9(2)

Sarton was trained as a mathematician, but his interests embraced all of the sciences. He was a dedicated man who believed that his was the most valuable form of history. To this end he took part in the founding of societies for the history of science throughout the world. He also worked for the establishment of scholarly journals in the field. He founded the History of Science Society and Isis, still the best known journal in the field, which was first published in Belgium in 1912. Of his many writings one must refer to his Introduction to the History of Science which covered the period from Homer to the fourteenth century in three massive volumes. It was published over a twenty year span and finally given up only when Sarton realized the impossibility of its completion. He also planned the publication of the lectures that composed his two year survey of the field that he gave at Harvard University - only two of the planned eight volumes had been published at the time of his death. It is unnecessary to list any of his other works here, but it is important to say a few words about his approach to the subject because of his enormous influence.

George Sarton frequently expressed his debt to the writings of Auguste Comte and there is no doubt that he considered himself a positivist. Writing in 1927 he defined science as « systematized positive knowledge. » [8]

Our main object is not simply to record isolated discoveries, but rather to explain the progress of scientific thought, the gradual development of human consciousness, that deliberate tendency to understand and to increase our part in the cosmic evolution [9].

As a positivist Sarton sought a history of real science - that is, science as we know it today. Subjects outside science that may have formed part of man’s outlook to nature in earlier periods were ignored or branded as « pseudo-science ». We know now that alchemy and natural magic were important elements in the development of modern science. Sarton was willing to accept the actual chemical reactions and equipment described by the alchemists in his history of science, but nothing else.

The historian of science can not devote much attention to the study of superstition and magic, that is, of unreason, because this does not help him very much to understand human progress. Magic is essentially unprogressive and conservative ; science is essentially progressive ; the former goes backward ; the latter, forward. We can not possibly deal with both movements at once except to indicate their constant strife, and even that is not very instructive, because that strife has hardly varied throughout the ages.
Human folly being at once unprogressive, unchangeable, and unlimited, its study is a hopeless undertaking .There can not be much incentive to encompass that which is indefinite and to investigate the history of something which did not develop
 [10].

Sarton also believed in a hierarchy of sciences. Mathematics stood at the top since it was necessary for the mathematical sciences : astronomy, physics and chemistry. Only eventually as we followed this scheme would we descend to the file sciences. He explained that

Men understand the world in different ways ... some men are more abstract-minded, and they naturally think first of unity and of God, of wholeness, of infinity and other such concepts, while the minds of other men are concrete and they cogitate about health and disease, profit and loss. They invent gadgets and remedies ; they are less interested in knowing anything than in applying whatever knowledge they may already have to practical problems ; they try to make things work and pay, to heal and teach. The first are called dreamers ... ; the second kind are recognized as practical and useful. History has often proved the shortsightedness of the practical men and vindicated the « lazy » dreamers ; it has also proved that the dreamers are often mistaken.
The historian of science ... is not willing to subordinate principles to applications, nor to sacrifice the so-called dreamers to the engineers, the teachers, or the healers
 [11].

Sarton surely idolized the dreamers. And, as he believed that the biological sciences stood far below the mathematical sciences, he believed that medicine was lower still. Because he was convinced that medicine was a practical art he was distressed by those medical historians who claimed that medicine is the real foundation of the other sciences. Indeed, he wrote, « the main misunderstandings concerning the history of science are due to historians of medicine who have the notion that medicine is the center of science. » [12] Sarton felt that medical historians had presented a warped version of scientific history because of their insufficient scientific knowledge.

Those of us who entered the graduate program in the history of science at Harvard University in the autumn of 1956 - only a few months after the death of George Sarton - expected the program to remain dominated by the spirit of his work. Instead we found that the most recent writings in the field were critical of Sarton and that the author most frequently referred to as a model was Alexandre Koyré, the Russian philosopher of science who spent most of his later years in Paris. It is understandable that Koyré should have insisted on a close linkage between scientific and philosophical thought, but history was also important to him for only through it could we be given a sense of the « glorious progress » of the evolution of scientific ideas [13]. Like most other scholars in the field Koyré centered his research on the development of physics and astronomy in the period from Copernicus to Newton. Galileo was an author of special concern, but
he rejected the « Duhem thesis »- that is, that the sources for Galileo’s mechanics were to be found in the work of his medieval predecessors [14]. For Koyré, Galileo was an innovator far removed from the medieval critics of Aristotle, and if he had any predecessor at all, one would have to find him in Archimedes. He explained the Scientific Revolution as a fundamental change in world views (from Aristotelian to Copernican) that could « be reducible to two fundamental and closely connected actions that I characterised as the destruction of the cosmos and the geometrization of space » [15].

[1En 1913, Georges Bigourdan édite un intéressant traité L’astronomie, l’évolution des idées et des méthodes, dans la table alphabétique duquel le mot comète n’est pas repris (non plus que météores, bolides, aérolithes ou étoiles filantes). Halley est cité huit fois sans l’ombre d’une allusion à la comète qui le rendit célèbre. Ceci est d’autant plus plaisant que l’auteur, astronome, rédigeait son travail (copyright en 1911) au moment du retour de 1910, qu’il l’a édité chez Flammarion éditeur et frère de Camille et, qu’en 1927, il compilera une liste de comètes historiques qui fait autorité (Ann. Bur. des Long.). Il existe heureusement une Histoire de l’astronomie de Doublet publiée en 1922 qui consacre plus de place à Halley et rappelle que Voltaire (Epître à Madame du Châtelet), Victor Hugo (La Légende des siècles) et Sully Prudhomme (Epreuves), qui était polytechnicien, célèbrent sa gloire.

[2 Hoefer (Histoire de l’Astronomie, 1873, pp. 461-462) attribue cet évènement à la comète de 1681-1682 en rapportant qu’Halley l’observa « pendant un voyage en France ». Par contre Doublet (op. cit. pp. 334-335) fixe ce voyage en 1680 et écrit : « il se trouvait à mi-route entre Calais et Paris quand il remarqua la fameuse comète de 1680... ». Dans son Histoire de la Science (1965), Pierre Rousseau emprunte aux deux auteurs des fragments difficilement conciliables : « ... 1679... l’année suivante ... une superbe comète apparut... L’astre chevelu passa, puis se perdit dans le rayonnement solaire. Sur ces entrefaites, Halley partit en France en 1682. Il était à mi-route entre Calais et Paris quand il aperçut une autre comète, exactement pareille à la première, mais passée de l’autre côté du Soleil et orientée juste à l’opposite. Si c’était la même ? se demanda-t-il ». Ce ne pouvait être la même. Admirons en passant l’ingénuité du « exactement pareille » tout aussi impossible.

[3 Hortense Lepaute, dont Le Gentil de la Galissière (1725-1792) retour des Indes en 1771, après avoir tenté en vain d’observer les passages de Vénus devant le Soleil les 6 juin 1761 et 9 juin 1769, fit la marraine de l’Hortensia.

[4Selon Doublet, il s’agirait du 3 avril (op. cit. p. 433). Mais J. Sauval (Ciel et Terre, vol. 101, 5-6, 1985, p. 210) précise trente deux jours d’écart. On peut penser qu’il s’agit d’une cocquille typographique (oubli de 1 dans 13).

[5On consultera avec profit l’article de H. Dupuis dans Ciel et Terre, vol. 101, pp. 217-220, 1985 : « 1910 : on se suicide, on fait la fête... mais on est surtout déçu ».

[6D’après A. M. Antoniadi « Idées des anciens sur les comètes » (L’astronomie, 52e année 1938, pp. 311-318, et « Les comètes, considérées en général comme des présages sinistres dans l’histoire » (ibidem, pp. 156-168).

[7IIIème Congrès International d’Histoire des Sciences. Tenu au Portugal du 30 septembre au 6 octobre 1934, sous le haut Patronage de S.E., le Président de la République Portugaise. Actes, Conférences et Communications. Lisboa, 1936 : 9-10.

[8G. Sarton, 1927-1948. - Introduction to the History of Science. I- III . 5 parts. Baltimore. I : 3.

[9ibid., 6.

[10Ibid., 19.

[11G. Sarton, 1952. - A History of Science : Ancient Science Through the Golden Age of Greece. Cambridge : xii.

[12Ibid., xi.

[13A. Koyré, 1966. - Etudes Galiléennes (3 parts, 1935-1939 ; reprinted in one volume), Paris : 11 .

[14See especially P. Duhem, 1913-59. - Le Système du Monde. I-X. Paris.

[15A. Koyré, 1958. - From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe. New York : vi.

[16ibid., v.

[17L. Thorndike, 1923-58. - A History of Magic and Experimental Science. I -VIII. New York.

[18H. Sigerist, 1955-61. - A History of Medicine. I-II . New York.

[19C. Singer, E. J. Holmyard & A.R. Hall, eds., 1954-58, A History of Technology. I-V. New York – London.

[20J. Needham, 1961. - Science and Civilisation in China, I : Introductory Orientations. Cambridge.

[21The first volume published was the second covering the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. J.R. Partinglon, 1961. - A History of Chemistry. II London.

[22 « I am exceedingly sceptical of any attempt to reach a ’synthesis’ - whatever this term may mean - and I am convinced that specialization is the only basis of sound knowledge. » O. Neugebauer, 1952 & 62. - The Exact Sciences in Antiquity. New York : v-vi.

[23I.B. Cohen, 1957. - Some Recent Books on the History of Science, in Roots of Scientific Thought : A Cultural Perspective, ed. Ph. P. Wiener & A. Noland. New York : 627 -656. Published originally in the Journal of the History of Ideas.

[24M. Clagett, ed., 1962. - Critical Problems in the History of Science : Proceedings of the Institute for the History of Science at the University of Wisconsin, September 1-11, 1957. Madison : vi.

[25
W. Pazel, 1930. - Jo. Bapt. Van Helmont : Einführung in die philosophische Medizin des Barock. Berlin ; 1958. - Paracelsus : An Introduction to Philosophical Medicine in the Era of the Renaissance. Basel-New York ; 1967. - William Harvey’s Biological Ideas : Selected Aspects and Historical Background. Basel-New York.

[26W. Pagel, Autumn, 1945. - The Vindication of Rubbish, in Middlesex Hospital Journal : 1-4.

[27Ibid.

[28W. Pagel, 1967. - : 82.

[29W. Pagel, 1945. - : 4.

[30 F.A.Yates, 1964. - Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition. Chigago-London-Toronto.

[31F.A. Yates, 1972. - The Rosicrucian Enlightenment. London-Boston.

[32See Ibid., 113, 171-205.

[33R.S. Westfall, 1972. - Newton and the Hermetic Tradition in Science, Medicine and Society in the Renaissance : Essays to honor Walter Pagal .I-II, ed. Allen G. Debus, New York : 183-98.

[34 B.J.T. Dobbs, 1975. - The Foundations of Newton’s Alchemy or « The Hunting of the Greene Lyon », Cambridge- London- New York- Melbourne : 230.

[35P.M. Rattansi, 1973. - Some Evaluations of Reason in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Natural Philosophy, in Changing Perspectives in the History of Science : Essays in Honour of Joseph Needham, ed. M. Teich & R. Young, London : 148-166.

[36M. Hesse, Reasons and Evaluation in the History of Science, Ibid., 127-147.

[37T.S. Kuhn, 1968 ; 1979. - History of Science, in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, I-XVIII, ed. D.L Sills. New York : XVI, 75-83.

[38Ibid. 79-81.

[39Ibid. 80.

[40Ibid.

[41T.S. Kuhn, 1962. - The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago. This book was alo issued as vol. II, number 2 of the International Encyclopedia of Allfied Science published by the University of Chicago Press.

[42As exemples of this literature see the following : B. Barnes, 1982. - T.S. Kuhn and Social Science, New York ; S. Seiler, 1980. - Wissenschaftstheorie in der Ethnologie : zur Kritik u. Weiterführung d. Theorie von Thomas S. Kuhn anhand etnograph. Berlin ; G. Gutting, ed. c. 1980. - Paradigms and Revolutions : Appraisals and Applications of Thomas Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science. Notre Dame.

[43K. Thomas, 1971 ; 1973. - Religion and the Decline of Magic : Studies in Popular Beliefs in Sixteenth - and Seventeenth-Century England. Harmondsworth.

[44C. Hill, 1972 ; 1973. - The World Turned Upside Down : Radical Ideas During the English Revolution. New York : especially 231-246.

[45 M.C. Jacob, 1976. - The Newtonians and the English Revolution 1689-1720. Ithaca : 16- 17.

[46W.J. Broad, History of Science Losing Its Science, in Science 207 January 25, 1980 : 389.

[47P. Wood, September, 1980. – RecentTrends in the History of Science : The dehumanisation of history, in BSHS Newsletter, N° 3 : 19-20.

[48H. Butterfield, 1959, - The History of Science and the Study of History, in Harvard Library Bulletin 13 : 329-347.

[49Ibid. 347.

[50 H. Butterfield, 1952. - The Origins of Modern Science 1300-1800. New York.

[51J.B. Conant, 1960. - History in the Education of Scientists, Harvard Library Bulletin 14 : 315-333.

[52Ibid. 325.

[53This assessment is my own after having taught courses of this genre for four years both at Harvard University and the University of Chicago during the years 1957-1959 and 1961-1963.

[54T.S. Kuhn, 1968 ; 1979 : 81.



















info visites 222019

     COCOF
                      Avec le soutien de la Commission
                           communautaire française