Advertisement

International Journal of the Classical Tradition

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 54–72 | Cite as

A ‘Crise de la Conscience Européenne avant la Lettre’? Classical science and the origins of the scientific revolution

  • David J. Sturdy
Article

Abstract

This article, which is speculative in nature, contends that a ‘crisis of the European conscience’ occurred in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, and may be traced through scientific thought of the period. That thought sometimes is presented in terms of a Scientific Revolution wherein nascent ‘modern’ science challenged and eventually replaced ‘Classical’ science. The argument presented here is that, at least in its early stages, ‘modern science’ sought to refine Classical theory rather than overturn it, and to contribute to the wider cultural purpose of upholding ‘the harmony of the world’. The challenge to this latter vision, according to which all forms of existence are connected and constitute a universal whole, came less from the sciences than from a vigorous philosophical scepticism. Both ‘Classical’ and ‘modern’ science fell under the scrutiny of sceptics, and it was in response to their objections that ‘modern science’ sought to justify itself. The epistemological debates generated by the ‘crisis of conscience’ took place through the written or printed word, but also in certain key institutions, notably royal courts, universities and other educational bodies.

Keywords

Seventeenth Century Modern Science Sixteenth Century Classical Tradition Scientific Revolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    In the history of science, recent guides to the period covered by this essay include I. B. Cohen,Revolution in Science (Cambridge, Mass., 1985), H. F. Cohen,The Scientific Revolution: A Historiographical Inquiry (Chicago, 1994), P. Dear,Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge and its Ambitions, 1500–1700 (Basingstoke, 2001), J. Henry,The Scientific Revolution and the Origins of Modern Science (London, 1997), J.R. Jacob,The Scientific Revolution: Aspirations and Achievements, 1500–1700 (Atlantic Highlands, 1998), L. Jardine,Ingenious Pursuits: Building the Scientific Revolution (London, 1999) and M.L. Osler (ed.),Rethinking the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, 2000). On the links between science and Humanist learning see A. Grafton,Defenders of the Text: The Traditions of Scholarship in an Age of Science, 1450–1800 (Cambridge, Mass., 1991) and M.B. Campbell,Wonder and Science: Imagining Worlds in Early Modern Europe (Ithaca, 1999).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antoine Furetiere,Dictionaire [sic]Universel, contenant generalement tous les mots françois, tant vieux que modernes, et les termes de toutes les sciences et des arts: Divisé en trois Tomes, t. III.P-Z (La Haye and Rotterdam, 1690), p. Ddd 2.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    On Gassendi, see B. Brundell,Pierre Gassendi: From Aristotelianism to a New Natural Philosophy (Boston, 1987) and L.S. Joy,Gassendi the Atomist: Advocate of History in an Age of Science (Cambridge, 1987).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Discours ou Homilies Académiques, IIIe partie: ‘Vingtième Homilie Académique: Des Sciences’ (Oeuvres de François de La Mothe Le Vayer [14 vols., Dresden, 1756–1759], t.iii, partie ii, 313) [Slatkine Reprints, vol. 1, 649].Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Discours pour montrer que les Doutes de la Philosophie Sceptique sont de Grand Usage dans les Sciences (Oeuvres, t.v, partie ii, 50–52) [Slatkine Reprint, vol. 2, 233–234].Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Hazard,La Crise de la Consience Européenne, 1680–1715 (Paris, 1934), partie ii, chap. 1.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    On scepticism, see R.H. Popkin, ‘Le Scepticisme pour ou contre les Sciences à la Fin du XVIe Siècle’, in:Sciences de la Renaissance: VIIIe Congrès International de Tours (Paris, 1973), 83–90; Popkin,The History of Scepticism from Erasmus to Spinoza (Berkeley, 1979); and B. Dooley,The Social History of Skepticism: Experience and Doubt in Early Modern Culture, The Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 117th ser., vol. 2 (Baltimore 1999) (cf. the review by Donald R. Kelley in this journal,IJCT, vol. 7 [2000/01], 475–477). On the medieval origins of scepticism, see A. M. Smith, ‘Knowing Things Inside Out: The Scientific Revolution from a Medieval Perspective’,American Historical Review, vol. 95 (1990), 726–744.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    See the introduction to G.J. Toomer (ed.),Ptolemy’s Almagest (London, 1984).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    See the introduction to N.M. Swerdlow and O. Neugebauer,Mathematical Astronomy in Copernicus’s De Revolutionibus; parts one and two (London, 1984).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Vermij,The Calvinist Copernicans: The Reception of the New Astronomy in the Dutch Republic, 1575–1750 (Amsterdam, 2002), 2–3, 26–30.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    C. Methuen, ‘Maestlin’s Teaching of Copernicus: The Evidence of his University Textbook and Disputations’,Isis, vol. 87, no. 2 (1996), 230–247; see also C. Methuen,Kepler’s Tübingen: Stimulus to a Theological Mathematics, ser. St. Andrews Studies in Reformation History (Aldershot, 1998) (cf. the review by the present author in this journal,IJCT, vol. 7 [2000/01], 295–297).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johannes Kepler,The Harmony of the World, Edited and translated by E.J. Aiton, A.M. Duncan and J.V. Field, ser. Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society 209 (Philadelphia, 1997).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    See B. Stephenson,Kepler’s Physical Astronomy (Princeton, 1994) and B. Stephenson,The Music of the Heavens: Kepler’s Harmonic Astronomy (Princeton, 1994).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    K. D. Keele,Leonardo da Vinci on Movement of the Heart and Blood (London, 1952), and hisLeonardo da Vinci’s Elements of the Science of Man (London, 1983).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. DaCosta Kaufmann,The Mastery of Nature: Aspects of Art, Science and Humanism in the Renaissance (Princeton, 1993); T. DaCosta Kaufmann, ‘Empiricism and Community in Early Modern Science and Art: Some Comments on Baths, Plants, and Courts’, in A. Grafton & N. Siraisi (eds.),Natural Particulars: Nature and the Disciplines in Renaissance Europe (Cambridge, Mass., 1999), 401–417; J. W. Shirley & F. D. Hoeniger (eds.),Science and the Arts in the Renaissance (Washington, 1985).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A.C. Crombie, ‘Science and the Arts in the Renaissance: The Search for Truth and Certainty, Old and New’, in Shirley & Hoeniger,Science and the Arts in the Renaissance, 17.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    See F.D. Hoeniger, ‘How Plants and Animals were studied in the Mid-Sixteenth Century’, inIbid. Science and the Arts in the Renaissance (Washington, 1985). 130–148.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    On this see A. Flocon, ‘Les Artistes du XVIe Siècle et la Fabrique du Corps Humain’, inSciences de la Renaissance: VIIIe Congrès International de Tours (Paris, 1973), 164–171.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    The analogous question of how artists illustrated artefacts in books dedicated to archaeology and its associated disciplines is discussed in P. Burke, ‘Images as Evidence in Seventeenth-Century Europe’, inJournal of the History of Ideas, vol. 64, no. 2 (2003), 293–294. On the economics of illustrating scientific and other texts, see A. Johns,The Nature of the Book: Print and Knowledge in the Making (Chicago, 1998), 444–542.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    The following passage is based on J. Sawday,The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the Human Body in Renaissance Culture (London, 1995), especially chapters 2, 3 and 4. In similar vein is N.G. Siraisi,The Clock and the Mirror: Girolamo Cardano and Renaissance Medicine (Princeton, 1997).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    On changing attitudes to dissections see. A. Carlino,Books of the Body: Anatomical Ritual and Renaissance Learning, trans. J. and A.C. Tedeschi (Chicago, 1999; originally published asLa fabbrica del corpo: Libri e dissezione nel Rinascimento, Piccola Biblioteca Einaudi 622 [torino, 1994], cf. the review of the English edition by. A.E. Hanson in this journal,IJCT, vol. 8 [2001/02], 645–649), and D.L. Hodges,Renaissance Fictions of Anatomy (Amherst, 1985).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    William Harvey,Exercitatio anatomica de motu cordis et sanguinis in animalibus. Being a Facsimile of the 1628 Francofurti Edition Together with the Keynes English Translation of 1928, [followed by:]The Anatomical Exercises of Dr. William Harvey, De Motu Cordis 1628: De Circulatione Sanguinis 1649: The First English text of 1653 now newly edited by Geoffrey Keynes, ser. The Classics of Medicine Library (Birmingham, Alabama 1978), 41–42. (Latin) and 57–60. (English). The English quotation comes from an anonymous translation of the work into English first published in 1653, in its 1673 edition (The anatomical exercises of Dr. William Harvey, professor of physick, and physician to King Charles the first, concerning the motion of the heart and blood [London, 1673]); it is reprinted in M.B. Hall,Nature and Nature’s Laws (London, 1970), 46–147, here pp. 145–147, and slightly revised by Keynes (as cited at the beginning of this note). As for the slightly skewed Latin in the above quotation (p. 62), see Keynes, op. cit. ser. The Classics of Medicine Library (Birmingham, Alabama 1978), 122: “The first Latin edition of 1628 had been very inaccurately printed, and later editions repeated many of its mistakes,” and cf. Robert, E. Erickson,The Language of the Heart, 1600–1750 (Philadelphia, 1997), 63f. In a note to his translation into English (first edition 1928) of theDe Motu Cordis, Chauncey D. Leake observed that Harvey seems to have been unaware of the work of Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo. If so, this would help to explain Harvey’s analogical use of the concept of circular motion (seeExercitatio Anatomica De Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus by William Harvey, M.D., An English Translation by Chauncey D. Leake [Springfield, Illinois, 5th edition, 1970 (reprinted 1978)], 70, note 1). On Harvey see A. Gregory,Harvey’s Heart: The Discovery of Blood Circulation (Cambridge, 2001).—An Aristotelian passage Harvey may have had in mind at the beginning of this excerpt is, for example,De generatione et corruptione II 10, esp. p. 337a 1–7 ed. Bekker.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    In passing it is perhaps worth noting that the ‘modernist’ Descartes, who disagreed with Harvey on the method whereby blood circulates, gave a dangerous hostage to fortune when ‘In 1639 he wrote to Mersenne that if what he [Descartes] had written about the movement of the heart should turn out to be false, then the whole of his philosophy was worthless.’ (A. Kenny,Descartes. A Study of his Philosophy [New York, 1968], 202.)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    For example, François Gigot de La Peyronie, ‘Observations par lesquelles on tâche de découvrir la partie du cerveau où l’Ame exerce ses fonctions’, inHistoire et Mémoires de l’Académie Royale des Sciences (Paris and Amsterdam 1741), 199–219; see also H. Kirkenen,Les Origines de la Conception Moderne de l’homme-Machine. Le Problème de l’Ame en France à la Fin du Règne de Louis XIV (1670–1715) (Helsinki, 1960).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    These and related questions are discussed in Z. Hanafi,The Monster in the Machine: Magic, Medicine, and the Marvelous in the Time of the Scientific revolution (Durham, N.C., 2000).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    E. g. herLull and Bruno: Collected Essays (vol.1, London, 1982), but especially herGiordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (London, 1964) andThe Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age (London, 1979); see also C. Webster,From Paracelsus to Newton: Magic and the Making of Modern Science (Cambridge, 1982). On astrology see S. J. Tester,A History of Western Astrology (Woodbridge, 1987), P. Curry (ed.).Astrology, Science and Society: Historical Essays (Woodbridge, 1987) and S.A. McKnight (ed.),Science, Pseudo-Science, and Utopianism in Early Modern Thought (Columbia, Missouri, 1992).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    A. Debus,The Chemical Philosophy: Paracelsian Science and Medicine in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (2 vols., New York, 1977), W. Pagel,Paracelsus: an Introduction to Philosophical medicin in the Era of the Renaissance (2nd ed., Basel, 1982).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    W. Pagel,Johann Baptista van Helmont: Reformer of Science and Medicine, ser. Cambridge Monographs on the History of Medicine (Cambridge, 1983).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    (London, 1949 [2nd. ed. 1957]).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    See, for example, B.J.T. Dobbs,The Foundation of Newton’s Alchemy, or ‘The Hunting of the Greene Lyon’ (Cambridge, 1975).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    B. Dooley, ‘The Ptolemaic Astrological Tradition in the Seventeenth Century: An Example from Rome’, in this journal,IJCT, 5 (1998–1999), 528–548; Idem,Morandi’s Last Prophecy and the End of Renaissance Politics (Princeton, 2002).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    See especially hisThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, 1962).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    (Cambridge, 1978).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    A. G. Debus (ed.),World Who’s Who in Science: A Biographical Dictionary of Notable Scientists from Antiquity to the Present (Chicago, 1968), 789.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    B. Vickers (ed.),Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance (Cambridge, 1984).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    See the accompanying catalogue: E. Fucikova et al. (eds.),Rudolf II and Prague: The Court and the City (London, 1997); also on the Rudolfine court: R.J.W. Evans,Rudolf II and his World: A Study in Intellectual History, 1576–1612 (Oxford, 1973).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    E. Fucikova et al. (eds.),Rudolf II and Prague: The Court and the City (London, 1997); 29.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Such views are outlined in Kaufmann,The Mastery of Nature, 174–194.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    B. T. Moran, ‘Patronage and Institutions: Courts, Universities, and Academies in Germany; an Overview: 1550–1750’, in B. T. Moran (ed.),Patronage and Institutions: Science, Technology and Medicine at the European Court, 1500–1750 (Woodbridge, 1991), 169–183; D. Mateer (ed.),The Renaissance in Europe: Courts, Patrons and Poets (New Haven, 2000).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Discussions of the Elizabethan court can be found in J. Guy (ed.),The Reign of Elizabeth I: Court and Culture in the Last Decade (Cambridge, 1995).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    N. Elias,The Court Society (Oxford, 1983), (originally published asDie Höfische Gesellschaft [Sociologische Texte 54, Neuwied, 1969]) brings to bear upon the subject of royal courts the perspective of a sociologist.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    The literature on Versailles and the court is extensive; good studies include P. Burke,The Fabrication of Louis XIV (London, 1992), L. Marin,Le Portrait du Roi (Paris, 1981), J.-F. Solnon,La Cour de France (Paris, 1987) and G. Walton,Louis XIV’s Versailles (London, 1986).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    See D.J. Sturdy,Louis XIV (London, 1998).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Modern works on Bacon include P. Rossi,Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science (London, 1968), A. Dodd,Francis Bacon’s Personal Life Story (Kila, MT, 1986), J.C. Briggs,Francis Bacon and the Rhetoric of Nature (Cambridge, MA, 1989), J. Martin,Francis Bacon, the State and the Reform of Natural Philosophy (Cambridge, 1992), R.K. Faulkner,Francis Bacon and the Project of Progress (London, 1993), N. Mathews,Francis Bacon: The History of a Character Assassination (New Haven, 1996), M. Peltonen (ed.),The Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge, 1996), L. Jardine and A. Stewart,Hostage of Fortune: The Troubled Life of Francis Bacon 1561–1626 (London, 1998), and P. Zagorin,Francis Bacon (Princeton, 1998); see also J.M. Archer,Sovereignty and Intelligence: Spying and Court Culture in the English Renaissance (Stanford, 1993).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Martin,Francis Bacon, the State and the Reform of Natural Philosophy argues that Bacon’s natural philosophy was a subordinate part of a larger programme to further the processes of a prying (“surveilling”, to use the Foucaultian term) and imperialistic state.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    This is a position taken, for example, by C. Hill,Intellectual Origins of the English Revolution (Oxford, 1977).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    J. M. Fletcher, ‘Change and Resistance to Change: A Consideration of the Development of English and German Universities during the Sixteenth Century’, in C. Schmitt (ed.),History of Universities, vol i,Continuity and Change in Early Modern Universities (Avebury, 1981), 1–36.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Clavius and his significance are discussed in L.M. Lattis,Between Copernicus and Galileo: Christoph Clavius and the Collapse of Ptolemaic Cosmology (Chicago, 1994).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    On Gresham College see F. Ames-Lewis (ed.),Sir Thomas Gresham and Gresham College. Studies in the Intellectual History of London in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Aldershot, 1999).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    On this subject see M. Feingold,The Mathematicians’ Apprenticeship: Science, Universities and Society in England, 1560–1640 (Cambridge, 1984); on Oxford, M. Feingold, ‘The Mathematical Sciences and New Philosophies’ in N. Tyacke (ed.),The History of the University of Oxford, vol. iv,Seventeenth-Century Oxford (Oxford, 1997), chap. 6.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    For these details see L.W.B. Brockliss, ‘Patterns of Attendance at the University of Paris, 1400–1800’, inThe Historical Journal, 21, no.3 (1978), 503–544 and J. de Viguerie,L’Institution des Enfants: L’Education en France, 16e–18e Siècle (Paris, 1978), 109–110.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Trinity College, Dublin, for example, all but ceased functioning in the 1640s and 1650s, only resuming serious work in 1657 (R.B. McDowell & D.A. Webb,Trinity College Dublin, 1592–1852 [Cambridge, 1982], 17–18). Oxford University fared better, but faced purge and counterpurge in the 1640s and 1650s (see I. Roy & D. Reinhart, ‘Oxford and the Civil Wars’ in Tyacke [ed.],Seventeenth-Century Oxford, chap. 14).Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    R. Chartier, M.-M. Compère et D. Julia,L’Education en France du XVIe au XVIIIe Siècle (Paris, 1976), 163–168.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    De Viguerie,L’Institution des Enfants, 208–209. On aspects of Jesuit approaches to education, including scientific training, see J.W. O’Malley SJet al. (eds.),The Jesuits: Cultures, Sciences, and the Arts, 1540–1773 (Toronto, 1999).Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    J. de Viguerie, ‘L’Influence des Corps Célestes et des Comètes selon l’Enseignement Scientifique du XVIIe Siècle’, inLa Comète de Halley et l’Influence Sociale et Politique des Astres [Actes du Colloque de 1986] (Bayeux, 1991), 101–106; see also S.S. Genuth,Comets, Popular Culture and the Birth of Modern Cosmology (Princeton, 1997).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    A. Grafton, ‘Some uses of Eclipses in Early Modern Chronology’, inJournal of the History of Ideas, vol. 64, no. 2 (2003), 213–229.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    There exists an enormous bibliography on Galileo. Good guides are S. Drake’s,Galileo (Oxford, 1980) andGalileo, Pioneer Scientist (Toronto, 1994); see also M. Sharratt,Galileo: Decisive Innovator (Cambridge, Mass., 1994), W.A. Wallace,Galileo and his Sources: The Heritage of the Collegio Romano in Galileo’s Science (Princeton, 1985) and W.A. Wallace,Galileo’s Logic of Discovery and Proof (Boston, 1992). An ingenious interpretation of the Galileo affair is offered by Pietro Redondi,Galileo: Heretic, trans. R. Rosenthal (London, 1988; originally published asGalileo eretico, Microstorie 7 [Torino, 1983]), which argues that the trial was a ‘cover-up’ by the Pope to protect Galileo against the more serious charge of atomism. The Galileo affair in its longer perspective is discussed in P.-N. Mayaud, SJ,La Condamnation des Livres Coperniciens et sa Révocation (Rome, 1999).Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    D.J. Sturdy,Science and Social Status: The Members of the Académie des Sciences, 1666–1750 (Woodbrige, 1995).Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    This is a view sustained by J. Israel,Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650–1750 (Oxford, 2001), also R. Porter,The Creation of the Modern World: The Untold Story of the British Enlightenment (London, 2000).Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    A survey of these societies is in J.E. McClellan III,Science Reorganized: Scientific Societies in the Eighteenth Century (New York, 1985).Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Thomas Sprat,The History of the Royal Society of London, For the Improving of Natural Knowledge (London, 1667); S. Schaffer & S. Shapin,Leviathan and the Airpump: Hobbes, Boyle and the Experimental Life (Princeton, 1985); Bernard de Bovier de Fontenelle,Entretiens sur la Pluralité des Mondes (Paris, 1686); on hiséloges see C.B. Paul,Science and Immortality: The Eloges of the Paris Academy of Sciences (1699–1791) (Berkeley, 1980).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • David J. Sturdy
    • 1
  1. 1.School of History and International AffairsUniversity of UlsterColeraineUK

Personalised recommendations