¹ 'sGravesande, to Newton, , 7 08 1721Google Scholar, in Correspondence of Isaac Newton (ed. Turnbull, H. W., Scott, J. F., Hall, A. R. and Tilling, Laura), 7 vols., Cambridge, 1959–1977, vii, 143–6Google Scholar and Fischer, to Desaguliers, , 08 1721Google Scholar, in Dircks, Henry, Perpetuum mobile, ora History of the Search for Self-Motive Power, second series, London, 1870, 110–12Google Scholar. See also Gould, R. T., ‘Orffyreus’ wheel', in Oddities: A Book of Unexplained Facts. London, 1928, 137–77Google Scholar and Crommelin, C. A., ‘La roue d'Orffyreus’, Janus (1960), 48, 47–52.Google Scholar

² See note 1 and 'sGravesande, to Crousaz, , 1729Google Scholar, in Dircks, , op. cit. (1), 113–14Google Scholar; Allamand, Jean, ‘Histoire de la vie et des ouvrages de Mr 'sGravesande’, in Willem 'sGravesande, Oeuvres philosophiques et mathématiques (ed. Allamand, Jean), 2 vols., Amsterdam, 1774, i, pp. xxiii–xxviiGoogle Scholar. The original version of this ‘Histoire’ is [Allamand], ‘'sGravesande’, in Prosper Marchand's posthumous Dictionnaire historique, 2 vols., The Hague, 1758, ii, 214–41, on 223–6Google Scholar (for the composition of this essay see Berkvens-Stevelinck, Christiane, Prosper Marchand, Leiden, 1987, 70Google Scholar). For the London perpetual-motion project, see Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum: Political and Personal Satires, London, 1873, ii, 443 (no. 1625, produced in 1720).Google Scholar

³ Kenrick, William, An Account of the Automaton Constructed by Orffyreus, London, 1770Google Scholar and A Lecture on the Perpetual Motion, London, 1771Google Scholar (an attack on Reid: citation from this text, 1); Reid, Thomas to Price, Richard, 1772Google Scholar, in Correspondence of Richard Price (ed. Peach, W. Bernard and Thomas, D. O.), 2 vols., Durham, 1983, i, 153–4Google Scholar. The Académie's ban is in Histoire de l'Académie Royale des Sciences (1775), Paris, 1778, 61–6Google Scholar, discussed in Hahn, Roger, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution: The Paris Academy of Sciences 1666–1803, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1971, 145Google Scholar. For Montucla's view in 1778 see Ozanam, Jacques, Recreations in Mathematics and Natural Philosophy (ed. Montucla, Jean), 1st English edition (tr. Hutton, Charles), 4 vols., London, 1803, ii, 105–6Google Scholar. For cautionary surveys see von Helmholtz, Hermann, ‘On the interaction of natural forces’ (1854), in Popular Scientific Lectures (ed. Kline, Morris), New York, 1962, 59–62Google Scholar and Ord-Hume, Arthur, Perpetual Motion: The History of an Obsession, London, 1977.Google Scholar

⁴ Mayr, Otto, Authority, Liberty and Automatic Machinery in Early Modern Europe, Baltimore, 1986, 67–81, 107–14Google Scholar; Séris, Jean-Pierre, Machine et communication: Du théâtre des machines à la mécanique industrielle, Paris, 1987, 11–34Google Scholar; Vérin, Hélène, La Gloire des ingénieurs: L'intelligence technique du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle, Paris, 1993, 102–11, 181–7.Google Scholar

⁵ See Wallace, Anthony, The Social Context of Innovation, Princeton, 1982, 40–52Google Scholar for Vauxhall, steam-engines and perpetual motion. See also, for comparison, Willmoth, Frances, ‘Mathematical sciences and military technology: the Ordnance Office in the reign of Charles II’, in Renaissance and Revolution (ed. Field, J. V. and James, F. A. J. L.), Cambridge, 1993, 117–32, on 122Google Scholar. For eighteenth-century measures of machines' efficiency see Reynolds, Terry S., Stronger than a Hundred Men: A History of the Vertical Water Wheel, Baltimore, 1983, 204–33Google Scholar; Lindqvist, Svante, Technology on Trial: The Introduction of Steam Power into Sweden 1715–1736, Stockholm, 1984, 67–77Google Scholar; and Morton, Alan, ‘Concepts of power: natural philosophy and the uses of machines in mid-eighteenth-century London’, BJHS (1995), 28, 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶ For British finance and the fiscal-military state see Dickson, P. G., The Financial Revolution in England: A Study of the Development of Public Credit 1688–1756, London, 1967, 41Google Scholar; Pocock, J. G. A., The Machiavellian Moment, Princeton, 1975, 425–7, 460–1Google Scholar; Brewer, John, The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State 1688–1783, London, 1989, 137–61Google Scholar. For Newton's role see Westfall, R. S., Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton, Cambridge, 1980, 551–79, 604–23 (citation from 619)Google Scholar and Stewart, Larry, The Rise of Public Science: Rhetoric, Technology and Natural Philosophy in Newtonian Britain, 1660–1750, Cambridge, 1992, 160–9.Google Scholar

⁷ For the politics of measurement see Kula, Witold, Measures and Men, Princeton, 1986, 167–84Google Scholar (for France) and Linebaugh, Peter, The London Hanged: Crime and Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century, Harmondsworth, 1991, 55–8, 162–3Google Scholar (for Britain). For credit mechanisms see Scharfer, Simon, ‘A social history of plausibility’, in Rethinking Social History (ed. Wilson, Adrian), Manchester, 1993, 128–57, on 137–41Google Scholar; Smith, Pamela, The Business of Alchemy: Science and Culture in the Holy Roman Empire, Princeton, 1994, 131–40Google Scholar; Shapin, Steven, A Social History of Truth, Chicago, 1994, 194–202Google Scholar. For the discipline and enclosure of places, see Foucault, Michel, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Harmondsworth, 1979, 141–9.Google Scholar

⁸ Frederick II, Considérations sur l'état présent du corps politique de l'Europe (1736)Google Scholar, cited in Mayr, , op. cit. (4), 108Google Scholar. Compare with Foucault, , op. cit. (7), 136Google Scholar, on ‘the meticulous king of small machines’ Frederick the Great for whom ‘the celebrated automata were not only a way of illustrating an organism, they were also political puppets, small-scale models of power’; and Apostolides, Jean-Marie, Le Roi-machine, Paris, 1981, 130–1Google Scholar on absolutism as the emergence of ‘a king-machine whose sole body is confounded with the machine of State’.

⁹ Leibniz, to Friedrich, Duke Johann, autumn 1678Google Scholar, in Leibniz, , Sämtliche Schriften und Briefen, Erste Reihe: Allgemeine Politischer und Historischer Briefwechsel, 14 vols., Darmstadt and Berlin, 1923-, ii, 89–90Google Scholar and Haas, to Leibniz, , 1695Google Scholar, cited in Philippi, Hans, Landgraf Karl von Hessen-Kassel: ein deutscher Fürst der Barockzeit, Marburg, 1976, 613Google Scholar. For baroque commerce and court society see Clark, William, ‘The scientific revolution in the German nations’, in The Scientific Revolution in National Context (ed. Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikuláš), Cambridge, 1992, 90–114, on 97–8, 104–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Moran, Bruce, The Alchemical World of the German Court, Stuttgart, 1991, 171Google ScholarPubMed; and especially Smith, , op. cit. (7), 126–31, 209–17.Google Scholar

¹⁰ For the court settings of perpetual-motion schemes see Evans, R. J. W., The Making of the Habsburg Monarchy 1550–1700, Oxford, 1979, 338–9Google Scholar and Smith, , op. cit. (7), 190–1Google Scholar; for Leupold see Hiersmann, Lothar, Jacob Leupold, Leipzig, 1982, 24ff.Google Scholar; for Becher, Oldenburg and the Royal Society see Smith, ibid., 59–60, 259 n44; for Becher and Huygens see Huygens, to Carcavy, , 26 02 1660Google Scholar, in Huygens, Christiaan, Oeuvres complètes, 22 vols., The Hague, 1888–1950, iii, 28Google Scholar. For Bertrand de la Coste see Hahn, , op. cit. (3), 142.Google Scholar

¹¹ Leibniz, to Friedrich, Duke Johann, autumn 1678 and 08 1679Google Scholar, in Leibniz, , op. cit. (9), ii, 89–90 and 189Google Scholar, discussed in Elster, Jon, Leibniz et la formation de l'esprit capitaliste, Paris, 1975, 89Google Scholar; Gabbey, Alan, ‘The mechanical philosophy and its problems’, in Change and Progress in Modern Science (ed. Pitt, Joseph), Dordrecht, 1985, 9–84, on 42–44, 75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Séris, , op. cit. (4), 159–210.Google Scholar

¹² Leibniz, , ‘The monadology’ (1714)Google Scholar; Leibniz, to Caroline, , 11 1715Google Scholar; Clarke, to Caroline, , 11 1715Google Scholar; all cited in Leibniz's Philosophical Papers and Letters (ed. Loemker, Leroy E.), Chicago, 1956, 1055, 1096 and 1098–9Google Scholar and discussed in Gabbey, , op. cit. (11), 63–6Google Scholar. For the politics of these rival models of power and artifice see Meyer, R. W., Leibniz and the Seventeenth Century Revolution, Cambridge, 1952, 142ff.Google Scholar; Elster, , op. cit. (11), 172–7Google Scholar; Shapin, Steven, ‘Of gods and kings’, Isis (1981), 72, 187–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Leibniz at Kassel see Moran, Bruce, ‘Science at the Court of Hesse-Kassel’, Ph.D. thesis, UCLA, Los Angeles, 1978, 176.Google Scholar

¹³ ‘Nova literaria mathematica de perpetuo mobili…’, Acta eruditorum (01 1715), 46–7Google Scholar; review of Wolff, , Mathematisches LexikonGoogle Scholar, in Acta eruditorum (02 1717), 92Google Scholar; and ‘Relatio de perpetuo mobilii Joh. Ernesti Eliae Orfyrei’, Acta eruditorum (11 1718), 497–9Google Scholar. Compare with Dircks, Henry, Perpetuum mobile, first series, London, 1861, 206–8Google Scholar, and second series, op. cit. (1), 95–8.

¹⁴ Dircks, , op. cit. (13), 208–9Google Scholar and Dircks, , op. cit. (1), 98–101Google Scholar; Gould, ; op. cit. (1), 144–5Google Scholar. These episodes should be compared with the strategies of revelation and concealment of Leibniz, Huygens and Hooke; see Iliffe, Rob, ‘In the warehouse: privacy, property and priority in the early Royal Society’, History of Science (1992), 30, 29–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Moran, , op. cit. (12), 144–77.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Brunner, Hugo, Geschichte der Residenzstadt Cassel (1913), Frankfurt-On-Main, 1978, 199–250Google Scholar; Philippi, , op. cit. (9), 609–15Google Scholar; Dreier, Franz Adrian, ‘The Kunstkammer of the Hessian Landgraves in Kassel’, in The Origins of Museums (ed. Impey, O. and MacGregor, A.), Oxford, 1985, 102–9Google Scholar; von Mackensen, Ludolf, Die naturwissenschaftlisch-technische Sammlung in Kassel, Kassel, 1991, 26–8Google Scholar; Daumas, Maurice, Scientific instruments of the 17th and 18th Centuries and their Makers, London, 1972, 143Google Scholar; de Clercq, Peter, ‘Exporting scientific instruments around 1700’, Tractrix (1991), 3, 79–120.Google ScholarPubMed

¹⁷ Leibniz, to Haas, , 10 08 1696Google Scholar, in Gerland, Ernst, Leibnizens und Huygens Briefwechsel mit Papin, Berlin, 1881, 209Google Scholar. For Papin and Leibniz in the early 1690s see Séris, , op. cit. (4), 250–8Google Scholar and Elster, , op. cit. (11), 79–88Google Scholar. For the steam-engines at Kassel see Wintzer, E., Denis Papins Erlebnisse in Marburg, Marburg, 1898, 19–23Google Scholar; Payen, J., ‘Huygens et Papin’, in Huygens et la France (ed. Taton, René), Paris, 1982, 197–208, on 202–5Google Scholar; Wallace, , op. cit. (5), 55–8.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Papin, to Leibniz, , 15 01 1705Google Scholar, in Gerland, , op. cit. (17), 339–40Google Scholar. For Savery see Rolt, L. T. C. and Allen, J. S., The Steam Engine of Thomas Newcomen, New York, 1977, 24Google Scholar; Hills, R. L., ‘Review of the history of the Savery engine’, Transactions of the Newcomen Society (1987), 58, 27–44, on 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ Papin, to Leibniz, , 7 07 1707Google Scholar, in Gerland, , op. cit. (17), 378Google Scholar. For Papin's departure from Kassel see Philippi, , op. cit. (9), 611–12.Google Scholar

²⁰ Papin, , ‘Proposition concerning a new invented boat’, 11 02 1708Google Scholar and Papin, to Sloane, , 31 12 1711Google Scholar, in Gerland, , op. cit. (17), 386–7, 394–7Google Scholar. For Papin in London see Heilbron, J. L., Physics at the Royal Society during Newton's Presidency, Los Angeles, 1983, 31Google Scholar; and Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 24–6, 175–6.Google Scholar

²¹ Papin, Denis, ‘Observations on a French paper concerning a perpetual motion’, Philosophical Transactions (1685), 15, 1240–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Leibniz, to Papin, , 25 10 1705Google Scholar, in Gerland, , op. cit. (17), 356–7Google Scholar. For Leibniz's earlier experiences with Becher and princely patrons, see Smith, , op. cit. (7), 255–8Google Scholar; Elster, , op. cit. (11), 83–4Google Scholar; and compare with Leibniz, to von dem Bussche, , 5 01 1684Google Scholar, in Leibniz, , op. cit. (9), iv, 12–14Google Scholar, ‘it is almost impossible to complete something difficult under these circumstances and with these obstacles when one is not oneself a workman and cannot be continually present on site’.

²² Orffyreus, , Triumphans perpetuum mobile Orffyreanum, Kassel, 1719, 10–12Google Scholar and ‘Relatio de perpetuo mobili Joh. Ernesti Orffyrei’, Acta eruditorum (11 1718), 497–9 on 498Google Scholar. This passage from the Acta is silently omitted in Dircks, , op. cit. (1), 96.Google Scholar

²³ Desaguliers, J. T., Course of Experimental Philosophy, 2 vols., London, 1734–1744, i, 175–8Google Scholar. For Rowley see King, Henry C. and Millburn, John R., Geared to the Stars, Bristol, 1978, 154–6.Google Scholar

²⁴ Rolt, and Allen, , op. cit. (18), 58–74Google Scholar; Lindqvist, , op. cit. (5), 112–14Google Scholar; Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 236.Google Scholar

²⁵ For the architectural context of Fischer von Erlach and his father Johann see Zacharias, T., Joseph Emmanuel Fischer von Erlach, Vienna, 1960, 15–24Google Scholar, and Rykwert, Joseph, The First Moderns: The Architects of the Eighteenth Century, Cambridge, MA, 1980, 67–75Google Scholar. For the engines see Hollister-Short, G. J., ‘The introduction of the Newcomen engine into Europe’, Transactions of the Newcomen Society (1977), 48, 11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar and ‘A new technology and its diffusion: steam engine construction in Europe 1720–1780’, Industrial Archaeology (1978), 13, 9–41 and 103–28Google Scholar; and Teich, Mikuláš, ‘The early history of the Newcomen engine at Nova Bana (Königsberg)’, East Central Europe (1982), 9, 24–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Desaguliers' demonstration is recorded in Royal Society of London Journal Book (22 01 1719), 11, 282.Google Scholar

²⁶ Allamand, , op. cit. (2), p. xxiiiGoogle Scholar; Hollister-Short, , ‘Introduction’, op. cit. (25), 21–2Google Scholar and ‘A new technology’, op. cit. (25), 27–8Google Scholar; Teich, , op. cit. (25), 26–7Google Scholar. For Fischer in Vienna, see Zacharias, , op. cit. (25) 19–21Google Scholar; Kurzel-Runtscheiner, Erich, ‘Die Fischer von Erlachschen Feuermaschinen’, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Technik und Industrie (1929), 19, 71–91Google Scholar; and von Guldenberg, Daniel to von dem Bussche, Heinrich, 1725Google Scholar, in Hoffmann, D., ‘Die frühesten Berichte über die erste Dampfmaschine auf dem europäische Kontinent’, Technikgeschichte (1974), 41, 118–31, on 128.Google Scholar

²⁷ Lindqvist, , op. cit. (5), 112–13Google Scholar. Hollister-Short cites Montesquieu in ‘A new technology’, op. cit. (25), 20Google Scholar. For Leibniz on workers' resistance, see Elster, , op. cit. (11), 97–102.Google Scholar

²⁸ News of the wheel is in Mercure historique et politique (09 1721), 363Google Scholar and Present State of Europe (08 1721), 32, 306–8Google Scholar. For drawings of Potter's engines by Leupold and by Fischer see Rolt, and Allen, , op. cit. (18), 70, 74.Google Scholar

²⁹ Allamand, , op. cit. (2), pp. ix–xiiGoogle Scholar; van Helden, Anne C., ‘Theory and practice in air pump construction: the cooperation between Willem Jacob 'sGravesande and Jan van Musschenbroek’, Annals of Science (1994), 51, 477–95, on 481–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Jacob, M. C., The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans, London, 1981, 185–7, 245Google Scholar, and Berkvens-Stevelinck, , op. cit. (2), 111Google Scholar for the Journal littéraire.

³⁰ 'sGravesande, to Newton, , 13/24 06 1718Google Scholar, in Hall, A. R., ‘Further Newton correspondence’, Notes and Records of the Royal Society (1982), 37, 7–34, on 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³¹ For the Leiden cabinet, see Crommelin, C. A., Descriptive Catalogue of the Physical Instruments of the 18th Century, Leiden, 1951, 24–41Google Scholar; de Clercq, Peter, The Leiden Cabinet of Physics, Leiden, 1989, 6–9Google Scholar; van Helden, , op. cit. (29), 485–6.Google Scholar

³² For Desaguliers' demonstration see Royal Society of London Journal Book (28 01 1720) 11, 437Google Scholar; for Triewald see Lindqvist, , op. cit. (5), 210Google Scholar; for Kassel see de Clercq, , op. cit. (16), 83Google Scholar and van Helden, , op. cit. (29), 488Google Scholar; for Leiden steam-engine models see de Clercq, , op. cit. (31), 50–3Google Scholar; for Adams see Morton, A. Q. and Wess, Jane, Public and Private Science: The King George III Collection, London, 1993, 245.Google Scholar

³³ Ruestow, Edward G., Physics at Seventeenth and Eighteenth-century Leiden, The Hague, 1973, 116–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar; van Helden, , op. cit. (29), 488Google Scholar; Daumas, , op. cit. (16), 137–9, 143Google Scholar. For ‘demonstration’ see Schaffer, Simon, ‘Machine philosophy: demonstration devices in Georgian mechanics’, Osiris (1994), 9, 157–82, on 157–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁴ 'sGravesande, to Newton, , 7 08 1721Google Scholar, in Newton, , op. cit. (1), vii, 144Google Scholar; Allamand, , op. cit. (2), p. xvGoogle Scholar; 'sGravesande, , ‘Remarques touchant le mouvement perpetuel’, in Oeuvres, op. cit. (2), i, 305–12Google Scholar. Here 'sGravesande mentions that he had performed these trials, and so changed his view on the law of force, between sending the letter to Newton in August 1721 and his composition of this paper eight months later.

³⁵ The apparatus is in Leiden: see Crommelin, , op. cit. (31), 29Google Scholar and de Clercq, , op. cit. (31), 28–9Google Scholar. See also Costabel, Pierre, ‘'sGravesande et les forces vives’, in Mélanges Alexandre Koyré (ed. Cohen, I. Bernard and Taton, René), 2 vols., Paris, 1964, i, 117–34 on 124–8Google Scholar; Hankins, T. L., ‘Eighteenth-century attempts to resolve the visviva controversy’, Isis (1965), 56, 281–97, on 287CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Iltis, Carolyn, ‘The Leibnizian-Newtonian debates’, BJHS (1973), 6, 343–77, on 358–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁶ 'sGravesande, , ‘Essai d'une nouvelle théorie de choc’Google Scholar, in Oeuvres, op. cit. (2), i, 217–51Google Scholar (originally published in Journal littéraire (1722), 12, 1–54 and 190–7Google Scholar) and ‘Remarques touchant le mouvement perpetuel’, ibid., i, 305–12.

³⁷ Leibniz, , ‘Reply to the thoughts on the system of pre-established harmony’ (1702)Google Scholar, in Leibniz, , op. cit. (12), 935Google Scholar; 'sGravesande, , ‘Remarques touchant le mouvement perpetuel’Google Scholar, in Oeuvres, op. cit. (2), i, 311–12Google Scholar. The source is Newton, Isaac, Opticks (1730), New York, 1952, 399Google Scholar: ‘seeing therefore the variety of motion which we find in the world is always decreasing, there is a necessity of conserving and recruiting it by active principles, such as are… the case of fermentation, by which the heart and blood of animals are kept in perpetual motion and heat’ (1706 version). For the display of active principles in lectures see Schaffer, Simon, ‘Natural philosophy and public spectacle’, History of Science (1983), 21, 1–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. Thanks to Joe Gross for help with these arguments.

³⁸ Bernoulli, to 'sGravesande, , 31 10 1722Google Scholar, in Allamand, , op. cit. (2), pp. xxxvi–xlvGoogle Scholar. For 'sGravesande's recipes see Costabel, , op. cit. (35), 131–3Google Scholar. For Bernoulli's earlier notions of ‘mixed perpetual motion’ see Gabbey, , op. cit. (11), 58–9Google Scholar and compare with Heimann, P. M., ‘Geometry and nature: Leibniz and Johann Bernoulli's theory of motion’, Centaurus (1977), 21, 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For his relations with Newton see Hall, A. R., Philosophers at War, Cambridge, 1980, 199, 240–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁹ For the answer to Poleni see Pemberton, Henry, ‘A letter… concerning an experiment, whereby it has been attempted to shew the falsity of the common opinion in relation to the force of bodies in motion’, Philosophical Transactions (1722), 32, 57–66, on 58CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Clarke, 's remarks are in ‘A letter occasioned by the present controversy among mathematicians’, Philosophical Transactions (1728), 35, 381–9, on 382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁰ Desaguliers, J. T., ‘An account of an experiment contrived by G. J. 'sGravesande relating to the force of moving bodies’, Philosophical Transactions (1733), 38, 143–4Google Scholar and op. cit. (23), i, 398–400Google Scholar. See also op. cit. (23), ii, 63Google Scholar: ‘I am now convinc'd that all the Phaenomena of the Congress of Bodies may be equally solv'd according to the Principles of the Defenders of the new, as well as those of the old Opinion’. Newton was the ‘excellent and learned friend’ who prepared Pemberton's postscript to his ‘Letter’ (ibid., 67–8), see Iltis, , op. cit. (35), 363.Google Scholar

⁴¹ For the English response see Iltis, , op. cit. (35), 362–76Google Scholar. Compare Desaguliers, op. cit. (23), ii, 54–5Google Scholar against 'sGravesande's argument that momentum is lost when bodies fall into soft obstacles.

⁴² Lindqvist, Svante, ‘Labs in the woods: the quantification of technology during the late Enlightenment’, in The Quantifying Spirit in the Eighteenth Century (ed. Frängsmyr, Tore, Heilbron, J. L. and Rider, Robin), Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1990, 291–314, on 311Google Scholar. For the London political context see Thompson, E. P., Whigs and Hunters, Harmondsworth, 1977, 197–218Google Scholar; Kenyon, J. P., Revolution Principles, Cambridge, 1977, 198–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Dabydeen, David, Hogarth, Walpole and Commercial Britain, London, 1987, 15–40Google Scholar. For the printer's scheme see Cowles, Virginia, The Great Swindle, London, 1960, 126Google Scholar. For the ubiquity of credit, see Earle, Peter, The Making of the English Middle Class, London, 1989, 115–23.Google Scholar

⁴³ Chetwood, William, The Stock Jobber, London, 1720Google Scholar, cited in Melville, Lewis, The South Sea Bubble, London, 1921, 80–1Google Scholar. For nervous maladies and Newtonian active principles, see Porter, Roy, ‘The rage of party: a glorious revolution in English psychiatry?’, Medical History (1983), 29, 35–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Guerrini, Anita, ‘Ether madness: Newtonianism, religion and insanity in eighteenth-century England’, in Action and Reaction (ed. Theerman, Paul and Seeff, Adele F.), Newark, 1993, 232–54Google Scholar. For Swift on perpetual motion in 1712 see Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 209Google Scholar, and for clockwork see ‘Travels into several remote nations of the world by Lemuel Gulliver’ (1721–1726), in Swift, Selected Writings (ed. Hayward, John), London, 1968, 30, 99.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Swift, , ‘The South Sea Project’Google Scholar, cited in Melville, , op. cit. (43), 150Google Scholar; Defoe, , A Review (1706), 22, 502–3Google Scholar and Considerations on the Present State of Great Britain, London, 1717, 146Google Scholar, cited in Schaffer, Simon, ‘Defoe's natural philosophy and the worlds of credit’, in Nature Transfigured (ed. Christie, John and Shuttleworth, Sally), Manchester, 1989, 13–44, on 30Google Scholar; ‘A South Sea Ballad, to a new tune, called the Philosopher's Stone’, cited in Melville, , op. cit. (43), 147.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ For Montesquieu on the credit crisis, see Letter 142 in Betts, C. J. (ed.), Persian Letters (1721), Harmondsworth, 1973, 256–8Google Scholar and Pocock, , op. cit. (6), 468Google Scholar. For Swift see Rogers, Pat, ‘Gulliver and the engineers’, in Eighteenth Century Encounters, Brighton, 1985, 11–25Google Scholar and Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 332–3.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ For the 1720 credit boom in Amsterdam and the link with Hesse-Kassel see Carswell, John, The South Sea Bubble, London, 1961, 165Google Scholar and Melville, , op. cit. (43), 65.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ 'sGravesande, , ‘Dissertation morale sur le commerce des actions de la compagnie du sud’, in Oeuvres, op. cit. (2), ii, 272–93Google Scholar, first quoted on 289 and second on 278, both of which can be dated to July 1720. Allamand describes the origin of this text in Marchand, , op. cit. (2), ii, 239.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Defoe, , A Review, op. cit. (44).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Hatzfeld, to Newton, , 1724Google Scholar, in Newton, , op. cit. (1), vii, 253–4Google Scholar; London Journal (10 12 1726)Google Scholar; Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 241, 349Google Scholar. For Hatzfeld's link with Orffyreus and 'sGravesande see Marchand, , op. cit. (2), ii, 223.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ de la Harpe, Jacqueline, Jean-Pierre de Crousaz, Geneva, 1955, 166Google Scholar; for Crousaz and the 1720 prize see Iltis, Carolyn, ‘The decline of Cartesianism in mechanics’, Isis (1973), 64, 350–73, on 359–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; for Crousaz and Kassel see Ingrao, Charles, The Hessian Mercenary State, Cambridge, 1987, 13.Google Scholar

⁵¹ British Library MSS ADD 4433, fols. 321–64 and Desaguliers, , op. cit. (23), i, 255Google Scholar; Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 125–7Google Scholar; Poni, Carlo, ‘The craftsman and the good engineer: technical practice and theoretical mechanics in Desaguliers’, History and Technology (1993), 10, 215–32, on 224–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the visit to the Society in autumn 1721 see McConnell, Anita, ‘L. F. Marsigli's visit to London in 1721’, Notes and Records of the Royal Society (1993), 47, 179–204, on 191–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Desaguliers complains to Newton, , 29 04 1725Google Scholar, in Newton, , op. cit. (1), 315Google Scholar. For an interesting text on the evaluation of inventions translated by Desaguliers see Pitcairne, Archibald, ‘A solution of the problem concerning inventors’ (1688), in The Works of Dr Archibald Pitcairne (ed. Desaguliers, J. T. and Sewell, G.), London, 1715, 135–63.Google Scholar

⁵² Desaguliers, , ‘Remarks on some attempts made towards a perpetual motion’, Philosophical Transactions (1721), 31, 237Google Scholar, and Royal Society of London Journal Book (2 11 1721), 12, 158 and (9 11 1721), 12, 161–2.Google Scholar

⁵³ Desaguliers, to Sloane, , 12 12 1729Google Scholar, British Library MSS Sloane 4050, fol. 244. See also Desaguliers, , ‘An examination of M. Perault's new invented Axis in Peritrochio said to be entirely void of friction’, Philosophical Transactions (1730), 36, 22–30, on 227Google Scholar, and Stewart, , op. cit. (6), 128, 241Google Scholar. For Perrault and Poleni, see Rykwert, , op. cit. (25), 23–4, 48 n2Google Scholar. For Perrault on the ‘advantage’ of frictionless machines see Séris, , op. cit. (4), 171–2Google Scholar and Picon, Antoine, Claude Perrault 1613–1688, Paris, 1988, 96–7.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ For Martin on ‘smatterers’ see Philosophia Britannica, 2 vols., Reading, 1747, i, 106–8Google Scholar; a comparable remark is in Pilot, Henri, ‘Règles pour connoistre l'effet qu'on doit espérer d'une machine’, Mémoires de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, 1737, 269–72Google Scholar. For Montucla on Desaguliers see Ozanam, , op. cit. (3), ii, 100Google Scholar. For Orffyreus’ reputation see Allamand, , op. cit. (2), p. xxviGoogle Scholar and Kenrick, , Account, op. cit. (3)Google Scholar. Kenrick denies any argument against perpetual motion in his Lecture, op. cit. (3), 3Google Scholar. For Kenrick, 's London ReviewGoogle Scholar defence of philosophical materialism in summer 1775 see Yolton, John, Thinking Matter, Oxford, 1984, 117Google Scholar. For the milieux of such writers see Jacob, , op. cit. (29), 200–1Google Scholar; Darnton, Robert, Mesmerism and the End of the Enlightenment in France, Cambridge, MA, 1968, 26–33Google Scholar; and Hahn, , op. cit. (3), 140–58.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ 'sGravesande, to Crousaz, , 1729Google Scholar, in Dircks, , op. cit. (1), 113–14Google Scholar. For Desaguliers as wizard see British Library MSS ADD 38175, fol. 215; for his troubles as servant see Desaguliers to Mortimer, MSS ADD 4435, fol. 108. For the heterogeneous audiences of eighteenth-century natural philosophy, see Lindqvist, Svante, ‘The spectacle of science’, Configurations (1992), 1, 57–94, on 88–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the distribution of trust see Shapin, , op. cit. (7), 86–95.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Steele, Richard, The Englishman (29 10 1713)Google Scholar, in King, and Millburn, , op. cit. (23), 154.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Sennett, Richard, The Fall of Public Man, London, 1986, 56–63Google Scholar; Koselleck, Reinhart, Critique and Crisis, Oxford, 1988, 62–9Google Scholar; Habermas, Jürgen, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Cambridge, 1992, 31–7, 57–61Google Scholar. For artisan resistance to metrology, see Linebaugh, , op. cit. (7), 162–3Google Scholar; for clericalism and superstition see Revel, Jacques, ‘Forms of expertise: intellectuals and popular culture in France, 1650–1800’, in Understanding Popular Culture (ed. Kaplan, Steven), Paris and New York, 1984, 255–73, on 262.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ [Louise-Bertrand Castel], Mémoires de Trévoux (05–10 1721), 1761Google Scholar, cited in Allamand, , op. cit. (2), p. xxxvGoogle Scholar. For Castel against Newton see Schier, D. S., Louis-Bertrand Castel: Anti-Newtonian Scientist, Cedar Rapids, 1941Google Scholar, and for his attack on 'sGravesande, see Verlet, Loup, La Malle de Newton, Paris, 1993 158–60.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ For the princely show as a technology of power see Apostolides, , op. cit. (8), 148–59Google Scholar; Biagioli, Mario, Galileo Courtier, Chicago, 1993, 120–33Google Scholar; Eamon, William, Science and the Secrets of Nature, Princeton, 1994, 223–4Google Scholar; Pomian, Krzysztof, Collectors and Curiosities, Cambridge, 1990, 261–7Google Scholar; Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean, Museums and the Shaping of Knowledge, London, 1992, 103Google Scholar; Smith, , op. cit. (7), 103–4Google Scholar. For modern science museums see Butler, Stella, Science and Technology Museums, Leicester, 1992, 35–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ For civil society and the exchange, see Sennett, , op. cit. (57), 80–7Google Scholar; Elias, Norbert, The Court Society, Oxford, 1983, 91Google Scholar; Agnew, Jean-Christophe, Worlds Apart: The Market and the Theater in Anglo-American Thought 1550–1750, Cambridge, 1986, 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar