Robert HookeFRS (/hʊk/; 18 July 1635 – 3 March 1703)[4][a] was an Englishpolymath who was active as a physicist ("natural philosopher"), astronomer, geologist, meteorologist and architect.[5] He is credited as one of the first scientists to investigate living things atmicroscopic scale in 1665,[6] using acompound microscope that he designed.[7] Hooke was an impoverished scientific inquirer in young adulthood who went on to become one of the most important scientists of his time.[8] After theGreat Fire of London in 1666, Hooke (as a surveyor and architect) attained wealth and esteem by performing more than half of theproperty line surveys and assisting with the city's rapid reconstruction.[9][8] Often vilified by writers in the centuries after his death, his reputation was restored at the end of the twentieth century and he has been called "England'sLeonardo [da Vinci]".[10]
Hooke was aFellow of the Royal Society and from 1662, he was its first Curator of Experiments.[9] From 1665 to 1703, he was alsoProfessor of Geometry at Gresham College.[11] Hooke began his scientific career as an assistant to the physical scientistRobert Boyle. Hooke built thevacuum pumps that were used in Boyle's experiments ongas law and also conducted experiments.[12] In 1664, Hooke identified the rotations ofMars andJupiter.[11] Hooke's 1665 bookMicrographia, in which he coined the termcell, encouraged microscopic investigations.[13][14] Investigatingoptics – specifically lightrefraction – Hooke inferred awave theory of light.[15] His is the first-recorded hypothesis of the cause of the expansion of matter by heat,[16] of air's composition by small particles in constant motion that thus generate its pressure,[17] and of heat as energy.[18]
In physics, Hooke inferred that gravity obeys aninverse square law and arguably was the first to hypothesise such a relation in planetary motion,[19][20] a principleIsaac Newton furthered and formalised inNewton's law of universal gravitation.[21]Priority over this insight contributed to the rivalry between Hooke and Newton. In geology andpalaeontology, Hooke originated the theory of aterraqueous globe,[22] thus disputing the Biblical view of the Earth's age; he also hypothesised the extinction of species, and argued hills and mountains had become elevated by geological processes.[23] By identifying fossils of extinct species, Hooke presaged thetheory of biological evolution.[22][24]
Life and works
Early life
Much of what is known of Hooke's early life comes from an autobiography he commenced in 1696 but never completed;Richard Waller FRS mentions it in his introduction toThe Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke, M.D. S.R.S., which was printed in 1705.[25][b] The work of Waller, along withJohn Ward'sLives of the Gresham Professors,[27] andJohn Aubrey'sBrief Lives[28] form the major near-contemporaneous biographical accounts of his life.
Hooke was born in 1635 inFreshwater, Isle of Wight, to Cecily Gyles and the Anglican priest John Hooke, who was the curate ofAll Saints' Church, Freshwater.[29] Robert was the youngest, by seven years, of four siblings (two boys and two girls); he was frail and not expected to live.[30][31] Although his father gave him some instruction in English,(Latin) Grammar andDivinity, Robert's education was largely neglected.[32] Left to his own devices, he made little mechanical toys; seeing a brass clock dismantled, he built a wooden replica that "would go".[32]
Hooke's father died in October 1648, leaving £40 in his will to Robert (plus another £10 held over from his grandmother).[33][c] At the age of 13, he took this to London to become an apprentice to the celebrated painterPeter Lely.[35] Hooke also had "some instruction in drawing" from thelimner Samuel Cowper[34] but "the smell of the Oil Colours did not agree with his Constitution, increasing his Head-ache to which he was ever too much subject", and he became a pupil atWestminster School, living with its masterRichard Busby.[37] Hooke quickly mastered Latin, Greek andEuclid'sElements;[11] he also learnt to play theorgan[38] and began his lifelong study of mechanics.[11] He remained an accomplished draughtsman, as he was later to demonstrate in his drawings that illustrate the work ofRobert Boyle and Hooke's ownMicrographia.[39]
While a student at Oxford, Hooke was also employed as an assistant to DrThomas Willis – a physician, chemist and member of theOxford Philosophical Club.[42][e] The Philosophical Club had been founded byJohn Wilkins, Warden ofWadham College, who led this important group of scientists who went on to form the nucleus of theRoyal Society.[44] In 1659, Hooke described to the Club some elements of a method of heavier-than-air flight but concluded human muscles were insufficient to the task.[45] Through the Club, Hooke metSeth Ward (the University'sSavilian Professor of Astronomy) and developed for Ward a mechanism that improved the regularity of pendulum clocks used for astronomical time-keeping.[46] Hooke characterised his Oxford days as the foundation of his lifelong passion for science.[47] The friends he made there, particularlyChristopher Wren, were important to him throughout his career. Willis introduced Hooke toRobert Boyle, who the Club sought to attract to Oxford.[48]
In 1655, Boyle moved to Oxford and Hooke became nominally his assistant but in practice his co-experimenter.[48] Boyle had been working on gas pressures; the possibility a vacuum might exist despiteAristotle's maxim "Nature abhors a vacuum" had justbegun to be considered. Hooke developed an air pump for Boyle's experiments rather than useRalph Greatorex's pump, which Hooke considered as "too gross to perform any great matter".[49] Hooke's engine enabled the development of theeponymous law that was subsequently attributed to Boyle;[50][f] Hooke had a particularly keen eye and was an adept mathematician, neither of which applied to Boyle. Hooke taught BoyleEuclid'sElements andDescartes'sPrinciples of Philosophy;[9] it also caused them to recognisefire as a chemical reaction and not, as Aristotle taught, afundamental element of nature.[52]
Royal Society
Hooke's scientific work while employed by the Society is summarised in the section§ Science, below.
According to Henry Robinson, Librarian of The Royal Society in 1935:
Without his weekly experiments and prolific work the Society could scarcely have survived, or, at least, would have developed in a quite different way. It is scarcely an exaggeration to say that he was, historically, the creator of the Royal Society.[53]
TheRoyal Society for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge by Experiment[g] was founded in 1660 and given itsRoyal Charter in July 1662.[54] On 5 November 1661,Robert Moray proposed the appointment of a curator to furnish the society with experiments, and this was unanimously passed and Hooke was named on Boyle's recommendation.[9] The Society did not have a reliable income to fully fund the post of Curator of Experiments but in 1664,John Cutler settled an annual gratuity of £50 on the Society to found a "Mechanick" lectureship at Gresham College[55] on the understanding the Society would appoint Hooke to this task.[56] On 27 June 1664, Hooke was confirmed to the office and on 11 January 1665, he was named Curator by Office for life with an annual salary of £80,[h] which consisting of £30 from the Society and Cutler's £50 annuity.[56][i]
Illustration fromThe posthumous works of Robert Hooke... published inActa Eruditorum, 1707
AlthoughJohn Aubrey described Hooke as a person of "great virtue and goodness".[62] much has been written about the unpleasant side of Hooke's personality. According to his first biographer Richard Waller, Hooke was "in person, but despicable", and "melancholy, mistrustful, and jealous".[63] Waller's comments influenced other writers for more than 200 years such that many books and articles – especially biographies ofIsaac Newton – portray Hooke as a disgruntled, selfish, anti-social curmudgeon. For example, Arthur Berry said Hooke "claimed credit for most of the scientific discoveries of the time".[64] Sullivan wrote he was "positively unscrupulous" and had an "uneasy apprehensive vanity" in dealings with Newton.[65] Manuel described Hooke as "cantankerous, envious, vengeful".[66] According to More, Hooke had both a "cynical temperament" and a "caustic tongue".[67] Andrade was more sympathetic but still described Hooke as "difficult", "suspicious" and "irritable".[68] In October 1675, the Council of the Royal Society considered a motion to expel Hooke because of an attack he made onChristiaan Huygens overscientific priority in watch design but it did not pass.[69] According to Hooke's biographer Ellen Drake:
if one studies the intellectual milieu of the time, the controversies and rivalries of the type in which he was involved seem almost to be the rule rather than the exception. And Hooke's reaction to such controversy involving his own discoveries and inventions seems mild in comparison to the behaviour of some of his contemporaries".[70]
The publication of Hooke's diary in 1935[71] revealed previously unknown details about his social and familial relationships. His biographer Margaret 'Espinasse said: "the picture which is usually painted of Hooke as amorose ... recluse is completely false".[72] He interacted with noted artisans such as clock-makerThomas Tompion[73] and instrument-maker Christopher Cocks (Cox).[74] Hooke often met Christopher Wren, with whom he shared many interests, and had a lasting friendship with John Aubrey. His diaries also make frequent reference to meetings at coffeehouses and taverns, as well as to dinners with Robert Boyle. On many occasions, Hooke took tea with his lab assistant Harry Hunt. Although he largely lived alone – apart from the servants who ran his home – his niece Grace Hooke and his cousin Tom Giles lived with him for some years as children.[75]
Hooke never married. According to his diary, Hooke had a sexual relationship with his niece Grace, after she had turned 16. Grace was in his custody since the age of 10.[76][77] He also had sexual relations with several maids and housekeepers. Hooke's biographer Stephen Inwood considers Grace to have been the love of his life, and he was devastated when she died in 1687. Inwood also mentions "The age difference between him and Grace was commonplace and would not have upset his contemporaries as it does us". The incestous relationship would nevertheless have been frowned upon and tried by an ecclesiastical court had it been discovered, it was not however a capital felony after 1660.[78][j]
Since childhood, Hooke suffered frommigraine,tinnitus, dizziness and bouts ofinsomnia;[80] he also had a spinal deformity that was consistent with a diagnosis ofScheuermann's kyphosis, giving him in middle and later years a "thin and crooked body, over-large head and protruding eyes".[81] Approaching these in a scientific spirit, he experimented with self-medication, diligently recording symptoms, substances and effects in his diary. He regularly usedsal ammoniac, emetics, laxatives and opiates, which appear to have had an increasing effect on his physical and mental health over time.[82]
Hooke died in London on 3 March 1703, having been blind and bedridden during the last year of his life. A chest containing £8,000 in money and gold was found in his room atGresham College.[83][k] His library contained over 3,000 books in Latin, French, Italian and English.[83] Although he had talked of leaving a generous bequest to the Royal Society, which would have given his name to a library, laboratory and lectures, no will was found and the money passed to a cousin named Elizabeth Stephens.[84] Hooke was buried atSt Helen's Church, Bishopsgate, in theCity of London[85] but the precise location of his grave is unknown.
Science
Hooke's role at the Royal Society was to demonstrate experiments from his own methods or at the suggestion of members. Among his earliest demonstrations were discussions of the nature of air and the implosion of glass bubbles that had been sealed with enclosed hot air.[57] He also demonstrated that a dog could be kept alive with itsthorax opened, provided air was pumped in and out of its lungs.[86][l] He noted the difference betweenvenous andarterial blood, and thus demonstrated that thePabulum vitae ("food of life")[m] andflammae [flames] were the same thing.[89][90] There were also experiments on gravity, the falling of objects, the weighing of bodies, the measurement ofbarometric pressure at different heights, and the movement ofpendulums up to 200 ft long (61 m).[89] His biographer Margaret 'Espinasse described him as England's firstmeteorologist, in her description of his essayMethod for making a history of the weather.[91] (Hooke specifies that a thermometer, ahygrometer, a wind gauge and a record sheet be used for proper weather records.[92][n])
Astronomy
Hooke noted the shadows (a and b) cast by both the globe and the rings on each other in this drawing of Saturn. Drawings of the Moon and the Pleiades from Hooke'sMicrographia
In May 1664, using a 12 ft (3.7 m)refracting telescope, Hooke observed theGreat Red Spot ofJupiter for two hours as it moved across the planet's face. In March 1665, he published his findings and from them, the Italian astronomerGiovanni Cassini calculated therotation period of Jupiter to be nine hours and fifty-five minutes.[93]
One of the most-challenging problems Hooke investigated was the measurement of the distance from Earth to a star other than the Sun. Hooke selected the starGamma Draconis and chose the method ofparallax determination. In 1669, after several months of observing, Hooke believed the desired result had been achieved. It is now known his equipment was far too imprecise to obtain an accurate measurement.[94]
Hooke'sMicrographia contains illustrations of thePleiades star cluster andlunar craters. He conducted experiments to investigate the formation of these craters and concluded their existence meant the Moon must have its own gravity, a radical departure from the contemporaneousAristotelian celestial model.[95] He also was an early observer of therings of Saturn,[96] and discovered one of the first-observeddouble-star systemsGamma Arietis in 1664.[97]
To achieve these discoveries, Hooke needed better instruments than those that were available at the time. Accordingly, he invented three new mechanisms: theHooke joint, a sophisticateduniversal joint that allowed his instruments to smoothly follow the apparent motion of the observed body; the firstclockwork drive to automate the process; and amicrometer screw that allowed him to achieve a precision of tenseconds of arc.[98][99] Hooke was dissatisfied withrefracting telescopes so he built the first practicalGregorian telescope that used a silvered glass mirror.[100][101][o]
In 1660, Hooke discoveredthe law ofelasticity that bears his name and describes the linear variation oftension with extension in anelastic spring. Hooke first described this discovery in an anagram "ceiiinosssttuv", whose solution he published in 1678 asUt tensio, sic vis ("As the extension, so the force").[103] His work on elasticity culminated in his development of thebalance spring or hairspring, which for the first time enabled a portable timepiece – a watch – to keep time with reasonable accuracy. A bitter dispute between Hooke andChristiaan Huygens on the priority of this invention was to continue for centuries after the death of both but a note dated 23 June 1670 in the journals of the Royal Society,[104] describing a demonstration of a balance-controlled watch before the Royal Society, may support Hooke's claim to priority for the idea. Nevertheless, it is Huygens who is credited with building the first watch to use a balance spring.[105][106]
Hooke's announcement of his law of elasticity using ananagram was a method scientists, such as Hooke, Huygens andGalileo, sometimes used to establish priority for a discovery without revealing details.[107] Hooke used mechanical analogues to understand fundamental processes such as the motion of a spherical pendulum and of a ball in a hollow cone, to demonstrate central force due to gravity,[108] and a hanging chain net with point loads to provide the optimum shape for a dome with heavy cross on top.[109]
Despite continuing reports to the contrary,[110] Hooke did not influenceThomas Newcomen's invention of thesteam engine; this myth, which originated in an article in the third edition ofEncyclopædia Britannica, has been found to be mistaken.[111]
While many of Hooke's contemporaries, such as Isaac Newton, believed inaether as a medium for transmitting attraction and repulsion between separated celestial bodies,[112][113] Hooke argued for an attracting principle of gravitation inMicrographia (1665). In a communication to the Royal Society in 1666,[114] he wrote:
I will explain a system of the world very different from any yet received. It is founded on the following positions. 1. That all the heavenly bodies have not only a gravitation of their parts to their own proper centre, but that they also mutually attract each other within their spheres of action. 2. That all bodies having a simple motion, will continue to move in a straight line, unless continually deflected from it by some extraneous force, causing them to describe a circle, an ellipse, or some other curve. 3. That this attraction is so much the greater as the bodies are nearer. As to the proportion in which those forces diminish by an increase of distance, I own I have not discovered it. ...
Hooke's 1674 Gresham lecture,An Attempt to Prove the Motion of the Earth by Observations (published 1679), said gravitation applies to "all celestial bodies"[115] and restated these three propositions.[116]
Hooke's statements up to 1674 make no mention, however, that an inverse square law applies or might apply to these attractions. His model of gravitation was also not yet universal, though it approached universality more closely than previous hypotheses.[117] Hooke did not provide accompanying evidence or mathematical demonstration; he stated in 1674: "Now what these several degrees [of gravitational attraction] are I have not yet experimentally verified", indicating he did not yet know what law the gravitation might follow; and about his whole proposal, he said: "This I only hint at present ... having my self many other things in hand which I would first compleat, and therefore cannot so well attend it" (i.e. "prosecuting this Inquiry").[116]
In November 1679, Hooke initiated a notable exchange of letters with Newton that was published in 1960.[118] Hooke's ostensible purpose was to tell Newton he (Hooke) had been appointed to manage the Royal Society's correspondence;[119] Hooke therefore wanted to hear from members about their research or their views about the research of others. Hooke asked Newton's opinions about various matters. Among other items, Hooke mentioned "compounding the celestial motions of the planets of a direct motion by the tangent and an attractive motion towards the central body"; his "hypothesis of the lawes or causes of springinesse"; a new hypothesis from Paris about planetary motions, which he described at length; efforts to carry out or improve national surveys; and the difference of latitude between London and Cambridge.[120]
Newton's reply offered "a fansy of my own" about a terrestrial experiment rather than a proposal about celestial motions that might detect the Earth's motion; the experiment would use a body suspended in air and then dropped. Hooke wanted to discern how Newton thought the falling body could experimentally reveal the Earth's motion by its direction of deviation from the vertical but Hooke went on hypothetically to consider how its motion could continue if the solid Earth had not been in the way, on a spiral path to the centre. Hooke disagreed with Newton's idea of the body's continuing motion. A further short correspondence developed; towards the end of it, writing on 6 January 1680 to Newton, Hooke communicated his "supposition ... that the Attraction always is in a duplicate proportion to the Distance from the Center Reciprocall, and Consequently that the Velocity will be in a subduplicate proportion to the Attraction and Consequently as Kepler Supposes Reciprocall to the Distance".[121] (Hooke's inference about the velocity is incorrect.[122])
In 1686, when the first book of Newton'sPrincipia was presented to the Royal Society, Hooke said he had given Newton the "notion" of "the rule of the decrease of Gravity, being reciprocally as the squares of the distances from the Center". At the same time, according toEdmond Halley's contemporaneous report, Hooke agreed "the Demonstration of the Curves generated thereby" was wholly Newton's.[123]
According to a 2002 assessment of the early history of the inverse square law: "by the late 1660s, the assumption of an 'inverse proportion between gravity and the square of distance' was rather common and had been advanced by a number of different people for different reasons".[124] In the 1660s, Newton had shown for planetary motion under a circular assumption, force in the radial direction had an inverse-square relation with distance from the centre.[125] Newton, who in May 1686 was presented with Hooke's claim to priority on the inverse square law, denied he was to be credited as author of the idea, giving reasons including the citation of prior work by others.[126] Newton also said that, even if he had first heard of the inverse square proportion from Hooke (which Newton said he had not), he would still have some rights to it because of his mathematical developments and demonstrations. These, he said, enabled observations to be relied upon as evidence of its accuracy while according to Newton, Hooke, without mathematical demonstrations and evidence in favour of the supposition, could only guess it was approximately valid "at great distances from the centre".[127]
Newton did accept and acknowledge, in all editions of thePrincipia, Hooke and others had separately appreciated the inverse square law in the solar system. Newton acknowledged Wren, Hooke and Halley in this connection in his "Scholium to Proposition 4" in Book1.[128] In a letter to Halley, Newton also acknowledged his correspondence with Hooke in 1679–1680 had reawakened his dormant interest in astronomical matters but that did not mean, according to Newton, Hooke had told Newton anything new or original. Newton wrote:
Yet am I not beholden to him for any light into that business ... but only for the diversion he gave me from my other studies to think on these things & for his dogmaticalness in writing as if he had found the motion in the Ellipsis, which inclined me to try it.[129]
Whilst Newton was primarily a pioneer in mathematical analysis and its applications, and optical experimentation, Hooke was a creative experimenter of such great range who left some of his ideas, such as those about gravitation, undeveloped. In 1759, decades after the deaths of both Newton and Hooke,Alexis Clairaut, mathematical astronomer eminent in his own right in the field of gravitational studies, reviewed Hooke's published work on gravitation. According toStephen Peter Rigaud, Clairaut wrote: "The example of Hooke and that of Kepler [serves] to show what a distance there is between a truth that is glimpsed and a truth that is demonstrated".[p][130]I. Bernard Cohen said: "Hooke's claim to the inverse-square law has masked Newton's far more fundamental debt to him, the analysis of curvilinear orbital motion. In asking for too much credit, Hooke effectively denied to himself the credit due him for a seminal idea".[131]
Horology
Drawing by Christiaan Huygens of one of his first balance springs, which is attached to a balance wheel
Hooke made important contributions to the science of timekeeping and was intimately involved in the advances of his time; these included refinement of the pendulum as a better regulator for clocks, increased precision of clock mechanisms and the use of thebalance spring to improve the timekeeping of watches.
Galileo had observed the regularity of a pendulum and Huygens first incorporated it in a clock;[132] in 1668, Hooke demonstrated his new device to keep a pendulum swinging regularly in unsteady conditions.[133] His invention of a tooth-cutting machine enabled a substantial improvement in the accuracy and precision of timepieces.[133] Waller reported the invention was, by Hooke's death, in constant use among clock makers.[89]
Hooke announced he conceived a way to build amarine chronometer to determine longitude.[134][q] and with the help of Boyle and others, he attempted to patent it. In the process, Hooke demonstrated a pocket-watch of his own devising that was fitted with acoil spring attached to the arbour of the balance. Hooke's refusal to accept anescape clause in the proposed exclusive contract for the use of this idea resulted in its abandonment.[134][r]
Hooke developed the principle of the balance spring independently of Huygens and at least five years beforehand.[135] Huygens published his own work inJournal de Scavans in February 1675 and built the first functioning watch to use a balance spring.[136]
In 1663 and 1664, Hooke made his microscopic, and some astronomic, observations, which he collated inMicrographia in 1665. His book, which describes observations with microscopes and telescopes, as well as original work in biology, contains the earliest-recorded observation of a microorganism, the microfungusMucor.[13][14] Hooke coined the term "cell", suggesting a resemblance between plant structures andhoneycomb cells.[137]The hand-crafted, leather-and-gold-tooled microscope he designed and used to make the observations forMicrographia, whichChristopher Cock made for him in London, is on display at theNational Museum of Health and Medicine inMaryland.[7] Hooke's work developed from that ofHenry Power, who published his microscopy work inExperimental Philosophy (1663);[6] in turn, the Dutch scientistAntonie van Leeuwenhoek went on to develop increased magnification and so revealprotozoa,blood cells andspermatozoa.[138][139]
Micrographia also contains Hooke's, or perhaps Boyle's and Hooke's, ideas on combustion. Hooke's experiments led him to conclude combustion involves a component of air, a statement with which modern scientists would agree but that was not understood widely, if at all, in the seventeenth century. He also concluded respiration and combustion involve a specific and limited component of air.[140] According to Partington, if "Hooke had continued his experiments on combustion, it is probable that he would have discovered oxygen".[141]
Samuel Pepys wrote of the book inhis diary on 21 January 1664/65[a]: "Before I went to bed I sat up till two o’clock in my chamber reading of Mr. Hooke's Microscopicall Observations, the most ingenious book that ever I read in my life".[142]
Hooke's microscopy
Hooke's microscope, from an engraving inMicrographia
One of the observations inMicrographia is offossil wood, the microscopic structure of which Hooke compared to that of ordinary wood. This led him to conclude that fossilised objects like petrified wood and fossil shells such asammonites were the remains of living things that had been soaked in mineral-laden petrifying water.[143] He believed that such fossils provided reliable clues about the history of life on Earth and, despite the objections of contemporary naturalists likeJohn Ray – who found the concept ofextinction theologically unacceptable – that in some cases they might represent species that had become extinct through some geological disaster.[144] In a series of lectures in 1668, Hooke proposed the then-heretical idea the Earth's surface had been formed by volcanoes and earthquakes, and that the latter were responsible for shell fossils being found far above sea level.[145]
In 1835,Charles Lyell, the Scottish geologist and associate ofCharles Darwin, wrote of Hooke inPrinciples of Geology: "His treatise ... is the most philosophical production of that age, in regard to the causes of former changes in the organic and inorganic kingdoms of nature".[146]
Memory
Hooke's scientific model of humanmemory was one of the first of its kind. In a 1682 lecture to the Royal Society, Hooke proposed a mechanical analogue model of human memory that bore little resemblance to the mainly philosophical models of earlier writers.[147] This model addressed the components of encoding, memory capacity, repetition, retrieval, and forgetting – some with surprisingly modern accuracy.[148] According to psychology professor Douglas Hintzman, Hooke's model's most-interesting points are that it allows for attention and other top-down influences on encoding; it uses resonance to implement parallel, cue-dependent retrieval; it explains memory for recency; it offers a single-system account of repetition and priming; and the power law of forgetting can be derived from the model's assumption in a straightforward way.[148]
Other
On 8 July 1680, Hooke observed thenodal patterns associated with themodes of vibration of glass plates. He ran abow along the edge of a flour-covered glass plate and saw the nodal patterns emerge.[149][150] In acoustics, in 1681, Hooke showed the Royal Society that musical tones can be generated using spinning brass cogs cut with teeth in particular proportions.[151]
Wren and Hooke were both keen astronomers. The Monument to the Great Fire of London was designed to serve a scientific function as azenith telescope for astronomical observation, though traffic vibration made it unusable for this purpose.[164][165] The legacy of this can be observed in the construction of thespiral staircase, which has no central column, and in the observation chamber, which remains in place below ground level. He also collaborated with Wren on the design ofSt Paul's Cathedral; Hooke determined the ideal shape of an arch is an invertedcatenary and thence that a circular series of such arches makes an ideal shape for the cathedral's dome.[109]
In the reconstruction after the Great Fire, Hooke proposed redesigning London's streets on a grid pattern with wide boulevards and arteries,[166] a pattern that was later used inHaussmann's renovation of Paris and in many American cities, for which Wren and others also submitted proposals. The King decided both the prospective cost of building and compensation, and the need to quickly restore trade and population meant the city would be rebuilt on the original property lines.[167] Hooke was given the task of surveying the ruins to identify foundations, street edges and property boundaries. He was closely involved with the drafting of anAct of Common Council (April 1667), which set out the process by which the original foundations would be formally recognised and certificated.[168] According toLisa Jardine: "in the four weeks from the 4th of October, [Hooke] helped map the fire-damaged area, began compiling a Land Information System for London, and drew up building regulations for an Act of Parliament to govern the rebuilding".[169] Stephen Inwood said: "the surveyors' reports, which were generally written by Hooke, show an admirable ability to get to the nub of intricate neighbourly squabbles, and to produce a crisp and judicious recommendation from a tangle of claims and counter-claims".[170]
Hooke also had to measure and certify land that would becompulsorily purchased for the planned road widening so compensation could be paid.[171] In 1670, he was appointed Surveyor of the Royal Works.[172] Hooke, together with the work of Scottishcartographer and printerJohn Ogilby, Hooke's precise and detailed surveys led to production in 1677 of a large-scale map of London,[152] the first-known to be of a specific scale (1:1200).[173]
No authenticated portrait of Robert Hooke exists, a situation that has sometimes been attributed to the heated conflicts between Hooke and Isaac Newton, although Hooke's biographerAllan Chapman rejects as a myth claims Newton or his acolytes deliberately destroyed Hooke's portrait.[176] German antiquarian and scholarZacharias Conrad von Uffenbach visited the Royal Society in 1710 and his account of his visit mentions him being shown portraits of "Boyle and Hoock", which were said to be good likenesses but, while Boyle's portrait survives, Hooke's has been lost.[10][177] In Hooke's time, the Royal Society met at Gresham College but within a few months of Hooke's death Newton became the Society's president and plans for a new meeting place were made. When the Royal Society moved to new premises in 1710, Hooke's was the only portrait that went missing[178] and remains so. According to Hooke's diary, he sat for a portrait by renowned artistMary Beale, so it is possible such a portrait did at some time exist.[179] Conversely, Chapman draws attention to the fact that Waller's extensively illustrated work,Posthumous works of Robert Hooke, published shortly after Hooke's death, has no portrait of him.[176]
Two contemporaneous, written descriptions of Hooke's appearance have survived; his close friend John Aubrey described him in middle age and at the height of his creative powers:
He is but of midling stature, something crooked, pale faced, and his face but little below, but his head is lardge, his eie full and popping, and not quick; a grey eie. He haz a delicate head of haire, browne, and of an excellent moist curle. He is and ever was temperate and moderate in dyet, etc.
Richard Waller, writing in 1705 inThe Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke, described the elderly Hooke:
As to his Person he was but despicable, being very crooked, tho' I have heard from himself, and others, that he was strait till about 16 Years of Age when he first grew awry, by frequent practising, with a Turn-Lath ... He was always very pale and lean, and laterly nothing but Skin and Bone, with a Meagre Aspect, his Eyes grey and full, with a sharp ingenious Look whilst younger; his nose but thin, of a moderate height and length; his Mouth meanly wide, and upper lip thin; his Chin sharp, and Forehead large; his Head of a middle size. He wore his own Hair of a dark Brown colour, very long and hanging neglected over his Face uncut and lank ...[63]
On 3 July 1939,Time magazine published a portrait, supposedly of Hooke, but whenAshley Montagu traced the source, it was found to lack a verifiable connection to Hooke. Montagu found the two contemporaneous written descriptions of Hooke's appearance agree with one another but that neither matches the portrait inTime.[180]
A seal used by Hooke displays an unusual profile portrait of a man's head, which some have said portrays Hooke.[176]
The engraved frontispiece to the 1728 edition ofChambers'Cyclopedia shows a drawing of a bust of Robert Hooke.[181] The extent to which the drawing is based on a real work of art is unknown.
In 2003, the amateur painter Rita Greer embarked on a project to memorialise Hooke and produce credible images of him, both painted and drawn, she believes match Aubrey's and Waller's the descriptions of him. Greer's images of Hooke, which are free to use under theFree Art License, have been used for television programmes in the UK and the US, in books, magazines and for public relations.[176]
In 2019, Larry Griffing, an associate professor in Biology atTexas A&M University, proposed that a portrait byMary Beale of an unknown sitter and referred to asPortrait of a Mathematician – is actually of Hooke, noting the physical features of the sitter in the portrait match Hooke's. The figure points to a drawing of elliptical motion that appears to match an unpublished manuscript created by him. The painting also includes anorrery depicting the same principle. According to Griffing, buildings included in the image are ofLowther Castle, now inCumbria, and its Church of St Michael. The church was renovated under one of Hooke's architectural commissions, which Beale would have known from her extensive body of work for the Lowther family.[1] According to Griffing, the painting would once have been owned by the Royal Society but was abandoned when Newton, its president, moved the Society's headquarters in 1710.[1] Christopher Whittaker of the School of Education,University of Durham, England, has questioned Griffing's analysis; according to Whittaker, it is more likely to be ofIsaac Barrow;[3] in a response to Whittaker,[2] Griffing reaffirmed his deduction.
1678 copy of Hooke'sLectures de potentia restitutiva
Title page ofLectures de potentia restitutiva
First page ofLectures de potentia restitutiva
Figure fromLectures de potentia restitutiva
Figure fromLectures de potentia restitutiva
Explanatory notes
^abcThese dates are according to theJulian calendar, which was still in use in England at the time. His date of death raises an additional complication: formally the civil year began on 25 March although common practice then as now was to start the year on 1 January. Thus his legal date of death was 3 March 1702 but 3 March 1703 in common usage and as shown here: according to thedual dating practice at the time it would be recorded in church records as 3 March 1702/3.[4] Wikipedia follows the convention adopted by most modern historical writing of retaining the dates according to the Julian calendar but taking the year as starting on 1 January rather than 25 March. (According to theGregorian calendar that was used in most of Europe, he was born on 28 July 1635 and died on 14 March 1703. The deviation between the calendars grew from ten to eleven days between his birth and his death because the Julian calendar had a 29 February 1700 but the Gregorian calendar did not. For a more detailed explanation, seeCalendar (New Style) Act 1750.)
^Aubrey says £100[34] but the will (Hampshire Record Office 1648B09/1) clearly states £40.[35] Adjusted for retail price inflation, £50 in 1648 equates to about £8,300 today;[36] Gribbin and Gribbin estimate its purchasing power as rather closer to £20,000.[33]
^According to Gribbin and Gribbin, thePuritan laws at the time forbade music in churches. The Mr Goodman to whom Hooke was nominally servitor was not an undergraduate at the time so Hooke was not required to perform any services in return.[41]
^A chance-surviving copy of Willis's pioneering workDe anima brutorum, a gift from the author, was chosen by Hooke from Wilkins's library on his death as a memento atJohn Tillotson's invitation. This book is now in theWellcome Library.[43]
^Gribbin and Gribbin say: "it is now widely accepted that it was Hooke who discovered what is now known as 'Boyle's Law' of gasses".[51] Boyle published the law in his 1662 book but did not claim it as his own.[50]
^Subsequently renamed "The Royal Society of London for Promoting Natural Knowledge"
^About £16,200 today, indexed by retail prices rather than earnings.
^Cutler proved unreliable and Hooke had to sue him in following years to secure payment.[56] Following Cutler's death, Hooke enlisted the aid of friends of the Cutler family, including Master ofThe Haberdashers CompanyRichard Levett, with whom Hooke was separately involved in a building commission, to help recover the funds Cutler owed.[29]
^Inwood considers it unlikely Hooke was father to a daughter by Grace, and it is more likely the father was Sir Robert Holmes,Governor of the Isle of Wight.[79] Jardine concurs.[77]
^Hooke was distressed by the experience ofvivisection. In a letter to Boyle, he wrote: "I shall hardly be induced to make further trials of this kind, because of the torture of the creature".[87]
^"Here then we observe a striking similarity between combustion and animal respiration. The ancients seem to have had a more accurate idea of respiration than most of the philosophers who followed them. They supposed that the air contained a principle proper for the support and nourishment of life, which they calledpabulum vitae" – Thomas Garnett,Popular lectures on zoonomia, or the laws of animal life, in health and disease (1804).[88] We now know this to beoxygen.
^Between Gregory's initial effort and Hooke's improvement, Isaac Newton had built a reflecting telescope – but because its mirror was made from polished steel, it tarnished and rapidly became useless.[102]
^Original French: "L'exemple de Hook & celui de Kepler [serve] à faire voir quelle distance il y a entre une vérité entrevue & une vérité démontrée."
^AsGemma Frisius had already observed, each four minutes of time difference is equivalent to one degree of longitude difference. The latitude is easily determined bysextant.
^His exclusivity would lapse as soon as another made any improvement to it which, he argued, would be easy to do.[134]
^The plaque on the structure that attributes it to Wren is not correct.[155]
Chapman, Allan (2005).England's Leonardo: Robert Hooke and the Seventeenth-Century Scientific Revolution. Institute of Physics Publishing Ltd.ISBN978-0-7503-0987-5.
'Espinasse, Margaret (1956).Robert Hooke. London: William Heinemann Ltd.OCLC459411551.
Fulton, John F. (1960). "The Honourable Robert Boyle, F.R.S. (1627–1692)".Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.15: 119–135 (123).doi:10.1098/rsnr.1960.0012.S2CID145310587.
Gould, Rupert T. (1923).The Marine Chronometer. Its History and Development. London: J. D. Potter. pp. 158–171.ISBN0-907462-05-7.{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Hall, A. R. (1978). "Horology and criticism: Robert Hooke".Studia Copernicana.16. Ossolinskich:261–281.
Harsch, Viktor (August 2006). "Robert Hooke, inventor of the vacuum pump and the first altitude chamber (1671)".Aviat Space Environ Med.77 (8):867–9.PMID16909884.
Hooke, Robert (1673) [1672]. "Given me by the Reverend Dr John Tillotson Dean of Canterbury for a rememberance of John Ld Bp of Chester. R Hooke Oct 8 1673".De anima brutorum. By Willis, Thomas. Retrieved6 January 2024 – viaWellcome Library.
Inwood, Stephen (2003).The Forgotten Genius. San Francisco: MacAdam/Cage Pub.ISBN978-1-931561-56-3.OCLC53006741. (Published in the UK (2003) asThe man who knew too much: the inventive life of Robert Hooke, 1635-1703, London, Pan Books, ISBN 978-0-330-48829-7, OCLC59355860)
Long Hall, Diana (1976). ""Bacon's mansion" the frustrations and rewards of respiratory physiology in the enlightenment".Bulletin of the History of Medicine.50 (2). The Johns Hopkins University Press:151–173.JSTOR44450329.
Jenkins, Rhys (1936). "The Heat Engine Idea in the Seventeenth Century".Transactions of the Newcomen Society.17 (1). Taylor and Francis:1–11.doi:10.1179/tns.1936.001.Paper read to the Chartered Institute of Patent Agents, 21 October 1936.
Jensen, William B. (November 2004). "A Previously Unrecognised Portrait of Joan Baptista Van Helmont (1579–1644)".Ambix.51 (3):263–268.doi:10.1179/amb.2004.51.3.263.
Lyell, Charles (1832).Principles of Geology: Being an Attempt to Explain the Former Changes of the Earth's Surface, by Reference to Causes Now in Operation. London: Spotiswode.
Manuel, Frank E. (1968).A Portrait of Isaac Newton. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.OCLC620957551.
Martin, Rob (2000)."The Tragedy of Robert Hooke's Brother".The Isle of Wight History Centre. Retrieved9 March 2010.Robert is given forty pounds, a chest and all the books
More, Louis Trenchard (1934).Isaac Newton. New York: Charles Schribner's Sons.
Nakajima, Hideto (1994). "Robert Hooke's Family and His Youth: Some New Evidence from the Will of the Rev. John Hooke".Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.48 (1):11–16.doi:10.1098/rsnr.1994.0002.JSTOR531416.
Newton, Isaac (1729) [1687].The mathematical principles of natural philosophy. Vol. 1. Translated by Andrew Motte. London: The Royal Society.
Oldenburg, Henry (1670)."Hooke Folio Online".Journal of the Royal Society (Draft?). University College, University of London. Retrieved11 January 2024.
Partington, J. P. (1951).A Short History of Chemistry (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan and Company.
Rosen, William (2012).The Most Powerful Idea in the World: A Story of Steam, Industry and Invention. University of Chicago Press.ISBN978-0-226-72634-2.
Rousseaux, Germain; Coullet, Pierre; Gilli, Jean-Marc (2006). "Robert Hooke's conical pendulum from the modern viewpoint of amplitude equations and its optical analogues".Proc. R. Soc. A.462 (2066):531–540.Bibcode:2006RSPSA.462..531R.doi:10.1098/rspa.2005.1587.
Rudwick, Martin J.S. (1976).The Meaning of Fossils. The University of Chicago Press.
Wilson, Curtis (1989). "13 "The Newtonian achievement in astronomy"".Planetary astronomy from the Renaissance to the rise of astrophysics. Vol. 2A: Tycho Brahe to Newton. Cambridge University Press. pp. 233–274.ISBN0521242541.
Bennett, Jim; Michael Cooper; Michael Hunter; Lisa Jardine (2003).London's Leonardo: The Life and Work of Robert Hooke. Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-852579-0.
Cooper, Michael (1997). "Robert Hooke's Work as Surveyor for the City of London in the Aftermath of the Great Fire. Part One: Robert Hooke's First Surveys for the City of London".Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.51 (2):161–174.doi:10.1098/rsnr.1997.0014.JSTOR531983.
Cooper, Michael (1998). "Robert Hooke's Work as Surveyor for the City of London in the Aftermath of the Great Fire. Part Two: Certification of Areas of Ground Taken Away for Streets and Other New Works".Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.52 (1):25–38.doi:10.1098/rsnr.1998.0032.JSTOR532074.
Cooper, Michael (1998). "Robert Hooke's Work as Surveyor for the City of London in the Aftermath of the Great Fire. Part Three: Settlement of Disputes and Complaints Arising from Rebuilding".Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.52 (2):205–220.doi:10.1098/rsnr.1998.0046.JSTOR531857.
Cooper, Michael (2003).'A More Beautiful City': Robert Hooke and the Rebuilding of London after the Great Fire. Sutton Publishing Ltd.ISBN978-0-7509-2959-2.
Gunther, Robert, ed. (1930).Early Science in Oxford. Vol. 6: The life and works of Robert Hooke. privately printed. Gunther'sEarly Science in Oxford devotes five of its fourteen volumes to Hooke.
Hart, Vaughan (2020).Christopher Wren: In Search of Eastern Antiquity. Yale University Press.ISBN978-1913107079.
Nauenberg, Michael (1994)."Hooke, Orbital Motion, and Newton's Principia"(PDF).American Journal of Physics.62 (4):331–350.Bibcode:1994AmJPh..62..331N.doi:10.1119/1.17576.This may help resolve the long-standing mystery of why Hooke never published his controversial claim that he had demonstrated that an attractive force, which is '... in duplicate proportion from the Center Reciprocall ...', implies elliptic orbits
Hall, A R (October 1951). "Two Unpublished Lectures of Robert Hooke".Isis.42 (3). The University of Chicago Press:219–230.doi:10.1086/349309.JSTOR226559.PMID14880332. (A pair of letters exchanged between Hooke and Newton (9 December 1679 and 13 December 1679, omitted from Waller'sThe Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke, M.D. S.R.S.)
Henderson, Felicity (22 May 2007). "Unpublished Material from the Memorandum Book of Robert Hooke, Guildhall Library MS 1758".Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.61 (2):129–175.doi:10.1098/rsnr.2006.0173.JSTOR20462618. (Hooke's diary for March–July 1672 and January 1681 to May 1683, omitted by Robinson and Adams fromThe Diary of Robert Hooke, M.A., M.D., F.R.S., 1672–1680)
Koyré, Alexandre (December 1952). "An Unpublished Letter of Robert Hooke to Isaac Newton".Isis.43 (4). The University of Chicago Press:312–337.doi:10.1086/348155.JSTOR227384.PMID13010921. (A pair of letters exchanged between Hooke and Newton (9 December 1679 and 13 December 1679, omitted from Rowse'sEssay on Newton's Principia.)
