After Boyle and the Leviathan: the Second Generation of British Air Pumps

Summary

This paper examines the second generation of British air pumps, covering the period 1700–1750. The air pump originated in the 1650s and 1660s thanks to the work of Otto von Guericke in Magdeburg, Robert Boyle in Oxford and London, and Accademia del Cimento in Florence. While these first models were often seen as unreliable and temperamental, and available to a small group only, the next period saw the air pump transformed into a publicly accessible device for use in public and private demonstrations, in practical applications, as well as in the production of new knowledge. In England, the instrument maker Francis Hauksbee and his followers played a decisive role in this process, which was connected, among other things, to popular medicine, anatomy and health. In this period, pneumatics (the field of air pumps and air-pump practice) reached a state where the pump came to be regarded as an unproblematic tool; and where a ‘vacuum’ came to be thought of and handled as an object.

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank friends and colleagues at the Museum of the History of Science in Oxford, UK, at the Institute for History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, University of Toronto, Canada, and the Department of History and Religious Studies, University of Tromsø, Norway, for many interesting discussions and helpful suggestions during this work. This study was made possible by support from Sparebank1's Gavefond (Tromsø, Norway), and the Canadian Post-Doctoral Research Fellowship (PDRF).

Notes

¹William E.K. Middleton, The History of the Barometer (Baltimore, 1964), p. 3.

²Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the air-pump (Princeton, 1985).Alan Q. Morton and Jane A. Wess, Public and Private Science (Oxford, 1993).For early air pumps generally, see:Alice Stroup, ‘Christiaan Huygens & the Development of the Air-pumps’, Janus, LXVIII (1981), 129–58.Anne. C. van Helden, ‘The Age of the Air-Pump’, Tractrix, vol. 3 (1991) 149–172.Anne C. van Helden, ‘Theory and Practice in Air-Pump Construction’, Annals of Science, 51 (1994) 477–495.Peter de Clercq, At the Sign of Oriental Lamp. The Musschenbroek workshop in Leiden, 1660–1750 (Rotterdam, 1997).Alto Brachner, Geschichte der Vakuumpumpen (Deutches Museum, München, Undated). (This is a general overview of the air pump from the seventeenth to the twentieth century, however it does not explore the early eighteenth-century British air pump deeply).Terje Brundtland, ‘From Medicine to Natural Philosophy: Francis Hauksbee's Way to the Air-pump’, The British Journal for the History of Science, 41 (2008), 209–240.

³van Helden (1991), (note 2), 151–2.

⁴Robert Boyle, The Works of Robert Boyle, edited by Michael Hunter and Edward B. Davis, 14 vols (London, 1999), I, p. 156.

⁵William E. K. Middleton, The Experimenters (Baltimore, 1971).

⁶R. Boyle (note 4), IX, pp. 121–263.

⁷Francis Hauksbee, ‘The Engine and Glasses…’. The Post Man, 27 October 1702. (All newspapers citedin this article were published in London. Dates are given according to the new style.)

⁸P. de Clercq, (note 2), p. 151.

⁹R. Boyle, (note 4), I, p. 163, and VI, p. 216.

¹⁰John Harris, Lexicon Technicum, 5th edition, 2 vols (London, 1736), II, under ‘Pneumatics’ and ‘Pneumatical Experiments’.

¹¹Anne C. van Helden, ‘Air-pumps’, in Instruments of Science, an Historical Encyclopedia, edited by R. Bud and D. Warner (London, 1998), p. 19.

¹²The National Gallery, London, NG725.

¹³The works of for example Thomas Savery (1650–1715), Thomas Newcomen (1664–1729), and Denis Papin (1647–1712) on applications of the vacuum principle for industrial purposes falls outside the scope of this article.

¹⁴A. Morton and J. Wess (note 2).

¹⁵George Wilson, ‘On the early history of the air pumps in England’, Edinburgh New PhilosophicalJournal 46 (1849), 330–54.

¹⁶Robert E.W. Maddison, The life of the Honourable Robert Boyle (London, 1969), p. 227.

¹⁷S. Shapin and S. Schaffer, (note 2), p. 26.

¹⁸Matthias Puhle (editor), Die Welt im Leeren Raum (München, 2002), pp. 78–80, 337–339.

¹⁹W.E.K. Middleton, (note 1), pp. 61–64.

²⁰A. Stroup (note 2), pp. 131–132.

²¹P. de Clercq, (note 2), p. 105.

²²P. de Clercq, (note 2), p. 112.

²³William Vream, A Description of the Air-Pump (London, 1717).

²⁴Francis Hauksbee, ‘A New way of Glass Cupping…’. The Post Man, 31 Jan 1699.

²⁵Francis Hauksbee, Physico-Mechanical Experiments (London, 1709, reprint 1719).

²⁶For an discussion on this development, see T. Brundtland (note 2).

²⁷F. Hauksbee, ‘HAuksbee's new Pneumatick Engin…’. The Post Man, 1 May 1705.

²⁸A direct influence from air-pump practice on the Continent on this development has not been found.

²⁹Vream (note 23). Vream also describes a modification of Hauksbee's pump that replaced the back-and-forth movement of the crank (causing the two pistons to rise and fall alternately) with a circular movement. However, the importance of this amendment, made intentionally in order to simplify the operation, is uncertain. Of the eight Hauksbee-pumps examined by the author, only two were equipped with this particular mechanism. On one of them (Edinburgh), this mechanism has been removed at a later stage and replaced with gears for the traditional back and forth movement. See R.G.W. Anderson, The Playfair Collection (Edinburgh, 1979), pp. 67–68.

³⁰John T. Desaguliers, A Course of Experimental Philosophy, 2 vols (London, 1744), II, pp. 379–390.

³¹Stephen Davenport, A description of the new invented Table air-pump (London, 1737).

³²For the development of the barometer, see Jan Golinski, ‘Barometers of Change’, in The Sciences in Enlightened Europe, edited by William Clark, Jan Golinski and Simon Schaffer (Chicago, 1999), pp. 69–93.

³³A. Morton and J. Wess, (note 2).

³⁴Alice N. Walters, ‘Conversation pieces: science and politeness in eighteenth-century England’, History of Science, xxxv (1997).

³⁵The general aspects of these courses are well known, see for example, Larry Stewart, The Rise of Public Science (Cambridge, 1992). A. Morton and J. Wess (note 2). Stephen Pumfrey, ‘Who did the work?’ The British Journal for the History of Science, 28 (1995) 131–156.

³⁶Francis Hauksbee and William Whiston, A Course of Mechanical, Optical, Hydrostatical and Pneumatical Experiments (London, 1714).

³⁷Wiliam Derham, Physico-Theology (London, 1714), p. 8.

³⁸J. Harris, (note 10), II, under ‘VACUUM’.

³⁹W. Vream (23), exp. 10, 49.

⁴⁰For a discussion on the eighteenth-century debate about air-pump experiments on animals, see Kathryn Ready, ‘What then, poor Beastie!’: Gender, Politics, and Animal Experimentation in Anna Barbauld's ‘The Mouse's Petition’, Eighteenth-Century Life, vol. 28, Number 1, Winter 2004.

⁴¹F. Hauksbee, Sen. and J. Hodgson, ‘For the Advancement of Natural Philosophy…’. The Daily Courant, Sat. 9 Dec (1704).

⁴²W. Vream (note 23), exp. 49.

⁴³W. Vream (note 23), exp. 8.

⁴⁴W. Vream (note 23), exp. 10.

⁴⁵Francis Hauksbee, ‘Experiments concerning the Effects of Air Pass'd through Red Hot Mettals, & c’, Philosophical Transactions, 27 (1710) 199.

⁴⁶W. Vream (note 23), exp. 44.

⁴⁷John Desaguliers, Physico Mechanical Lectures (London, 1717), p. 40.

⁴⁸Henry Pemberton, A view of Sir Isaac Newton's philosophy (London, 1728), Preface.

⁴⁹See L. Stewart, S. Pumfrey (note 35), and Morton and J.A. Wess (note 2).

⁵⁰Judy Egerton, J. Wright of Derby (London, 1990), p. 58. Benedict Nicolson, Joseph Wright of Derby, 2 vols (London 1968), I, pp. 111–114. The pump depicted in Wright's painting (1767) has never been properly identified. Most commentators describe it as similar to one used by James Ferguson (1710 –1776), (J. Egerton, 58, B. Nicolson, 113), others point to Benjamin Martin's (1705–1784) air-pump tradition. However, the pump is an artistic construction, composed of elements from two important British air pumps: Boyle's first version (1659) and Hauksbee's double-barrelled model (1705). The receiver in Wright's painting is definitely Boyle's, mounted above the structure and with the access-cover on top of it. This likeness becomes even clearer in Wright's first study of the painting (Nicolson, plate 59), where more details of Boyle's pump are sketched, for example the stopcock below the receiver. The pumping section, which is the frame with the two barrels and the crank, situated below and to the left of the receiver, is clearly of Hauksbee's design. Wright's draft also contains instruments that not are shown in the painting, for example a lung-glass, like the one in Figure 4, Fig. 7. The components that constituted the air pump in Wright's draft and painting, as well as the pneumatic instruments shown there, were thus all made before 1720 (The Magdeburg Hemispheres, 1656, Boyle's pump 1659, Hauksbee's double-barrelled pump, 1705, the lung glass 1717). Further discussion on this topic, together with a possible reinterpretation of the painting based on these facts falls outside the scope of this text.

⁵¹W. Vream (note 23), p. 11.

⁵²The air pump can be identified as Davenport's table pump, having two barrels driven by a crank,and four characteristic corner-columns, separating the lower and upper pump plates (see Figure 7).

⁵³Ellen D'Oench, The conversation Piece: Arthur Devis & His Contemporaries (New Haven, 1980), pp. 1–3, 45–46. See also: Polite Society by Arthur Devis 1712–1787: Portraits of the English Country Gentleman and his Family (Harris Museum and Art Gallery, Preston, 1983) 9–10, 22, 43–44.

⁵⁴R. Boyle (note 4), III, 358.

⁵⁵R. Boyle (note 4), VIII, 225–232.

⁵⁶Christiaan Huygens, ‘A Continuation of the Experiments’, Philosophical Transactions, 10 (1675)492–495.

⁵⁷W. Vream (note 23), exp. 37.

⁵⁸Barbara A. Blakistone, Principles and Applications of Modified Atmosphere Packaging of Foods (New York, 1998), pp. 3, 15–17.

⁵⁹Denis Papin, NOVA METHODUS AD VIRES MOTRICES VALIDISSMAS LEVI PRETIO COMPARANDA [A new method of obtaining very great powers at small cost], Acta Eruditorium Lipsiæ (1690), 410–414.

⁶⁰Alexander Monro Primus, A Treatise on the Anatomical Encheiresis or Manual Part of Anatomy (1747), MS 169, University of Otago Medical Library, 25. See also F.J. Cole, ‘The history of anatomical injections’, in Studies in the History and Method of Science, edited by C. Singer, 2 vols (Oxford, 1921), I, pp. 286–343.

⁶¹For a discussion of the categorisation of scientific instruments, see W. Hackmann, ‘Scientific instruments’, in Reader's Guide to the History of Science, edited by A. Hessenbruck (London, 2000), 675–7.

⁶²Alexander Monro Secundus, The works of Alexander Monro (Edinburgh, 1781), pp. 1–10.

⁶³A. Monro Primus (note 60).

⁶⁴Alexander Monro, Primus, The Professor's Daughter, An Essay on Female Conduct (Edinburgh, 1996), pp. ix–x.

⁶⁵The condensing engine was used, for example, to force water out of arteries and veins after flushing, before they became injected with wax. See Alexander Monro Secundus (note 62), p. 7.

⁶⁶Anita Guerrini, ‘Anatomists and Entrepreneurs in Early Eighteenth Century London’, Journal of the History of Medicine and allied Sciences, 59 (2004) 219–239, and Alexander Monro Primus and the Moral Theatre of Anatomy', The Eighteenth Century, 47 (2006) 18.

⁶⁷A. Monro Primus (1747), (note 60), pp. 110–111.

⁶⁸Colin Blakemore and Sheila Jennett, The Oxford Companion to the Body (Oxford, 2001), p. 91.

⁶⁹William Brockbank, Ancient Therapeutic Arts (London, 1954), pp. 67, 82.

⁷⁰T. Brundtland (note 2), p. 14.

⁷¹R. Campbell, The London Tradesman (London, 1747), pp. 331–340.

⁷²Edward Hatton, A new view of London (London, 1708), pp. 784–798. Hatton lists six Bagnios in London, and describes them as places for ‘Sweating, Cupping and Bathing’.

⁷³T. Brundtland (note 2), 14.

⁷⁴J. Harris (note 10), I, under ‘CUCURBITULA’.

⁷⁵James Yonge, ‘An Account of Balls of Hair (…)’, Philosophical Transactions, 25, (1706–1707), 2387.

⁷⁶Ambroise Paré, The workes of that famous chirurgion Ambrose Parey (London, 1634), 344.

⁷⁷Royal Society Journal Book, JBC 10, 1702–14, 22 December 1703.

⁷⁸John Patrick O'Grady, et al, Vacuum Extraction in Modern Obstetric Practice (Carnforth, England), 1–12.

⁷⁹van Helden, (note 11), 19.

⁸⁰Around 1709, Hauksbee stated that he no longer wanted to ‘take any further notice of the pump’ (write about it in the texts), but would concentrate on the experiments. F. Hauksbee (note 25), 21.

⁸¹Gad Freudenthal, ‘Electricity Between Chemistry and Physics: The Simultaneous Itineraries of Francis Hauksbee, Samuel Wall, and Pierre Polinière’, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 11 (1981) 203–229. Roderick W. Home, ‘Francis Hauksbee's Theory of Electricity’, in Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 4.10 (1967), pp. 203–217. John Heilbron, Electricity in the 17th and 18th centuries: A study of early modern physics (Berkeley, 1979), pp. 229–239. Willem Hackmann, Electricity from Glass (Alphen aan der Rijn, 1978), pp. 29–39.

⁸²Jean Picard, ‘Experience faite à l'Observatoire sur la Barometre simple touchant un nouveau Phenomene qu'on y a découvert [Experiment made at the observatory on a simple barometer concerning a new phenomenon that was discovered there]’, Le Journal des Sçavans (1676) 112–113.

⁸³F. Hauksbee, ‘Several Experiments on the Mercurial Phosphorus’, Philosophical Transactions, 24 (1705) 2129–2135, 2130–2131.

⁸⁴F. Hauksbee, ‘Several Experiments on the Attrition of Bodies in Vacuo’, Philosophical Transactions, 24 (1705) 2165–2175.

⁸⁵F. Hauksbee, ‘An Account of an Experiment (…) Touching the Extraordinary Electricity ofGlass’, Philosophical Transactions, 25 (1707) 2332–2335.

⁸⁶F. Hauksbee, ‘An Account of an Experiment Made before the Royal Society’, PhilosophicalTransactions, 25 (1707) 2277–2282.

⁸⁷F. Hauksbee (note 25), pp. 268, 298.

⁸⁸F. Hauksbee (note 25), pp. 225–230.

⁸⁹John Lowthorp, ‘An experiment of the Refraction of the Air’, Philosophical Transactions, 21 (1699) 339–342.

⁹⁰As above, these data can also be described as ‘inputs’, and ‘outputs’.

⁹¹This experiment was shown in the ‘Opticks session’ in Hauksbee and Whiston's course syllabus, see F. Hauksbee and W. Whiston (note 36), p. 2. A similar prism is found in Museo di Storia della Scienza, Florence, dated to early nineteenth century. See Willem Hackmann, Catalogue of Pneumatic, Magnetic and Electrical Instruments (Florence, 1995), p. 65 (see also Figure 2.4).

⁹²William Derham, ‘Experiments about the Motion of Pendulums in Vacuo’, Philosophical Transactions, 24 (1704) 1785.

⁹³Stephen Hales, Vegetable Staticks (1727). All references are to the reprint (London, 1969).

⁹⁴Stephen Hales, Haemastaticks (London, 1733).

⁹⁵Alan Morton, History of Botanical Science (London, 1981), p. 246.

⁹⁶Louis. J. Acierno, The History of Cardiology (London, 1994), p. 493.

⁹⁷Stephen Hales, Philosophical experiments (London, 1739), pp. 57–94.

⁹⁸Stephen Hales A description of ventilators (London, 1743).

⁹⁹S. Hales (note 93), p. 28.

¹⁰⁰S. Hales (note 93), p. 85.

¹⁰¹S. Hales (note 93), p. 142.

¹⁰²‘Raising mercury’ (in the in-built barometer of the pump) indicates reduced air pressure in the receiver.

¹⁰³S. Hales (note 93), p. 144. The dog died before the experiment was finished. Comments on Hales's attitude to research on live animals is found in Nicolaas A. Rupke, Vivisection in historical perspective (London, 1987), p. 31.

¹⁰⁴S. Hales (note 93), p. 148, Experiment CXV.

¹⁰⁵A similar experiment was often demonstrated in public lectures (see Figure 4, subfigure 27).

¹⁰⁶However, this does not exclude the possibility that Hales had technical concerns about the air pump himself, but it shows that he didn't see these concerns as part of the experiments.

¹⁰⁷Hales's use of an air pump is mentioned, but not discussed in: D.G.C. Allan and Robert Schofield, Stephen Hales, Scientist and philanthropist (London, 1980), p. 39.