;
The discovery of these bodies (at present more than 3000 Pan and Sari, 2005).
have been detected and listed in the Minor Planet Center) The classical population includes bodies with semimajor
revolutionized our understanding of the processes and evolu- axis between 40 and 48 AU and e <0.2. It has been divided
tion of the protoplanetary nebula in our solar system and, into two subpopulations, cold and hot classical objects, based
by extension, of other exoplanetary systems. Small bodies on the inclination. Cold classical objects have low i, and
provide the richest information for studying a planetary sys- low e, while hot classical objects have high inclination (>5°).

21
22   Pluto System After New Horizons

Gomez (2003) showed by numerical simulation that the hot TNO properties and the connection to the Pluto system. We
population could find its origin in the migration of Neptune, will describe what has been confirmed about Pluto from
which scattered planetesimals originally formed inside 30 AU. the ground knowledge and, in particular, give more details
As such, the current classical population could be the super- on the larger objects closer to Pluto in their characteristics.
position of these objects with the local cold objects, believed The results obtained on TNOs will be coupled with those
to have formed in situ, beyond 30 AU. obtained by the New Horizons mission, to outline what has
Resonant objects are locked in mean-motion resonances been learned from the TNO population at large and where
with Neptune and their configuration provides them dy- we have to go from here.
namical stability. Although many resonances exist, the 3:2
mean-motion resonance with Neptune (a = 39.4 AU) is 2. TRANSNEPTUNIAN OBJECT
the most densely populated, and objects trapped in it are PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
called plutinos as they include Pluto. The origin of these
resonant objects is also closely related to Neptune’s migra-
tion: Indeed, while Neptune was migrating outward, objects 2.1. Observational Techniques:
that followed this migration were captured in a resonance Occultations and Radiometry
(Malhotra, 2019).
Scattering/scattered disk objects have very eccentric orbits The most precise technique to determine the size and
and perihelion distances near that of Neptune, while detached shape of a TNO is by means of stellar occultation, i.e., when
objects are those in very eccentric orbits with large perihelion a TNO passes in front of a star. This technique has only
distances but away from Neptune’s influence (Gladman et al., been applied to determine the size and shape of TNOs in the
2008). They have long lifetimes. (136199) Eris is part of the past 10 years. In fact, TNOs have angular diameters on the
scattered population, while an example of a detached object order of ~10 milliarcseconds, and therefore high accuracy
is (90377) Sedna, whose orbit has a perihelion distance at is required in both the TNO’s ephemeris and the stellar
76 AU and semimajor axis a = 506.8 AU. catalogs (at the milliarcsecond level). So far ~60 occulta-
The availability of large groundbased telescopes (8–10 m) tion events by ~25 TNOs and Centaurs have been recorded
and telescopes out of Earth’s atmosphere (Hubble, Spitzer, (Ortiz et al., 2019, and references therein), yielding a very
and Herschel) has allowed the start of the investigation of precise size estimation for about 15 TNOs and Centaurs.
the physical properties and composition of these distant This technique has also allowed scientists to discover the
objects (Jewitt and Luu, 2001; Brown, 2000), obtaining good first ring systems not circling a giant planet: a double ring
accuracy for the brightest ones. around the Centaur Chariklo (Braga-Ribas et al., 2014) and
A few TNOs are relatively large (>1400 km). In fact, in 2005 a single ring around the dwarf planet Haumea (Ortiz et al.,
three large icy bodies were discovered — (136108) Haumea, 2017); ring systems are also inferred to be around other
(136472) Makemake, and (136199) Eris — that are compara- bodies (Ortiz et al., 2015).
ble to (134340) Pluto in size. After the discovery of Eris, with Radiometry is the most powerful technique for investi-
an initial size estimation larger than Pluto, the International gating sizes and albedos of the transneptunian population
Astronomical Union (IAU) revised the definition of a planet, at a statistically significant level. This technique combines
introducing the new category of “dwarf planets” as “objects thermal infrared and visible observations. The absolute
large enough to be in hydrostatic equilibrium but not large H magnitude alone, being proportional to the area and
enough to have cleaned their orbit of other minor bodies.” albedo of a body, gives only a crude estimate of the size
These three TNOs and Pluto are included in this category and assuming a given geometric albedo range. To determine the
many other are candidates. The asteroid (1) Ceres, thought individual diameter and albedo values of a TNO, observa-
(although controversially) to have originated as part of the tions in the visible range should be coupled with thermal
TNO population (McKinnon, 2012; De Sanctis et al., 2015), infrared observations. For the TNOs, the peak of the thermal
is also a member of the dwarf planets’ class. emission ranges between ~40 and 100 µm. Observations in
In general, because of their size and distance, understand- the thermal infrared are done mostly from space, because
ing the detailed composition of TNOs is difficult. The major- of the telluric atmosphere’s low transmission in most of
ity of objects are small and far away and particularly difficult the near-, mid-, and far-infrared range, and because of the
to study even with the largest available ground telescopes. faint thermal flux of the transneptunian population, related
Knowledge of TNOs’ physical properties, in particular, their to their large heliocentric distances and to their low surface
composition, yields information on the thermal and chemical temperature. Groundbased observations covering the N and
processes in the outer protoplanetary disk, sets constraints Q bands at 7–14 µm and 17–25 µm, respectively, and the
on the conditions of the early solar system, and informs us submillimeter and millimeter range permitted the determina-
about their dynamical evolutionary history. tion of the thermal properties of few Centaurs and TNOs,
In this chapter we will give a state-of-the-art overview including the Pluto-Charon system (Stern et al., 1993, and
of the physical properties and composition of these faint references therein). The very first infrared space telescope
and distant objects. This is complementary to the Parker observations of Centaurs and TNOs were performed with
chapter in this volume, which will focus on the dynamical the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) and the Infrared
 Barucci et al.: The Transneptunian Objects as the Context for Pluto   23

Space Observatory (ISO). These included the thermal found also for 52 Centaurs and SDOs from WISE observa-
characterization of the Pluto-Charon system (Aumann and tions (Bauer et al., 2013), and, for the TNOs, derived also
Walker, 1987; Tedesco et al., 1987; Sykes et al., 1987; Sykes, from thermophysical models (Müller et al., 2020). Lel-
1999; Lellouch et al., 2000a,b). louch et al. (2013) also found an anticorrelation with the
The next big step forward in the determination of the heliocentric distances, with the thermal inertia decreasing
transneptunian population size, albedo, and thermal prop- by more than a factor of 2 from the inner (8–25 AU) to the
erties was achieved using the Spitzer Space Telescope, outer (41–53 AU) regions of the solar system. They sug-
the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE), and the gest that the thermal inertia is inversely proportional to the
Herschel infrared space telescope. With Spitzer the albedo heliocentric distance, that in these bodies the heat transfer is
and size of 47 objects were derived (Stansberry et al., 2008, affected by radiative conductivity within pores and increases
2012; Brucker et al., 2009). Another 52 Centaurs and scat- with depth in the subsurface.
tered disk objects (SDOs) located at heliocentric distances Overlapping Spitzer, WISE, and Herschel observations
closer than about 20 AU were investigated with WISE. in the 20–500-µm range are available for a tenth of the
Finally, 170 TNOs and Centaurs were studied with Herschel objects, permitting the first study of the spectral energy
(Müller et al., 2010, 2019) (see references in Table 1), with distribution and submillimeter emissivity (Fornasier et
partial overlap with the Spitzer and WISE TNOs sample but al., 2013; Lellouch et al., 2017). When calculating the lo-
covering longer wavelengths. cal temperatures and monochromatic fluxes with NEATM
2.1.1. Thermal properties. To interpret the thermal data, models, the emissivity (e) is usually assumed constant for all
different models can be applied. The most popular ones are wavelengths. The far-infrared observations clearly indicate
the standard thermal model (STM) (cf. Lebofsky et al., 1986; a significant decrease in the spectral emissivity longward of
Lebofsky and Spencer, 1989) and the near-Earth asteroid ther- ~250 µm and especially at 500 µm for most of the bodies
mal model (NEATM) (Harris, 1998). The former assumes a investigated (Fornasier et al., 2013). This behavior is also
smooth, spherical asteroid, not rotating, with zero thermal in- confirmed at the millimeter wavelength as observed with
ertia, observed at zero phase angle and with a fixed beaming the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA)
factor h, and a grey emissivity constant for all wavelengths. (Lellouch et al., 2016; Brown and Butler, 2017). Fornasier
The latter is a hybrid version of the STM, which also assumes et al. (2013) interpreted the low emissivity at submillimeter
a spherical shape of the body and constant emissivity, but in and millimeter wavelengths as attributed to surfaces having
which h is a free parameter that empirically represents the absorption coefficients 10–20× larger than those of pure
combined effects of thermal inertia, spin state, and surface water ice (Matzler, 1998), probably due to impurities within
roughness. High h values at large heliocentric distances the ices. The Pluto-Charon system also shows a decrease of
unambiguously indicate high thermal inertia and the lack of the emissivity with wavelength, interpreted as a combination
a dusty regolith, while h < 1 indicates a strong “beaming” of a high dielectric constant (3–5) and the transparency of
effect due to surface roughness. the surface material, which has a typical penetration depth
The NEATM is the model most often used to interpret TNO of ~1 cm at 500 µm (Lellouch et al., 2016).
thermal data. In the case of limited wavelength coverage, it 2.1.2. Size and albedo. Size and albedo values, derived
is run with a fixed beaming factor. Alternatively, the thermo- from Herschel, Spitzer, and WISE observations, and a few
physical model (TPM) (Lagerros, 1996, 1997, 1998; Müller from occultations, are available for a total of 170 TNOs and
and Lagerros, 1998) can ingest a non-spherical shape and a Centaurs and are reported in Table 1. Eight additional bodies
wavelength-dependent emissivity, and can provide temperature have lower and upper limit estimations for the diameter and
distribution, thermal inertia, and constraints on the spin axis, albedo values, respectively. The most striking observation
but requires some physical properties information as input. is the huge variation of the albedo value across the TNO
Lellouch et al. (2013) investigated the thermal proper- population, which includes both extremely dark surfaces
ties of 85 TNOs and Centaurs from Spitzer and Herschel with geometric albedo of 2–3% and high reflective bodies.
observations (reporting a relatively high variability of the The latter objects are the volatile-rich dwarf planets and
beaming factor). With the use of a statistical approach on Haumea family members, with a geometric albedo greater
the bodies spin rate and surface roughness, they estimated than 50% and as high as 96% for Eris. However, exclud-
the thermal inertia from the h value. They found a mean ing the peculiar volatile-rich bodies and those with upper/
thermal inertia value of 2.5 ± 0.5 J m–2 s–0.5 K–1, i.e., 2–3 lower limit estimation only, the albedo ranges between 2%
orders of magnitude lower than expected for compact ices and 33%, with a mean value of 9.9 ± 0.5% on a sample of
(Ferrari and Lucas, 2016), and lower than that measured 160 objects. Thus globally the TNO population is relatively
for the water-rich saturnian satellites (5–20 J m–2 s–0.5 K–1) dark. For newly discovered objects, their diameter can be
(Howett et al., 2011, 2012) or for Pluto and Charon (16–26 estimated with an error lower than a factor of 1.6 from
and 9–14 J m–2 s–0.5 K–1 respectively) (Lellouch et al., 2011, their absolute magnitude assuming an albedo value of 10%.
2016), whose surface texture might, however, be affected by Figure 1 reports the geometric albedo vs. diameter for the
the condensation/sublimation cycles of volatiles. Low TNO different dynamical classes of the transneptunian population
thermal inertia indicates surfaces with a very high porosity (Table 1), defined according to the Gladman et al. (2008)
(Lellouch et al., 2013). Low thermal inertia values were dynamical classification. The size of known TNOs ranges
 TABLE 1. Physical properties of the TNOs and Centaurs have been reported
for all objects with diameter and albedo determined by space telescopes.

Object Dyn. D errD+ errD– Pv err_ Err_ Period Amplitude Taxa References
(km) (km) (km) pv+ pv– (hr) (Δmv)
(2060) Chiron Cen 215.6 9.9 –9.9 0.167 0.037 –0.03 5.918 ± 0.0001 0.088 ± 0.003 BB Fornasier et al. (2013); Bus et al. (1989)
(5145) Pholus Cen 99 15 –14 0.155 0.076 –0.049 9.98 0.6 RR Duffard et al. (2014); Tegler et al. (2005)
(7066) Nessus Cen 57 17 –14 0.086 0.075 –0.034 RR Duffard et al. (2014)
(8405) Asbolus Cen 85 8 –9 0.056 0.019 –0.015 8.9351 ± 0.003 0.55 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Kern et al. (2000)
(10199) Chariklo Cen 238 10 –10 0.042 0.005 –0.005 7.004 ± 0.036 0.11 BR Fornasier et al. (2013, 2014)
24   Pluto System After New Horizons

(10199) Chariklo* Cen 246 6 –6 0.042 0.001 –0.001 Leiva et al. (2017)
(10370) Hylonome Cen 74 16 –16 0.051 0.03 –0.017 BR Duffard et al. (2014)
(31824) Elatus Cen 49.8 10.4 –9.8 0.049 0.028 –0.016 13.41 ± 0.04 0.102 ± 0.005 RR Duffard et al. (2014); Bauer et al. (2002)
(32532) Thereus Cen 62 3 –3 0.083 0.016 –0.013 8.3091 ± 0.001 0.16 ± 0.02 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Ortiz et al. (2003)
(52872) Okyrhoe Cen 35 3 –3 0.056 0.012 –0.01 6.08 0.07 ± 0.01 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(52975) Cyllarus Cen 56 21 –18 0.139 0.157 –0.064 RR Duffard et al. (2014)
(54598) Bienor Cen 198 6 –7 0.043 0.016 –0.012 9.14 ± 0.04 0.75 ± 0.09 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Ortiz et al. (2003)
(55576) Amycus Cen 104 8 –8 0.083 0.016 –0.015 9.76 0.16 ± 0.01 RR Duffard et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(60558) Echeclus Cen 64.6 1.6 –1.6 0.052 0.007 –0.007 26.802 0.24 ± 0.06 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Rousselot et al. (2005)
(63252) 2001 BL41 Cen 34.6 6.6 –6.1 0.043 0.028 –0.014 BR Duffard et al. (2014)
(83982) Crantor Cen 59 11 –12 0.121 0.064 –0.038 6.97 ± 0.04 0.14 ± 0.04 RR Duffard et al. (2014); Ortiz et al. (2003)
(95626) 2002 GZ32 Cen 237 8 –8 0.037 0.004 –0.004 5.8 ± 0.03 0.15 ± 0.03 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Dotto et al. (2008)
(119315) 2001 SQ73 Cen 90 23 –20 0.048 0.03 –0.018 BR Duffard et al. (2014)
(119976) 2002 VR130 Cen 24.4 5.4 –4.6 0.093 0.066 –0.036 Duffard et al. (2014)
(120061) 2003 CO1 Cen 94 5 –5 0.049 0.005 –0.006 4.51 0.06 ± 0.01 BR Duffard et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(136204) 2003 WL7 Cen 105 6 –7 0.053 0.01 –0.01 16.48 0.05 ± 0.01 BB Duffard et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(145486) 2005 UJ438 Cen 16 1 –2 0.256 0.097 –0.076 8.32 0.11 ± 0.01 RR-IR Duffard et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(148975) 2001 XA255 Cen 37.7 10.5 –10.5 0.041 0.014 –0.014 Bauer et al. (2013)
(248835) 2006 SX368 Cen 76 2 –2 0.052 0.007 –0.006 BR Duffard et al. (2014)
(250112) 2002 KY14 Cen 47 3 –4 0.057 0.011 –0.007 7.12 0.11 ± 0.01 RR Duffard et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(281371) 2008 FC76 Cen 68 6 –7 0.067 0.017 –0.011 RR Duffard et al. (2014)
(309139) 2006 XQ51 Cen 39.1 15.7 –15.7 0.139 0.058 –0.058 Bauer et al. (2013)
(310071) 2010 KR59 Cen 110.1 30.8 –30.8 0.121 0.037 –0.037 Bauer et al. (2013)
(309737) 2008 SJ236 Cen 17.7 1.5 –1.5 0.074 0.021 –0.021 Bauer et al. (2013)
(328884) 2010 LJ109 Cen 44.2 3.8 –3.8 0.083 0.021 –0.021 Bauer et al. (2013)
 TABLE 1. (continued).

Object Dyn. D errD+ errD– Pv err_pv+ Err_ Period (hr) Amplitude Taxa References
(km) (km) (km) pv– (Δmv)

(330759) 2008 SO218 Cen 11.8 0.4 –0.4 0.097 0.017 –0.017 Bauer et al. (2013)
(332685) 2009 HH36 Cen 33 2.8 –2.8 0.078 0.018 –0.018 Bauer et al. (2013)
(342842) 2008 YB3 Cen 67.1 1 –1 0.062 0.012 –0.012 Bauer et al. (2013)
(346889) 2009 QV38 Cen 23.2 9.5 –9.5 0.062 0.049 –0.049 Bauer et al. (2013)
(447178) 2005 RO43 Cen 194 10 –10 0.056 0.036 –0.021 Duffard et al. (2014)
(900391) 29P/SW 1 Cen 46 13 –13 0.033 0.015 –0.015 Bauer et al. (2013)
(901056) 167P/CINEOS Cen 66.2 22.9 –22.9 0.053 0.019 –0.019 Bauer et al. (2013)
(903956) C/2011 KP36 Cen 55.1 19.4 –19.4 0.101 0.062 –0.062 Bauer et al. (2013)
2000 GM137 Cen 8.6 1.5 –1.5 0.043 0.026 –0.016 Duffard et al. (2014)
2004 QQ26 Cen 79 19 –19 0.044 0.039 –0.014 Duffard et al. (2014)
2013 AZ60 Cen 62.3 5.3 –5.3 0.029 0.006 –0.006 9.39 0.013 ± 0.008 Pal et al. (2015a)
2008 JS14 Cen 14.5 1.8 –1.8 0.044 0.019 –0.019 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 CR140 Cen 7.5 1.4 –1.4 0.02 0.01 –0.01 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 HU20 Cen 10.5 1.1 –1.1 0.101 0.024 –0.024 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 LG61 Cen 0.9 0.2 –0.2 0.089 0.056 –0.056 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 OR1 Cen 3.3 0.6 –0.6 0.055 0.013 –0.013 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 OM101 Cen 3.1 0.2 –0.2 0.029 0.005 –0.005 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 PO58 Cen 8.9 0.6 –0.6 0.035 0.007 –0.007 Bauer et al. (2013)
2007 VH305 Cen 23.8 8 –8 0.07 0.036 –0.036 Bauer et al. (2013)
2008 HY21 Cen 24 1.5 –1.5 0.044 0.01 –0.01 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 BL4 Cen 15.7 3.2 –3.2 0.114 0.052 –0.052 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 ES65 Cen 26.9 7.9 –7.9 0.049 0.024 –0.024 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 FH92 Cen 28 0.6 –0.6 0.047 0.007 –0.007 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 RM64 Cen 21 2 –2 0.159 0.048 –0.048 Bauer et al. (2013)
2010 TH Cen 69.9 24.2 –24.2 0.078 0.033 –0.033 Bauer et al. (2013)
2011 MM4 Cen 63.7 6.2 –6.2 0.083 0.024 –0.024 Bauer et al. (2013)
2000 CN105 CC 247 63 –40 0.151 0.07 –0.059 RR Lacerda et al. (2014a)
2001 QS322 CC 186 99 –24 0.095 0.531 –0.06 Vilenius et al. (2014)
2001 RZ143 CC 140 39 –33 0.191 0.066 –0.045 Vilenius et al. (2012)
Barucci et al.: The Transneptunian Objects as the Context for Pluto   25

2001 XR254 CC 221 41 –71 0.136 0.168 –0.044 Vilenius et al. (2014)
 TABLE 1. (continued).

Object Dyn. D errD+ errD– Pv err_pv+ Err_ Period (hr) Amplitude Taxa References
(km) (km) (km) pv– (Δmv)

2003 BF91 CC 9.1 1.09 ± 0.25 Trilling and Bernstein (2006)

2003 BH91 CC 2.8 0.42 Trilling and Bernstein (2006)
2003 BG91 CC 4.2 0.18 ± 0.075 Trilling and Bernstein (2006)
2003 FM127 CC 6.22 ± 0.02 0.46 ± 0.04 Kern (2006)
2003 QY90A CC 3.4 ± 1.1 0.34 ± 0.06 Kern and Elliot (2006)
2003 QY90B CC 7.1 ± 2.9 0.9 ± 0.18 Kern and Elliot (2006)
26   Pluto System After New Horizons

2003 QR91 CC 280 27 –30 0.054 0.035 –0.028 Vilenius et al. (2014)
2003 WU188 CC <220 >0.15 Vilenius et al. (2014)
(486958) Arrokoth† CC 30 0.165 0.01 –0.01 Stern et al. (2019)
(66652) Borasisi CC 163 32 –66 0.236 0.438 –0.077 6.4 ± 1 0.08 ± 0.02 IR-RR Vilenius et al. (2014); Kern (2006)
(79360) Sila-Nunam CC 343 42 –42 0.09 0.027 –0.017 150.149 0.12 ± 0.01 RR Vilenius et al. (2012); Rabinowitz et al. (2014)
(88611) Teharonhiawako CC 220 41 –44 0.145 0.086 –0.045 Vilenius et al. (2014)
(119951) 2002 KX14 CC 455 27 –27 0.097 0.014 –0.013 Vilenius et al. (2012)
(119951) 2002 KX14* CC 365 30 –21 0.15 0.04 –0.03 Alvarez-Candal et al. (2014)
(120181) 2003 UR292 CC 136 16 –26 0.105 0.081 –0.033 Vilenius et al. (2014)
(135182) 2001 QT322 CC 159 30 –47 0.085 0.424 –0.052 Vilenius et al. (2014)
(275809) 2001 QY297 CC 229 22 –108 0.152 0.439 –0.035 BR Vilenius et al. (2014)
(385266) 2001 QB298 CC 196 71 –53 0.167 0.162 –0.082 Mommert (2013)
(385437) 2003 GH55 CC 178 21 –56 0.15 0.182 –0.031 RR Vilenius et al. (2014)
(469438) 2002 GV31 CC <180 >0.019 29.2 0.35 ± 0.06 Vilenius et al. (2014); Pàl et al. (2015b)
(469514) 2003 QA91 CC 260 30 –36 0.13 0.119 –0.075 Vilenius et al. (2014)
(469705) 2005 EF298 CC 174 27 –32 0.16 0.13 –0.07 9.65 0.31 ± 0.04 Vilenius et al. (2012); Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
(508869) 2002 VT130 CC 324 57 –68 0.097 0.098 –0.049 Mommert (2013)
1996 TS66 HC 159 44 –46 0.179 0.173 –0.07 RR Vilenius et al. (2014)
2001 KA77 HC 310 170 –60 0.099 0.052 –0.056 >6 >0.14 RR Vilenius et al. (2012); Kern (2006)
2001 QC298 HC 303 27 –30 0.061 0.027 –0.017 12 0.4 Vilenius et al. (2014); Snodgrass et al. (2010)
2001 QD298 HC 233 27 –63 0.067 0.062 –0.014 Vilenius et al. (2012)
2002 GH32 HC <180 >0.13 3.98 0.36 ± 0.02 IR Vilenius et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2016)
2003 SQ317 HC 7.21 ± 0.001 0.85 ± 0.05 Lacerda et al. (2014b)
2010 FX86 HC 15.8 0.26 ± 0.04 Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
 TABLE 1. (continued).

Object Dyn. D errD+ errD– Pv err_pv+ Err_ Period (hr) Amplitude Taxa References
(km) (km) (km) pv– (Δmv)

2010 VK201 HC 7.59 0.3 ± 0.02 Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)

(19308) HC <330 >0.20 7.92 ± 0.04 0.26 ± 0.03 BB Vilenius et al. (2018); Sheppard and Jewitt (2003)
1996 TO66
(19521) Chaos HC 600 140 –130 0.05 0.03 –0.016 IR Vilenius et al. (2012)
(20000) HC 668 154 –86 0.127 0.04 –0.042 6.3436 ± 0.41 ± 0.09 IR Lellouch et al. (2013); Ortiz et al. (2003)
Varuna 0.0001
(24835) HC <280 >0.360 8.08 0.05 ± 0.02 BB Vilenius et al. (2018); Thirouin et al. (2016)
1995 SM55
(35671) HC 393 39 –38 0.06 0.019 –0.013 8.84 0.16 ± 0.01 BB Vilenius et al. (2012); Lacerda and Luu (2006)
1998 SN165
(50000) Quaoar HC 1073.6 37.9 –37.9 0.127 0.01 –0.009 17.6788 ± 0.13 ± 0.03 RR Fornasier et al. (2013); Ortiz et al. (2003)
0.0004
(50000) Quaoar* HC 1110 5 5 0.109 0.007 –0.007 RR Braga-Ribas et al. (2013)
(55565) 2002 AW197 HC 768 39 –38 0.112 0.012 –0.011 8.86 ± 0.01 0.08± 0.02 IR Vilenius et al. (2014); Ortiz et al. (2006)
(55636) 2002 TX300 HC 323 95 –37 0.76 0.15 –0.45 16.24 ± 0.08 0.08 ± 0.02 BB Vilenius et al. (2018); Sheppard and Jewitt (2003)
(55636) 2002 TX300* HC 286 10 –10 0.88 0.15 –0.06 Elliot et al. (2010)
(55637) 2002 UX25 HC 165 36 –42 0.049 0.038 –0.017 6.55 0.09 ± 0.03 IR Lellouch et al. (2013); Thirouin (2013)
(78799) 2002 XW93 HC 565 71 –73 0.038 0.043 –0.025 Vilenius et al. (2012)
(79983) 1999 DF9 HC 6.65 ± 0.4 0.02 RR Lacerda and Luu (2006)
(86177) 1999 RY215 HC 263 29 –37 0.039 0.012 –0.007 BR Vilenius et al. (2012)
(90568) 2004 GV9 HC 680 34 –34 0.077 0.008 –0.008 5.86 ± 0.03 0.16 ± 0.03 BR-IR Vilenius et al. (2012); Dotto et al. (2008)
(120178) 2003 OP32 HC 274 47 –25 0.54 0.11 –0.15 9.71 0.18 ± 0.01 BB Vilenius et al. (2018); Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
(120347) Salacia HC 901 45 –45 0.044 0.004 –0.004 6.61 0.04 ± 0.02 BB Fornasier et al. (2013); Thirouin et al. (2014)
(136108) Haumea HC 1240 69 –58 0.804 0.062 –0.095 3.9155 ± 0.29 ± 0.02 BB Fornasier et al. (2013); Lacerda et al. (2008)
0.0001
(136108) Haumea* HC 1595 11 –11 0.51 0.02 0.02 BB Ortiz et al. (2017)
(136472) Makemake HC 1440 9 –9 0.77 0.02 –0.02 7.771 ± 0.003 0.029 ± 0.002 BB Lellouch et al. (2013); Heinze and de Lahunta, (2009)
(136472) Makemake* HC 1440 9 –9 0.77 0.03 –0.03 Ortiz et al. (2012)
(138537) 2000 OK67 HC 164 33 –45 0.169 0.159 –0.052 RR Vilenius et al. (2014)
(145452) 2005 RN43 HC 679 55 –73 0.107 0.029 –0.018 13.89 0.06 ± 0.01 IR-RR Vilenius et al. (2012); Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
(145453) 2005 RR43 HC 300 43 –34 0.44 0.12 –0.1 7.87 0.06 ± 0.01 BB Vilenius et al. (2018); Thirouin et al. (2010)
Barucci et al.: The Transneptunian Objects as the Context for Pluto   27
 TABLE 1. (continued).

Object Dyn. D errD+ errD– Pv err_pv+ Err_ Period (hr) Amplitude Taxa References
(km) (km) (km) pv– (Δmv)

(148780) Altjira HC 331 51 –187 0.043 0.183 –0.009 RR-IR Vilenius et al. (2014)
(150642) 2001 CZ31 HC 4.71 0.21 ± 0.02 BB/BR Lacerda and Luu (2006)
(174567) Varda HC 792 91 –84 0.102 0.024 –0.02 5.91 0.02 ± 0.01 IR Vilenius et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2014)
(182934) 2002 GJ32 HC 416 81 –78 0.035 0.019 –0.011 RR Vilenius et al. (2014)
(202421) 2005 UQ513 HC 498 63 –75 0.202 0.084 –0.049 7.03 0.05 ± 0.02 Vilenius et al. (2012); Thirouin et al. (2012)
(230965) 2004 XA192 HC 339 120 –95 0.26 0.34 –0.15 7.88 0.07 ± 0.02 Vilenius et al. (2012); Thirouin et al. (2012)
28   Pluto System After New Horizons

(307251) 2002 KW14 HC 161 35 –40 0.31 0.281 –0.094 13.25 0.25 ± 0.03 Vilenius et al. (2012); Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
(307261) 2002 MS4 HC 934 47 –47 0.051 0.036 –0.022 7.33 0.05 ± 0.01 Vilenius et al. (2012); Thirouin (2013)
(307616) 2003 QW90 HC 401 63 –48 0.084 0.026 –0.022 RR Lacerda et al. (2014a)
(308193) 2005 CB79 HC 6.76 0.13 ± 0.02 Thirouin et al. (2010)
(416400) 2003 UZ117 HC 222 57 –42 0.29 0.16 –0.11 11.29 0.09 ± 0.01 BB Vilenius et al. (2018); Thirouin et al. (2016)
(444030) 2004 NT33 HC 423 87 –80 0.125 0.069 –0.039 7.87 0.04 ± 0.01 BB- Vilenius et al. (2014); Thirouin et al. (2012)
BR
(469306) 1999 CD158 HC <310 >0.130 6.88 0.49 ± 0.03 BR-IR Vilenius et al. (2018); Thirouin et al. (2016)
(469615) 2004 PT107 HC 400 45 –51 0.032 0.011 –0.007 20 0.05 Vilenius et al. (2014); Snodgrass et al. (2010)
(134340) Pluto† Plu 2376 2 2 0.52 0.14 –0.03 153.2935 0.3 BB Stern et al. (2018); Tholen and Buie, 1997
Charon† Plu 1212 1 1 0.41 0.02 –0.02 153.2935 Stern et al. (2018); Tholen and Buie, 1997
2001 KD77 Plu 232.3 40.5 –39.4 0.089 0.044 –0.027 IR-RR Mommert et al. (2012)
2002 XV93 Plu 549.2 21.7 –23 0.04 0.02 –0.015 Mommert et al. (2012)
2003 UT292 Plu 185.6 17.9 –18 0.067 0.068 –0.034 Mommert et al. (2012)
(15789) 1993 SC Plu 7.7 0.04 RR Tegler et al. (1997)
(15810) Arawn Plu 5.47 ± 0.33 0.58 Porter et al. (2016)
(15820) 1994 TB Plu 85 36 –28 0.172 0.258 –0.097 6 0.26 RR Lellouch et al. (2013); Romanishin and Tegler, 1999
(15875) 1996 TP66 Plu 154 28.8 –33.7 0.074 0.063 –0.031 1.96 <0.04 RR Mommert et al. (2012); Collander-Brown et al. 1999
(28978) Ixion Plu 617 19 –20 0.141 0.011 –0.011 12.4 ± 0.3 IR Lellouch et al. (2013); Galiazzo et al. (2016)
(32929) 1995 QY9 Plu 7.3 ± 0.1 0.6 ± 0.04 BR Sheppard and Jewitt (2002)
(33340) 1998 VG44 Plu 248 43 –41 0.063 0.026 –0.017 IR Lellouch et al. (2013)
(38628) Huya Plu 458 9.2 –9.2 0.083 0.004 –0.004 5.21 0.02 ± 0.01 IR Fornasier et al. (2013); Thirouin et al. (2014)
(47171) 1999 TC36 Plu 393.1 25.2 –26.8 0.079 0.013 –0.011 6.21 ± 0.02 0.06 RR Mommert et al. (2012); Ortiz et al. (2003)
(47932) 2000 GN171 Plu 147.1 20.7 –17.8 0.215 0.093 –0.07 8.329 ± 0.005 0.61 ± 0.03 IR Mommert et al. (2012); Sheppard and Jewitt (2002)
 TABLE 1. (continued).

Object Dyn. D errD+ errD– Pv err_pv+ Err_ Period (hr) Amplitude Taxa References
(km) (km) (km) pv– (Δmv)

(55638) 2002 VE95 Plu 249.8 13.5 –13.1 0.149 0.019 –0.016 9.97 0.05 ± 0.01 RR Mommert et al. (2012); Thirouin et al. (2010)
(84719) 2002 VR128 Plu 448.5 42.1 –43.2 0.052 0.027 –0.018 Mommert et al. (2012)
(84922) 2003 VS2 Plu 523 35.1 –34.4 0.147 0.063 –0.043 7.4208 0.224 ± 0.013 Mommert et al. (2012); Thirouin (2013)
(90482) Orcus Plu 958.4 22.9 –22.9 0.231 0.018 –0.011 10.08 ± 0.01 0.04 ± 0.02 BB Fornasier et al. (2013); Ortiz et al. (2006)
(120216) 2004 EW95 Plu 291.1 20.3 –25.9 0.044 0.021 –0.015 BB Mommert et al. (2012)
(120348) 2004 TY364 Plu 512 37 –40 0.107 0.02 –0.015 11.7 ± 0.01 0.22 ± 0.02 BR-IR Lellouch et al. (2013); Sheppard 2007
(133067) 2003 FB128 Plu 186 27 –29 0.074 0.035 –0.021 Lacerda et al. (2014a)
(139775) 2001 QG298 Plu 13.7744 ± 1.14 ± 0.04 BR Sheppard and Jewitt (2004)
0.0004
(144897) 2004 UX10 Plu 398.1 32.6 –39.3 0.141 0.044 –0.031 7.58 ± 0.05 0.14 ± 0.04 BR-IR Mommert et al. (2012); Perna et al. 2009
(175113) 2004 PF115 Plu 468.2 38.6 –49.1 0.123 0.043 –0.033 Mommert et al. (2012)
(208996) 2003 AZ84 Plu 727 62 –67 0.107 0.023 –0.016 6.72 ± 0.05 0.14 ± 0.03 BB Mommert et al. (2012); Sheppard and Jewitt (2003)
(208996) 2003 AZ84* Plu 772 12 –12 0.097 0.009 –0.009 BB Dias-Oliveira et al. (2017)
(307463) 2002 VU130 Plu 252.9 33.6 –31.3 0.179 0.202 –0.103 Mommert et al. (2012)
(341520) 2007 TY430 Plu 9.28 0.24 ± 0.0 Thirouin et al. (2014)
(450265) 2003 WU172 Plu 312 0.039 Lacerda et al. (2014a)
(455502) 2003 UZ413 Plu 670 84 –82 0.07 0.022 –0.015 4.13 ± 0.05 0.13 ± 0.13 BB Lacerda et al. (2014a); Perna et al. 2009
(469372) 2001 QF298 Plu 408.2 40.2 –44.9 0.071 0.02 –0.014 BB Mommert et al. (2012)
(469708) 2005 GE187 Plu 11.99 0.29 ± 0.02 Thirouin et al. (2016)
(469987) 2006 HJ23 Plu 216.4 29.7 –34.2 0.281 0.259 –0.152 Mommert et al. (2012)
2003 HA57 Plu 6.44 0.31 ± 0.03 Thirouin et al. (2016)
2007 JF43 Plu 9.52 0.22 ± 0.02 Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
2010 EL139 Plu 6.32 0.15 ± 0.03 Benecchi and Sheppard (2013)
2014 JL80 Plu 34.87 0.55 Thirouin and Sheppard (2018)
2014 JO80 Plu 6.32 0.6 ± 0.05 Thirouin and Sheppard (2018)
2014 JQ80 Plu 12.16 0.76 ± 0.04 Thirouin and Sheppard (2018)
2014 KC102 Plu 9 0.2 Thirouin and Sheppard (2018)
2015 BA519 Plu 8 0.16 Thirouin and Sheppard (2018)
(126154) 2001 YH140 Res 349 81 –81 0.08 0.05 –0.05 8.45 ± 0.05 0.34 ± 0.06 IR Müller et al. (2010); Ortiz et al. (2006)
(119066) 2001 KJ76 Res 3.38 ± 0.39 0.34 ± 0.06 Kern (2006)
Barucci et al.: The Transneptunian Objects as the Context for Pluto   29
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
kennels, and the deepness of their throats is the depth of his
discourse.
A justice of peace he is to domineer in his parish, and do his
neighbour wrong with more right. He will be drunk with his hunters
for company, and stain his gentility with drippings of ale. He is
fearful of being sheriff of the shire by instinct, and dreads the assize
week as much as the prisoner.
In sum, he's but a clod of his own earth, or his land is the dunghill,
and he the cock that crows over it; and commonly his race is quickly
run, and his children's children, though they 'scape hanging, return
to the place from whence they came.

A Plain Country-Fellow.

A plain country-fellow is one that manures his ground well, but lets
himself lie fallow and untilled. He has reason enough to do his
business, and not enough to be idle and melancholy. He seems to
have the punishment of Nebuchadnezzar, for his conversation is
among beasts, and his talons none of the shortest, only he eats not
grass because he loves not salads. His hand guides the plough, and
the plough his thoughts, and his ditch and landmark is the very
mound of his meditations. He expostulates with his oxen very
understandingly, and speaks gee, and ree, better than English. His
mind is not much distracted with objects, but if a good fat sow come
in his way, he stands dumb and astonished, and though his haste be
never so great, will fix here half an hour's contemplation. His
habitation is some poor thatched roof, distinguished from his barn by
the loop-holes that let out smoke, which the rain had long since
washed through, but for the double ceiling of bacon on the inside,
which has hung there from his grandsire's time, and is yet to make
rashers for posterity. His dinner is his other work, for he sweats at it
as much as at his labour; he is a terrible fastener on a piece of beef,
and you may hope to stave the guard off sooner. His religion is part
of his copyhold, which he takes from his landlord, and refers it
wholly to his discretion. Yet if he give him leave he is a good
Christian to his power—that is, comes to church in his best clothes,
and sits there with his neighbours, where he is capable only of two
prayers, for rain, and fair weather. He apprehends God's blessings
only in a good year, or a fat pasture, and never praises Him but on
good ground. Sunday he esteems a day to make merry in, and
thinks a bagpipe as essential to it as evening prayer, when he walks
very solemnly after service with his hands coupled behind him, and
censures the dancing of his parish. His compliment with his
neighbour is a good thump on the back, and his salutation
commonly some blunt curse. He thinks nothing to be vices, but pride
and ill husbandry, from which he will gravely dissuade the youth, and
has some thrifty hob-nail proverbs to clout his discourse. He is a
niggard all the week, except only market days, when, if his corn sell
well, he thinks he may be drunk with a good conscience. He is
sensible of no calamity but the burning of a stack of corn, or the
overflowing of a meadow, and thinks Noah's flood the greatest
plague that ever was, not because it drowned the world, but spoiled
the grass. For death he is never troubled, and if he get in but his
harvest before, let it come when it will, he cares not.

A Pot Poet.
A pot poet is the dregs of wit, yet mingled with good drink may have
some relish. His inspirations are more real than others, for they do
but feign a god, but he has his by him. His verse runs like the tap,
and his invention as the barrel ebbs and flows at the mercy of the
spiggot. In thin drink he aspires not above a ballad, but a cup of
sack inflames him, and sets his muse and nose a-fire together. The
press is his mint, and stamps him now and then a sixpence or two in
reward of the baser coin, his pamphlet. His works would scarce sell
for three halfpence, though they are given oft for three shillings, but
for the pretty title that allures the country gentleman; for which the
printer maintains him in ale for a fortnight. His verses are, like his
clothes, miserable stolen scraps and patches, yet their pace is not
altogether so hobbling as an almanac's. The death of a great man,
or the burning of a house, furnish him with an argument, and the
nine muses are out strait in mourning gowns, and Melpomene cries
'Fire! fire!' His other poems are but briefs in rhyme, and, like the
poor Greek's collections, to redeem from captivity.

His frequentest works go out in single sheets, and are chanted from
market to market to a vile tune and a viler throat; whilst the poor
country wench melts like her butter to hear them. And these are the
stories of some men of Tyburn, or of a strange monster broken
loose; or sitting in a tap-room he writes sermons on judgments. He
drops away at last, and his life, like a can too full, spills upon the
bench. He leaves twenty shillings on the score, which his hostess
loses.

A Bowl Alley.
A bowl alley is the place where there are three things thrown away
besides bowls—to wit, time, money, and curses, and the last ten for
one. The best sport in it is the gamesters, and he enjoys it that looks
on and bets not. It is the school of wrangling, and worse than the
schools, for men will cavil here for a hair's breadth, and make a stir
where a straw would end the controversy. No antic screws men's
bodies into such strange flexures, and you would think them here
senseless, to speak sense to their bowl, and put their trust in
entreaties for a good cast. It is the best discovery of humours,
especially in the losers, where you have fine variety of impatience,
whilst some fret, some rail, some swear, and others more ridiculously
comfort themselves with philosophy. To give you the moral of it, it is
the emblem of the world, or the world's ambition; where most are
short, or over, or wide, or wrong-biassed, and some few justle in to
the mistress of fortune. And it is here as in the court, where the
nearest are most spited, and all blows aimed at the toucher.

A Handsome Hostess.
A handsome hostess is the fairer commendation of an
inn, above the fair sign, or fair lodgings. She is the
loadstone that attracts men of iron, gallants and
roarers, where they cleave sometimes long, and are
not easily got off. Her lips are your welcome, and your
entertainment her company, which is put into the
reckoning too, and is the dearest parcel in it. No
citizen's wife is demurer than she at the first greeting, nor draws in
her mouth with a chaster simper; but you may be more familiar
without distaste, and she does not startle at a loose jest. She is the
confusion of a pottle of sack more than would have been spent
elsewhere, and her little jugs are accepted to have her kiss excuse
them. She may be an honest woman, but is not believed so in her
parish, and no man is a greater infidel in it than her husband.

A Poor Fiddler.
A poor fiddler is a man and a fiddle out of case, and he
in worse case than his fiddle. One that rubs two sticks
together (as the Indians strike fire), and rubs a poor
living out of it; partly from this, and partly from your
charity, which is more in the hearing than giving him,
for he sells nothing dearer than to be gone. He is just
so many strings above a beggar, though he have but
two; and yet he begs too. Hunger is the greatest pain he takes,
except a broken head sometimes. Otherwise his life is so many fits
of mirth, and 'tis some mirth to see him. A good feast shall draw him
five miles by the nose, and you shall track him again by the scent.
His other pilgrimages are fairs and good houses, where his devotion
is great to the Christmas; and no man loves good times better. He is
in league with the tapsters for the worshipful of the inn, whom he
torments next morning with his art, and has their names more
perfect than their men. A new song is better to him than a new
jacket, especially if it be lewd, which he calls merry; and hates
naturally the puritan, as an enemy to this mirth. A country wedding
and Whitsun-ale are the two main places he domineers in, where he
goes for a musician, and overlooks the bagpipe. The rest of him is
drunk, and in the stocks.

A Coward.
A coward is the man that is commonly most fierce against the
coward, and labouring to take off this suspicion from himself; for the
opinion of valour is a good protection to those that dare not use it.
No man is valianter than he is in civil company, and where he thinks
no danger may come of it, and is the readiest man to fall upon a
drawer and those that must not strike again; wonderfully exceptious
and choleric where he sees men are loth to give him occasion, and
you cannot pacify him better than by quarrelling with him. The
hotter you grow, the more temperate man is he; he protests he
always honoured you, and the more you rail upon him, the more he
honours you, and you threaten him at last into a very honest quiet
man. The sight of a sword wounds him more sensibly than the
stroke, for before that come, he is dead already. Every man is his
master that dare beat him, and every man dares that knows him.
And he who dare do this is the only man that can do much with him;
for his friend he cares not, as a man that carries no such terror as
his enemy, which for this cause only is more potent with him of the
two; and men fall out with him on purpose to get courtesies from
him, and be bribed again to a reconcilement. A man in whom no
secret can be bound up, for the apprehension of each danger
loosens him, and makes him betray both the room and it. He is a
Christian merely for fear of hell fire; and if any religion could frighten
him more, would be of that.

(APPENDIX.)
CHARACTERS FROM THE 'FRATERNITY OF VAGABONDS.'
WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE CRAFTY COMPANY OF CUSONERS
AND SHIFTERS, WHEREUNTO IS ADDED THE TWENTY-FIVE
ORDERS OF KNAVES. 1565.
'A Ruffler goeth with a weapon to seek service, saying he hath been
a servitor in the wars, and beggeth for relief. But his chiefest trade is
to rob poor wayfaring men and market-women.
'An Upright Man is one that goeth with the truncheon of a staff. This
man is of so much authority, that, meeting with any of his
profession, he may call them to account, and command a share or
"snap" unto himself of all that they have gained by their trade in one
month.
'A Whipiake, or fresh-water mariner, is a person who travels with a
counterfeit license in the dress of a sailor.
'An Abraham Man (hence to "Sham-Abraham") is he that walketh bare-
armed and bare-legged, and feigneth himself mad, and carryeth a
pack of wool, or a stick with a bauble on it, or such-like toy, and
nameth himself "Poor Tom."'

AN ESSAY IN DEFENCE OF THE FEMALE SEX.

DEDICATED TO THE PRINCESS ANNE OF DENMARK.
As this book does not bear the reputation of being generally familiar,
we give a slight sketch of its contents. The vitality of a work
depends in so large a degree on the estimation which its subject
happens to secure at the date of publication, that, as a rule, it may
be held when a book is forgotten, or extinguished before its first
spark of life has time to catch popular attention, the fault is its own,
and, being buried, it is a charity to allow its last rest to remain
undisturbed. We are inclined to believe, however, that this little
treatise forms an exception. The 'Essay in Defence of the Female
 Sex' is written by a lady. The third edition,
which now comes under our consideration
as having formed one of the works in
Thackeray's library (illustrated with original
little sketches of the characters dealt with
by their authors), was published in 1697, at
the signs of the 'Black Boy' and the
'Peacock,' both in Fleet Street. The
authoress disclaims any participation in a
brace of verses which appear on its title:—

'Since each is fond of his own ugly face,

Why should you, when we hold it, break the glass?'
Prol. to 'Sir F. Flutter.'

The second couplet appears under an engraving of the 'Compleat

Beau,' an elaborate creation adjusting his curls with a simper, whilst
a left-handed barber bestows a finishing puff from his powder-box:—
'This vain gay thing set up for man,
But see what fate attends him,
The powd'ring Barber first began,
The barber-Surgeon ends him!'

The paragraphs distinguished with little drawings, which we have

extracted, may give an impression that the 'defence' consists of an
attack on the male, rather than a vindication of the fair sex. The
arguments of the gentle champion are, however, temperate and
sensible, in parts; they are stated in a lively, quaint manner, and the
general quality of the book may be considered superior to the
average of its class and date. The preface, which discourses of
vanity as the mainspring of our actions, deals with the characters it
is designed to introduce in the work as with the mimic actors of a
puppet-show; this coincidence with a similar assumption in the
preface to the great novel of our century, from the pen of the gifted
author who at one time possessed this little treatise, is worthy of a
passing remark.

Preface.
'Prefaces to most books are like prolocutors to
puppet-shows; they come first to tell you what
figures are to be presented, and what tricks they are
to play. According, therefore, to ancient and laudable
custom, I thought fit to let you know, by way of
preface or advertisement (call it which you please),
that here are many fine figures within to be seen, as
well worth your curiosity as any in Smithfield at
Bartholomew-tide. I will not deny, reader, but that
you may have seen some of them there already; to
those that have I have little more to say, than that if they have a
mind to see them again in effigy, they may do it here. What is it you
would have? Here are St. Georges, Batemans, John Dories,
Punchinelloes, and the "Creation of the World," or what's as good,
&c. The bookseller, poor man, is desirous to please you at firsthand,
and therefore has put a fine picture in the front to invite you in.'

Character of a Pedant.
(The Authoress alludes to scholars 'falling short' of certain
qualifications. The expression is literally illustrated.)
'For scholars, though by their acquaintance with books, and
conversing much with old authors, they may know perfectly the
sense of the learned dead, and be perfect masters of the wisdom,
be thoroughly informed of the state, and nicely skilled in the policies
of ages long since past, yet by their retired and inactive life, their
neglect of business, and constant conversation with antiquity, they
are such strangers to, and so ignorant of, the domestic affairs and
manners of their own country and times, that they appear like the
 ghosts of old Romans raised by magic. Talk to them
of the Assyrian or Persian monarchies, the Grecian
or Roman commonwealths, they answer like
oracles; they are such finished statesmen, that we
should scarce take them to have been less than
confidants of Semiramis, tutors to Cyrus the Great,
old cronies of Solon and Lycurgus, or privy
councillors at least to the twelve Cæsars
successively. But engage them in a discourse that
concerns the present times, and their native
country, and they hardly speak the language of it,
and know so little of the affairs of it, that as much
might reasonably be expected from an animated
Egyptian mummy.
'They are much disturbed to see a fold or plait amiss in the picture
of an old Roman gown, yet take no notice that their own are
threadbare, out at the elbows, or ragged; or suffer more if Priscian's
head be broken than if it were their own. They are excellent guides,
and can direct you to every alley and turning in old Rome, yet lose
their way at home in their own parish. They are mighty admirers of
the wit and eloquence of the ancients, and yet had they lived in the
time of Cicero and Cæsar, would have treated them with as much
supercilious pride and disrespect as they do now with reverence.
They are great hunters of ancient manuscripts, and have in great
veneration anything that has escaped the teeth of time and rats, and
if age has obliterated the characters 'tis the more valuable for not
being legible. But if by chance they can pick out one word, they rate
it higher than the whole author in print, and would give more for
one proverb of Solomon under his own hand, than for all his
wisdom.'

Extracts from the Character of a Country Gentleman.

Contrasting the picture of a pedant with that of a country
gentleman, the writer states these two characters are presented to
 show 'that men may, and do often,
baffle and frustrate the effects of a
liberal education as well by
industry as negligence. For my
part I think the learned and
unlearned blockhead pretty equal,
for 'tis all one to me, whether a
man talk nonsense or unintelligible sense.'
After describing the relief experienced by the
country squire on his release from the bondage of
learning, the authoress continues her sketch:—
'Thus accomplished and finished for a gentleman, he enters the civil
list, and holds the scales of Justice with as much blindness as she is
said to do. From henceforward his worship becomes as formidable to
the ale-houses as he was before familiar; he sizes an ale-pot, and
takes the dimensions of bread with great dexterity and sagacity. He
is the terror of all the deer and poultry stealers in the
neighbourhood, and is so implacable a persecutor of poachers that
he keeps a register of all the guns and dogs in the hundred, and is
the scare-beggar of the parish. Short pots, and unjustifiable dogs
and nets, furnish him with sufficient matter of presentments to carry
him once a quarter to the sessions, where he says little, eats and
drinks much, and after dinner, hunts over the last chase, and so
rides, worshipfully drunk, home again.'

Extracts from the Character of a Scowler.

'These are your men of nice honour, that
love fighting for the sake of blows, and are
never well but when they are wounded;
they are severe interpreters of looks, are
affronted at every face that don't please
them, and like true cocks of the game, have a quarrel with all
mankind at first sight. They are passionate admirers of scarred
faces, and dote on a wooden leg. They receive a challenge like a
"billet-doux," and a home-thrust as a favour. Their common
adversary is the constable, and their usual lodging "the counter."
Broken heads are a diversion, and an arm in a scarf is a high
satisfaction. They are frugal in their expenses with the tailor, for they
have their doublets pinked on their backs; but they are as good as
an annuity to the surgeon, though they need him not to let them
blood.'

Extracts from the Character of a Beau.

'A beau is one that has more
learning in his heels than his
head, which is better covered
than filled. His tailor and his
barber are his cabinet council, to
whom he is more beholden for
what he is than to his Maker. He
is one that has travelled to see fashions, and
brought over with him the newest cut suits and the
prettiest fancied ribands for sword-knots. He should
be a philosopher, for he studies nothing but
himself, yet every one knows him better that thinks
him not worth knowing. His looks and gestures are
his constant lesson, and his glass is the oracle that
resolves all his mighty doubts and scruples. He examines and
refreshes his complexion by it, and is more dejected at a pimple
than if it were a cancer. When his eyes are set to a languishing air,
his motions all prepared according to art, his wig and his coat
abundantly powdered, his gloves essenced, and his handkerchief
perfumed, and all the rest of his bravery adjusted rightly, the
greatest part of the day, as well as the business of it at home, is
over; 'tis time to launch, and down he comes, scented like a
perfumer's shop, and looks like a vessel with all her rigging under
sail without ballast.' ... 'He first visits the chocolate-house, where he
admires himself in the glass, and starts a learned argument on the
newest fashions. From hence he adjourns to the play-house, where
he is to be met again in the side box, from whence he makes his
court to all the ladies in general with his eyes, and is particular only
with the orange wench. After a while he engages some neighbouring
vizor, and altogether they run over all the boxes, take to pieces
every face, examine every feature, pass their censure upon every
one, and so on to their dress; but, in conclusion, sees nobody
complete, but himself, in the whole house. After this he looks down
with contempt upon the pit, and rallies all the slovenly fellows and
awkward "beaux," as he calls them, of the other end of the town; is
mightily offended at their ill-scented snuff, and, in spite of all his
"pulvilio" and essences, is overcome with the stink of their Cordovant
gloves. To close all, Madam in the mask must give him an account of
the scandal of the town, which she does in the history of abundance
of intrigues, real or feigned, at all of which he laughs aloud and
often, not to show his satisfaction, but his teeth. His next stage is
Locket's, where his vanity, not his stomach, is to be gratified with
something that is little and dear. Quails and ortolans are the
meanest of his diet, and a spoonful of green peas at Christmas is
worth more to him than the inheritance of the field where they grow
in summer. His amours are all profound secrets, yet he makes a
confidence of them to every man he meets with. Thus the show
goes forward, until he is beaten for trespasses he was never guilty
of, and shall be damned for sins he never committed. At last, with
his credit as low as his fortune, he retires sullenly to his cloister, the
King's Bench or the Fleet, and passes the rest of his days in privacy
and contemplation. Here, if you please, we will give him one visit
more, and see the last act of the farce; and you shall find him
(whose sobriety was before a vice, as being only the pander to his
other pleasures, and who feared a lighted pipe as much as if it had
been a great gun levelled at him) with his nose flaming, and his
breath stinking of spirits worse than a Dutch tarpaulin's, and
smoking out of a short pipe, that for some months has been kept
hot as constantly as a glass-house, and so I leave him to his
meditation.'
 Extracts from the Character of a 'Poetaster.'
After commencing his education in a shop or counting-
house, the poetaster sets up as a manufacturer of
verse.
'He talks much of Jack Dryden, and Will Wycherley, and
the rest of that set, and protests he can't help having
some respect for them, because they have so much for
him and his writings; otherwise he could prove them to
be mere sots and blockheads that understand little of
poetry in comparison with himself. He is the oracle of
those who want wit, and the plague of those that have
it, for he haunts their lodgings, and is more terrible to
them than their duns. His pocket is an inexhaustible magazine of
rhyme and nonsense, and his tongue, like a repeating clock with
chimes, is ready upon every touch to sound them. Men avoid him for
the same reason they avoid the pillory, the security of their ears, of
which he is as merciless a prosecutor. He is the bane to society, a
friend to the stationers, the plague of the press, and the ruin of his
bookseller. He is more profitable to the grocers and tobacconists
than the paper manufacturer; for his works, which talk so much of
fire and flame, commonly expire in their shops in vapour and
smoke.'

Extracts from the Character of a Virtuoso.

'The virtuoso is one who has sold his estate in
land to purchase one in scallop, couch, and
cockle shells, and has abandoned the society
of men for that of insects, worms, grubs,
lizards, tortoises, beetles, and moths. His study
is like Noah's ark, the general rendezvous of all creatures
in the universe, and the greatest part of his movables are
the remainders of the deluge. His travels are not designed as visits
to the inhabitants of any place, but to the pits, shores, and hills; and
from whence he fetches not the treasure but the trumpery. He is
ravished at finding an uncommon shell or an odd-shaped stone, and
is desperately enamoured at first sight of an unusual marked
butterfly, which he will hunt a whole day to be master of. He traffics
to all places, and has his correspondents in every part of the world.
He preserves carefully those creatures which other men industriously
destroy, and cultivates sedulously those plants which others root up
as weeds. His cash consists much in old coins, and he thinks the
face of Alexander on one of them worth more than all his
conquests.'

Character of a City Militiaman.

After describing the contests in Flanders being re-
fought by the newsmongers in the coffee-houses,
the sketch proceeds:—
'Our greatest actions must be buffooned in show as
well as talk. Shall Namur be taken and our heroes of
the city not show their prowess upon so great an
occasion? It must never be said that the coffee-houses dared more
than Moorfields. No; for the honour of London, out comes the
foreman of the shop, very formidable in buff and bandoleers, and
away he marches, with feather in cap, to the general rendezvous in
the Artillery Ground. There these terrible mimics of Mars are to
spend their fury in noise and smoke upon a Namur erected for that
purpose on a molehill, and by the help of guns and drums out-stink
and out-rattle Smithfield in all its bravery, and would be too hard for
the greatest man in all France, if they had him but amongst them.
Yet this is but skirmishing, the hot service is in another place, when
they engage the capons and quart pots; never was onset more
vigorous, for they come to handy blows immediately, and now is the
real cutting and slashing, and tilting without quarter: were the towns
in Flanders all walled with beef, and the French as good meat as
capons, and dressed the same way, the king need never beat his
drums for soldiers; and all these gallant fellows would come in
voluntarily, the meanest of which would be able to eat a marshal.'
These descriptions of character are concluded by contrasts drawn
between the virtues and vices of the respective sexes, and the
authoress remarks that if the masses are to be measured by the
instances of either Tullia, Claudia, or Messalina, by Sardanapalus,
Nero, or Caligula, the human race will certainly be found the vilest
part of the creation.
The essayist records that she has gained one experience by her
treatise:—
'I find when our hands are in 'tis as hard to stop them as our
tongues, and as difficult not to write as not to talk too much. I have
done wondering at those men that can write huge volumes upon
slender subjects, and shall hereafter admire their judgment only who
can confine their imaginations, and curb their wandering fancies.'

WORKS ON DEMONOLOGY AND MAGIC.

Among the books which formed part of Thackeray's library are one
or two treating on the subject of the 'Black Arts.' The most curious
and valuable example, H. Mengo's 'Flagellum Dæmonum,' appears
to have been purchased in Paris; in addition to the book-stamp
 usually employed by the author of 'Vanity
Fair,' there is an autograph, and the remark,
'a very rare and curious volume,' in his own
hand-writing. As the work is seldom met
with, we give the title-pages of the two
volumes entire, for the benefit of those
readers who may have a taste for 'Diablerie':
—
FLAGELLUM DÆMONUM.
EXORCISMOS, TERRIBILES,
POTENTISSIMOS, ET EFFICACES.
REMEDIAQUE PROBATISSIMA, AC
DOCTRINAM SINGULAREM IN MALIGNOS
SPIRITUS EXPELLENDOS, FACTURASQUE, ET MALESICIA FUGANDA
DE OBSESSIS CORPORIBUS COMPLECTENS, CUM SUIS
BENEDICTIONIBUS,
ET OMNIBUS REQUISITIS AD
EORUM EXPULSIONEM.
Accessit postremo Pars Secunda, quæ Fustis Dæmonum inscribitur.
QUIBUS NOVI EXORCISMI, ET ALIA NONNULLA, QUÆ PRIUS
DESIDERABANTUR, SUPER ADDITA FUERUNT
Auctore R. P. F. Hieronymo Mengo,
VITELLIANENSI, ORDINIS MINORUM REGULARIS OBSERVANTIÆ.
ANNO 1727.
The fly-leaf is illustrated with the following animated design in
pencil, possibly drawn from a vivid recollection existing in the artist's
mind of a similar subject, by the magic etching-needle of that
fantastic creator of demons and imaginative devices, Jacques Callot;
found in the 'Capricci,' dedicated to Lorenzo Medici.
We are unable, in the limits of the present volume, to offer more
than a brief summary of the contents of this singular work. The first
volume (309 pages) contains three indexes, a 'dedicatoria' to 'D.D.
Lotharia a Metternich,' and a list of authors who have been
consulted in the composition of the book.
We are inclined to believe that this list of authorities, on a subject
which presents a large field for exploration, will be of value to
investigators, and not altogether without interest to the general
reader. Their names are arranged alphabetically:—
Alexander Papa Sanctus. Alexander de Ales
Doctor. Alphonsus Castrensis. Ambrosius
Doctor S. Athanasius Doctor S. August. de
Ancona. Bartholomæus Sybilla. Beda
Venerabilis. Bernardus Abbas S. Bernardinus
de Bustis. Boetius Severinus. Bonaventura
Doctor S. Concilia diversa. Dionysius
Cartusianus. Fulgentius Doctor S. Glossa
ordinaria. Gregorius Papa Doctor Sanctus. Haymo Episcopus.
Henricus Arphius. Hieronymus Doctor S. Hilarius Doctor S. Hugo de
Sancto Victore. Joachim Abbas. Johannes Crysostomus S. Joannes
Cassianus Abb. Joann. Damascenus S. Johannes Gerson Doctor.
Joannes Scotus Doctor. Josephus de Bello Judaico. Isidorus Doctor S.
Leo Papa Doctor S. Ludovicus Blosius. Magister Sententiarum.
Magister Historiarum. Malleus Malesicarum. Michael Psellus. Nicolaus
de Lira Doct. Paulus Ghirlandus. Petrus Galatinus. Richardus
Mediavilla Doctor. Rupertus Abbas. Silvester Prierius. Thomas
Aquinas Doctor Sanctus.

Forty-five pages are devoted to 'Doctrina pulcherrima in malignos

Spiritus.' One hundred and seventy-two pages are occupied with
'Exorcismus I. ad VII.' An 'Exorcismus' consists of various 'Oratio,'
'Adjuratio,' and 'Conjuratio;' the latter, in Exor. VI., graduating
through the 'Conjuratio æris—terræ—aquæ—ignis—omnium
elementalium—Inferni—&c.' Vol. I. concludes with 'Remedia
Efficacissima in malignos spiritus,' and offers, besides Psalms proper
for the purpose, regular physicians' prescriptions—drugs and their
proportions—under the head of 'Medicina pro Maleficiatis.'
The artist's pencil has made a humorous marginal
sketch in 'Exorcismus V.,' opposite this 'Conjuratio.'
'Conjuro te ✠ dæmon per illum, cujus Nativitatem
Angelus Mariæ Virgini annunciavit, quique pro nobis
peccatoribus descendit de cœlis, &c.'
The title-page of Vol. II. we also give in full:—
 FUSTIS DÆMONUM.
ADJURATIONES FORMIDABILES POTENTISSIMAS, ET EFFICACES.
IN MALIGNOS SPIRITUS FUGANDOS DE OPPRESSIS
CORPORIBUS HUMANIS.
EX SACRÆ APOCALYPSIS FONTE VARIISQUE SANCTORUM PATRUM
AUCTORITATIBUS HAUSTAS COMPLECTENS.
Auctore R. P. F. Hieronymo Mengo,
VITELLIANENSI, ORDINIS MINORUM REGULARIS OBSERVANTIÆ.
Opus sanè ad maximam Exorcistarum commoditatem nunc in
lucem editum.

'LA MAGIE ET L'ASTROLOGIE,'

Par L. F. Alfred Maury.
'La Magie et l'Astrologie dans l'Antiquité et au Moyen Age; ou, Étude
sur les Superstitions Païennes qui se sont perpétuées jusqu'à nos
jours.' This work, in two parts, by the author of 'Les Premiers Ages
de la Nature' and 'Une Histoire des Religions,' gives evidence of
wide-spread research. To the curious in 'dark' literature, A. Maury's
compilation must form a vastly concise and interesting introduction
to a subject which once absorbed a large proportion of the erudition
and 'fond' wisdom of our ancestors. From its high seat amidst kings
and profound sages, cabalistic art has, in this practical age, sunk so
low that its exclusive privilege may be considered the delectation
and delusion of the most forlorn ignorance.
It is, indeed, a source of congratulation that magic and astrology in
our day rarely rise above the basement (for their modern patrons
inhabit the kitchen), unless they are admitted in the palpable form of
'parlour necromancy,' degenerating into mere manual dexterity and
common-place conjuring tricks.
 A. Maury's work traces the progress of
magic from its source among uncivilised
nations, and in the earliest ages, through
the history of the Chaldeans, the Persians,
the Egyptians, the Greeks, and the
Romans. He exhibits the struggle of
Christianity with magic, until the greater
power overcame vain superstitions. He
then follows its evil track through the
middle ages, and illustrates in the
observances of astrology, an imitation of Pagan rites.

In the Second Part the author reviews the subject of superstitions

attaching to dreams, and defines their employment as a means of
divination, from the earliest records down to a recent period. He
then describes the demoniac origin, once attributed to mental and
nervous derangements, and elucidates the assistance contributed by
the imagination to the deceptions of so-called magic. He concludes
by considering the production of mental phenomena by the use of
narcotics, the destruction of reason and of the intellectual faculties,
and closes his summary by treating of hypnotism and
somnambulism.
In the chapter describing the influence of magic on the teachings of
the Neoplatonic school of philosophy, we find the arguments
advanced in the paragraphs we extract, wittily and practically
embodied in a little sketch of an antique divinity, introduced with
modern attributes.
'... The new school of Plato imagined a complete hierarchy
of demons, with which they combined a portion of the
divinities of the ancient Greek religion, reconstructed in a
newer and more philosophical spirit.
'In the doctrines expounded by the author of the "Mystères
des Egyptiens," who had borrowed most of his ideas from
the Egyptian theology, demons are represented as veritable
divinities, who divide the government of the world with the
deities.
'The inconsistent chronological confusion which prevailed at that
period frequently offers similar contradictions; for the doctrines of
antiquity, while taking their position in the new philosophy, had not
been submitted to the modifications necessary to bring them into
harmony with the later system.
'... The severity directed by Church and State against magicians and
sorcerers was not solely inspired by the terrors of demons or a dread
of witchcraft.
'... Although there existed in the rites of magic many foolish
ceremonials that were harmless and inoffensive, the perpetuation of
the observances of the ancient Polytheism were, however, employed
as a veil, beneath which existed practices that were absolutely
criminal, stamped with the most atrocious and sanguinary
superstitions. The preparation of poisons played a considerable part
in these observances, and witchcraft was not entirely confined to
mere influences on the mind. Those who connected themselves with
sorcery most frequently employed it with a view of gratifying either
personal vengeance or culpable covetousness.'
In the chapter on 'Possession Démoniaque,' devoted to the
demoniacal origin attributed to nervous and mental afflictions, we
find a quaint pencil-heading which precedes the extracts we have
made, to explain the matter it illustrates.

'... The ancients no more succeeded in mastering the natural

character and physical origin of disease than they were able to
recognise the constancy of the phenomena of the universe.
'All descriptions of sickness, especially epidemics and mental or
nervous affections, were particularly reputed of supernatural agency;
the first on account of their unexpected approaches, and their
contagious and deadly effects; the second on the grounds of their
mysterious origin, and the profound affections they bring either to
the mind, the muscular system, or the sensations.
'When an epidemic broke out they immediately concluded that a
divinity was abroad, sent forth to execute vengeance or to inflict just
corrections. They then employed their faculties in searching for a
motive that might have provoked his anger, and they strove to
appease his wrath by sacrifices; or they sought to avert the effects
of evil by ceremonies, by purifications, and exorcisms.

'Their legends record that the deities of evil have been seen riding
through the air, scattering death and desolation far and wide.
'... A passage in Minutius Felix (Octav. c.
29, which confirms Saint Cyprien ad
Demetrian. p. 501, et Lactance, Inst. Div.
Il. xv.; cf. Kopp, "Palæographia Critica," t.
iii. p. 75) informs us that in order to
constrain the demon to declare, through
the mouth of the person supposed to be
thus possessed, that he was driven out, recourse was had to blows,
and to the employment of barbarous methods. This will at once
explain the apparent successes of certain exorcists, and the ready
compliance with which the devils responded to their conjurations.
The signs by which the departure of the evil spirit were recognised
were naturally very varied. Pious legends make frequent mention of
demons that have been expelled, and have been seen to proceed,
with terrible cries, from the mouths of those so possessed.'

The two priestly figures, which are found at the commencement of

this short résumé of Alfred Maury's work, might be readily assumed
to embody the characteristics of magic and astrology. They are
drawn on a fly-leaf in the original, and on the corresponding leaf at
the end is pencilled the richly quaint conception, which appropriately
concludes the summary of contents.

MAGIC, WITCHCRAFT, ANIMAL MAGNETISM,

HYPNOTISM, AND ELECTRO BIOLOGY.
By James Braid. 1852.

Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates, sed magis amica Veritas.

Mr. Braid has selected a neat motto for his treatise, for the matter
contained in it will hardly warrant the assumption of a more
ambitious title.
 Mr. Braid, of Burlington House,
Manchester, a doctor by profession, is a
believer in and exponent of hypnotism. A
great portion of his little work reviews the
criticisms on earlier editions, or deals with
statements regarding Colquhoun's 'History
of Magic.' Its author, while rejecting the
doctrines known as animal mesmerism
and magnetism, admits the effects they
are declared to produce; but he refers
such results to hypnotism—a state of
induced sleep—into which a patient may
be thrown by artificial contrivance.
It is possible that the contents of this
book would not prove of much general interest excepting to
amateurs of 'animal magnetism;' but we give one extract, which may
prove of service to those who do not happen to be already informed
of the theory it advances, which is one that every reader can
practically test:—
'In my work on hypnotism,' observes Mr. Braid, 'published in 1843, I
explained how "tired nature's sweet restorer, balmy sleep," might be
procured, in many instances, through a most simple device, by the
patient himself. All that is required for this purpose is simply to place
himself in a comfortable posture in bed, and then to close the
eyelids, and turn up the eyeballs gently, as if looking at a distant
object, such as an imaginary star, situated somewhat above and
behind the forehead, giving the whole concentrated attention of the
mind to the idea of maintaining a steady view of the star, and
breathing softly, as if in profound attention, the mind at the same
time yielding to the idea that sleep will ensue, and to the tendency
to somnolence which will creep upon him whilst engaged in this act
of fixed attention. Mr. Walker's method of "procuring sleep at will,"
by desiring the patient to maintain a fixed act of attention by
imagining himself watching his breath issuing slowly from his
nostrils, after having placed his body in a comfortable position in
bed, which was first published by Dr. Binns, is essentially the same
as my own method, &c.'
Professor Gregory, in his 'Letters to a Candid
Inquirer,' after describing the induction of
sleep effected by reading a class of books of
a dry character, remarks: 'But let these
persons (sufferers from a difficulty in getting
off to sleep) try the experiment of placing a
small bright object, seen by the reflection of
a safe and distant light, in such a position
that the eyes are strained a little upwards or backwards, and at such
a distance as to give a tendency to squinting, and they will probably
never again have recourse to the venerable authors above alluded
to. Sir David Brewster, who, with more than youthful ardour, never
fails to investigate any curious fact connected with the eye, has not
only seen Mr. Braid operate, but has also himself often adopted this
method of inducing sleep, and compares it to the feeling we have
when, after severe and long-continued bodily exertion, we sit or lie
down and fall asleep, being overcome, in a most agreeable manner,
by the solicitations of Morpheus, to which, at such times, we have a
positive pleasure in yielding, however inappropriate the scene of our
slumbers.'
Among the contents are numerous instances of magnetism, and
anecdotes of experiments, which have been amusingly 'hit off' in
little marginal sketches. One of the best of these is an illustration of
the contagious dancing mania said to be excited by the bite of the
tarantula spider—'against the effect of which neither youth nor age
afforded any protection, so that old men of ninety threw away their
crutches,' and the very sight of those so affected was equally potent.
These sketches are, however, so small that we think it advisable to
exclude them from our selection. The pantomimic mesmerism
produced by the harlequin's magic wand, and practically seconded
by the sly slaps of the clown, are happily given on the fly-leaf of the
treatise; and a vastly original and startling result of animal
magnetism records on the last page the droller impressions of the
artist-reader on the subject, through the medium of his pencil.

Carried away under the influence of spirits

 CHAPTER XI.

ENGLISH ESSAYISTS OF THE GEORGIAN ERA.

Early Essayists whose Writings have furnished Thackeray with the Accessories of
Portions of his Novels and Lectures—Works from the Novelist's Library,
elucidating his Course of Reading for the Preparation of his 'Lectures'—'Henry
Esmond,' 'The Virginians,' &c.—Characteristic Passages from the Lucubrations of
the Essayists of the Augustan Era illustrated with original marginal Sketches,
suggested by the Text, by Thackeray's Hand—The 'Tatler'—Its History and
Influence—Reforms introduced by the purer Style of the Essayists—The
Literature of Queen Anne's Reign—Thackeray's Love for the Writings of that
Period—His Gift of reproducing their masterly and simple Style of Composition;
their Irony, and playful Humour—Extracts from notable Essays; illustrated with
original Pencillings from the Series of the 'Tatler,' 1709.

The commencement of the eighteenth century has been christened

the Augustan Era of English literature, from the brilliant assembly of
writers, pre-eminent for their wit, genius, and cultivation, who then
enriched our literature with a perfectly original school of humour.
The essayists, to whose accomplished parts we are
indebted for the 'Tatlers,' 'Spectators,' 'Guardians,'
'Humorists,' 'Worlds,' 'Connoisseurs,' 'Mirrors,'
'Adventurers,' 'Observers,' 'Loungers,' 'Lookers-on,'
'Ramblers,' and kindred papers, which picture the
many-coloured scenes of our society and literature,
have conferred a lasting benefit upon posterity by
the sterling merit of their writings. It has been justly
said that these essays, by their intrinsic worth, have
outlived many revolutions of taste, and have attained unrivalled
popularity and classic fame, while multitudes of their
contemporaries, successors, and imitators have perished with the
accidents or caprices of fashion.
The general purpose of the essayists as laid down by Steele, who
may be considered foremost among the originators of the familiar
school of writing, 'was to expose the false arts of life, to pull off the
disguises of cunning, vanity, and affectation, and to recommend a
general simplicity in our dress, our discourse, and our behaviour.'
Bickerstaff's lucubrations were directed to good-humoured
exposures of those freaks and vagaries of life, 'too trivial for the
chastisement of the law and too fantastical for the cognisance of the
pulpit,' of those failings, according to Addison's summary of their
purpose in the 'Spectator' (No. 34), thus harmonised by Pope:—
Safe from the bar, the pulpit, and the throne,
Yet touched and shamed by Ridicule alone.

The graceful philosophers, polished wits and playful satirists exerted

their abilities to supply 'those temporary demands and casual
exigencies, overlooked by graver writers and more bulky theorists,'
to bring, in the language of Addison, 'philosophy out of closets and
libraries, schools and colleges, to dwell in clubs and assemblies, at
tea-tables and in coffee-houses.'
'The method of conveying cheap and easy knowledge began among
us in the civil wars, when it was much the interest of either party to
raise and fix the prejudices of the people.' It was in this spirit that
the oft-mentioned Mercuries, 'Mercurius Aulicus,' 'Mercurius
Rusticus,' and 'Mercurius Civicus' first appeared.
A hint of the original plan of the 'Tatler' may in some degree be
traced to Defoe's 'Review; consisting of a Scandal Club, on Questions
of Theology, Morals, Politics, Trade, Language, Poetry, &c.,' published
about the year 1703.
'The "Tatler,"' writes Dr. Chalmers, 'like many other ancient
superstructures, rose from small beginnings. It does not appear that
the author (Steele) foresaw to what perfection this method of
writing could be brought. By dividing each paper into compartments,
he appears to have consulted the ease with which an author may
say a little upon many subjects, who has neither leisure nor
inclination to enter deeply on a single topic. This, however, did not
proceed either from distrust in his abilities, or in the favour of the
public; for he at once addressed them with confidence and
familiarity; but it is probable that he did not foresee to what
perfection the continued practice of writing will frequently lead a
man whose natural endowments are wit and eloquence, superadded
to a knowledge of the world, and a habit of observation.'
The first number of the 'Tatler' bore the motto,

Quicquid agunt homines—

nostri est farrago libelli.—Juv. Sat. I. 85, 86.

Whate'er men do, or say, or think, or dream,

Our motley paper seizes for its theme.

The original sheet appeared on Tuesday, April 12, 1709,[13] and the
days of its publication were fixed to be Tuesdays, Thursdays, and
Saturdays. 'In the selection of a name for the work, Steele affords
an early instance of delicate raillery, by informing us that the name
"Tatler" was invented in honour of the fair sex; and that in such a
character he might indulge with impunity the desultory plan he first
laid down, with a becoming imitation of the tattle and gossip of the
day.' The first four numbers were given gratis, the price was then
fixed at a penny, which was afterwards doubled.
Steele, whose humour was most happily adapted to his task,
assumed as censor of manners the alias of Isaac Bickerstaff.
'Throughout the whole work,' writes Beattie, 'the conjuror, the
politician, the man of humour, the critic; the seriousness of the
moralist, and the mock dignity of the astrologer; the vivacities and
infirmities peculiar to old age, are all so blended and contrasted in
the censor of Great Britain as to form a character equally complex
and natural, equally laughable and respectable,' and as the editor
declares, in his proper person, 'the attacks upon prevailing and
fashionable vices had been carried forward by Mr. Bickerstaff with a
freedom of spirit that would have lost its attraction and efficacy, had
it been pretended to by Mr. Steele.'
A scarce pamphlet, attributed to Gay, draws attention to the high
moral and philosophic purpose which was entertained originally.
'There was this difference between Steele and all the rest of the
polite and gallant authors of the time: the latter endeavoured to
please the age by falling in with them, and encouraging them in
their fashionable vices and false notions of things. It would have
been a jest some time since for a man to have asserted that
anything witty could have been said in praise of a married state; or
that devotion and virtue were any way necessary to the character of
a fine gentleman. Bickerstaff ventured to tell the town that they
were a parcel of fops, fools, and vain coquettes; but in such a
manner as even pleased them, and made them more than half
inclined to believe that he spoke truth.'
The humorists of the Augustan era were, as the world knows,
peculiar objects of regard to the great writer of 'Roundabout Essays'
in the age of Queen Victoria. Novels, lectures, and reviews alike
prove the industry and affection with which Thackeray conducted his
researches amidst the veins of singular richness and congenial
material opened to him by the lives and writings of these famous
essayists, in such profusion that selection became a point of real art.
It is not difficult to trace the results of Thackeray's reading among
his favourite writers, or to watch its influence on his own
compositions. Nor did his regard for these sources of inspiration pass
the bounds of reasonable admiration; he argues convincingly of the
authentic importance of his chosen authorities.
From his minute and intelligent studies of the works of these genial
humorists Thackeray acquired a remarkable facility of thinking,
spontaneously acknowledged by all his contemporaries, with the
felicitous aptitude of the originals, and learned to express his
conceptions in language simple, lucid, and sparkling as the
outpourings from those pure fonts for which his eagerness may be
said to have been unquenched to the end of his career.
That artist-like local colouring which gives such scholarly value to
'Henry Esmond,' to the 'Virginians,' to the 'Humorists of the
Eighteenth Century,' and which was no less manifest in the work
which engaged his thoughts when Death lightly touched the
novelist's hand, furnishes the evidence of Thackeray's familiarity
with, and command of, the quaintest, wittiest, wisest, and
pleasantest writings in our language.
It will be felt by readers who realise Thackeray in his familiar
association with the kindred early humorists, that the merry
passages his pencil has italicised by droll marginal sketches are, with
all their suggestive slightness, in no degree unworthy of the conceits
to which they give a new interest; while in some cases, with playful
whimsicality, they present a reading entirely novel. The fidelity of
costume and appointments, even in this miniature state, confirms
the diligence and thought with which the author of 'Henry Esmond'
pursued every detail which illustrated his cherished period, and
which might serve as a basis for its consistent reconstruction, to
carry his reader far back up the stream of time.
The necessity of compressing within the limits of this volume our
selections from the comparatively exhaustless field of the humorous
essayists, necessarily renders the paragraphs elucidated by
Thackeray's quaint etchings somewhat fragmentary and abrupt,
while the miscellaneous nature of the topics thus indiscriminately
touched on may be best set forth according to the advertisement
with which Swift ushered in his memorable 'Number One':
'All accounts of gallantry, pleasure, and entertainment shall be under
the article of White's Chocolate-house;[14] poetry, under that of
Will's Coffee-house;[15] learning, under the title of Grecian;[16]
foreign and domestic news, you will have from Saint James's Coffee-
house; and what else I have to offer on any other subject shall be
dated from my own apartment.[17]
'I once more desire my reader to consider, that as I cannot keep an
ingenious man to go daily to Will's under twopence each day, merely
for his charges; to White's, under sixpence; nor to the Grecian,
without allowing him some plain Spanish, to be as able as others at
the learned table; and that a good observer cannot speak with even
Kidney (the waiter) at St. James's without clean linen; I say, these
considerations will, I hope, make all persons willing to comply with
my humble request (when my gratis stock is exhausted) of a penny
apiece; especially since they are sure of some proper amusement,
and that it is impossible for me to want means to entertain them,
having, besides the force of my own parts, the power of divination,
and that I can, by casting a figure, tell you all that may happen
before it comes to pass.'

No. 5. The 'Tatler.'—April 21, 1709.

Who names that lost thing love without a tear,
Since so debauch'd by ill-bred customs here?
To an exact perfection they have brought
The action love, the passion is forgot.

'This was long ago a witty author's lamentation, but the evil still
continues; and if a man of any delicacy were to attend the
discourses of the young fellows of this age, he would believe there
were none but the fallen to make the objects of passion. So true it is
what the author of the above verses said, a little before his death, of
the modern pretenders to gallantry: "They set up for wits in this
age, by saying, when they are sober, what they of the last spoke
only when they were drunk." But Cupid is not only blind at present,
but dead drunk; and he has lost all his faculties; else how should
Celia be so long a maid, with that agreeable behaviour? Corinna,
with that sprightly wit? Serbia, with that heavenly voice? and
Sacharissa, with all those excellences in one person, frequent the
park, the play, and murder the poor Tits that drag her to public
places, and not a man turn pale at her appearance? But such is the
fallen state of love, that if it were not for honest Cynthio, who is true
to the cause, we should hardly have a pattern left of the ancient
worthies in that way; and indeed he has but very little
encouragement to persevere. Though Cynthio has wit, good sense,
fortune, and his very being depends upon her, the termagant for
whom he sighs is in love with a fellow who stares in the glass all the
time he is with her, and lets her plainly see she may possibly be his
rival, but never his mistress. Yet Cynthio pleases himself with a vain
imagination that, with the language of his eyes, now he has found
out who she is, he shall conquer her, though her eyes are intent
upon one who looks from her, which is ordinary with the sex.
'It is certainly a mistake in the ancients to draw the little gentleman
Love as a blind boy, for his real character is a little thief that squints;
for ask Mrs. Meddle, who is a confidante or spy upon all the passions
in town, and she will tell you that the whole is a game of cross
purposes. The lover is generally pursuing one who is in pursuit of
another, and running from one that desires to meet him. Nay, the
nature of this passion is so justly represented in a squinting little
thief (who is always in a double action), that do but observe Clarissa
next time you see her, and you will find, when her eyes have made
their soft tour round the company she makes no stay on him they
say she is to marry, but rests two seconds of a minute on Wildair,
who neither looks nor thinks on her or any woman else. However,
Cynthio had a bow from her the other day, upon which he is very
much come to himself; and I heard him send his man of an errand
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com