NEWTON, ISAAC (b. Woolsthorpe, England, 25 December 1642; d. London, England, 20 March 1727), mathematics, dynamics, celestial mechanics, astronomy, optics, natural philosophy.

    “Newton's Chemical Papers,” in Newton's Papers and Letters (I), pp. 241-248; and A. R. Hall and M. B. Hall, “Newton's Chemical Experiments,” in Archives internationales d'histoire des sciences, 11 (1958), 113-152; “Newton's Mechanical Principles,” in Journal of the History of Ideas, 20 (1959), 167-178; “Newton's Theory of Matter,” in Isis, 51 (1960), 131-144; and “Newton and the Theory of Matter,” in Robert Palter, ed., The Annus Mirabilis (VI), pp. 54-68.

On Newton's chemistry and theory of matter, see additionally R. Kargon, Atomism in England From Hariot to Newton (Oxford, 1966); A. Koyré, “Les Queries de l'Optique,” in Archives internationales d'histoire des sciences, 13 (1960), 15-29; T. S. Kuhn, “Newton's 31st Query and the Degradation of Gold,” in Isis, 42 (1951), 296-298, with discussion ibid., 43 (1952), 123-124; J. E. McGuire, “Body and Void ...,” in Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 3 (1966), 206-248; “Transmutation and Immutability,” in Ambix, 14 (1967), 69-95; and other papers; D. McKie, “Some Notes on Newton's Chemical Philosophy,” in Philosophical Magazine, 33 (1942), 847-870; and J. R. Partington, A History of Chemistry, II (London, 1961), 468-477, 482-485.

For Newton's theories of chemistry and matter, and their influence, see the books by Hélène Metzger (VI), R. E. Schofield (VI), and A. Thackray (VI).

Geoffroy's summary (“extrait”) of the Opticks, presented at meetings of the Paris Academy of Sciences, is discussed in I. B. Cohen, “Isaac Newton, Hans Sloane, and the Académie Royale des Sciences,” in Mélanges Alexandre Koyré, I, L'aventure de la science (Paris, 1964), 61-116; on the general agreement by Newtonians that the queries were not so much asking questions as stating answers to such questions (and on the rhetorical form of the queries), see I. B. Cohen, Franklin and Newton (VI), ch. 6.

9. Alchemy, Theology, and Prophecy. Chronology and History. Newton published no essays or books on alchemy. His Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended (London, 1728) also appeared in an abridged version (London, 1728). His major study of prophecy is Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John (London, 1733). A selection of Theological Manuscripts was edited by H. McLachlan (Liverpool, 1950).

For details concerning Newton's theological MSS, and MSS relating to chronology, see secs. VII-VIII of the catalogue of the Sotheby sale of the Newton papers (IV); for other eds. of the Chronology and the Observations, see the Gray bibliography and the catalogue of the Babson Collection (III). There is no analysis of Newton's theological writings based on a thorough analysis of the MSS; see R. S. Westfall, Science and Religion in Seventeenth-Century England (New Haven, 1958), ch. 8; F. E. Manuel, The Eighteenth Century Confronts the Gods (Cambridge, 1959), ch. 3; and George S. Brett, “Newton's Place in the History of Religious Thought,” in F. E. Brasch, ed., Sir Isaac Newton (VI), pp. 259-273. For Newton's chronological and allied studies, see F. E. Manuel, Isaac Newton, Historian (Cambridge, 1963).

On alchemy, the catalogue of the Sotheby sale is most illuminating. Important MSS and annotated alchemical books are to be found in the Keynes Collection (King's College, Cambridge) and in the Burndy Library and the University of Wisconsin, M.I.T., and the Babson Institute. A major scholarly study of Newton's alchemy and hermeticism, based on an extensive study of Newton's MSS, is P. M. Rattansi, “Newton's Alchemical Studies,” in Allen G. Debus, ed., Science, Medicine and Society in the Renaissance: Essays to Honor Walter Pagel, II (New York, 1972), 167-182; see also R. S. Westfall, “Newton and the Hermetic Tradition,” ibid., pp. 183-198.

On Newton and the tradition of the ancients, and the intended inclusion in the Principia of references to an ancient tradition of wisdom, see I. B. Cohen, “ ‘Quantum in se est’: Newton's Concept of Inertia in Relation to Descartes and Lucretius,” in Notes and Records. Royal Society of London, 19 (1964), 131-155; and esp. J. E. McGuire and P. M. Rattansi, “Newton and the ‘Pipes of Pan’,” ibid., 21 (1966), 108-143; also J. E. McGuire, “Transmutation and Immutability,” in Ambix, 14 (1967), 69-95. On alchemy, see R. J. Forbes, “Was Newton an Alchemist?,” in Chymia, 2 (1949), 27-36; F. Sherwood Taylor, “An Alchemical Work of Sir Isaac Newton,” in Ambix, 5 (1956), 59-84; E. D. Geoghegan, “Some Indications of Newton's Attitude Towards Alchemy,” ibid., 6 (1957), 102-106; and A. R. and M. B. Hall, “Newton's Chemical Experiments,” in Archives internationales d'histoire des sciences, 11 (1958), 113-152.

A salutary point of view is expressed by Mary Hesse, “Hermeticism and Historiography: An Apology for the Internal History of Science,” in Roger H. Stuewer, ed., Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science, vol. V of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science (Minneapolis, 1970), 134-162. But see also P. M. Rattansi, “Some Evaluations of Reason in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy,” in Mikuláš Teich and Robert Young, eds., Changing Perspectives in the History of Science, Essays in Honour of Joseph Needham (London, 1973), pp. 148-166.

10. The London Years: the Mint, the Royal Society, Quarrels With Flamsteed and With Leibniz. On Newton's life in London and the affairs of the mint, see the biographies by More and Brewster (1), supplemented by Manuel's Portrait (1). Of special interest are Augustus De Morgan, Newton: His Friend: and His Niece (London, 1885); and Sir John Craig, Newton at the Mint (Cambridge, 1946). On the quarrel with Flamsteed, see Francis Baily, An Account of the Revd. John Flamsteed (London, 1835; supp., 1837; repr. London, 1966); the above-mentioned biographies of Newton; and Newton's Correspondence (II). On the controversy with Leibniz, see the Commercium epistolicum (I). Newton's MSS on this controversy (U.L.C. MS Add. 3968) have never been fully analyzed; but see Augustus De Morgan, “On the Additions Made to the Second Edition of the Commercium epistolicum,” in Philosophical Magazine, 3rd ser., 32 (1848), 446-456; and “On the Authorship of the Account of the Commercium epistolicum, Published in the Philosophical Transactions,” ibid., 4th ser., 3 (1852), 440-444. The most recent ed. of