The attempts at navigating a balloon having proved thus far so unsuccessful, many inventors now returned to the idea of producing a flying-machine which was independent of the inflated balloon. It was evident that the resistance presented by the great surface necessary in a balloon of sufficient size to have the required lifting power was such that no known efforts of propulsion could overcome this resistance even in the face of a slight breeze, to say nothing of a strong wind. The balloon was by no means abandoned, however, and two definite schools of aeronauts gradually came into existence, each having ardent advocates. As early as 1784, the aeronaut Gérard had proposed a flying-machine which was to be made with body, wings, and steering apparatus, in which propulsion was to be accomplished by the use of escaping gas and gun-cotton. The inventor himself was so sanguine of the results, and so many contemporary inventors were of the same opinion, that when this machine proved to be an utter failure, the blow to the advocates of the flying-machine was so great that they did not rally from it for something like a quarter of a century. In 1809, however, a Viennese watchmaker named Degen revived interest in attempts at mechanical flight by inventing a flying-machine which consisted essentially of two parachutes. These were worked by hand, and the inventor was said to have been able to rise to a height of over fifty feet from the ground "moving in any desired direction." These claims were not borne out in fact, but they stimulated an interest in the possibilities of mechanical flight, and in the parachute, which had never come into popular favor despite its successful use by the inventor, Garnerin. Hopes were again entertained that a modification of this device might be utilized in solving the problem of aerial flight, and in 1837 an aeronaut, Henry Cocking, invented a new type in which he proposed to descend from a balloon. The parachute of Garnerin, as we know, had been constructed like a huge umbrella, whereas Cocking's parachute had the general appearance of an umbrella held upside down. An unusual interest was aroused in the prospective experiment from the fact that a great majority of scientists did not consider that this parachute was constructed on correct scientific principles, and predicted that the aeronaut would be killed when he attempted to use it. Before the day of the trial arrived numerous articles had been published, presenting arguments for and against Cocking's device, and on the very day itself one of the newspapers contained a long article by a leading authority on aerostatics, reviewing the numerous reasons why the attempt would surely prove a failure.