Abstract
MR. JAMES'S letter is of interest as recording that he personally does not agree with my opinion of the character and temperament of Oldenburg, but it has little objective content. In my article I referred briefly to some of the facts on which I base my conclusions: the affair of the watch, where Oldenburg, who had a (secret ?) financial interest in a rival invention, went out of his way to decry Hooke's achievements, and certainly went beyond what he would have known: the undoubted political, although no doubt innocent, correspondence with foreigners, which he denied: the opinion of Sydenham. I may further point out that in his correspondence with Spinoza, extending over the years 1661–76, in which the scientific discoveries of the day are freely discussed, and the names of Boyle and Huygens occur again and again, there is only one reference to Hooke's work (to the ” Micrographia”, without mention of Hooke's name).
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Robert Hooke and his Contemporaries. Nature 136, 603–604 (1935). https://doi.org/10.1038/136603c0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/136603c0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.