ebook img

Newton and Newtonianism: New Studies (International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées) PDF

254 Pages·2005·1.35 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Newton and Newtonianism: New Studies (International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées)

NEWTONANDNEWTONIANISM ARCHIVESINTERNATIONALESD’HISTOIREDESIDE´ES INTERNATIONALARCHIVESOFTHEHISTORYOFIDEAS 188 NEWTON AND NEWTONIANISM New Studies Editedby JAMESE.FORCE and SARAHHUTTON FoundingDirectors: P.Dibon†(Paris)andR.H.Popkin(WashingtonUniversity,St.Louis&UCLA) Director: SarahHutton(MiddlesexUniversity,UnitedKingdom) Associate-Directors:J.E.Force(Lexington);J.C.Laursen(Riverside) EditorialBoard:M.J.B.Allen(LosAngeles);J.R.Armogathe(Paris);A.Gabbey(NewYork); T.Gregory(Rome);J.Henry(Edinburgh);J.D.North(Oxford);J.Popkin(Lexington); G.A.J.Rogers(Keele);Th.Verbeek(Utrecht) NEWTON AND NEWTONIANISM New Studies editedby JAMES E. FORCE UniversityofKentucky, Lexington,U.S.A. and SARAH HUTTON MiddlesexUniversity, UnitedKingdom KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS NEW YORK,BOSTON, DORDRECHT, LONDON, MOSCOW eBookISBN: 1-4020-2238-7 Print ISBN: 1-4020-1969-6 ©2004 Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. Print ©2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht All rights reserved No part of this eBook maybe reproducedor transmitted inanyform or byanymeans,electronic, mechanical, recording, or otherwise, without written consent from the Publisher Created in the United States of America Visit Springer's eBookstore at: http://www.ebooks.kluweronline.com and the Springer Global Website Online at: http://www.springeronline.com CONTENTS PREFACE—JamesE.ForceandSarahHutton ....................... vii INTRODUCTION—MargaretC.Jacob .............................. ix ESSAY1 / “TheNewNewtonianScholarshipandtheFateoftheSci- entificRevolution”—MargaretJ.Osler ........................... 01 ESSAY2 / “PlansforPublishingNewton’sReligiousandAlchemical Manuscripts,1982–1998”—RichardH.Popkin ................... 15 ESSAY3 / “Digitizing Isaac: The Newton Project and an Electronic EditionofNewton’sPapers”—RobIliffe .......................... 23 ESSAY4 / “WasNewtonaVoluntarist?”—PeterHarrison ........... 39 ESSAY5 / “ProvidenceandNewton’sPantokrator:NaturalLaw, Miracles,andNewtonianScience”—JamesE.Force ............. 65 ESSAY6 / “Eighteenth-CenturyReactionstoNewton’s Anti-Trinitarianism”—ScottMandelbrote ......................... 93 ESSAY7 / “Prosecuting Athanasius: Protestant Forensics and the MirrorsofPersecution”—RobIliffe ............................... 113 ESSAY8 / “Lust,Pride,andAmbition:IsaacNewtonandtheDevil” —StephenD.Snobelen ............................................. 155 ESSAY9 / “Women,Science,andNewtonianism:EmilieduChaˆtelet versusFrancescoAlgarotti”—SarahHutton ...................... 183 ESSAY10 / “ReflectionsonNewton’sAlchemyinLightoftheNew HistoriographyofAlchemy”—LawrenceM.Principe ............ 205 ESSAY11 / “The Trouble with Newton in the Eighteenth Century” —LarryStewart .................................................... 221 INDEX ................................................................. 239 v PREFACE Sir Isaac Newton’s pre-eminence in the history of science remains fixed, yet the picture which we have of the whole man, and of the influence of his wide-ranging intellect, has been changing rapidly as scholars have increas- inglytakencognizanceofthoseaspectsofNewton’sthoughthithertohidden inhisunpublishedmanuscripts.Atthestartofthethirdmillennium,wefind ourselvespoisedtolaunchthegreatestrevolutionyetinNewtonstudiesasan internationalteamofscholarshasbeenassembledtopublishallofNewton’s widelyscatteredunpublishedpapers.TheWilliamAndrewsClarkMemorial LibraryhasbeenassociatedwiththeworldofNewtonianscholarshipforsome yearsthroughitspurchase,in1961,ofanimportantmanuscript(“Paradoxical Questions concerning ye morals & Actions of Athanasius & his followers”) andthroughitslongassociationwithProfessorRichardH.Popkin(U.C.L.A.) and Professor James E. Force (University of Kentucky). Through the gen- erous sponsorship of both the U.C.L.A. Center for 17th- and 18th-Century StudiesandtheU.C.L.A.WilliamAndrewsClarkMemorialLibrary—which areunderthedirectionofProfessorPeterH.Reill—ProfessorsForceandPop- kinwereabletostageaseriesofClarkLibraryconferencesdevotedtoNewton throughoutthe1990s.Thepapersdeliveredattheseconferencesevolvedinto aseriesofimportanteditedvolumeswhosegeneralthemewasthecentrality of theological and religious ideas to Newton’s intellectual formation. In the presentvolume,thislongstandingprojectcontinues.Onceagainthankstothe generosityofProfessorReillandtheresourcesoftheU.C.L.A.Centerfor17th- and18th-CenturyStudiesandtheClarkLibrary,inNovember,2000,Professor Force and Dr Sarah Hutton (Middlesex University) organized a conference at the Clark Library which aimed to review the current state of Newtonian scholarship and to describe the revolution that the publication of Newton’s manuscripts was bringing about in Newton studies. Several of the speakers, whose papers are included in this volume, are eminent scholars connected with the Newton Project, based in London and Cambridge, which aims to publishallNewton’sunpublishedwritings.Alloftheessaysincludedinthis collectionelucidateeitherthecurrentstateofNewtonianstudiesorthesemi- nalfigureofSirIsaacNewtonhimselfwhoembodiessomanyofthecomplex andseeminglyparadoxicalpatternsoftheEnlightenment. JamesE.Force SarahHutton vii INTRODUCTION MARGARETC.JACOB UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles They have now all passed away. The greats of the previous era of Newton scholarship—I. B. Cohen, B. J. T. Dobbs, Henry Guerlac, Frank Manuel, Richard Westfall, Derek (Tom) Whiteside—will never again contribute to Newtonianscholarship.Theirachievementsweremassivelyimpressive,even ifconsideredsolelyontheleveloftranscriptionandediting.Beforethe1960s wehadnodefinitivepublishedcorrespondence,nobackgroundmathematical papers, none of the critically important manuscript material in print, and we possessed a rationalist definition of science that was alien to what Newton wastryingtodo.ThatgroupofscholarsrescuedNewtonfromthepositivist obliviontowhichhehadbeenconsigned.Theopeningessayinthiscollection by Margaret Osler does a fine job at describing their major achievements in fargreaterdetailthanIcanofferhere. Yet even after their labors, one area remained relatively untouched, New- ton’s voluminous theological writings. By the 1980s, everyone who studied Newton and Newtonianism had come somewhat belatedly to recognize the importance of his theology. As the essays by Richard Popkin and Rob Iliffe presented here explain, the theological manuscripts, along with many of the alchemicalones,stillremainthelastfrontier,asitwere,uponwhicharising generationwillnowincreasinglyconcentrate. As this volume attests, Newton’s theological and religious material has begun to yield its secrets to scholarly effort. We have here a sampling of the next generation of that scholarship. Predictably its trajectory is radically different from the characteristic work of ‘the greats.’ Theological issues are frontandcenter,followedbythealchemical-chemical,andtheeverpersistent questions about Newton’s legacy and complex influence into the eighteenth century, and beyond. The masters of the previous generation labored just tosetNewton’shistoricalchronology,toestablishthewaysandmeansofhis mathematicalandphysicalexperimentsandhisnaturalphilosophicalinsights. Nowthefocushasshifted,althoughtheissueofgettinghismanuscriptsinto useableformremainsasvitalasitwasbackinthe1960s. This volume also offers an account of past and present efforts to make all of Newton’s legacy available to the world of historical research. Richard Popkin,fortunatelyforusoneofthefewofthegreatsstillwithus,andactive, recountstheherculeaneffortstofindafundingsourcebackatatimewhenthe ix x Introduction verythoughtofNewtonastheologianandalchemistwasfoundtoberepellant insomequarters.Iwasintheaudienceinthe1970swhenRichardWestfall, speakingatoneofthebiginternationalcongressesinthehistoryofscience, presented his early work on Newton’s alchemy. There were audible gasps, andunderabarrageofhostilequestioning,Westfallretortedinexasperation, “I did not write these manuscripts,” or words to that effect. Very few in the audience wanted Newton to be a practicing alchemist, as well as a serious religiousthinker. The reluctance to accept Newton’s alchemy and theology also was fed by the culture wars when the right could assume that anti-rationalist lefties were trying to debunk the founder of modern science. The Popkin-headed projecttoproducetenormorevolumesofNewton’salchemicalandtheolog- ical manuscripts never got its funding, and I suspect that Dick is right when he sees the politics of the 1980s at work in the decision at the NEH (with assistance from the NSF) not to fund. The only good news to come out of thatsadstoryarisesfromthechangeinformatthattimemadepossibleasthe digital revolution unfolded. As Rob Iliffe explains, putting Newton on-line electronically will permit an almost photographic reproduction of his reser- vations, crossing outs, jottings, ramblings and musings to be registered in a manner that print does not allow. A more authentic Newton can be seen on thewebthanontheprintedpage.TheAHRBdidtheglobalworldofscholar- shipimmensegoodservicewhenitprovidedtheinitialfundingfortheproject nowhousedatImperialCollege.WouldthattheAmericanfundingagencies hadbeenasclear-sighted.Wecanonlyhopethatprivatedonorswillnowbe moregenerous,andthattheobviousqualityofvolumessuchasthisonewill aidImperialCollegeinitsfund-raisingefforts. ReevaluatingNewtonopensthewholeofearlymodernintellectualhistory forreevaluation.MargaretOslerissurelyrighttostressthatpoint,asdidthe volumesherecentlyedited.Itexploredthequestionofwhathashappenedto our understanding of the Scientific Revolution because we have changed so muchofourunderstandingofitsmajorfigures,mostnotably,Newtonhimself.1 In the late 1980s a split had occurred among the “greats” as to how to view the Scientific Revolution. Dobbs argued that it was a concept that had worn outitsusefulness,whileWestfallsawitasunproblematicallyself-explanatory, thecentraleventofmodernity.InOsler’searlieranthology,andinheressayin thisvolume,sherecountshowwegottothosecontradictorypositions,without perhaps, regrettably, telling us where she stands on the issue of whether, or if,aScientificRevolutionoccurred.Aswithmostconceptsofthisnature,the issueisoneofdefinition.IbelievethatJoDobbswaswrongwhensheargued thatbecauseNewtonpracticedalchemythewholehistoricalconstructofthere 1 MargaretJ.Osler,ed.,RethinkingtheScientificRevolution(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 2000). Introduction xi havingbeenascientificrevolutionhadbeenpoorlyconceivedandincorrectly defined. The old positivist Newton is a dead duck, but the larger shift, one that made his alchemy an embarrassment and that mechanized the Western understanding of nature, still needs explaining, regardless of what Newton wasreadingandwritingaboutinhisroomsatTrinity.Forbetterorworse,the modernemergedwithonefootplantedfirmlyonthebackofwhatitlabeled magicandsuperstition.From1600to1750aculturalshiftasprofoundasany wehaveknownoccurred,andtheappellation“scientificrevolution,”provided itiscarefullynuanced,willdotobeginaconversationaboutwhathappened withinliterateculture. As a later essay in this volume by Lawrence Principe reminds us, what Newtonwasdoinginhis“laboratory”atTrinityisbynomeanstransparent. Principe argues that Boyle’s alchemy/chemistry is a whole lot clearer than Newton’s, and he implies that Dobbs took too holistic an approach to the manuscripts,andhencetotheargumentthatalchemyprovidedNewtonwith thecrucialevidenceforhisconceptofforce.Byholistic,IbelievethatPrincipe means that Dobbs wished to lump the manuscripts, to see coherence among them where he would split, and break them down as to their origin or pedi- gree.ShealsotookasyntheticapproachtoNewton’salchemy,religiosity,and celestial dynamics, indeed she saw the categories themselves as inhibiting. Dobbs in The Janus Face of Genius had a deft appreciation for his religious sensibility,onethatseemedtodemandthekindofholismsheembraced. While I disagreed with Jo Dobbs about the issue of there having been a ScientificRevolution,asherfriendandcollaboratorIalsocametoadmireand endorsehervisionofaunifiedNewton,heldtogetherbythefabricofhisdeep religiosity. It never occurred to me that Jo had much sympathy for Jungian ideas as Principe seems to find in her approach. Yet if she possessed some sortofreligiouscore,howevereccentric,didthatperhapsnotplacehercloser to her subject than more secularist scholars might hope to be? We need to knowmoreaboutNewton’sreligion,andtakingalookatthevastmanuscript notesonthesubjectthatDobbsleftbehindandnowstoredattheUniversity ofCalifornia,Davis,mightbeoneplacetobegin.Principefindstheeffortby somefeministscholarstogenderthemechanicalphilosophymale,andhence the alchemical, female, to be vastly overdone. He is undoubtedly right, but surely the baby is sliding along in the bath water when he tries to dismiss the association of some alchemical texts with Renaissance naturalism, and hence with vitalist, spirit-in-matter and heretical natural philosophies. Just like naturalism, alchemy had the potential to be intellectually subversive, as civil war radicals demonstrated when they took it up as but one of their manyheresies.IfweneedtorethinkNewton’salchemy,thelargerseventeenth- century ideological context, particularly as presented by the English civil wars,mustbepreserved.Sotoo,asthemanyeighteenth-centuryadmirersof xii Introduction Newtonianmethodwouldhavetoldus,thepointofanewanalysisistoarrive atanewsynthesis. Newton’s alchemy may belong in that dark nether world outlined by Rob Iliffe in his essay on prosecuting Athanasius, in a place in Newton’s mind wherebishopsandkingscouldbetraytheirbelievers,wherelittlewassacred exceptapersonalsearchforpurityofheartandsoul.Perhapsonlylonghours overthecruciblemadepuritypossibleinaworldwhereevenpriestscouldnot be trusted and where, after 1660, alchemy along with all doctrinal deviation had been banned from public discourse. Indeed the survival of alchemy in theFrenchacademyofscienceafteritsestablishmentin1666offersdramatic testimony, by way of contrast, to the crushing effect of the fear induced in English intellectual life by the disorder of the 1650s. The retreat from all radicalassociations,andhencethesuppressionofalchemicaltalk—although not alchemical practice and the desire to reform medicine and science— gripped Boyle (b. 1632) and then Newton, and their many associates who backinthe1650shadthoughtaneworderfigurativelybutmomentsaway.We looklongandhardattheproceedingsoftheRoyalSociety,foundedin1662, for evidence of any alchemical activities. Indeed only the scholarship of the lasttwentyyearshasrevealedthem,socarefullyweretheykeptprivate. Bycontrast,journeytoParisinthe1660sandalchemyisfrontandcenter in the early proceedings of the royally sponsored, Acade´mie des Sciences. Meetinginprivatetwiceaweek,onedaytoconsidermathematics,theother physics,thecompanymightseemveryfamiliartomoderneyes.Butitsunder- standing of the natural world that set the agenda of what ‘physics’ meant in the 1660s in Paris was far closer to what we would call alchemy (as well as medicine.) The guiding spirits in matters experimental were two older naturalists, Gilles Personne de Roberval and Samuel Cottereau Duclos.2 By 1668, a mere twenty-two investigators—of whom two, the famous Huygens and Cassini, were foreign but essentially expatriated in France—assembled in the King’s Library to search the mysteries of nature. In texts to this day unpublished, Duclos laid out the terms and the language; it was essentially alchemical.Truetotheexperimentaltraditionwithinalchemy,hewantedthe companytofindbymeansof“l’analysechymique”theunderlyingsubstances that compose all natural mixes or combinations found in the world. “Three ofthesesubstancesareaswewouldsayessential,spirit(l’esprit),oilandsalt becausetheyparticipateintheessentialvirtuesofduMixte...thatismercury, sulphur, and salt (which has no other name.)” The three essential principles 2 Forbiographicalinformationonthem,seetheinvaluableDavidJ.Sturdy,ScienceandSocialStatus.The MembersoftheAcademiedesSciences,1666–1750(Rochester,NY:TheBoydellPress,1995),chap.6. SeealsoAllenG.Debus,TheFrenchParacelsians.TheChemicalChallengetoMedicalandScientific TraditioninEarlyModernFrance(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1991),p.151,butupdated bySturdy.

Description:
This volume contains eleven essays by eminent scholars which focus on Newton's theology, his study of alchemy, the early reception of Newtonianism, and the history of Newton scholarship. It includes unique accounts of the attempts over the last quarter of the twentieth century, to publish Sir Isaac
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.