1966Notes and Records the Royal Society Journal of the History of ScienceRequires access

Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’

James E. Mcguire, Piyo M. Rattansi

Open publisher page 290 citations

Abstract

Abstract Newtonian scholars have long been aware of a set of draft Scholia to Propositions IV to IX of Book III of the Principia (2). These were composed in the 1690’s, as part of an unimplemented plan for a second edition of the work. Since they describe supposed anticipations of Newton’s doctrines in the thought of Graeco-Roman antiquity, they have become known as the ‘classical’ Scholia (3). The analogies and parallels drawn in them are so strained, as judged by modern standards of scholarship, that it is tempting to consider them as merely literary embellishments of a scientific work. However, the sheer bulk of the manuscripts, the number of copies and variants, their relation to Newton’s other writings, and the testimony of Newton’s associates together with their publication of some of the materials, all make it certain that he considered the arguments and conclusions of the Scholia an important part of his philosophy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract Newtonian scholars have long been aware of a set of draft Scholia to Propositions IV to IX of Book III of the Principia (2). These were composed in the 1690’s, as part of an unimplemented plan for a second edition of the work. Since they describe supposed anticipations of Newton’s doctrines in the thought of Graeco-Roman antiquity, they have become known as the ‘classical’ Scholia (3). The analogies and parallels drawn in them are so strained, as judged by modern standards of scholarship, that it is tempting to consider them as merely literary embellishments of a scientific work. However, the sheer bulk of the manuscripts, the number of copies and variants, their relation to Newton’s other writings, and the testimony of Newton’s associates together with their publication of some of the materials, all make it certain that he considered the arguments and conclusions of the Scholia an important part of his philosophy.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 290 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract Newtonian scholars have long been aware of a set of draft Scholia to Propositions IV to IX of Book III of the Principia (2). These were composed in the 1690’s, as part of an unimplemented plan for a second edition of the work. Since they describe supposed anticipations of Newton’s doctrines in the thought of Graeco-Roman antiquity, they have become known as the ‘classical’ Scholia (3). The analogies and parallels drawn in them are so strained, as judged by modern standards of scholarship, that it is tempting to consider them as merely literary embellishments of a scientific work. However, the sheer bulk of the manuscripts, the number of copies and variants, their relation to Newton’s other writings, and the testimony of Newton’s associates together with their publication of some of the materials, all make it certain that he considered the arguments and conclusions of the Scholia an important part of his philosophy.

Key concepts: Parallels, Relation (database), Scholarship, Philosophy, Classics, Set (abstract data type), Epistemology, Literature

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’ — Research Paper | ScholarLens