"Morbus, " Locke and Boyle-a response to Peter Anstey

Early Science and Medicine

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 378-397

  Walmsley, Jonathan ^a  

^a NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; GENERAL ASPECTS OF DISEASE; HISTORY; PHILOSOPHY;

DISEASE; HISTORIOGRAPHY; HISTORY, 17TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 21ST CENTURY; HISTORY, ANCIENT; PHILOSOPHY;

EID: 1842612659     PISSN: 13837427     EISSN: 15733823     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/157338202X00243     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Manuscript references comprise: Library, Shclfmark and folio or page number. Manuscript entries beginning on one page and ending on another are linked by an ampersand. 'BL' = British Library, 'Bodl.' = Bodleian Library and 'PRO' = Public Record Office (both library and shelfmark). References to Drafts A and B of the Essay cite Draft, section and page number from the P.H. Nidditch and G.A.J. Rogers edition (Drafts for the Essay concerning Human Underssanding, and other Philosophical Writingss 1, (Oxford, 1990)).
2. References to Locke's correspondence indicate the letter number in The Correspondence of John Locke, E.S. de Beer (ed.), (Oxford, 1978-)
3. References to Boyle are from The Works of Robert Boyle, M. Hunter and E. B. Davis (eds.) (London, 1999-2000), (hereafter Boyle, Works), volume and page number. In this paper (⋯) = an editorial insertion, [⋯] = a deletion.
4. M. Boas-Hall, "An Early Version of Boyle's Sceptical Chymist, " in Isis, 45 (1954), 153-168, passim.
5. It was replaced by a historical discussion of the theory that water was the sole element. A similar passage on the formation of chicks in eggs did appear in the Origine of Formee and Qualities, discussed in Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 384-385.
6. Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 376.
7. Clericuzio also noted this passage's Helmontian overtones: "the passage devoted to seminal principles-presented here as a kind of comment on the water culture experiment, but which disappears in The Sceptical Chymist-is evidence of Boyle's acceptance of one of the key notions of Helmontian natural philosophy." (A. Clericuzio, "Carneades and the chemists, " in Robert Boyle Reconsidered, M. Hunter (ed.), (Cambridge, 1994), 79-90, esp. 80.) Clericuzio does not appear to think that Boyle's removal of such allusions by the time of publication has any bearing on the changing nature of Boyle's views over this period.
8. Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 378.
9. See J.R. Milton, "Locke at Oxford, " in Locke's Philosophyy Content and Contextt G.A.J. Rogers (ed.), (Oxford, 1994), 29-47, esp. Table 1: "Locke's reading 1658-March 1667, " 36. "Medicine" accounts for 46.6% of the books Locke read in this period, contrasted with 16.4% on "Natural Philosophy" and 15.4% for "Theology and religion."
10. Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 367-368.
11. M. Hunter, "Boyle versus the Galenists: A Suppressed Critique of Seventeenth-Century Medical Practice and its Significance, " in Medical History, 41 (1997), 322-361, esp. 332. (Pubitemid 127459620)
12. For a discussion of Lower's work in this period, Locke's association with Lower and Lower's Vindicatio of Willis' work, see R.G. Frank, Harvey and the Oxford Physiologists (Berkeley, 1980), 164-192.
13. See Boyle's New Experiments Physico-Mechanicall, touching the Spring of the Air (Oxford, 1660), in Boyle, Workss I: 287
14. and The General History of Air (London, 1692), in Boyle, Workss XII: 32.
15. K. Dewhurst, "Locke's Essay on Respiration, " in Bulletin for the History of Medicine, 24 (1960), 257-273.
16. Boyle, Some Considerations touching the Usefulnesse of Experimental Naturall Philosophy (Oxford, 1663), in Boyle, Workss III: 466-467
17. (mentioned in Walmsley, Locke s Early Essay on Disease, 382-383)
18. and Boyle, The Origine of Formes and Qualities (Oxford, 1666)
19. in Boyle, Works, V: 388
20. (mentioned in Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 386), respectively.
21. J. Glanvill, Scepsis Scientifica (London, 1665), 32-33.
22. J. Glanvill, The Vanity of Dogmatizing (London, 1661), 43-44.
23. J. Glanvill, Essays on Several Important Subjectt in Philosoph' and Religion (London, 1676), 1-33, esp. 10-12.
24. For the varying usage of "Archeus" see, A. Clericuzio, "From van Helmont to Boyle. A Study of the Transmission of Helmontian Chemical and Medical Theories in Seventeenth-Century England, in The British Journal for the History of Sciencee 26 (1993), 303-334, passim.
25. Clericuzio, in referring to "Morbus, " cites Locke as its author and attests to the paper's "commitment to iatrochemistry and in particular to the Helmontian theory of diseases" (Clericuzio, "From van Helmont to Boyle, " 318).
26. ch name Helmont has as clearely & intelligibly explained it to us as Aristotle by his description" (PRO 30/24/4722 f. 36v).
27. As noted by Milton, "Locke, Medicine and Mechanical Philosophy, " 239, Locke referred to the "archeus being enraged" as late as 1684 (cf. Bodl. MS Locke f. 8 pp. 214-215). Locke also studied the work of Basil Valentine, cited in the OED as the first reference for their definition of "Archeus" (Bodl. MS Locke d.11ff. 267r-265v rev);
28. see G.G. Meynell, "Locke and Alchemy: His Notes on Basilius Valentinus and Andre Cellarius, " Locke Studies 2 (2002), 177-197.
29. "The Excellency and Grounds Of the Corpuscular or Mechanical Philosophy, " in The Excellency oj Theology Compar'd with Natural Philosoph'y (London, 1674)
30. in Boyle, Workss VIII: 103-116, esp. 104.
31. "Requisites of a Good Hypothesis, " in Boyle, Workss XIII: 270-272.
32. For dating see Boyle, Workss XIII: 259.
33. Locke did make errors of this type-see his copy of Sydenham's "Small Pox of the years 1667 & 1668" in Bodl. MS f.21 in G.G Meynell (ed.), Thomas Syden ham's 'Observatione. Medicae' and his 'Medical Observations' With new transcripts of related Locke MSS, in the Bodleian Library, (Folkestone, 1991)) 75 and 85.
34. For details of Locke's system see J.R. Milton, "The Date and Significance of two of Locke's Early Manuscripts, " in The Locke Newsletter, 19 (1988), 47-89
35. and G.G. Meynell, 'John Locke's Method of Common-Placing, as Seen in his Drafts and his Medical Notebooks, Bodleian MSS Locke d.9, f.21 and f.23, " in The Seventeenth Century, 8 (1993), 245-267.
36. This essay appears on ft. 53r, 121v, 122r, 122v & 126v as the last entry under "Su." Locke used the next free set of facing pages to continue entries that had run out of space on the 2 pages allocated for a heading. So each of the first entries of the versos of pages between ff. 53r and 121v pre-date the note that straddled them. The first entry on f. 111v was "Ambustio" from Boyle's Sceptical Chymist, which Locke read in 1664 (Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 373, n. 34). Thus Anstey's statement that the essay is a manuscript source of the Usefulness (Anstey implies that this essay was "re-worked" for publication) must be questioned-Locke copied this essay into his notebook after publication of the Usefulness. It is not possible to say exactly when-the fact that this was the last entry under this heading gives us little evidence of what came after it (though, given the arrangement of the respective texts, "Morbus" was later than this entry). As well as minor textual changes, there are some significant differences between the two versions-that in BL Add. MS 32554 has an anecdotal introduction identifying Boyle and the dedicatee in the third person and includes a significant new section, whilst omitting another portion from the published text.
37. Walmsley, "Locke's Early Essay on Disease, " 377-378.
38. A. Clericuzio, "A Redefinition of Boyle's Chemistry and Corpuscular Philosophy, " in Annals of Sciencee 47 (1990), 561-589. Anstey refers to this paper in Section 2, prior to admitting his conversion to Clericuzio's view. It is interesting to note that Anstey's quotation concerning Boyle's "nescience appeared first in Clericuzio: ibid., 584.