Aristotle, Descartes and the New Science: Natural philosophy at the University of Paris, 1600–1740

References

• Compare Randall J.H. The school of Padua and the emergence of modern science Padua 1961 and C. Schmitt, ‘Towards a reassessment of Renaissance Aristotelianism’, History of science, 11 (1973), 153–194. Other important interpretative articles include: P. Kristeller, ‘Renaissance Aristotelianism’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine studies, 6 (1965), 157–174; N. W. Gilbert, ‘Renaissance Aristotelianism and its fate: some observations and problems’, in Naturalism and historical understanding: essays on the philosophy of J. H. Randall (1967, Buffalo), 42–52; and I. During, ‘The impact of Aristotle's scientific ideas in the Middle Ages and at the beginning of the Scientific Revolution’, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 50 (1968), 115–133. For a general discussion of the related literature, see C. Schmitt, Critical survey and bibliography of studies on Renaissance Aristotelianism (1971, Padua).
   Google Scholar
• For the most recent remarks, see Grant E. Aristotelianism and the longevity of the Medieval world view History of science 1978 16 77 92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• A comprehensive list of the vast literature is unnecessary here. Compare especially Kearney H. Scholars and gentlemen London 1970 77 77 et seq.; and R. G. Frank Jnr., ‘Science, medicine and the universities of early-modern England’. History of science. 11 (1973). 194–216, 236–269.
   Google Scholar
• Petersen , P. 1921 . Geschichte desaristotelischen Philosophie im protestantischen Deutschland Leipzig E. G. Ruestow. Physics at secrenteenth and eighteenth century Leiden (1973. The Hague). P. Dibon. La philosophie néederlandaise au siècle d'or, Vol. 1 (1951, Paris) will doubtless prove to be the definitive work on the situation in the Dutch universities, but at present it stops in the mid seventeenth century. A number of Dutch scholars have studied the contribution of particular professors and colleges to the promotion of the new science in the United Provinces but a general study is lacking (compare W. D. Hackmann's review of Ruestow in British journal for the history of science, 8 (1975), 183–185). Hackmann, ‘The growth of science in the Netherlands in the seventeenth and early-eighteenth centuries’, in M. Crosland (ed.), The emergence of science in western Europe (1975, London), is also illuminating on the role of the Dutch universities.
   Google Scholar
• Compare the general remarks in Spink J.S. French free thought from Gassendi to Voltaire London 1960 188 197 For France in particular, see H. Martin, Livres, pouvoirs et société è Paris an XVIIe siècle, 1598–1701 (1969, Paris), 874–883.
   Google Scholar
• The academies founded in the second half of the seventeenth century were essentially centres for the exchange of information among the cognoscenti. In the eighteenth century the gradual establishment of provincial academies and reading societies, sometimes endowed with lectureships, certainly helped to promote the dissemination of new ideas, but even their influence, except in the largest cities, was limited. Among recent studies, see Hahn R. The anatomy of a scientific institution: the Paris Academy of Sciences 1666–1803 London 1971 K. T. Hoppen, The common scientist in the seventeenth century: a study of the Dublin Philosophical Society 1683–1708 (1970, London); R. Schofield, The Lunar Society of Birmingham: a social history of provincial science and industry in eighteenth-century England (1963, Oxford); and D. Roche. Le siècle des lumières en province: académies et académiciens provinciaux 1680–1785 (1978, Paris). The fullest study of the dissemination of the mechanical philosophy in a particular European state still remains D. Mornet, Les origines intellectuelles de la Révolution française 1715–1787 (1930, Paris).
   Google Scholar
• This development on the continent can be directly attributed to the religious quarrels of the sixteenth century. Both Protestants and Catholics felt that the surest way to maintain the loyalty of the élite was to give the young an integrated Christian and arts education in specially designed institutions. For a general introduction to the pedagogical theory of the Reformation era, see Garin E. L'éducation de l'homme moderne , 1968 edn. Paris 170 190 for the new foundations. W. Boyd, The history of western education (1969 edn., London), 183–208. England, on the other hand, stood outside this general development, for the newly-founded grammar schools only taught Latin and Greek grammar and the humanities. The universities' monopoly on science teaching, though, was challenged towards the end of the seventeenth century with the foundation of the dissenting academies; see H. McLachlan, English education under the Test acts, being the history of the non-conformist academies 1662–1820 (1931 Manchester).
   Google Scholar
• An idea of the large number of printed commentaries that exist for the Renaissance period prior to 1650 can be gained from the unfinished study of Lohr C. Index of Aristotelian commentaries Studies in the Renaissance 1974 21 228 289 and Renaissance quarterly, 28 (1975), 689–741, 29 (1976), 714–745. Lohr to date has reached the letter ‘F’. There is no convenient list of surviving manuscript courses, although some are listed by Lohr. The only effective bibliographical source is still the catalogue of manuscripts of the individual national, municipal or university library. The value of the manuscript courses cannot be too greatly emphasised. They are generally verbatim transcriptions, for the professors delivered their course at dictation speed. The manuscript courses, then, are the only accurate record of classroom teaching for the printed courses were doubtless altered and refined for publication.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• The abstracts are generally in-folio or in-quarto and seldom more than a dozen pages. They listed the basic position that the students would be expected to defend in an oral debate of several hours length. The student would have the abstracts printed and distributed among his family and friends. It is for this reason that so many have survived. The source, though, remains virtually unused for the theses are generally catalogued among a library's printed books under the name of the student or the presiding professor. As a result their discovery is often by chance. A well-catalogued collection of German theses, however, is to be found in the Bodleian library, Oxford; for a discussion, see R. Evans, ‘German universities after the Thirty Years War’ (unpublished paper presented to a symposium on universities in early modern Europe held at the Warburg Institute, London, spring 1979). Similar abstracts have survived of theses sustained in the higher faculties of medicine, theology and law. For an idea of the utility of medical theses in tracing the dissemination of new medical developments, see Brockliss L.W.B. Medical teaching at the University of Paris 1600–1720 Annals of science 1978 35 221 251
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• This is so obvious that it seems surprising that no one has studied the problem already. In fact, to the best of my knowledge only one article has been written on the history of physics teaching at the University of Paris in the early-modern period and that was devoted to the eighteenth century Locoarnet Mlle.M. Ter-Menassien Mme. Taton R. L'enseignement et diffusion des sciences au dixhuitième siècle Paris 1963 125 151 Although provided with a useful bibliography of potential source material, it is not an article based upon detailed research. The failure to look at the seventeenth century, too, is typical of the recent research of French early-modernists into the role of the classroom in the dissemination of new ideas and theories in natural philosophy. A number of articles have appeared in the last twenty years on the teaching of natural philosophy in French provincial colleges, especially those run by the Jesuits, but virtually all have concentrated on the century after 1700. Compare, for instance, three articles in Taton's collection cited above: Fr. de Dainville. ‘L'enseignement scientifique dans les collèges de Jésuites’. pp. 27–65; P. Costabel. ‘L'Oratoire de France et ses collèges’. pp. 67–91; and R. Lemoine. ‘L'enseignement scientifique dans les collèges bénédictins’, pp. 101–123. Only one study has been made of science teaching in the seventeenth as well as the eighteenth centuries, and that is the work of De Viguerie on the colleges of the Doctrinaires; unfortunately, though, the source material that has survived in this particular instance is limited (see J. De Viguerie, Une oeuvre d'éducation aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles: Les pères de la doctrine chrétienne en France et en Italie (1975, Paris), 533–573). With this exception historians seeking to trace the decline of Aristotelianism in French colleges and universities must still rely on the brief remarks contained in nineteenth-century institutional studies, but again there is nothing of use for Paris.
   Google Scholar
• This arrangement emphasized the integral nature of the philosophy course. Logic was the tool for a knowledge of physics, and metaphysics provided the fundamental principles. The order of teaching was laid down in the University statutes of 1601: see Réformation de l'Université de Paris Paris 1601 31 32 The professors' conception of the relationship between physics and logic is specifically discussed in section 6.
   Google Scholar
• For the movement of arts teaching into the colleges, see Rashdall H. The universities of Europe in the middle ages Powicke Emden Oxford 1936 1 518 521 3 vols. and 527–531. Further details about the collèges de plein exercice, their number and relative economic position in the seventeenth century can be found in L. W. B. Brockliss, ‘The University of Paris in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries’ (umpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1976, Cambridge University), 76–83.
   Google Scholar
• Information about professors of philosophy has been chiefly extracted from references in account books, visitations and legal briefs to be found in the surviving college archives; see A. N., série M. 79–104 and série M.M. 333–469. The only complete lists of professors of philosophy at Paris are for the years 1691, 1704 and 1705; see Jourdain Ch. Histoire de l'université de Paris aux XVIIe at XVIIIe siècles Paris 1862–1866 269 270 and ‘pièces justicatives’, pp. 138, 145.
   Google Scholar
• A conclusion based upon the following courses and theses: Asseline Eustache Summa philosophiae quadrapartita Paris 1609 110 349 (called Eustatius a S. Paulo, regular, convent des Feuilletants) part iii B. N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 6538A, part ii, Jean Cecil Frey (coll. de Montaigu), ‘Physica’, 1619; Jean Crassot (La Marche), Physica (1618, Paris); Ch. d'Abra de Raconis (Les Grassins), Totius philosophiae hoc est logicae, moralis, physicae et metaphysicae brevis, et accurate, facilisque et clara methodo disposita tractatio (2 vols., 1622 ed., Paris), II, part i; B.M., Caen, Ms. 70, part ii, Guillaume Mazure (Lisieux), ‘Physica’, 1627/8; Nicolas de Castille, ‘Concl. phil.’ under Sebastien de Saint-Martin (Navarre), B.U.P., collection encadrée; B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii, Jacques du Chevreul (Harcourt), ‘Physica’, 1629, J. C. Frey, Universae philosophiae compendium (1633, Paris), part iii, pp. 134–359; and B.M. Cherbourg, Ms. 23, part ii, J. du Chevreul, ‘Physica’, 1635.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Crassot Physica Paris 1618 24 24 Du Chevreul, B. M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii, ff. 334–335; and Frey (footnote 20), 134.
   Google Scholar
• The cause of the tides, for instance, was generally put down to the influence of the moon, on the grounds that this was the most commonly held view from the time of Pliny and had been taught by Aquinas. D'Abra de Raconis for one discussed a number of views before accepting the traditional interpretation. These included the belief that the sea had its own principle of movement, the idea that the answer lay in the configuration of the sea-bed, and Seneca's view that the earth breathed like a whale. D'Abra de Raconis Totius philosophiae hoc est logicae, moralis, physicae et metaphysicae brevis, et accurate, facilisque et clara methodo disposita tractatio Paris 1622 II 455 459 2 vols. part i see also Asseline (footnote 20), 238–239; Du Chevreul, B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii, ff. 770–778.
   Google Scholar
• B. M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii, f. 359: ‘Platoni in quovis opere coeunt duo [principia]: materia et forma. Materia ordine substernitur, forma in materiam inducitur: doctrina pluribus explicat in Phaedone et Timaeo … obiter adnotabis Platonem, ut passim … Aristoteles, pro principiis posuisse magnum et parvum. Sed his significantur materia et forma’. Du Chevreul in his attempt to underplay the differences between Plato and Aristotle, was working in a tradition at the University of Paris that began with Jacques Charpentier in the mid-sixteenth century. Compare Charpentier J. Platonis cum Aristotele in universa philosophia comparatio Paris 1573 The fact that no other professor whose course has survived shows a similar interest may be fortuitous. Certainly according to C. P. Goujet, Mémoire historique et littéraire sur le Collège Royal (3 vols., 1758, Paris), Vol. 2, 274–286, Du Chevreul's colleague and mentor at the college d'Harcourt, Pierre Padet, was an enthusiastic supporter of Platonism.
   Google Scholar
• Interestingly, there is no reference either to the Coimbra commentators. This may reflect the general hostility of the University towards the Jesuits as an order, that stemmed in part from the latter's Ultramontism and in part from their wealth and influence in early-modern France. The University and the many Jesuit colleges were also in competition for students. Compare Douarche A. L'Université de Paris at les Jésuites Paris 1888 passim.
   Google Scholar
• B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii 363 – 383 . and 435–492.
   Google Scholar
• Crassot . 1618 . Physica 236 – 320 . Paris Frey, B.N., Fonds Latin 6538A, ff. 238–262.
   Google Scholar
• Donahue , W.H. 1975 . “ The solid planetary spheres in post-Copernican natural philosophy ” . In The Copernican achievement Edited by: Westman , R.S. 244 – 284 . Berkeley
   Google Scholar
• Asseline , Compare . 1609 . Summa philosophiae quadrapartita 179 – 179 . Paris Frey (footnote 20), 240; and Du Chevreul, B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii, ff. 627–635.
   Google Scholar
• Capreolus , Jacobus . 1623 . Sphaera 32 – 43 . Paris [Du Chevreul] 132–135. Du Chevreul accepted the reality of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn's rings, but rejected the existence of sun-spots; these were identified as satellite planets.
   Google Scholar
• Crassot . 1618 . Physica 307 – 311 . Paris esp. p. 309: ‘Adhibeatur etiam oculare instrumentum ad feliciorem maculae illius perceptionem’.
   Google Scholar
• Crassot . 1618 . Physica 307 – 307 . Paris
   Google Scholar
• Crassot . 1618 . Physica 475 – 477 . Paris What Crassot understood by ‘illustratae impressiones’ is not revealed by the text. Possibly he was referring to the opinion that comets were formed by the condensation of celestial liquid and that their brightness was attributable to the rays of the sun. This view is briefly discussed in section 3. Certainly Crassot rejected the idea that comets were literally on fire; they could not be formed by ‘accensas impressiones’.
   Google Scholar
• Crassot . 1618 . Physica 273 – 306 . Paris and 311–318.
   Google Scholar
• Compare for instance Du Chevreul, B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 23, part ii, ff. 472–473; Ms. 24, ff. 677–678. Also Crassot Physica Paris 1618 328 328 To the Paris Aristotelians the chemists' elements were both empirically and philosophically unsound. All three of their elements contained fire for this would be added to the residue of any substance resolved. But if this were the case, then the chemists' elements would not have the requisite balance of qualities, so vital for explaining the behaviour of physical phenomena.
   Google Scholar
• Frey . 1633 . Universae philosophiae compendium 244 – 244 . Paris He did admit, though, that the chemists' elements could be secondary.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Du Chevreul, B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, part ii 648 – 649 . Asseline (footnote 20), 284; and D'Abra de Raconis (footnote 20), Vol. 2, part i, 411–416. The latter believed that the influence of the heavens on the formation of rocks and stones was only probable.
   Google Scholar
• Frey . 1633 . Universae philosophiae compendium 263 – 264 . Paris Hae omnes a natura fiunt per varios vapores a calore elevatos, et in materiam impressos, et virtute caelesti formatos: quod ita ostenditur: 1° videmus varios vapores et exhalationes in nubibus varias exprimere figuras. Si igitur vento non dissiparentur, aut per novos vapores elevatos qui priorem difficiunt [difindunt?] figuram nubium, aut si esset natura quaedam tenax et comprehensiva quemadmodum est in terra, sine dubio figurae illae permanerent. 2°: Quemadmodum de nostris dictum est vis caelorum et constellationum saepe in semine humano monstri similem efformat figuram, propterea quod talis constellatio generativa et conformativa alterius figurae quam humanae; ita etiam saepe in aliis animalibus, ut in porcellis, vaccis figuram firme facit capitis human[or]um, non tantum propter commixtionem seminum, sed etiam sine ista commixtione, imo etiam sine imaginatione: ita ex variis vaporibus elevatis, et in molli materia, qualis est lapidum pretiosorum effigiat virtus illa figuras … Quemadmodum autem sigillum, molli cerae facile imprimit figuram; ita enim materiae in visceribus terrae molli antequam concresect facile Natura efformet et quasi sigillet.
   Google Scholar
• Brockliss , Compare . 1978 . Medical teaching at the University of Paris 1600–1720 . Annals of science , 35 : 241 – 244 . The date of Frey's doctorate is given in Bib.Fac.Med., Ms. 11, Faculty minutes 1612–1622, f. 411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sections 3 and 4 of this paper are based on information revealed in the following sources: Le Rées François Summa philosophica Paris 1642 3 (Beauvais) 4 vols. and 4; Bib. Maz., Ms. 3536, part ii. Jacques Desperiers (Lisieux). ‘Commentaria in physicam Aristotelis’, 1648: B.U.P., Ms. 576, end-piece, Fr. Sanson, ‘Concl. phil.’. 1649, under Desperiers; Claude Frassen (regular, convent des Cordeliers). Philosophia academica (1668, Paris), part iii; Etienne de Melles (Sorbonne-Plessis), Novum totius philosophiae syntagma in IV partes distributum ad usum scholae (6 vols., 1669, Paris), vols. 2 and 3; B.N., Dossiers Bleus (Ognies), R. Pucelle, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1669 under Jean du Hamel (Sorbonne-Plessis); B.N., Imp., Rp 108, Ph. Gouyet. ‘Concl. phil.’, 1672, under Du Hamel. Pierre Barbay (Beauvais), Commentarius in Aristotelis physicam (2 vols., 2nd ed., 1676, Paris), B.M., Tours, Ms. 770, part ii, Jean Courtillier (Montaigu), ‘Physica’, 1679/80 (this manuscript was destroyed in World War II, and I have relied on the partial transcription in E. Gilson, La pensée mediévale dans le système cartésien (1930, Paris), 324–333); B.U.P., Ms. 1050, Claude Flamand (La Marche), ‘Compendium physicorum’, 1687; and J. Du Hamel, Philosophia universalis, sive commentarius in unirersam Aristotelis philosophiam ad usum scholarum comparatum (5 vols., 1705, Paris), vols. 4 and 5 (Du Hamel's cahiers were published some twenty years after he gave up his chair).
   Google Scholar
• Rées , Le . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 3 , 432 – 470 . Paris and vol. 4, 14–36; the latter section is devoted to a discussion on comets.
   Google Scholar
• These satellite planets were known as Bourbons, a name given them by the French astronomer, Jean Tardeus, who claimed to have discovered them. The professors who definitely supported this theory were: De Melles Novum totius philosophiae syntagma in IV partes distributum ad usum scholae Paris 1669 III 42 42 Flamand, B.U.P., Ms. 1050, f. 149; Du Hamel (footnote 42), vol. 5, 46. For Desperiers's tentative acceptance of the reality of sun-spots, Bib.Maz., Ms. 3536, part ii, f. 408.
   Google Scholar
• Le Rées . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 3 , 14 – 36 . Paris
   Google Scholar
• Bib. Maz. Ms. 3536, part ii 506 – 514 .
   Google Scholar
• Barbay . 1676 . Commentarius in Aristotelis physicam , 2nd ed. Vol. 2 , 21 – 21 . Paris ‘In coelis praeter stellas conspicabiles, multae sint aliae, quae propter nimiam exiguitatem fugiunt oculos et telescopium quae possunt certis temporibus multae ad se invicem accedere favente premeabilitate coeli planetici, quea sic approximatae postea speciem habent alicujus stellae justae magnitudinis: quae si recedant a se invicem iterum fugiunt’.
   Google Scholar
• Barbay . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 1 , 407 – 407 . Paris 4 vols. et seq: ‘Ideo quamvis ratio naturalis nihil convincat nos, tamen propter solam sacrarum paginarum authoritatem, systema Tychonicum Copernicano anteponimus, in captivitatem redigentes intellectum in obsequium Christi, cui hoc nostrum qualecumque opusculum tota mente consecramus’.
   Google Scholar
• Of the protessors whose course has survived, the first to discuss the mechanical philosophy was Jean du Hamel. One of his students sustained a thesis attacking mechanism in 1669 (see Pucelle Summa philosophica Paris 1642 3 4 vols. There may well have been others who did so before Du Hamel, however, whose course has been lost.
   Google Scholar
• That Descartes was attacked more thoroughly than Gassendi can be attributed to a number of factors. First, Descartes set out to produce a physics that would supplant Aristotle as the dominant influence on collegiate teaching; his physical works then were a mirror-image of the Aristotelian texts. Second, Descartes remained much more closely wedded to many Aristotelian assumptions, especially the plenum. Descartes therefore was the heretic, Gassendi the infidel, and the orthodox always fear the former the more. For a good discussion, see Gilson Summa philosophica Paris 1642 3 4 vols. passim. Thirdly, the direction of the attack doubtless reflected the fact that in the decades after 1660, of the two philosophies, Cartesianism commanded the greater support in the capital. Compare what is said in section 7 below.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Flamand, B.U.P., Ms. 1050, ff. 168–191 Hamel Du Summa philosophica Paris 1642 4 264 363 4 vols. Ofcourse Du Hamel may have included this appendix from an earlier date; he was certainly discussing Descartes's conception of motion in 1669 (see Pucelle (footnote 42)).
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 6 – 39 . Paris 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 6 – 6 . Paris 4 vols. ‘Principia physica sunt ea. sine quibus res naturales nec esse, nec concipi possunt in suo fieri et componi’.
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 18 – 26 . Paris 4 vols. Before tackling Descartes. Du Hamel discussed and rejected the principles of the illustrious’ Gassendi.
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 27 – 31 . Paris 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 29 – 29 . Paris 4 vols. Supponamus cum Cartesio particulas, ex quibus conflatus est orbis universus, fuisse cubicas; deinde ex angulorum detritone [detritu?] factas esse rotundas: ita ut ramenta detrita possint omnia globulorum interstitia replere: dico copiam omnem ramentorum se habere ad omnes globulos, sicut decem ad undecim, quia iuxta Mathematicos se habet cubus ad globum inscriptum, sicut unum et viginti ad undecim. Jam ergo si temporis progressu major ramentorum copia ex globulis deteratur, ut deteri fatetur Cartesianus, brevi augebitur copia ramentorum, ut omnam globulorum molem adaequet. Jam vero si media pars ramentorum replendis globulorum interstitiis insumatur. ut insumi necesse est, altera tantum medietas supererit ad solis globum conficendum. Cum ergo globuli et ramenta omnem universitatem ex aequo impleant, et sol habeat dimidiam partem ramentorum. sequitur quod sol debeat occupare quartem hujus vorticis partem. quodque debeat se habere ad illum vortieem. sicut unum ad quatuor: hoc autem posito sequitur globum solis continere omnes planetas terramque ipsam, quae ex numero planetarum est.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Descartes René Oeuvres philosophiques Alquié F. Paris 1963-1973 1 343 349 3 vols. and vol. 3, 249–252. Although Descartes says that primary matter is divided into equal parts in Les principes de la philosophie, he never says that matter is divided into cubes. If this, then, is not necessarily so. Du Hamel's argument collapses. It is quite possible to imagine a configuration of first and second elements resulting from the attrition of primary matter where the amount of the first element is not given by the volume ratio of a cube and an inscribed sphere.
   Google Scholar
• Huet , P.D. 1695 . Censura philosophiae cartesianae , 4th ed. 199 – 200 . Paris ch. 6
   Google Scholar
• Gilson . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 3 , 328 – 328 . Paris 4 vols. ‘Primo enim supponit eandem nune esse motus quantitatem quae fuit in prima mundi genesi, cum tamen novo quotidie generatur. Secundo placet illi motum ab uno in aliud corpus transferri cum tamen motus non possit migrare a subjecto in subjectum, sed corpori motu adhaereat, ut quies corpori quieto’.
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 334 – 334 . Paris 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Descartes , Compare . 1963-1973 . Oeuvres philosophiques Edited by: Alquié , F. Vol. 3 , 185 – 195 . Paris 3 vols. That Descartes differentiates absolutely determination and quantity of force of motion comes out clearly in his third law of nature concerning the conservation and transference of force.
   Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 342 – 342 . Paris 4 vols. ‘Nam, generatim loquendo, corpora quae moventur, non resistunt moventi, nisi per naturae suae gravitatem, aut medii densitatem: Atqui in mathematica corpora majora, neque habent majorem gravitatem, quia seorsim ab omni gravitate, neque majorem medii densitatem, quia considerantur scorsim ab omni medio per suam densitatem resistente’.
   Google Scholar
• For a recent discussion of Descartes's position, see Clarke Desmond M. The impact rules of Descartes Physics Isis 1977 68 55 66 for the philosopher's own description of ‘grandeur’, see Descartes (footnote 58), vol. 3, 191–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamel , Du . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 4 , 340 – 351 . Paris 4 vols. Du Hamel makes the same objections to Descartes's mathematical laws as Flamand. His own ‘corrected’ laws of percussion are as follows. (1) A body in motion in collision with another body at rest communicates to that body its motion and remains at rest in turn. (2) Two bodies in collision at equal speeds will be reflected in the opposite direction at equal speeds. (3) Two bodies in collision at different speeds will be reflected in the opposite direction at different speeds except now the faster of the two before the collision is now the slower. (4) Two bodies moving in the same direction at different speeds will continue to move in the same direction after collision but their velocity will be interchanged. (5) Where a body in motion is in collision with an inflexible body at rest (for example, a brick-wall?), then the former will be reflected with its original velocity. (6) Where two bodies in motion meet a third at rest, the velocity of the former will be imparted to the latter in its entirety and the two former will now remain at rest in their turn. These six laws, said Du Hamel, were true, mathematically speaking. The first was also true physically speaking if the bodies were of equal weight. Du Hamel gives no source for his laws; nor does he explain his conclusions. The laws as stated suggest he was working from the assumption that bodies in a vacuum or at rest have no power of resistance per se, and that the quantity of force is determined solely by the velocity. He seems to accept, however, that in any collision the quantity of force in toto must be conserved.
   Google Scholar
• Gilson . 1642 . Summa philosophica Vol. 3 , 328 – 329 . Paris 4 vols. [Cartesius] vult corpus motum dum aliud offendit tantum ei sui motus vel impetus impertiri dum ambo aequa celeritate promoveantur, tantumque asserit uni corpori motus decedere quantum alteri accedit. Sed id experientiae non videtur consonum, nam si duo corpora aequalia aequalibili motu impulsa sibi occurrant in ipsa collisione quiescant neque unum alteri suum motum communicabit.
   Google Scholar
• ‘Materia subtilis est principium activum motui instrumentale et secundarium’. Thus Flamand, B.U.P., Ms. 1050, f. 19; for a similar comment, see Hamel Du Summa philosophica Paris 1642 4 30 30 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Bib. Maz. Ms. 3536 224 – 225 . ‘Aer quidem tenuissimus est et qui facile rarescit ut vel ipsi oculi percipiant a thermometro’. The thermometre in question is presumably Galileo's thermoscope.
   Google Scholar
• For example Frassen Summa philosophica Paris 1642 3 265 269 4 vols. part iii
   Google Scholar
• The same can be said of Du Hamel. He too preferred the Cartesian explanation of Torricelli's experiments and the cause of the tides; but he rejected Descartes's theory of magnetism. See Hamel Du Summa philosophica Paris 1642 4 206 208 4 vols. 310–311; vol. 5, 172.
   Google Scholar
• This is a conclusion based upon the following courses and theses Pourchot Edmonde Institutio philosophica Paris 1695 2 (Mazarin) 4 vols. and 3 G. Dagoumer (Lisieux), Philosophia ad usum scholae accommodata (6 vols., 1757 ed., Lyon; 1st ed. 1702), vols. 4–6; B.N., Fonds Franc., Ms. 21736, ff. 248–265; B.N., Imp., R 894; Bib.Maz., Imp., 10371v: four sets of these sustained in 1707 under Jean Gabriel Petit de Montempuys (Sorbonne-Plessis); B.N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 9963, ff. 47–52, ‘Conel. phil.’, 1707, under Egide Le Blond (La Marche); Bib.Fac.Med., Montpellier, Ms. 547, Gaspard Poitevin (Beauvais), ‘Physica’, 1712 (at the end, a thesis sustained under the same); B.S.G., Ms.2081–2082, Jerome Besoigne (Sorbonne-Plessis), ‘Physica’, 1713/14; B.N., Imp., R 6824, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1713 under De Montempuys; B.U.P., U 17, no. 47, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1717, under Jean Denyse (Montaigu); B.N., Imp., RZ 947, ‘Concl. phil.’, under De Montempuys, 1717; B.M., Meaux, Ms. 34–35, Antoine de Bacq (Mazarin), ‘Physica’, 1718; J. Denyse, La nature expliquée par le raisonnement et l'expérience (1719, Paris); B.N., Imp., R6620 and RZ 2543, two theses under Poitevin 1724, 1726; B.N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 11175–11177, Poitevin, ‘Physica’, 1731/2; B.N., Imp., R 8916 and RZ 951, two theses under Poitevin 1732; G. Guillier, Candidatus artium ubi de rhetorica et philosophia eiusque singulis partibus necnon de sphaera et mathesi tractatur, modoque respondendi et disputandi in scholis dum theses propugnantur (1732, Paris), 183–235; B.M., Vire, Ms. 38–41, Pierre Le Monnier (Harcourt), ‘Physica’, 1734; B.N., Imp., R 8922; Fonds Franc., Ms. 29746, f. 4; Pièces Originales, no. 1672; three theses sustained under Dominique Rivard (Beauvais), 1738, 1740, 1741; and P. Le Monnier, Cursus philosophicus ad scholarum usum accommodatus (6 vols., 1750, Paris), vols. 3–6 (Le Monnier had retired by 1750 as he is described on the fly-leaf as emeritus professor).
   Google Scholar
• Jourdain . 1862–1866 . Histoire de l'université de Paris aux XVIIe at XVIIIe siècles 269 – 270 . Paris list of professors, 1691. Pourchot was professor at Mazarin from 1690, but according to Michaud, Biographie universelle, vol. 34, 229–230, he held the chair of philosophy at Les Grassins from 1677. For Pourchot's career at Mazarin, see A.N., série H3 2825, college accounts 1688–98, no page.
   Google Scholar
• Jourdain . 1862–1866 . Histoire de l'université de Paris aux XVIIe at XVIIIe siècles 269 – 270 . Paris Du Hamel (footnote 42), vol. 5, appendix, ‘Quaedam recentiorum philosophicae ac praesertim (‘artesii propositiones damnatae ac prohibitae’, 33. Among the proscribed propositions was the belief that the way to knowledge was through universal doubt, that the demands of evidence should be given the priority over the demands of faith, and that matter was defined by extension. Du Hamel, in addition, reveals that the crown had been worried as early as 1671 that anti-Catholic positions were being upheld in the University, but he gives no further details. The outcome in this earlier instance seems to have been that the Faculty of Theology asked the Parlement of Paris to revive an edict of 1624 originally aimed at Paracelsianism that outlawed the teaching of all but Aristotelian philosophy (Du Hamel, vol. 5, appendix. 19). (footnote 42).
   Google Scholar
• For details on all three manoeuvres by the Sorbonne. see Jourdain Histoire de l'université de Paris aux XVIIe at XVIIIe siècles Paris 1862–1866 269 270 ‘pièces justicatives’, 129–153. J. G. Petit de Montempuys. Journal des contradictions que j'ai ê [sic] è soutenir sur ma philosophie de la part de la maison de la Sorbonne depuis l'année 1704 jusqu'en 1707’. The society of the Sorbonne had the power of surveillance over the Collège du Sorbonne-Plessis from the fact that it appointed the principal.
   Google Scholar
• Morus , M. 1716 . Veri sciendi methodus Paris preface (unoriginated): ‘In physicis vero nostris scholis nihil aliud audias, quan materiam subtilem, globosam, striatam, imaginaria spectra quae numquam in rerum natura comparant; neque apud plerosque aliud nune est Physica nostra, quam commentarius in phaenaticam Cartesii de origine Mundi fabulam’. There were professors royal teaching all parts of the arts course at Paris in the late seventeenth century, plus two languages not taught in the Collèges de plein exercise, Hebrew and Syriac. They had been mainly established in the early sixteenth century by Francis I through the influence of humanists like Budé, and formed a group of professors completely outside University control and appointed by the crown. There were two professors in philosophy. See A. Lefranc, Histoire du collège de France depuis ses origines jusqu'è la fin du premier empire (1913, Paris), passim.
   Google Scholar
• B.S.G., Ms. 2081 80 – 90 . Du Hamel (footnote 42), vol. 4, 16-18.
   Google Scholar
• Besoigne B.S.G. Ms. 2081 74 – 75 . Corporum Physicorum natura, discrimina, effectus explicari possunt absque formis substantialibus a materia distinctis; scilicet per solam mechanicam partium texturam et dispositionem commode explicantur quaecumque spectabit corpora inanimata … Formae substantiales seu potius essentiales corporum nihil aliud esse videntur, quam certa totius corporis eiusque partium dispositio, seu accidentium et qualitatum congeries. Similar views are expressed in all the courses. For a general discussion of the principles of physics, compare Besoigne, ff. 61–171; De Montempuys, B.N., Imp., R 894, pp. 10–11; Du Bacq, B.M., Meaux, Ms. 34, pp. 1–322; and Le Monnier, B.M., Vire, Ms. 38, ff. 13–205.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Besoigne. B.S.G., Ms. 2081 72 – 74 . Pourchot (footnote 74), vol. 2, 116–129.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Du Bacq, B.M., Meaux, Ms. 34 77 – 103 . Poitevin, B.N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 11177, Tract. V, no pag.; Le Monnier, B.M., Vire, Ms. 41, ff. 2–264.
   Google Scholar
• This was a view held by the majority of Paris Aristotelians irrespective of their belief in the erystalline sphere Asseline Compare Asseline Eustache Summa philosophiae quadrapartita Paris 1609 179 189 (called Eustatius a S. Paulo, regular, convent des Feuilletants) Flamand, B.U.P., Ms. 1050, f. 341. The explanation suggests a Nominalist influence upon the professors. Only Le Rées (footnote 42), vol. 4, 459, accepted the Thomist position that the heavenly bodies were moved by angels.
   Google Scholar
• B.N., Imp., R 894 16 – 16 . Globus terrae, e mari eminens, multigenus multiferque est. Sed quum partes ejus intimae et mediae nullis sint perviae experimentis, de solo velut cortice conjicere licet duris illum, ramosis et uncinatis corpusculis constare; quo vulnerato eruuntur fossilia duplicis generis, metalla atque mineralia. Illa ductilia sunt et liquabilia; haec neutra, vel altera solummodo. Sales fiunt ex aculeatis rigidisque columellis: olea ex implexis et adhaerentibus ramulis: lapides ex viscoso et pingui humore. rigidisque salium partibus cum terra implicatis.
   Google Scholar
• The fullest evidence that the professors had absorbed the work of figures such as Mariotte, Roemer and Huygens is to be found in the courses after 1710. Compare Besoigne, B.S.G., Ms. 2081, ff. 160–168, 176–189; De Bacq, B.B., Meaux, Ms. 34, pp. 147–383; Poitevin, B.N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 11175, Disp. II, no pag., Ms. 11177, Tract. I, part ii, no pag.; Le Monnier, B.M., Vire, Ms. 38, ff. 278–287, Ms. 39, ff. 364–462. The various Cartesian critiques of Descartes's theories of movement and light are discussed in Mouy P. Ledéveloppement de la physique cartésienne 1646–1712 Paris 1934 154 156 192–214, 292–308.
   Google Scholar
• Pourchot and Pourchot , Edmonde . 1695 . Institutio philosophica Vol. 2 , 317 – 341 . Paris (Mazarin) 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• B.N., Imp., R 894 14 – 14 . ‘Gravium descensus recte attribuitur verticoso caelestis materiae motui, quae hypothesis difficiles tamen explicatus habet’.
   Google Scholar
• B.S.G., Ms. 2081 207 – 221 .
   Google Scholar
• Most of these theories are discussed in Mouy Ledéveloppement de la physique cartésienne 1646–1712 Paris 1934 30 31 133–134, 157, 187–192, 200–201, 310–314, For Varignon's ideas, see P. Varignon, Nouvelles conjectures de la pesanteur (1690, Paris), esp. pp. 1–48.
   Google Scholar
• B.M., Vire. Ms. 40 5 – 53 . ‘Gravitas corporum univers[or]um repeti debet a materia coelesti’. The quotation is taken from Le Monnier (footnote 74), vol. 4 492. Le Monnier's discussion of gravity in his printed course is virtually word for word identical to the 1734 transcription.
   Google Scholar
• B.M., Vire, Ms. 39 126 – 127 . ‘Vero attractio sit per impressionem ut alibi probarum fuit; et impulsio cursus planetae versus aliquod corpus impossibiis est in principiis illius autoris; ut patet esse ex quo a Newtone remota fuerit materia quaevis, aquae planetae possint et in se invicem et in solem impelli’. The translation given in the text is rather free. The Latin of the transcription is grammatically peculiar, but this may simply reflect the illegibility of the manuscript where the endings of words were difficult to decipher.
   Google Scholar
• Poitevin, B.N., Imp., RZ 2543, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1726; B.N., Imp., R 8916, ‘Concl, phil.’, 1732, p. 10; B.N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 11177, section on gravity, light and elasticity, 1732, no pag.; Rivard, B.N., Imp., R 8922, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1741, p. 11; Le Monnier, B.M., Vire, Ms. 39, ff. 462–511, 1734. Poitevin originally accepted the Cartesian position: compare Bib. Fac.Med., Montpellier, Ms. 546, end, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1712, p. 10. Le Monnier believed that Newton misread his own experiment. When light falls onto the surface of an object it does not split up into its constituent parts. Rather the more oblique the angle at which the ray falls, the greater the speed with which it is refracted; thus the cause of colour is to be sought in the speed of refraction. This was basically Malebranche's theory: see Mouy Le développement de la physique cartésienne 1646–1712 Paris 1934 305 308
   Google Scholar
• B.N., Imp., RZ 2543 10 – 10 . Lumen instanti propagari, colores nihil aliud esse, quam motus a corpore lucido impressi modificationem, non constat. Illa enim opinio observationibus circa primi Jovis satellitis eclipses factis, haec vero celebris Angli experimentis tam valide impugnatur, ut difficile defendi possint. Haec est autem solertissimi istius autoris sententia de coloribus a lumine ortis. Radii luminis antequam refractionem aut reflexionem passi fuerint, inter se differunt. Si eos alios ab aliis separes, alii. quocumque refringantur, aut reflectantur modo, rubicundum v.g. colorem semper exhibebunt, alii aureum, alii caeruleum, etc. Omnibus rursus conjunctis albitudo nascetur: Juxta hanc hypothesim charta alba cernetur, quia radios cujuslibet generis remittet; mare, caeruleum; aurum, flavum; quia illud radios caeruleos, hoe vero flavus, aliis fere onmibus extinetis aut transmissis reflectet.
   Google Scholar
• Compare De Montempuys, B.N., Imp., R. 894 Concl. phil. 1707 11 11
   Google Scholar
• B.S.G., Ms. 2081 92 – 94 .
   Google Scholar
• B.S.G., Ms. 2081 94 – 94 . Nam corpora omnia vel lucem emittunt, ut sol, stellae fixae, et ignis, veleum transmittunt, ut coeli, et aer, vel remittunt, ut terra et planetae: atque corpora quae lumen emittunt ea videntur magna ex parte fieri ex primo elemento cujus motus pernicillimus est: quae lumen transmittunt et vocantur diaphana, videntur constare globulis secundi elementi, quorum contiguitas et raritas ad transmittendum lumen est aptissimae: quae tandum lumen reflectunt, et opacae [sic] dicuntur, abundant crassiori materia ut patebit ex dicendis.
   Google Scholar
• B.N., Imp., RZ2543 Concl. phil. 1726 10 10 Bib. Fac. Med., Montpellier, Ms. 546, end, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1712, p. 10.
   Google Scholar
• B.M., Vire, Ms. 38 159 – 160 . Sine vacuolis philosophiciis inter materiae partes quasi disseminatis, varii motus, quales deprehenduntur in hac mundo, forent impossibiles. Per unum enim ejususmodi [sic] motibus, partes quaedam materiae separantur a se in vicem secundum determinatione oppositas, sicut contigit in corporum reflexionibus, et ut agnoscendum est in omnibus fluidis; atque motus quo materiae partes separantur per se in vicem secundum determinatione oppositas, impossibilis est absque vacuolis philosophicis. Concerning the translation given in the text, see the remarks at footnote 92.
   Google Scholar
• B.M., Vire, Ms. 40 92 – 103 .
   Google Scholar
• B.M., Vire, Ms. 39 311 – 323 . Impossibilis enim est materiae portio, quae non componatur ex infinites partibus substantialibus diversemode figuralibus’.
   Google Scholar
• The first Newtonian to teach physics at the University of Paris was Pierre Sigorgne, professor at Le Sorbonne-Plessis from the early 1740s. By the end of the decade Newton's influence was spreading fast. Rivard for one had been converted. Sigorgne P. Institutions newtoniennes ou introduction è la philosophie de M. Newton Paris 1747 idem, Astronomiae physicae juxta Newton principia breviarum, methodo scholastica ad usum studiosae iuventutis (1749, Paris); B.N., Imp., R 8887, Rivard, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1749. In the light of this development the 1750 version of Le Monnier's physics contained a much more sophisticated attack on Newton. Attraction, he claimed, was a figment of the imagination. If Newton's system was correct and all bodies attracted one another then the planets would not move in ellipses; only a mechanical explanation based on the plenum fitted the known movements of the heavens and met the demands of scientific rationality. Le Monnier was still teaching in the 1740s, so this expanded attack on Newton was doubtless contained in his course towards the end of his career. In these years, too, it would seem that Le Monnier continued to feel that Newton had deceived himself with his experiments on colour (Le Monnier (footnote 74), vol. 4, 71–105, and vol. 5, 406–434). No research has ever been done on the dissemination of Newtonianism at the University of Paris; this is a study in which I am at present engaged.
   Google Scholar
• Barbay , P. 1675 . “ Disputatio proemialis ” . In Commentarius in Aristotelis logicam 34 – 34 . Paris ‘Nos quanquam authores omnes dogmaticos veneramur, praesertimque Platonem, Aristotelem, et sanctam Thomam, in nullius tamen verba iuramus … philosophi siquidem est mentem suam ratione potius quam authoritate confirmare’. It was customary to preface the logic course with a general account of the nature and purpose of philosophy. Barbay's views were anticipated by many of his predecessors: Compare Crassot (footnote 20), 47: Du Chevreul, B.M., Cherbourg, Ms. 24, ff. 334–335; and De Melles (footnote 42), vol. 1 ‘Disputatio prima’. 56 (De Melles also used the nullius in verba tag.)
   Google Scholar
• For example Raconis D'Abra de Summa philosophiae quadrapartita Paris 1609 1 17 17 Frey (footnote 20), 1–10; De Melles (footnote 42). vol. 1. 57–58; and Du Hamel (footnote 42), vol. 1. 5–20.
   Google Scholar
• Barbay . 1675 . “ Disputatio proemialis ” . In Commentarius in Aristotelis logicam 6 – 6 . Paris ‘Philosophia est cognitio certa et evidens rerum naturalium per causas’. Compare also Crassot (footnote 20), 26–34; Desperiers. Bib. Maz. Ms. 3536, part ii, ff. 1–6, 1648; and Du Hamel (footnote 42), vol. 4, 2.
   Google Scholar
• B.U.P., Ms. 756 Desperiers Jacques Logica 1648 28 28 ‘Logica est necessaria secundum quid et ad melius, nempe promptius, facilius, certiusque alias scientias comparandas adeo ut quamquam absolute sine logica aliae scientiae comparari possint, id tamen ita difficile est quia sumus hebetudine ingenii et veritatis percipiendae difficultate, ut saltem omnium scientiarum coetus sine logica artificiali moraliter loquendo comparari non possit’. For similar views, see B.U.P., Ms. 579, Jacques du Chevreul, ‘Commentarius in universalem dialecticam’, 1623, preface, no fol.; De Melles (footnote 42), vol. 1, 124; and Barbay, (footnote 104), 40.
   Google Scholar
• B.N., Imp., RZ 2543 Concl. phil Poitevin 1726 4 4 Philosophi demonstrata Entis supremi existentia, substantias et a Deo et a mente sua diversas existere recte probant, eas corpora dixere, totumque ex illis constans, Mundum aspectabilem. Sed hae generali cognitione non contenti, quid sit corporibus illis commune, quid singulis proprium, quae sit diversorum, qui ab eis oriri videntur, effectuum causa detegere conati sunt. Cum aliud non sit felicis in hac inquisitione successus signum, quam principiorum simplicitas, eorumque cum effectibus explicandis conformatis; ubi haec assecuti sunt, indagationi suae finem imponere possunt. Compare also: De Montempuys, B.N., Imp., R 894, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1707, p. 10; Besoigne, B.S.G., Ms. 2081, ff. 43–48; and Le Monnier, B.M., Vire, Ms. 38, ff. 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Gravity as a quality inherent in matter was simply assumed to act equally on every material part or point of an object. If the effect of the medium was discounted. therefore, whatever an object's size or density, it would fall neither faster nor slower than any other object Barbay Compare Summa philosophica Paris 1642 2 99 100 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Le Monnier had rejected Descartes's theory of comets as early as 1734 on the grounds of its observational insufficiency, but at that date he remained uncommitted as to how they actually moved. By the end of his teaching career, however, he had definitely accepted that comets had an orbital path. Compare B.M., Vire, Ms. 39, ff. 283–304; and Le Monnier Institutio philosophica Paris 1695 4 253 260 4 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Le Monnier Brevis tractatus mechanicae 205 287 B.M., Vire, Ms. 39
   Google Scholar
• Only an elementary knowledge however. A student would have been adequately equipped if he knew the basic procedures of arithmetic, the primary principles of Euclidian geometry and the symbolic use of algebraic notation. A brief exposition of Euclidian geometry was given by the Cartesian professors before the physics course (see Pourchot Institutio philosophica Paris 1695 1 481 536 4 vols. Besoigne, B.S.G., Ms. 2081, ff. 2–38; De Bacq, B.M. Meaux, Ms. 34, pp. 8–26; B.U.P., Ms. 1051. part ii, Moreau (coll, de Montaigu), ‘Brevis geometriae tractatus’, 1739 (no physics course survives)). Le Monnier, B.M., Vire, Ms. 39, ff. 1–197, introduced his physics course with a ‘Brevis arithmeticae tractatio’. In his 1750 course, on the other hand, he provided instruction in arithmetic, elementary algebra, Euclidian geometry and trigonometry, doubtless a sign of the growing role of mathematics in physics teaching at the start of the Newtonian epoch. It must be pointed out though that trigonometry was apparently taught in isolation after the ethics course (see Le Monnier (footnote 74), vol. 2; vol. 3, 289–370; and vol.4, part ii). According to Rivard, Elémens de géométrie, avec un abrégé d'arithmétique et d'algèbre (1732, Paris), preface, the elements of mathematics were taught at the time of publication in the majority of the University's philosophy classes. Certainly the handbook for examinees in philosophy prepared by Guillier (footnote 74), published in the same year, had a section. pp. 249–262. on arithmetic and elementary geometry.
   Google Scholar
• The diagrams to be found in Besoigne, B.S.G., Ms. 2081–2082 are a particularly fine example. The Aristotelians used such diagrams but only in their printed texts Compare Du Hamel Summa philosophica Paris 1642 4 4 vols. and 5
   Google Scholar
• Compare the comments in Polinière P. Expériences de physique Paris 1728 ed. Réflexions sur ces expériences: Plan de ce livre’, no pag. Polinière was a native of Caen, but studied philosophy at Paris gaining his M.A. in 1695 (B.N., Fonds Latin, Ms. 9156, f. 152, list of graduates in arts).
   Google Scholar
• Denyse's part in the popularization of experimentation is clear from his treatise of 1719; see Denyse Summa philosophiae quadrapartita Paris 1609 110 349 part iii For the development of cabinets de physique in other colleges, see J. Torlais, ‘La physique expérimentale’, in Taton (footnote 11), 654–655. The general trend was institutionalized in 1753 when Nollet was appointed to the first official University chair of experimental physics in the Collège de Navarre (see Jourdain (footnote 16), 385). Nollet discusses the progress of experimental science at the University in his inaugural lecture; see Oratio habita a J. A. Nollet cum primum physicae experimentalis cursum … auspicaretur in Regia Navarra (1753, Paris), 11–16.
   Google Scholar
• See remarks in Denyse Summa philosophiae quadrapartita Paris 1609 110 349 part iii preface, no pag. As early as 1717, one of his pupils, the abbé Neret, was performing experiments before an audience.
   Google Scholar
• In the light of recent research it would seem that this was also the epistemology of Descartes himself; in the late-seventeenth century however he was seen as a dogmatist. Buchdahl Compare G. Metaphysics and the philosophy of science the classical origins. Descartes to Kant Oxford 1969 79 180 and D. M. Clarke, ‘The ambiguous role of experience in Cartesian science’, Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. (1976). pt. 1. 151–164.
   Google Scholar
• Brunet , Compare P. 1931 . Lintroduction des théories de Newton en France au XVIII^e siècle avant 1738 Paris passim: Hahn (footnote 7). 1–34: and L. Marzak. ‘Bernard de Fontenelle and the idea of science in the French Enligh tenment’, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 49 (1959), part 7.
   Google Scholar
• Cartesianism first began to enter Paris salon society in the late 1660s as a result of the success of Rohault's conférences. The-latter is textbook, first published in 1671 was in its twelfth edition by 1708. Régis was giving private lectures on Cartesianism in the capital in 1680; Fontenelle's Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes first appeared in 1686. Details about Cartesianism at Paris in the second half of the seventeenth century are to be found in Bouillier F. Histoire de la philosophie cartésienne , 3rd. ed. Paris 1868 1 429 446 2 vols. B. Neveu, ‘La vie érudite è Paris è la fin du XVIIe siècle Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Chartes, 124 (1966), 432–511; and Mouy (footnote 86), 110–112.
   Google Scholar
• Compare Bouillier Histoire de la philosophie cartésienne , 3rd ed. Paris 1868 2 226 263 2 vols.
   Google Scholar
• Boileau's famous satire on the University's conservatism was published in 1671 and reprinted a number of times before the end of the century. See N. Boileau, ‘Arrest donné en le Grand-chambre du Parnasse [Parlement de Paris] en faveur des maˆitres-es-arts. médecins et professeurs de l'université de Stagyre [Paris].. pour le maintien de la doetrine d'Aristote’. in Boileau Oeurres complètes , 1966 ed. Paris 327 330
   Google Scholar
• Until 1721 few professors received a regular stipend. According to the statutes of 1601, students in philosophy were supposed to give the professor 5–6 écus to cover the two-year course. The sum thereby received formed the basis of the professor's income. It was sometimes supplemented by the college and from the mid seventeenth century by an irregular dole from the Nation to which the professor belonged. The Nations were societies of masters of arts at Paris that drew their funds from the sale of messengerships, offices entrusted to Parisian and provincial merchants who acted as agents and bankers for the University's students. For a discussion, Targe M. Professeurs et régents de collège dans l'ancienne université de Paris au 17^e et 18^e siècle Paris 1902 164 200
   Google Scholar
• It is impossible to know the number of philosophy students precisely, but a crude estimate based on the number of graduates in arts and the number of students beginning a course in law per annum suggests that the twenty professors shared some 1,000 students. If a professor had no other support but his income from his students, and he captured an average share of the market, he would earn in a year little more than the price of an average student's pension. Compare the figures in Brockliss L.W.B. Patterns of attendance at the University of Paris. 1400–1800 The historical journal 1978 21 503 544 esp. pp. 512–514, 520n. 529.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Collège de Louis-le-Grand dated from 1564. Originally called the Collège de Clermont, it was an independent foundation never integrated with the University. The college was closed between 1595 and 1618 when the Society of Jesus was temporarily out of favour with the Bourbon dynasty. Thereafter it became a favourite child of the royal family and in 1682 changed its name to Louis-le-Grand in honour of its royal patron. For a history. see Dupont-Ferrier G. Du collège de Clermont an ycée Louis-le-Grand Paris 1921 1 (3 vols. For the Collège Royal see footnote 78.
   Google Scholar
• For instance, Colbert's son, the future Archbishop of Rouen, Jacques-Nicolas was tutored in the late 1670s by the secretary of the Académie des Sciences Jean-Baptiste du Hamel Dictionnaire de biographie française 12 cols. 15–16
   Google Scholar
• The role of the visitors is laid down in the original college statutes. For these, A.N., série M 79–104: série M.M. 333–469: B.U.P., collection ‘Archives de l'université de Paris’. cartons 17–22: also Félibien M. Histoire de la ville de Paris Paris 1725 3-5 5 vols. pièces justicatives passim.
   Google Scholar
• The best description of the Church and crown's response to Cartesianism remains Bouillier Histoire de la philosophie cartésienne , 3rd ed. Paris 1868 1 429 466 (2 vols. 571–607 and vol. 2, 227–263. The hierarchy found a willing ally for its attack on Cartesianism in the Jesuits: see G. Sortais. ‘Le cartésianisme chez les Jésuites française au XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles. Archires de la philosophie. 6 (1929). pt. 3. 1–109. esp. pp. 46–86.
   Google Scholar
• For details, see Maillard J. L'Oratoire è Angers Paris 1975 188 196 P. Lallemand, rL'éducation dans l'ancien Oratoire (1888, Chatillon-sur-Seine), 113–135; and Sortais (footnote 132), 26–46. Oratorian professors seem to have been the first to teach Cartesianism openly in France. For a chronological list of the crown's denunciations of Cartesian teaching, see Du Hamel (footnote 84), vol. 5, Appendix, ‘Quaedam recentiorum philosophicae propositiones … prohibitae’, 1–45.
   Google Scholar
• No serious study has ever been made of theological teaching at Paris in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The judgement is based on personal acquaintance with a number of printed courses published in the critical period by Paris professors of theology. Witasse Compare Charles Opera theologica dictata in scholis Sorbonicis Paris 1717–1720 H. Tournély. Praelectiones theologicae … quae in scholis Sorbonicis habuil (1725–1728. Paris): N. L Herminier, Summa theologica ad usum scholae accommodata (1710–1711. Paris): and N. Le Tourneux. Abrégé des principaux traités de théologie (1693. Paris).
   Google Scholar
• It must be pointed out too that they made no attempt to develop a metaphysics that could logically allow them to hold two diametrically opposite sets of epistemological assumptions. The part of their philosophy course devoted to metaphysics was essentially Cartesian Compare Besoigne Metaphysica 1712 Ms. 2080 De Bacq, B.M.,Meaux, Ms. 33, ‘Metaphysica’, 1718; De Montempuys, B.N.,Imp., R 894, ‘Concl. phil.’, 1707. pp. 5–8.
   Google Scholar
• In the case of the first two factors, Trevor McLaughlin's work on France as a whole suggests what may be achieved in the future; compare his recent article Censorship and defenders of the Cartesian faith in mid-seventeenth century France Journal of the history of ideas 1979 20 563 581 Where the latter two are concerned, however, useful information will prove hard to find. I have failed to uncover a course of physics given by either the professors royal or the Jesuits of Louis-le-Grand in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Potted biographies of the university professors have also proved hard to assemble. Generally all that can be discovered is the date of their University degrees. When they began and finished teaching is usually a matter of intelligent guess-work. Also, as seldom more than one transcription of a professor's course has survived, it is virtually impossible to compile an intellectual biography over time. It would be interesting to know if any of the Cartesian professors had started their academic careers as Aristotelians. We know that one Cartesian. Dominique Rivard, became a Newtonian.
   Google Scholar
• I have already looked at the position in France very generally. relying almost entirely on printed material. See Brockliss L.W.B. Philosophy teaching in France 1600–1740 (unpublished paper, symposium on universities in the early-modern period. Warburg Institute, London, March, 1979). What is needed is a detailed study of particular universities or regions.
   Google Scholar