ABSTRACT
The reputation of Robert Hooke has come a long way since its revival started 50 years ago. According to one writer, ‘It needs to be said that the numerous discoveries of Hooke form the basis of modern science’1 and according to another, ‘It is impossible for the unbiased historian to say whether Newton or Hooke made the more significant contribution’.2 Elsewhere, claims are made for Hooke’s achievement that exceed even the most favourable interpretation of the evidence.3
Mixed views of Hooke survive, though, for example: ‘Micrographia … presented not a systematic investigation of any one question, but a banquet of observations …’4 versus ‘Micrographia … amply demonstrates how brilliantly eclectic, yet how tightly controlled, a series of physical investigations can be’.5
