Professor Douglas McKie, F. R. S. E

1968 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-103
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Narrative Style ◽  
Century Science ◽  
Intellectual Climate ◽  
Royal Society Of London

Notes and Records has good reason to mourn the death of Douglas McKie as for many years successive editors so often called on him for help and advice and his rich store of knowledge and his critical judgment were always most generously placed at their disposal. He contributed to our Tercentenary Volume, Origins and Founders , his article, ‘The Origins and Foundation of the Royal Society of London’, the best account of the events leading up to the birth of the Royal Society and of the intellectual climate in which it was formed, that has yet been written. It was a labour of love to which McKie devoted much study. Many of his findings were confirmed by Sir Geoffrey Keynes in his recent Wilkins Lecture. Written in McKie’s clear narrative style with its admirable balance like all McKie’s writings it will always be a pleasure to read. In the planning of Origins and Founders , in the choice of authors and in some of the delicate problems that arose in the editing, McKie’s intimate study of seventeenth-century science was of the utmost value. So the Royal Society now acknowledges its debt to him.

scholarly journals I. A letter from his Excellency Nicolas-Michael d'Aragona, Prince of Cassano, and F. R. S. to the President of the Royal Society, containing an account of the eruption of Vesuvius in May 1737. Translated from the Italian by T. S. M. D. F. R. S.

1740 ◽  
Vol 41 (455) ◽  
pp. 237-252
Keyword(s):  
Royal Society ◽  
Experimental Philosophy ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Short Account ◽  
Royal Society Of London

Sir, As your extraordinary Talents, and excellent Taste, in a true Examination of Natural Effects, and in Discoveries relating to Experimental Philosophy, are so well known, that you have, with Justice, been elected into the most celebrated Academies of Europe, and to the Presidentship of the Royal Society of London in Particular; I resolved, with good Reason, to offer you a short Account of the last great, dreadful and pernicious Eruption of our Vesuvins.

The Royal Society and Ireland . II

1965 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-99 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
Previous Article ◽  
Royal Irish Academy ◽  
Short Account ◽  
Royal Dublin Society ◽  
Lasting Influence ◽  
Scientific Life ◽  
Royal Society Of London

In a previous article (i) a short account was given of the life of William Molyneux F.R.S. (1656-1698), who was, without doubt, the most able of the Irish scientists of the late seventeenth century. He was the founder of the Dublin Philosophical Society which held its first official meeting in October 1683, and ensured that it soon established and maintained close links with the Royal Society of London. Although it never numbered more than forty persons among its membership, the Dublin Society laid the foundation upon which Irish scientists of later generations were able to build, and the establishment of the Royal Dublin Society in 1731 and of the Royal Irish Academy in 1785 is evidence of its lasting influence on the scientific life of eighteenthcentury Ireland. The constitution and organization of the Dublin group was closely modelled on that of the Royal Society (2), and its original style o f ‘The Dublin Society for the improving of naturall knowledge, Mathematicks and Mechanicks’ shows that it shared the aims and interests of its English counterpart. In November 1684, Sir William Petty, the Society’s first President, drew up a series of ‘advertisements. . . containing some proposals for modelling . . . future progress’. These were so well approved of ‘that they were readily submitted to by the whole company’ (3)

Who Wrote What When: The Bible, Science and Criticism

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-315
Author(s):  
Geert Lernout
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
Science And Religion ◽  
Religion And Science ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
The Bible ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
John William Draper ◽  
Century Science

According to the traditional (or ‘whig’) interpretation of history, sometime in the seventeenth century science was born in the form that we know today, in a new spirit that can best be summed up by the motto of the Royal Society: nullius in verba, take nobody's word for it. In the next few centuries this new critical way of looking at reality was instrumental in the creation of a coherent view of the world, and of that world's history, which was found to be increasingly at odds with traditional claims, most famously in the case of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. By the end of the nineteenth century, the divide between science and religion was described by means of words such as ‘conflict’ and ‘warfare,’ the terms used by John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White in the titles of their respective books: History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874) and History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896).

Quakers and the Royal Society of London in the seventeenth century

1976 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-150
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
The Other ◽  
Central Question ◽  
Scientific Thought ◽  
Historical Interpretation ◽  
Free Inquiry ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Scientific Endeavour ◽  
Royal Society Of London

One of the more vigorously debated problems of historical interpretation in recent years has been that of the relationship between Puritanism and science in the seventeenth century. The controversy over this problem has at times been heated, and it has attracted the participation of a number of scholars including Christopher Hill, Leo F. Solt, Hugh Kearney, Theodore K. Rabb, Barbara J. Shapiro, and Richard L. Greaves. The central question in the debate has been, ‘Did Puritanism contribute to the development and acceptance of scientific thought?’ Two major lines of argument have been followed. One has involved the examination of Puritan ideas and attitudes which may have been supportive of scientific endeavour. Included among these have been the Puritan emphasis upon empiricism, interest in the study of nature for the glory of God, and the support of free inquiry in opposition to authoritarianism. The other line of argument has involved the analysis of the membership of scientific groups such as the Royal Society of London in order to assess the level of Puritan participation and interest.

‘A Less Agreeable Matter’: The Disagreeable Case of Newton and Achromatic Refraction

1975 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zev Bechler
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Precise Form ◽  
New Instrument

There is no evidence to suggest that even as late as January 1672, when Newton was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, anyone (except those unknown few who had in the previous years attended his Lucasian lectures at Cambridge) had any inkling of his new theory of colours. His name exploded on the scientific scene as the inventor and constructor of a new kind of telescope—what later became known as the reflector (which was somewhat misleading compared with its name during the seventeenth century: the catadioptrical telescope). Had the erudition of the London virtuosi been a little broader, they would have known that in fact he was not the inventor of the telescope, even though the precise form he gave it was his. Not only was the idea a hundred years old, during which period it was repeatedly suggested by various writers, but also Newton himself took the idea straight from the most recent of these suggestions, namely that included in James Gregory's Optica promota of 1663. The situation becomes even more ironic when we realize that the new instrument was admired for wrong reasons and on merits that were far from Newton's intentions. Nevertheless, admired it was, and there was a good reason for this: Newton's instrument was in fact the first reflector actually to be constructed and, moreover, for a few weeks (before its mirror became tarnished) it performed quite well. Several astonomers became interested because of the high magnifying power relative to its dimensions (about 7 inches long, with a magnification of 38).

Jerónimo Lobo SJ and his Discourse of palm-trees in the context of seventeenth-century botany

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
João Paulo Cabral ◽  
J. M. S. Martins
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
English Translation ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
Academic Training ◽  
Palm Trees ◽  
Royal Society Of London

Father Jerónimo Lobo SJ was on a mission to Ethiopia between 1624 and 1634, during which he travelled on foot through parts of Abyssinia and Eritrea. After a troubled period of life in India, he returned to Lisbon in 1657, where died in 1678. In Lisbon Lobo wrote one of his most important works, “Discurso das Palmeiras”, published in 1669 in an English translation by the Royal Society of London. In this work, Lobo described the morphology and uses of eight important palm trees. Two of these – “macomeira” (Hyphaene) and “trafolim” (Borassus) – were novelties to European botanists. An analysis of published works from this period, including lists of plants cultivated in botanical and private European gardens, indicates that when “Discurso” was published, printed descriptions of only some of the palms that Lobo described were available. At that period few palms were cultivated in British and Dutch gardens. The botanical novelties in Lobo's “Discurso” were most probably the reason for interest shown by the Royal Society. This remarkable seventeenth-century botanical account reflected Lobo's ability to observe nature (perhaps enhanced by academic training in Jesuit schools) during his walks through the Abyssinian empire.

An Addition to the Correspondence of Spinoza

Philosophy ◽  
1935 ◽  
Vol 10 (38) ◽  
pp. 200-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Wolf
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
Large Collection ◽  
Royal Society Of London

The Library of the Royal Society of London contains a large collection of manuscript material relating to Henry Oldenburg and his correspondents. Oldenburg was one of the two Secretaries of the Royal Society when it was founded in 1662. For many years he acted as intermediary between British and Continental philosophers: and scientists. He also edited the early volumes of the Royal Society's Philosophical Transactions. His contacts were accordingly very extensive. Nearly all the seventeenth-century pioneers of science were among his correspondents. In his role of intermediary he was in the habit of sending extracts from some of his foreign letters to

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document