Although the volume of the surviving papers of Robert Boyle is substantial (over 20,000 leaves), a considerable amount of the written material left by Boyle at his death in 1691 has not survived in the Boyle archive. This paper gauges the scale and identity of these losses using the surviving inventories made by the Rev. Henry Miles in the 1740s when he was collecting and sorting Boyle's literary remains in conjunction with Thomas Birch's preparation of his 1744 Life and Works (...) of Boyle. These detailed lists (edited as appendices to this paper), together with other sources, indicate losses due to a variety of reasons, some deliberate, others accidental. The losses involved the disposal of both items judged (in the eighteenth century) to be peripheral to Boyle's archive and, ironically, those in the most finished state from Boyle's hand, which were perhaps abortively destined for the Birch edition. These losses have significantly altered the character of the Boyle Papers, and thus the view of Boyle that is derived from them. (shrink)

Alchemy now holds an important place in the history of science. Its current status contrasts with its former exile as a “pseudoscience” or worse and results from several rehabilitative steps carried out by scholars who made closer, less programmatic, and more innovative studies of the documentary sources. Interestingly, alchemy's outcast status was created in the eighteenth century and perpetuated thereafter in part for strategic and polemical reasons—and not only on account of a lack of historical understanding. Alchemy's return to the (...) fold of the history of science highlights important features about the development of science and our changing understanding of it. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Alchemy now holds an important place in the history of science. Its current status contrasts with its former exile as a “pseudoscience” or worse and results from several rehabilitative steps carried out by scholars who made closer, less programmatic, and more innovative studies of the documentary sources. Interestingly, alchemy's outcast status was created in the eighteenth century and perpetuated thereafter in part for strategic and polemical reasons—and not only on account of a lack of historical understanding. Alchemy's return to (...) the fold of the history of science highlights important features about the development of science and our changing understanding of it. (shrink)

The Century between the death of Copernicus and the birth of Newton witnessed a major reshaping of traditional ways of viewing the universe. The Ptolemaic system was challenged by Copernican heliocentrism, the Aristotelian world was assailed by Galilean physics and revived atomism, and theology was troubled by the progressive distancing of God from the daily operation of His creation. Besides earning this era the title of ‘the Scientific Revolution’, the intellectual ferment of these times offered many world systems as successors (...) to the throne of crumbling Aristotelianism. (shrink)

En 1705, Wilhem Homberg, le principal chimiste de l’Académie royale des sciences, proposa une nouvelle théorie chimique selon laquelle le Soufre principe des corps mixtes était identique à la lumière. Il affirma par la suite que cette lumière corporelle était la seule source d’activité et de changement dans les substances matérielles. Cet article montre comment la théorie de Homberg s’élabora progressivement pendant de nombreuses années sous l’influence de ses observations et des résultats de ses expériences de laboratoire, ce qui nous (...) fournit un exemple de la manière selon laquelle un chimiste du début du XVIIIe siècle a pu développer une théorie raffinée grâce à l’interaction de la réflexion et de la manipulation. L’influence probable de la théorie de Homberg sur les fameuses « questions chimiques » de Newton est également signalée ici pour la première fois. Enfin l’article avance que nous comprendrons plus précisément l’histoire de la chimie si nous reconnaissons le caractère spécifique de la chimie et sa relative autonomie, plutôt que si nous cherchons à lui imposer des développements faciles et convenus tirés d’autres champs du savoir comme la philosophie ou la physique. (shrink)