Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ktprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T05:48:11.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Graphic Understanding: Instruments and Interpretation in Robert Hooke's Micrographia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Michael Aaron Dennis
Michael Aaron Dennis
Affiliation:
Department of History of Science The Johns Hopkins University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay answers a single question: what was Robert Hooke, the Royal Society's curator of experiments, doing in his well-known 1665 work, Micrographia? Hooke was articulating a “universal cure of the mind” capable of bringing about a “reformation in Philosophy,” a change in philosophy's interpretive practices and organization. The work explicated the interpretive and political foundations for a community of optical instrument users coextensive with the struggling Royal Society. Standard observational practices would overcome the problem of using nonstandard instruments, while inherent in representation – the interpretive practice championed in the text – were important theological and political meanings. Hooke's kind of experimental philosophy undermined the claims made by “atheists” and “enthusiasts” – the enemies of the restored church and state – while also producing useful knowledge. Equally important, Hooke modeled the community described in Micrographia upon the classical res publica, but his community made important concessions to Restoration political realities, especially the growing role of commercial or transactional relationships.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1989 , pp. 309 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aarsleff, Hans. 1970“John Wilkins.” DSB 14:361–81.Google Scholar
Agnew, Jean-Christophe. 1986. World's Apart: The Market and the Theater in Anglo-American Thought, 1550–1750. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alpers, Svetlana. 1983. The Art of Describing: Dutch Art in the Seventeenth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Andrade, E. N. C. 1965. “The Birth and Early Days of the Philosophical Transactions,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 20:9–27.Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1962. Politics. Translated by Sinclair., T. A. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Baxandall, Michael. 1972. Painting and Experience in Fifteenth-Century Italy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bechler, Zev 1974. “Newton's 1672 Optical Controversies: A Study in the Grammar of Scientific Dissent.” In The Interaction between Science and Philosophy, edited by Elkana, Yehuda, 115–42. Atlantic Highlands, N. J.: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Beddard, R. A. 1979. “The Restoration Church.” In The Restored Monarchy, edited by Jones, J. R. 155–75. Totowa, N. J.: Rowan and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. A. 1975. “Christopher Wren: Astronomy, Architecture, and the Mathematical Sciences.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 6:149–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, J. A. 1980. “Robert Hooke as Mechanic and Natural Philosopher.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 35:33–48.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. A. 1982. The Mathematical Sciences of Christopher Wren. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. A. 1986. “‘The Mechanics’ and the Mechanical Philosophy.” History of Science 24:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, Thomas, ed. [1756–1757] 1968. History of the Royal Society, 4vols. edited by Hall, A. R. and Hall, M. B. New York: Johnson Reprint Company. Originally published in London.Google Scholar
Birch, Thomas. 1772. The Works of the Honourable Robert Boyle, 6vols. London: J. and F. Rivington.Google Scholar
Bluhm, R. K. 1958. “Remarks on the Royal Society's Finances.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 13:82–103.Google Scholar
Boyle, Robert. 1660. New Experiments Physico-Mechanical, Touching the Spring of the Air. Oxford.Google Scholar
Bradbury, Saville. 1967. The Evolution of the Microscope. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Burke, J. G., ed. 1983. The Uses of Science in the Age of Newton. Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chérubine, Pierre 1677. La Vision Parfaite. Paris.Google Scholar
Cicero. [1913] 1975. De Officiis. Translated by Miller, Walter. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Clagett, Marshall 1970. “Archimedes.” DSB 1:213–31.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. B. 1956. Franklin and Newton. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
Collins, Harry 1985. Changing Order – Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Corsi, Pietro, and Paul, Weindling, eds. 1983. Information Sources in the History of Science and Medicine. London: Butterworth Scientific.Google Scholar
Courdet, Allison. 1976. “A Quaker-Kabbalist Controversy: George Fox‘s Reaction to Francis Mercury van Helmont.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtland Institute 39:171–89.Google Scholar
Court, Thomas S.and Moritz von, Rohr 1930–1931. “New Knowledge of Old Telescopes.” Optical Society Transactions 32:113–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawforth, M. A. 1985. “Evidence from Trade Cards for the Scientific Instruments Industry.” Annals of Science 42:453–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawforth, M. A. 1987. “Instrument Makers in the London Guilds.” Annals of Science 44:319–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dear, Peter 1985. “Totius in Verba: Rhetoric and Authority in the Early Royal Society.” Isis 76:145–61.Google Scholar
Derham, William, ed. 1726. Philosophical Experiments and Observations of the Late Eminent Dr. Hooke. London: W. J. Inys.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1978. “Freud and the Scene of Writing.” In Derrida, Writing and Difference, translated by Bass, Alan, 196–231. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dilthey, Wilhelm. 1976. “The Development of Hermeneutics.” In Wilhelm Dilthey: Selected Writings, edited and translated by Rickman, H. P. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dobbs, B. J. T. 1975. The Foundations of Newton's Alchemy or, “The Hunting of the Green Lyon”. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dunn, John. 1985. “From Applied Theology to Social Analysis: The Break Between John Locke and the Scottish Enlightenment.” In Dunn, Rethinking Modern Political Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eamon, William. 1985. “From the Secrets of Nature to Public Knowledge: The Origins of the Concept of Openness in Science.” Minerva 23:321–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eastwood, Bruce S. 1984. “Descartes on Refraction: Scientific versus Rhetorical Method.” Isis 75:481–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eire, Carlos M. N. 1986. War Against the Idols: The Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to Calvin. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstein, Elizabeth. 1980. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change in Early Modern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerton, Norma E.,. 1984. The Scientific Reinterpretation of Form. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
’Espinasse, Margaret 1956. Robert Hooke. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Febvre, Lucien and Martin, Henri-Jean. 1984. The Coming of the Book: The Impact of Printing, 1450–1800. Translated by Gerard, David. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Field, J. V. 1988. “What Is Scientific about a Scientific Instrument?” Nuncius 3:3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, Stanley. 1980. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fleck, Ludwik. [1935]1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Translated by Bradley, Fred and Trenn, Thaddeus. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1973. The Order of Things. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Frank, Robert G. 1980. Harvey and the Oxford Physiologists. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. 1955. Moses and Monotheism. Translated by Jones, Katherine. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Glanvill, Joseph. 1661. The Vanity of Dogmatizing. London.Google Scholar
Golinski, Jan V. 1987. “Robert Boyle: Scepticism and Authority in Seventeenth-Century Chemical Discourse.” In The Figural and the Literal Problems of Language in the History of Science and Philosophy, 1630–1800, edited by Benjamin, A. E. et al. , 58–82. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Goody, Jack. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, Stephen. 1985. “Invisible Bullets: Renaissance Authority and its Subversion, Henry IV and Henry V.” In Political Shakespeare, edited by Dollimore, J. and Sinfield, A.. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gunther, R. T., ed. 1923–67. Early Science in Oxford, 15vols. Oxford: Privately printed for the author.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian, 1975. The Emergence of Probability. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1983. Representing and Intervening. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, Roger. 1971. The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution: The Paris Academy of Sciences, 1666–1803. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, A. R. 1966. Hooke's Micrographia 1665–1965. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Hall, A. R., and Hall, M. B., eds. 1965–1972. The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg, 11vols. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Hall, A. R. and Hall, M. B. 1968. “The Intéllectual Origins of the Royal Society – London and Oxford,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 23:157–68.Google Scholar
Hall, Marie Boas. 1952. “The Establishment of the Mechanical Philosophy,”Osiris 10:412–541.Google Scholar
Hall, Marie Boas. 1965. “Oldenburg and the Art of Scientific Communication,” British Journal for the History of Science 2:277–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankins, Thomas. 1985. Science and the Enlightenment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannaway, Owen. 1975. The Chemists and the Word: The Didactic Origins of Modern Chemistry. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hannaway, Owen 1986. “Laboratory Design and the Aim of Science: Andreas Libavius versus Tycho Brahe.” Isis 77:585–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, John. 1986. “Occult Qualities and the Experimental Philosophy: Active Principles in Pre-Newtonian Matter Theory.” History of Science 24:335–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hexter, J. H. 1979. “Republic, Virtue, Liberty, and the Political Universe of J. G. A. Pocock.” In his On Historians, 255–303. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Heyd, Michael. 1981. “The Reaction Towards Enthusiasm: An Integrative Approach.” Journal of Modern History 53:258–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heyd, Michael. 1987. “The New Experimental Philosophy: A Manifestation of ‘Enthusiasm’ or an Antidote to It?” Minerva 25:423–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Christopher. 1968. “The Intellectual Origins of the Royal Society – London or Oxford.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 23:144–56.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1978. The Passions and the Interests. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Holly, Michael Ann,. 1984. Panofsky and the Foundations of Art History. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hont, Istvanand Ignatieff, Michael, eds. 1983. Wealth and Virtue: The Shaping of Political Economy in the Scottish Enlightenment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooke, Robert. [1665] 1961. Micrographia or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies Made by Magnifying Glasses with Observations and Inquiries There-upon. London: John Martyn and Sons; reprint, New York: Dover Press.Google Scholar
Hooke, Robert. 1726. “Dr. Hook's Method of Making Experiments.” In Derham 1726, 26–28.Google Scholar
Hoppen, K. T. 1976. “The Nature of the Early Royal Society,” British Journal for the History of Science 9:1–24,243–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horace, 1926. Satire, Epistles, and Ars Poetica. Translated by Fairclough, H.Ruston. New York: G. P. Putnam.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael. 1981. Science and Society in Restoration England. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael. 1982. The Royal Society and Its Fellows,1660–1700:The Morphology of an Early Scientific Institution. Chalfont St. Giles: British Society for the History of Science.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael 1988. “Promoting the New Science: Henry Oldenburg and the Early Royal Society,” History of Science 26:165–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, Michael 1989. Establishing the New Science. London: Boydell.Google Scholar
Ivins, William M. 1953. Prints and Visual Communication. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jacob, J. R. 1983. Henry Stubbe, Radical Protestantism and the Early Enlightenment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob,, M. C. 1976. The Newtonians and the English Revolution, 1689–1720. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Jacyna, L. S. 1983. “Sir June Goodsir and the Making of Cellular Reality.” Journal of the History of Biology 16:75–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jardine, Lisa. 1974. Francis Bacon: Discovery and the Art of Discourse. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, R. F. 1930. “Science and English Prose Style in the Third Quarter of the Seventeenth Century,” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 45:977–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kargon, Robert. 1966. Atomism in England from Hariot to Newton. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Katz, David S. 1982. Philo-Semitism and the Readmission of the Jews to England,1603–1655. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. 1979. “Institutional Control of Interpretation,” Salmagundi 43:72–86.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. 1985. Forms of Attention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Klein, Lawrence. 1984–1985. “The Third Earl of Shaftesbury and the Rise of Politeness.” Eighteenth-Century Studies 18:186–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knowlson, James. 1975. Universal Language Schemes in England and France 1660–1800. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre. 1952. “An Unpublished Letter of Robert Hooke to Isaac Newton.” Isis 43:312–37; reprinted in Turnbull 1960, 300–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
L'E., Turner G. 1969. “The History of Optical Instruments: A Brief Survey of Sources and Modern Studies.” History of Science 8:53–93.Google Scholar
L'E., Turner 1980. Essays on the History of the Microscope. Oxford: Senecio Publishing.Google Scholar
L'E., Turner G. 1983. “Scientific Instruments.” In Corsi and Weindling 1983, 243–58.Google Scholar
Latham, Robert, and Matthews, William, eds. 1971. The Diary of Samuel Pepys, 11vols. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 1983. “Give me a Laboratory and I Shall Move the World.” In Science Observed, edited by Mulkay, Michael and Cetina, Karin-Knorr, 141–70. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno, 1986. “Visualization and Cognition,” Knowledge and Society 6:1–40.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno 1987. Science in Action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno, and Woolgar, Steven. 1979. Laboratory Life. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Lehmann-Haupt, Hellmut. 1973. “The Microscope and the Book.” In Festschrift für Claus Nissen, edited by Pressler, Guido and Geck, Elisabeth Wiesbaden: Guido Pressler.Google Scholar
Lynch, Michael. 1985. “Discipline and the Material Form of Images: An Analysis of Scientific Visibility,” Social Studies of Science 15:37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1984. After Virtue. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1985. “The Relationship of Philosophy to Its Past.” In Philosophy in History, edited by Rorty, Richard et al. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacLeod, Christine. 1987. “Accident or Design? George Ravenscroft's Patent and the Invention of Lead Crystal Glass.” Technology and Culture 28:776–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manten, A. A. 1980. “The Growth of Scientific Journal Publishing before 1850.” In Development of Science Publishing in Europe, edited by Meadows, A. J., 1–22. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Middleton, W. E.Knowles.1971. The Experimenters: A Study of the Accademia del Cimento. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Millburn, J. R. 1976. Benjamin Martin, Author, Instrument-maker, and “Country Showman.” Leiden: Noordhoff International Publishing.Google Scholar
Miles, Margaret R. 1985. Image as Insight: Visual Understanding in Western Christianity and Secular Culture. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, W. J. T., ed. 1983. The Politics of Interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nakajima, Hideto. 1984. “Two Kinds of Modification Theory of Light.” Annals of Science 41:261–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, Jane O. 1985. “The World Made Print: Luther's 1522 New Testament in an Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” Representations 11:95–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakeshott, Michael. [1962] 1984. “Rationalism in Politics.” In Oakeshott, Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays, 1–36. New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
Ochs, Kathleen. 1985. “The Royal Society of London's History of Trades Programme: An Early Episode of Applied Science.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 39:129–58.Google Scholar
Oldroyd, D. R. 1972. “Robert Hooke's Methodology of Science as Exemplified in His ‘Discourse on Earthquakes’.” British Journal for the History of Science 6:109–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ornstein, Martha. [1913] 1975. The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seventeenth Century. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
Pagel, Walter. 1970. “Paracelsus.” DSB 10:304–13.Google Scholar
Patterson, Annabel. 1985. Censorship and Interpretation. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, John. 1973. The Reformation of Images: The Destruction of Art in England, 1535–1660. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pinch, Trevor. 1985. “Towards an Analysis of Scientific Observation: The Externality and Evidential Significance of Observational Reports in Physics.” Social Studies of Science 15:3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plato, . 1973. Phaedrus. Translated by Hamilton, Walter New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1975. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton: Princeton UniversityGoogle Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1978. “Time, Eschatology, and History in the Work of Thomas Hobbes.” In Politics, Language, and Time, edited by Pocock, New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1980. “Post-Puritan England and the Problem of Enlightenment.” In Culture and Politics: Puritanism to Enlightenment, edited by Zagorin, Perez Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1981. “The Machiavellian Moment Revisited: A Study in History and Ideology.” Journal of Modern History 53:49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1985a. Virtue, Commerce, and History. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1985b. “Virtue, Rights, and Manners: A Model for Historians of Political Thought.” In Pocock 1985a, 37–50.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1985c. “The Mobility of Property and the Rise of Eighteenth Century Sociology.” In Pocock 1985a, 103–25.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1985d. “The Varieties of Whiggism from Exclusion to Reform.” In Pocock 1985a, 215–310.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1985e. “Clergy and Commerce: The Conservative Enlightenment in England.” In L'Et dei Lumi: Studi in onode di Franco Venturi, edited by R. Ajello et al. Napoli.Google Scholar
Poggendorff, J. C. 1865. Biographisch-Literarisches Handwörterbuch. Leipzig: J. A. Barth.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Michael 1958. Personal Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Porter, Roy. 1981. “The Enlightenment in England.” In The Enlightenment in National Context, 1–18. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, Roy. 1986. “The Scientific Revolution: A Spoke in the Wheel.” In Revolution in History, edited by Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikulas. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, Roy,Schaffer, Simon, Bennett, J. A., and Brown, Olivia. 1985. Science and Profit in Eighteenth-Century London. Cambridge: Whipple Museum of the History of Science.Google Scholar
Power, Henry. [1664] 1966. Experimental Philosophy. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation.Google Scholar
Price, D. J. 1957. “The Manufacture of Scientific Instruments from c.1500 to c.1700.” In A History of Technology, 7 vols., edited by Singer, Charles et al. , 3:620–47. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ravetz, Jerome. 1971. Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rivington, Charles A. 1984. “Early Printers to the Royal Society, 1663–1708.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 39:1–24.Google Scholar
Roberts, Julian. 1981. “The Politics of Interpretation: Sacred and Secular Hermeneutics in the Work of Luther, J. S. Semler, and H. G. Gadamer.” Ideas and Production 1:15–32.Google Scholar
Rossi, Paolo. 1984a. The Dark Abyss of Time: The History of the Earth and the History of Nations from Hooke to Vico. Translated by Cochrane, Lydia G. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rossi, Paolo. 1984b. “Universal Languages, Classifications, and Nomenclatures in the Seventeenth Century.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 6:119–31.Google Scholar
Rostenberg, Leona. 1965. Literary, Political, Religious, and Legal Bookselling in England, 1551–1700, 2vols. New York: Burt Franklin.Google Scholar
Rousseau, G. S., and Porter, Roy, eds. 1980. The Ferment of Knowledge: Studies in the Historiography of Eighteenth-Century Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, Martin 1976a. “The Emergence of a Visual Language for Geological Science, 1740–1840.” History of Science 14:149–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, Martin 1976b. The Meaning of Fossils. New York: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Ruestow, Edward G. 1983. “Images and Ideas: Leeuwenhoek's Perception of the Spermatozoa.” Journal for the History of Biology 16:185–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sabra, A. I. [1967] 1981. Theories of Light from Descartes to Newton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Simon. 1980. “Herschel in Bedlam: Natural History and Stellar Astronomy.” British Journal for the History of Science 13:211–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Simon 1983a. “History of Physical Science.” In Corsi and Weindling 1983, 285–314.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Simon 1983b. “Natural Philosophy as Public Spectacle.” History of Science 21:1–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaffer, Simon 1984. “Making Certain.” Social Studies of Science 14: 137–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Simon 1987. “Godly Men and Mechanical Philosophers: Souls and Spirits in Restoration Natural Philosophy.” Science in Context 1:55–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholem, Gershom. 1974. Kabbalah. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven 1984. “Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle's Literary Technology.” Social Studies of Science 14:481–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven 1987. “O Henry.” Isis 78:417–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven 1988a. “The House of Experiment in Seventeenth Century England.” Isis 79:373–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven 1988b. “Robert Boyle and Mathematics: Reality, Representation, and Experimental Practice.” Science in Context 2:23–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven and Schaffer, Simon n.d. “Making Newton.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven and Schaffer, Simon 1985. Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Barbara 1969. John Wilkins. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Barbara 1983. Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Siebert, F. S. 1952. Freedom of the Press in England, 1476–1776. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Slaughter, M. M. 1982. Universal Languages and Scientific Taxonomy in the Seventeenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sprat, Thomas. 1667. History of the Royal Society. London: John Martyn.Google Scholar
Steiner, George. 1975. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steiner, George. 1976. “In a Post-Culture.” In Steiner, Extraterritorial: Essays on Language and the Language Revolution, 155–71. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
Steiner, George 1985. “Our Homeland, the Text.” Salmagundi 66:4–25.Google Scholar
Stewart, Larry 1986. “Public Lectures and Private Patronage in Newtonian England.” Isis 77:47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stubbe, Henry. 1670.Campanella Revisited. London.Google Scholar
Syfret, 1950a. “Some early reaction to the Royal Society,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 7:207–58.Google Scholar
Syfret, 1950b. “Some early critics of the Royal Society,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 8:20–64.Google Scholar
Szondi, Peter 1986. On Textual Understanding, trans. Harvey Mendelsohn. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, E. G. R. 1940. “‘The English Atlas’ of Moses Pitt, 1680–83.” The Geographical Journal 95:292–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, H. W., ed. 1960. The Correspondence of Isaac Newton, 7vols. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Helden, A. 1983. “The Birth of the Modern Scientific Instrument.” In Burke 1983, 49–84.Google Scholar
Vickers, Brian, ed. 1984. Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vickers, Brian 1985. “The Royal Society and English Prose Style: A Reassessment.” In Rhetoric and the Pursuit of Truth, edited by Vickers, Los Angeles: Clark Library.Google Scholar
Waller, Richard, ed. [1705] 1969. The Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke. Reprint edited by Westfall, Richard New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation.Google Scholar
Weber, S. 1987. Institution and Interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Webster, Charles. 1967a. “Henry Power's Experimental Philosophy.” Ambix 14:150–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webster, Charles. 1967b. “The Origins of the Royal Society.” History of Science 6:106–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, Charles. 1982. From Paracelsus to Newton: Magic and the Making of Modern Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard. 1969. “Introduction.” In Waller [1705] 1969, ix-xxvi.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard. 1972. “Robert Hooke.” DSB 6:481–88.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard. 1983. “Robert Hooke, Mechanical Technology, and Scientific Investigation.” In Burke 1983, 85–110.Google Scholar
Westman, Robert 1984. “Nature, Art, and Psyche: Jung, Pauli, and the Kepler-Fludd Polemic.” In Vickers 1984, 177–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westrum, Ron. 1978. “Science and Social Intelligence about Anomalies: The Case of Meteorites.” Social Studies of Science 8:461–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, John [1638] 1708. The Mathematical and Philosophical Works. London: J. Nicholson.Google Scholar
Wilson, Catherine 1988. “Visual Surface and Visual Symbol: The Microscope and the Occult in Early Modern Science.” Journal of the History of Ideas 49:85–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, Paul 1980. “Methodology and Apologetics in Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society.” British Journal for the History of Science 13:1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wren, Stephen, ed. 1750. Paternalia, or Memoirs of the Family of Wrens. London: T. Osborne.Google Scholar