ROBERT HOOKE, CHEMIST CLARA DE MILT H. Sophie Kewcomb Memorial College, Tulane University, New Orleans. Louisiana
T
HE recent publication of the diary of Robert reader the idea that the contents are in part devoted to Hooke1has turned the attention of those interested the phenomenon of combustion. in the history of science, particularly those interRobert Hooke, son of a curate, was born a t Freshested in thelatter half of the seventeenth century, to the water, Isle of Wight, July 18, 1635. From birth he achievements and the influenceof this truly remarkable must have been a sickly child, but despite his weakness man. His great work, the "Micrographia," published he was agile and active. In later life his body was bent in 1665, contains his theory of combustion, a theory and crooked due to an illness which he seems to have similar to that of Dr. John Mayow which did not appear until 1674, except that whereas Dr. Mayow's presentation is indirect, rather complicated, a t times even obscure, Hooke's postulates are simply, clearly, and concisely stated. Why did Hooke's theory make little or no impression on the development of chemistry of his own time and later? Why has it not been mentioned by those writing of this period who have taken pains to describe the work of Dr. Mayow? One can give only incomplete answers to these questions. For a period of about seventeen years, from February, 1663 to about 1680, Hooke performed experiments before the Royal Society to prove the correctness of his theory. Besides these direct efforts he worked with Dr. Richard Lower in his experiments on respiration and was all during this period, according to the "Diary," a very frequent visitor to the home and laboratory of Robert Boyle. There is no doubt that Hooke did all that he could to convince the members of the Royal Society of the soundness of his views on combustion. Their indifferencez to his theory can best be explained by a consideration of the membership in the Society a t the time as given by Bishop Sprat, first historian of the Royal S ~ c i e t y , ~ "But, though the Society entertains very many men of particular Professions; yet the farr greater Number are Gentlemen, free and unconfined," and by the fact that Hooke's simple theory would not make an appeal to minds educated in the so-called scientific books on chemistry published a t the time, steeped as most of them were in the fantastic conceptions of the later alchemists. That Hooke's theory has been neglected by most historians of chemistry is most probably due to his CourUsy o f f h a Edgar Pohs Smith Mcrnorinl Collriiion never having written a single tract or book devoted enin the Hislory of Chemirrrg tirely to the subjects of combustion and respiration, JOHN MAYOW (1643-lfi79) although he states his intention of doing so in the "Microgra&ian and later i n other publicati~nis. .4nd i n none of his published works dors the title convcv to thc sufferedabout the age of sixteen years. His father, who ' ROBINWN. H. W. AND w. ADAMS. editor^, "The diary of intended this, his second son, for the ministry, taught Robert Hooke," Taylor and Francis. London, 1935. him in his early years, but the boy's poor health and his LYSAGHT, D. J., in an article, "Hooke's theory of combustion," published in Ambix, 1, 108 (1937), believes that Hooke's father's own infirmities soon ended this instruction and "experimental work was responsible for staving off (in England) the active boy was left to his own resources. Thus a t for a considerable time the adoption of the phlogiston theory." an early age he busied himself with the construction of "SPRAT, T.,"The history of the Royal Society of London," mechanical toys and in imitation of a painter, who came F. Martyn. London. 1667, p. 67.
to the neighborhood for a short time, Robert Hooke moved to Oxford and erected a laboratory, adjoining began to draw and paint, making his own materials. University C ~ l l e g e . ~ According to Aubrey, who was an When he was thirteen years old his father died and he intimate friend of Hooke's, Dr. Willis6 "recommended was sent to London to be apprenticed to a painter, him to the honbIeRobert Boyle, esqre, to be useful1 to Peter Lely. The odor of paints made him sick, so with him in his chymicall operations. Mr. Hooke then read the hundred pounds left him by his father and intended to him (R. B. esqre) Euclid's Elements and made him as a premium for Lely still in his possession, he entered understand Des Cartes' Philosophy." Hooke worked Westminster School then under the direction of the in Boyle's laboratory in Oxford from about 1655 until famous Dr. Busby, in whose home he lived. While at late in the year 1662 when he moved to London to bethis school Hooke learned to play the organ, and come curator of experiments of the Royal Society, a throughout his life he was interested in music and post which he filled until his death in 1703. musical instruments. I t is certainly unfortunate that no detailed account In 1653 he entered Christ Church College, Oxford, of the chemical researches carried out by Boyle and having secured a chorister's place,' "which was a pretty Hooke in Boyle's Oxford laboratory has come down to good maintenance" and Hooke further increased his us, so that it is not possible to estimate just how much meager funds by acting as a servitor. The nucleus of Hooke's scientific instinct and mechanical ingenuity contributed to the success of Boyle's experiments and discoveries. About 1659 Hooke contrived and perfected the air pump for Boyle according to the testimony of both Boyle and Hooke, and Hooke certainly helped with the experiments. Boyle published the account a t Oxford in 1660 in a book entitled "New Experiments Physico-Mechanical Touching the Spring of the Air." The term "spring of the air" was most probably originated by Hooke as a t this same time he was working on the balance spring for matches. Boyle's "The Skeptical Chymist" belongs to this period; it was published in 1661. One should mention here that according to James' the credit for the discovery of Boyle's law must be divided among Boyle, Hooke, and Townley, Boyle receiving the largest share. Hooke demonstrated the law for pressures of less than one atmosphere and for pressures up to two atmospheres in Boyle's laboratory. The account of his work was published in the "Micrograpbia" in 1665, the work having been submitted to the Royal Society in 1664. From his experiments Hooke agreed with Townley's hypothesis that "the Elater of the Air is reciprocal to its extension or a t least very near." But neither Hooke nor Boyle appreciated the importance of the discovery. It was left to Mariotte to formulate the law that the air is compressed in proportion to its weight in his book "Discours de la Nature de I'Air," published in 1676. The published "Diary" covers the period from August, 1672 through December, 1680 but there is no mention of Mariotte after 1673. In 1672 Hooke purchased a book the future Royal Society was gathered in Oxford a t this by the "French Mamott" and early in 1673 he bought time, the leader of this "experimental1 philosophical another by him on motion. In 1655 Hooke began to attend the meetings of the clubbe," Dr. John Wilkins, having moved from London "Invisible College" as Boyle called the nucleus of the in 1649 to become the Warden of Wadham College. future Royal Society and from this time on the members Dr. Wilkins became interested in Hooke, as did other of the group, many of whom came to occupy prominent members of the group. In the "Diary" Hooke relates positions in England in the late seventeenth century, the last illness and death of Dr. Wilkins, referring to became his friends. Among his special friends may be him as Lord Chester. Hooke's investigations in chemmentioned Dr. Wilkins, Dr. Goddard, Christopher istry began in the laboratory of Dr. Thomas Wllis when Hooke became the assistant to this physician in his chemical experiments. In 1654 Robert Boyle CLARK,A,, editor. "Aubrey's brief ;lives,", Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, 1899, V o l 1: pjj4!0
-
WOOD,A. A,, "Fasti Oxoniensis," 3rd ed., F. C. and J. Rivington, London, 1813-1820, Vol. 5, p. 287. 6 "Aubrey's brief lives," op. cil, Vol. 1. p. 411. JAMES, W. S., "The discovery of the gas laws," Sci. Progr., 20 (90). 263-72 (Oct., 1928).
Wren, and Robert Boyle, though Hooke must have known many of the others very well judging by the number of references to them in the "Diary." His friendship with Boyle is of special interest to chemists. Hooke in later life had many misunderstandings with scientific men of his day over the matter of Hooke's priority in certain discoveries and inventions. Whatever may be said of these quarrels, and much has been said, there is nothing in Hooke's diary that would lead us to believe that Boyle and Hooke ever had such a misunderstanding. On the contrary the "Diary" shows that the strong friendship established between them in Oxford remained unchanged throughout Boyle's life. Boyle died in December, 1691, and in his will he did not forget "Rob. H ~ o k e . " ~ By the year 1659 the larger number of the Oxford group had migrated to London. Boyle spent most of his time in London, though he maintained a residence in Oxford until 1671. In that year he moved to London where he lived a t the home of his sister, Lady Ranalagh. Robert Hooke built Lady Ranalagh's house in Pall Mall, near the site of the present Admiralty Arch and he also built a laboratory for Boyle adjoining it. Dr. Goddard had moved to London and had lodgings in Gresham College, where he was Professor of Medicine and in which lodgings he "had his laboratory for Chymistrie."g The "Invisible College" usually met a t Gresham College in the college parlour. Out of these meetings grew the Royal Society founded in 1662 "for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge." The Society soon realized that it could not depend on the good will and interest of the Fellows for experiments every Thursday afternoon, the usual time of meeting, and that it would be necessary to employ someone who could do this with regularity. According to Aubreylo Boyle recommended Hooke as curator of experiments, "wherein he did an admirable good worke to the Commonwealth of Learning, in recommending the fittest person in the world to them." H. W. Robinson, in his brief sketch of Hooke'slife says" of Hooke's service to the Society, "Thus began the association with the Society and the responsibility of regularly conducting experiments for the Society, which continued for the next forty years, until his death. At the age of twenty-seven Hooke had entered the position for which his special gifts and interests seemed almost to destine him; the Journal Books of the Society for the next four decades show with what assiduity and fertile ingenuity he discharged the duties of his office. There can be no doubt that Hooke was the one man who did most to shape the form of the new Soriety and to maintain its active existence. Without is weekly experiments and prolific work the Society auld scarcely have survived, or, a t least, would have veloped in a quite different way. It is scarcely an uggeration to say that he was, historically, the creator Woon, A. A,, op. cit., Vol. 5, 287. "Aubrey's brief lives," op. cit., Vol.l,268. ' 0 "Aubrey's brief lives," op. cit., Vol. 1, p . 411. 11 "The diary of Robert Hoake." op, cit., p . X X . 8
9
of the Royal Society." The results of the appointment on Hooke's development and his own achievements are a matter for argument. He had already shown a wide diversity of interests in Oxford. The experiments carried out from 1662 on to satisfy the interests of the exceedingly varied membership of the Society further broadened but did not deepen his studies. Hooke's responsibilities as curator of experiments and as general manager, if we are to believe certain remarks in the "Diary," made i t almost impossible for him to pursue one line of investigation. The Society received its Royal charter July 15, 1662,12 and July 27, 1664, agreed to nominate Hooke as curator with a salary of eighty pounds a year, to be raised by subscription, and with lodgings in Gresham College. On December 14, 1664, the Society confirmed his appointment as curator for perpetuity a t thirty pounds per annum, fifty pounds per annum having been offered by Sir John Cutler, one of the merchants of the city, for lectures to be delivered by Hooke a t Gresham College--known as the Cutlerian lectures. Through the influence of the members of the Society he was elected by the Gresham Committee Professor of Geometry March 20, 1665, which position he held until his death. One would suppose from this account so far that Hooke was doing well financially. This is far from the truth. His salary as curator was paid with little if any regularity; the difficulties about the payments due from Sir John Cutler were even greater. In 1688 Hooke took the matter to court. The suit was settled eventually in 1696 in Hooke's favor, three years after the death of Sir John Cutler, when Hooke himself was sixty-one years old. The "Micrographia," printed in 1664 and submitted to the Royal Society, was published in April, 1665. I t is the first treatise on the microscope in which the observations are recorded in detail. Its publication made microscopy popular. Samuel Pepys, the diarist, bought a copy and prized i t very highly. Shortly after its publication the plague appeared in London. Hooke left London with Sir William Petty and Dr. Wikins for Durdans, a t Epsom, then the residence of the Earl of Berkeley. He returned to Gresham College early in 1666 and the Society, which had adjourned during the visitation of the plague, met again March 14, 1666. On September 2, 1666, the Great F i e broke out, destroying the greater part of the city and a new phase of the career of Robert Hooke began, for from this time on much of his time was occupied as an architect and builder. Before the ruins of the city had ceased burning he presented a model for the rebuilding of London to the Royal Society which was approved by the Society and two days later, September 21st, by the Council of the city of London. As a result of this effort and of his other activities, which should most certainly include his constant attendance a t coffee houses and taverns, of which over one hundred fifty are mentioned in the "Diary," where Hooke had 1%Masson, I., "Three centuries of chemistry." The Macmillan Co., New York City, 1926, p. 43.
made the acquaintance of people of all classes of any Great Fire as a builder. Sunday, December 31, 1676, importance in London, he was appointed October 4, he wrote a summary of his financial affairs and this 1666, as one of the Surveyors of the city. His friend, memorandum shows that he had to his credit, not yet Christopher Wren, was appointed a Surveyor by the paid to him thirteen hundred pounds, of which Sir King, Charles 11. According to the records preserved John Cutler owed him three hundred twenty-five in the Guildhall, Hooke was the most active of the pounds for lectures already given for the past six and surveyors. During the period covered by the "Diary," one-half years, the Royal Society thirty pounds and 1672-1680, Hooke was the architect and builder of the Sir Christopher Wren one hundred fifty pounds due Monument, Bedlam Hospital, Montague House, Lady him for work on churches. He himself owed very Ranalagh's house, Merchant Taylors Hall and part of little and a fair share of this was for shoes of which he the College of Physicians. This period is probably the seems to have needed many. One of the entries shows most active and productive of his life. the spirit of the man: "Much love to all my friends The last years of his l i e must have been sad and I owe."la It has been said that he meant to leave disappointing. His contemporaries certainly recog- part of his fortune for the building of an edifice for the nized his great worth and ability and respected his Royal Society to house a Library, a Repository and a . knowledge, but they did little or nothing to show in a Laboratory and part to endow a Physico-Mecanik material, tangible way that the development of science Lecture, but he failed to make a will, so died intestate, in England and the success of the Royal Society owed and his effects were sold a t public auction. much to him. One can sense in the "Diary" that There is no portrait of him. There may be one, Hooke realized that his labors were often unappre- however, as the "Diary" records that on October 16, ciated. On December 17, 1691, he took the oath be- 1674, "Mr. Bonust drew picture."'4 Aubreyts defore Sir Charles Hedges in Doctors' Commons for the scription of him is of about the year 1680,15"He is of Degree of "Doctor of Physic" but this honor could midling stature, something crooked, pale faced, and have meant very little to him a t the time. He was too his face but little belowe, but his head is lardge, his keen a judge of men and the times not to have realized eie full and popping, and not quick; a grey eie. He that the center of scientific interest in England was haz a delicate head of haire, browne, and of an excellent Isaac Newton. Many of his friends died during the moist curle." period covered by the Diary; Grace, his only brother's Hooke must have begun his investigations on comchild, who had kept house for him died in 1687; his bustion while working in ~ ~laboratory ~ before l ~ ' devoted friend, Robert Boyle, a t whose home he dined 1661. In his first publication, a small tract, published a t least once a week died in 1691; his own health could in oxford in this year, he says,i6 " ~ as~to the d ~ i ~ i not have improved with age. He worked on, however, of Oyl, melted Tallow, Spirit of Wine etc., inthe Weeck almost to the end of his life. His last invention made a candle or L ~ it is~evident, ~ that , it differs in in 1700 was that of the Marine Barometer, described nothing from the former, save only in this, that in a by Halley in the "Philosophical Transactions." Filtre the Liquor descends and runs away by another In 1697 he complained of swelling in the legs and and in the wee& the ~i~~~~ is dispersed and had scurvy. His last appearance a t a council meeting carried away by the ~l~~~ (which what it is and horn. of the Royal Society was on April 1, 1702. The last it consumes bodies, I shall on some other occasion by thing he wrote was a memorandum, believed to have many luciferous Experiments manifestly prove) somebeen written December 17, 1702, of an instrument for thing there is ascribable to the heat, for that it may measuring the horizontal diameter of the sun to the rarefie the more volatil and spirituous parts of those tenth of a second. He died March 3, 1703, in his Liquors.. . . ." lodgings in Gresham College; the next day or day after The experiments were carried out and the explanahis body was carried across Bishopsgate Street in the tion of the results appeared in the ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ presence of the Fellows of the Royal Society to St. As one reads this first modern interpretation of comHelen's Church and was buried in the chancel. The bustion and notes that it is tucked away in observ. exact spot of the grave is not hewn. There is a XVI, "Of Charcoal, or Burnt Vegetables," one is window of five lights a t the west end of the Nuns' forced to agree with an observation of Hooke's given in Choir of the church to the Worthies of St. Helen's~ h 'tis i no~ , ~ 1 7 the prefaceto the u ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~stso ~that Hooke's name is there. wonder, that our power over natural causes and effects HOOkein his prime have a shrewd busi- is so slowly improv'd, seeing we are not only to contend ness man, who realized his worth as a scientist, an with the obscurity and dificully of the things whereol1 experimenter, a builder, a director, as curator of the work and think, but even theforces ofour own mind ~ o ~society. a l ~ccordingto Waller, the Secretary of conspire to betray us." So reasonable, almost selF the Royal Society who edited his "Posthumous Works," "The diary of Robert Hooke," oP. n't., P. 265. ~~~k~ was an avaricious man, a miser who deprived 141bid., p. 127. himself of the very necessities of life to collect gold and la "Aubrey's brief lives," op. cit., p. 411. LYSAGHT, D. J., "Hwke's theory of combustion," Ambix. silver in a large iron chest. That this is not the truth 1, 108 (Dec., 1937). is evidenced by the "Diary" on practically every page. ,, from Micrographia,n Alembic Club Reprints He must have made a great deal of money after the Number 5. The Alembic Club, Edinburgh. 1902. p. 7.
evident did Hooke's hypotheses appear to him that he failed to realize the importance of his ideas, nor did he appreciate how much a t variance they were with the ideas of combustion prevalent a t the time and this in spite of his constant purchase of books of the period. The hypotheses as given in Alembic Club Reprint Number 5 may be condensed as follows. "First, that theAirin which welive,move,and breathe, . . . is the menstruum or universal dissolvent of all Sulfureous bodies. "Secondly, that this action it performs not, till the body be first sufficiently heated, as we find requisite also to the dissolution of many other bodies by several other menstruum. "Thirdly, that this action of dissolution, produces or generates a very great heat, and that which we call Fire; . . . . . "Fourthly, that this action is perform'd with so great a violence, and does so minutely act, and rapidly agitate the smallest parts of the combustible matter, that it produces in the diephanous medium of the Air, the action or pulse of light, which what i t is, I have elsewhere already shewn. "Fifthly, that the dissolution of sulphureous bodies is made by a substance inherent, and mixt with the Air, that is like, if not the very same, with that which is fixt in Salt-peter, . . . . . "Sixthly, that in this dissolution of bodies by the Air, a certain part is united and mixt, or dissolv'd and turn'd into the Air, and made to fly up and down with ~. it . . . . . "Teuthly, therefore the dissolving parts of the Air are but few, that is, it seems of the nature of those Saline menstruums, or spirits, . . ., and therefore a small parcel of i t is quickly glutted, and will dissolve no more; and therefore unless some fresh part of this menstruum be apply'd to the body to be dissolv'd, the action ceases, . . . ; whereas Salt-peter is a m a struum, when melted and red-hot, that abounds more with those Dissolvent particles, and therefore as a small quantity of i t will dissolve a great sulphureous body, so will the dissolution be very quick and violent. "Therefore in the Eleventh place, i t is observable that as in other solutions, if a copious and quick supply of fresh menstruum, though but weak, be poured on, or applied to the dissoluble body, i t quickly consumes it: So this menstrunm of the Air, if by Bellows, or any other such contrivance, it be copiously apply'd to the shining body, is found to dissolve i t as soon, and as violently the more strong menstruum of melted
Nitre. "Therefore twelfthly, it seems reasonable to think that there is no such thing as an Element of Fire that should attract or draw up the flame, or towards which the flame should endeavor to ascend out of a desire or appetite of uniting with that as its Homogaeal primitive and generating Element; but that that shining transient body which we call Flume, is nothing else but a mixture of Air. , , . and the combustible volatil parts of any body
"This Hypothesis I have endeavoured to raise from an Infinite of Observations and Experiments, the process of which would be much too long to be here inserted, and will perhaps another time afford matter copious enough for a much longer Discourse, the Air being a Subject which (though all the world has hitherto liv'd and breatb'd in, and has been unconversant about) has yet been so little truly examin'd or explain'd, that a diligent enquirer will be able to find but very little information from what has been (till of late) written of it: But being once well understood, i t will, I doubt not, inable a man to render an intelligible,
This portrait hangs in the Pepys Library at Cambridge OF CHEMICAL EDUUniversity. It appears in the JOURNAL CATION through the courtesy of Walter Adams.
nay probable, if not the true reason of all the Phaenomena of Fire" . . . In the first ten chapters of his book "Tractatus medico-physi~i"'~ published in 1674, Dr. John Mayow discusses a theory of combustion similar to Hooke's. He includes also its application to respiration and describes many beautiful experiments to illustrate his ideas. It is believed today that the source of Mayow's ideas, even of many of his experiments, was the work of Hooke and Boyle. Mayow entered Wadham College, Oxford, in 16-58 and was elected to a fellowship in All
-
'8 MAYOW. J., "Medico-physical works," Alembic Club Reprints, No. 17. The Alembic Club, Edinburgh, 1907, pp. 1-147.
Souls College in 1660. Possibly Mayow worked in Boyle's laboratory with Hooke part of the time be was in Oxford. Mayow was Hooke's friend, and so far as we know there was never any disagreement between them. It was Hooke who proposed Mayow's name as a Fellow of the Royal Society, November 30, 1676. Hooke may have hoped to have Dr. Mayow as an ally in his struggle to convince by experiments the members of the Royal Society of the soundness of his theory. One of the few references in the "Diary" from which one can get an idea of Hooke's feeling toward his friends relates to Mayow. On Saturday, November 8, 1679 he writes,IS"Mayow Dead a month since." The Royal Society began its inquiries on combustion and the air in February, 1663, probably a t the suggestion of Hooke, possibly a t Boyle's suggestion. The scheme for the investigation brought in by Hooke a t the next meeting appears to have grown out of his own work on combustion and his work with Boyle on experiments with the air-pump, for he was interested in the nature of the "spring" of the air, of its extent and height, of the composition of its particles. In this early period there were others who furnished experiments. Lard Brouncker's paper,20"Of the Weight of Bodies increased in the Fire," was published in Bishop Sprat's "History of the Royal Society." When Samuel Pepys was admitted to membership Hooke was demonstrating the necessity of a supply of air in the process of combustion. Pepys wrote of February 15, 16G4,2' . . .. "Thence with Creed to Gresham College, where I had been by Mr. Povy the last week proposed to be admitted a member; and was this day admitted by signing a book and being taken by the hand of the President, my Lord Brouncker, and some words of admittance said to me. But it is a most acceptable thing to hear their discourse, and see their experiments which were this day on fire, and how it goes out in a place where the air is not free, and sooner out where the air is exhausted, which they showed by an engine on purpose. After this being done, they to the Crown Tavern, behind the 'Change and there my Lord and most of the company to a club supper; Sir P. Neale, Sir R. Murray, Dr. Clerke, Dr. Whistler, Dr. Goddard, and others of the most eminent worth. Above all, Mr. Boyle was a t the meeting and above him Mr. Hooke, who is the most and promises the least, of any man in the world that I ever saw. Here excellent discourse till ten a t night, and then home." In 1667 the problem was again attacked, but this time the interest was not so much in what we would call the effectof the pressure of the air surrounding the combustible and in the calcination of metals but in the part the air played in respiration. Many of the experiments were tried with birds. Hooke's experiments and discourses continued and his belief in the fundamental postulates of his theory did not change. In the "Diary," October
-
"The diary of Robert Hooke," op. cit., p. 430. 20 SPRAT, T., op. cil., p. 228. fl "The diary of Samuel Pepys," Everyman's Library, E. P. Dutton & Co., New York City, 1923, Vol. 1 , p. 556. 19
19, 1675, he records his observation of the hollowuess of the flame of a candle. In the opening paragraph of "Lampas" published in 1676 he refers to the "Hypothesis of Fire and Flame" published eleven years before. In 1681 in his lectures on light he once more referred to his theory and again in 1682 in writing of comets. Comets interested Hooke. On January 31, 1076, he records that he sat up to observe a comet and dreamt strangely afterward; on November 22, 1680, he records his observation of Halley's Comet and December 30th of thesame year he sat up all night observing it. During the period of the investigation of combustion by the Royal Society, another great scientific genius was working in the same field. Isaac Newton began his experiments in chemistry about 1601in a laboratory in or near his lodgings in Trinity College, Cambridge, and he pursued his inquiries until about 1696.22 Newton published nothing, however, on the subject until 1704, one year after Hooke's death. The summary of his work in chemistry during this period of over thirty years, most of which must have been concerned with calcination and the properties of metals, was published as a series of queries, appended to his book on optics. The ideas given here on combustion are very, very much like those of Hooke. . It is my opinion that if Hooke had collected in one volume all his experimental work on combustion and respiration and had published it in 1680 (by which time be had finished most of it) and if Sir Isaac Newton had recognized publicly the reasonableness and value of Hooke's theory and had given it his support, the theory would have received the consideration it deserved. Its acceptance would have made possible the organization of chemistry a t the beginning of the eighteenth century. There would have been few followers of the Phlogiston Theory and much valuable time would have been saved on the pursuit of such topics as the negative weight of phlogiston. Many reasons can be offered to explain Newton's attitude toward Hooke's work. Newton always made every effort to avoid adverse criticism of his ideas and his work; he thoroughly disliked controversies; the explanation of combustion was a controversial subject a t this time. It is very probable also that Newton was influenced in his attitude toward Hooke and Hooke's worth by Henry Oldenburg, first Secretary of the Royal Society whom Hooke disliked and mistrusted, whom Andrade23 calls "an oblique, intriguing and toadying individual, jealous of Hooke's fame and his earnings." Not long after the acceptance of Lavoisier's work in England, John Robison in the notes and observations appended to volume one of his edition of Joseph Black's lectures on chemistry devoted four pagesz4to a sum-
2 Z NEWELL, L. C.. "Sir Isaac Newton, 1727-1927," The Williams and wilkins c o . , Baltimore, Md., 1928, pp. 2 0 3 5 5 , ANDRADE,E. N. DA C., "Robert Hooke and his contemporaris." Nafzrre. 136, 360 (Sept., 1935). a4 ROBISON, J., "Lectures on the elements of chemistry," First American Edition, M. Carey, Philadelphia, Pa., 1807, Vol. 1, pp. 376-80.
"
mary of Hooke's theory and the great worth of his ideas. Robison referring to Lavoisier's theory says, "This Theory, so opposite, as Black observes, to the Theory of Stahl, is not so recent as is generally imagined. It was seen, in all its extent and importance, by Robert Hooke, one of the greatest geniuses and most ardent inquirers into the operations of nature,. . . .." Further on Robison says, "I do not know a more unaccountable thing in the history of science, than the total oblivion of this theory of Dr. Hooke, so clearly expressed, and so likely to catch attention." There has been much written of late on the discovery of phosphorus and its introduction from Germany into England and France. Phosphorus was introduced into England in 1677 and the first time any notice of it appeared in print in English was in a paper written by Boyle of a report given before the Royal Society. This report was published in 1678 with the title, "Mr. Boyle's Observations made on two new Phosphori of Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Craft," in "The Lectures and Collections made by Robert Hooke," then Secretary of the Royal Society. Baldwin's phosphorus (phosphorescent calcium nitrate) is mentioned b y Hooke, January 4, 1677.25 "Oldenburg produced the Phosfihorus Baldwini. 'Twas affirmed that it shined best. I could not perceive it." Hooke's record also shows that a letter from KraiTt, a German chemist, whose name Hooke spells Crafts, about phosphorus was presented to the Society a t its meeting of May 17, 1677. Krafft evidently came to London late in the summer of this year where he exhibited specimens of the element. Several men must have seen his demonstrations and later learned to prepare phosphorus. Boyle, however, seems to have been the only one who prepared i t in any quantity and who accurately described its glowing.26 Boyle prepared it from urine and i t is possible that he may have had suggestions from Hooke in his experiments for when Hooke was working in the laboratory of Dr. Willis in Oxford, Dr. Willis was interested in urine. Boyle, according to his own statement, was visited by Krafft on September 15, 1677, and shown phosphorus. Partington in his "Early History of Phosph~rus"~'says, "On Septemher 22, Krafft came and saw Boyle alone, and was then able to show him an experiment which had failed on the 15th, dz.,the ignition of gunpowder after a short interval in contact with a piece of warm phosphorus taken up on a quill pen." This is the substance of the account given by Hooke, also dated September 22, 1677.28 " . . . Dind with Mr. Harvey. Saw Crafts fire gunpowder with his powder thus: putting as mnch gunpowder as would lye on a 6d. on a peice of white paper, he dryd or warmd i t over a chaffing dish of charcoles, then whilest the powder "The diarv of Robert Hooke." 00. cit.. n.266. J. R., "inorganic chemistry," 5th ed., The Macmillan Co., New York City, 1937, p. 609. 27 P~\RTMGTON, J. R., "The early history of phosphorus," 16
PARTINGTON,
Sri. P r o ~ r . .30 (119). 405 (Tan.. 1936). ~
28
"~hDediar~'of ~obertkodke,"dp. cit., p. 314.
was yet warm he touchd it with a 10th part of a graine of his white powder which was putt into the pith of a quill and it immediately took fire. Then he hrused with the point of a knife and with his naile a very little of the same white powder on a peice of white paper and as soon as ever it was warmed over the fire it waxed afire and fired the paper. Both were exceeding strange and mnch more than I had ever seen. By water with Crafts and Slayer to the old Swan. To Jonathans with Hill &c." Hooke was with Boyle on September 27th and also with Krafft and Pappin, a French inventor and scientist, a t the Green Dragon. On October 1st Hooke records that he walked with Boyle in the garden and had much discourse with him about printing his (Boyle's) discourse of phosphorus. On October 3rd Hooke gave Boyle a copy of Elsholtz. Elsholtz published two papers on phosphorus: one in 1676 and another in 1677. There is nothing to indicate which tract Boyle received. This entry is interesting, for Partington says in his paper that Boyle could not procure the paper by Elsholtz. On February 20, 1678 Hooke mentioned the "Preface to Boyles phosphorus." Many others in London must have prepared phosphorus a t the time. On March 13th Hooke "spake with Mr. Boyle and saw Mr. Sleyers phosphorus." On May 23rd he was "at Mr. Slayers and Mr. Harveys borrowed phosphorus of Slayer." Nothing more of phosphorus is mentioned in the "Diary" until September i , 1679 when Hooke records that he told Sir J. Hoskins of "Pappin's Receipt for Phosphorus." On August 13, 1680, Hooke was "at Mr. Boyles about his book" and on December 28th the entry reads " . . . Directed Mr. Boyles chimny, he gave me a guilded book of phosphorus." This was the first book on phosphorus printed in English and bore the title, "The Aerial Noctiluca, or some new phenomena and a Process of a Factitious Self-shining substance, imparted in a letter to a Friend living in the country.'' Quaere in the manner of Aubrey: could the friend living in the country have been Isaac Newton whose letters to Boyle Hooke had read on December 24, 1679? The "Diary" so much quoted in the account above is not really a diary like the diaries of John Evelyn and Samuel Pepys, both of whom knew Hooke and admired him. It is rather a collection of memoranda kept by Hooke for his own use. Aubrey indicates that Hooke's memory was not always reliable,z*"Now when I have sayd his inventive faculty is so great, you cannot imagine his memory to be excellent, for they are like two bucketts, as one goes up, the other goes downe," and he must have found it necessary to keep certain records of his affairs, when his activities as an architect and builder increased enormously the details which he had to remember in order to keep up with his many interests. In his life time, despite his ill health, he accomplished an amazing amount of work, involving the use of his mind and his hands. He must have been a great reader in all the fields of science, and he
1a
"Aubrey's brief lives," op. cit., p. 411
purchased, borrowed, and loaned books of all kinds, many of which dealt with chemistry. A fuU account of
-
Hooke's life, his work, and his influence has yet to be written.
