Science,England's ‘Interest’ and Universal Monarchy: The Making of Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society

Seth Ward suggested a “draught of the Society's design” in May 1662: Birch T. , History of the Royal Society (1756–57), i, 85.

Apart from writing the History, and serving as a member of two of the Society's committees (on natural history and language reform), Sprat apparently played no part in the Society. Birch , History (ref. 1), i, 407, 499–500. Sprat's later publications do not mention the Society.

Sprat Thomas , The history of the Royal-Society of London, for the improving of natural knowledge (1667), ed. by Cope J. I. Jones H. W. (Washington, 1959; reprinted 1966). On Sprat's life and career, see esp. Oxford dictionary of national biography; Dictionary of scientific biography; Cope and Jones, “Introduction” to the History; Jones H. W. , “Thomas Sprat (1635–1713)”, Notes and queries, cxcvii (1952), 1952–14 and 118–23; anon., Some account of the life and writings of … Thomas Sprat … (1715); Sonnichsen Charles L. , “The life and works of Thomas Sprat”, Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1931; and Cluett Robert , “These seeming mysteries: The mind and style of Thomas Sprat (1635–1713)”, Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University, 1969.

Aarsleff Hans , “Thomas Sprat”, in Dictionary of scientific biography; Wood Paul B. , “Methodology and apologetics: Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society“, The British journal for the history of science, xiii (1980), 1–26, esp. pp. 1, 4–5.

Especially relevant to this paper are Hunter Michael , Science and society in Restoration England (Cambridge, 1981); Wood , “Methodology and apologetics” (ref. 4); Shapiro Barbara , “Latitudinarianism and science in seventeenth-century England”, Past & present, no. 40 (1968), 16–41; Hunter Michael , “Latitudinarianism and the ‘ideology’ of the early Royal Society: Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society (1667) reconsidered”, in Philosophy, science, and religion in England 1640–1700, ed. by Kroll Richard (Cambridge, 1992), 199–229; Shapin Steven Schaffer Simon , Leviathan and the air pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life (Princeton, 1985); Hunter Michael , Science and the shape of orthodoxy (Woodbridge, 1995), esp. chap. 8; Jacob J. R. , “Restoration, reformation and the origins of the Royal Society”, History of science, xiii (1975), 1975–76; Jacob J. R. , “Restoration ideologies and the Royal Society”, History of science, xviii (1980), 1980–38; Heyd Michael , “The new experimental philosophy: A manifestation of ‘enthusiasm’ or an antidote to it?”, Minerva, xxv (1987), 1987–40; Lynch William , Solomon's child: Method in the early Royal Society of London (Stanford, 2001), esp. chap. 5; and Syfret R. H. , “Some early reaction to the Royal Society”, Notes and records of the Royal Society of London, vii (1950), 1950–58, and “Some early critics of the Royal Society”, ibid., viii (1950), 1950–64. While Sprat interwove the religious and the political, I have had to treat them separately, for reasons of length. On Sprat's religious views, and their effect on the writing of the History, see my “Religious conventions and science in the early Restoration: Reformation and ‘Israel’ in Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society (1667)” (forthcoming, The British journal for the history of science).

See, for example, Rob Iliffe's recent argument that English scientific attitudes developed in part as a reflection of a broader cultural construction of both “English” and “foreign” characteristics, and that the Royal Society's “internationalism” was filtered through an imperialist English outlook. While Iliffe briefly discusses Sprat's History, there is no mention of Sprat's Observations or of the Anglo-Dutch war and concerns about universal monarchy. Iliffe Robert , “Foreign bodies: Travel, empire and the early Royal Society of London. Part I. Englishmen on tour”, Canadian journal of history, xxxiii (1998), 358–85, and “Part II. The land of experimental knowledge”, ibid., xxxiv (1999), 1999–50. Wood , “Methodology” (ref. 4), 5, noted the need for the Society to balance its “aspirations and activities” with ”the search for stability and prosperity in the Restoration”, but did not connect the specific politics of the 1660s and the text of the History.

Sprat Thomas , Observations on Monsieur de Sorbier's voyage into England. Written to Dr. Wren, professor of astronomy in Oxford (1665), 287–88.

Quoted in Scott Jonathan , England's troubles: Seventeenth-century English political instability in European context (Cambridge, 2000), 166.

Goldie Mark , “John Locke and Anglican royalism”, Political studies, xxxi (1983), 61–85. While Goldie is concerned with the later Restoration, the term is tied to the 1660s in, e.g., Pincus Steven , “Popery, trade and universal monarchy: The ideological context of the outbreak of the second Anglo-Dutch war”, The English historical review, cccxxii (1992), 1992–29, p. 2, while Anthony Milton explores some of the earlier origins in Milton, Laudian and royalist polemic in seventeenth-century England: The career and writings of Peter Heylyn (Manchester and New York, 2007).

Sprat Thomas , “To the happie memorie of … Oliver, Lord Protector”, 24, 26, in Three poems upon the death of … Oliver Lord Protector … (1659). The volume contained similar poems by John Dryden and Edmund Waller.

Wren C. , Parentalia (1750 edn), i, 254.

Sprat Thomas , The plague of Athens, which hapned in the second year of the Peloponnesian warre … (1659). Sprat's poem was based on Hobbes's translation of Thucydides.

On Sprat's response to Sorbière, see esp. Aarsleff , “Thomas Sprat” (ref. 4); Guilloton Vincent , “Autour de la Relation du voyage de Samuel Sorbière en Angleterrre, 1663–1664”, Smith College studies in modern languages, xi (1930), 1–29, esp. pp. 7–20; Sonnichsen , “Life and works of Sprat” (ref. 3), chap. 5; Sarasohn Lisa , “Who was then the gentleman?: Samuel Sorbière, Thomas Hobbes, and the Royal Society”, History of science, xlii (2004), 2004–32, esp. pp. 223–8. Of great use are the letters between Hobbes and Sorbière in Malcolm Noel (ed.), Thomas Hobbes: The correspondence (2 vols, Oxford, 1994).

Samuel de Sorbière, A voyage to England … (1709), 33, 32.

Birch , History (ref. 1), ii, 123–7.

Aarsleff , “Thomas Sprat” (ref. 4).

For a variety of views on Hobbes's “science” and his relations with the Royal Society, see Shapin Schaffer , Leviathan (ref. 5); Mintz Samuel , The hunting of Leviathan: Seventeenth-century reactions to the materialism and moral philosophy of Thomas Hobbes (Cambridge, 1962); Malcolm Noel , “Hobbes and the Royal Society”, in Perspectives on Thomas Hobbes, ed. by Rogers G. A. J. Ryan Alan (Oxford, 1988), 43–66, esp. p. 65; Hunter , Science and society (ref. 5), esp. 168–9, 178–9, 182; Probst Siegmund , “Infinity and creation: The origin of the controversy between Thomas Hobbes and the Savilian professors Seth Ward and John Wallis”, The British journal for the history of science, xxvi (1993), 1993–9; and Sommerville Johann , “Lofty science and local politics”, The Cambridge companion to Hobbes, ed. by Sorrell T. (Cambridge, 1996), 246–73.

Aarsleff , “Thomas Sprat” (ref. 4); Hunter , “Latitudinarianism” (ref. 5), 203–5; Birch , History (ref. 1), ii, 3–7, 47; and Oldenburg to Robert Boyle, 6 March 1665/6, in Hall A. R. Hall M. B. (ed. & transl.), The correspondence of Henry Oldenburg, iii: 1666–1667 (Madison, 1966), 49.

Sorbière complained to Hobbes about the way he had been treated: Malcolm (ed.), Hobbes: Correspondence (ref. 13), ii, 620–1, 808; Guilloton , “Autour de la Relation” (ref. 14), 5ff.; Jusserand J. J. , A French ambassador at the court of Charles the Second: Le Comte de Cominges from his unpublished correspondence (New York and London, 1892), 63; and Aarsleff , “Thomas Sprat” (ref. 4).

Sorbière , Voyage (ref. 14), 47, 54. Sorbière's comments on English smoking and drinking habits, his low esteem for London's architecture, and his anecdote about being called “French dogs”, raise questions concerning whether he was relating his own experience or merely uttering commonplaces. John Evelyn, a few years before, had published a satire of the English character in which he “recounted” the very same things: Evelyn, A character of England. As it was lately presented in a letter, to a noble man of France (1659), 6, 10, 28–29. See also Evelyn John , The diary of John Evelyn, ed. by De Beer E. S. (1955), iii, 224.

Sorbière , Voyage (ref. 14), 18–23, 51, 24.

Sorbière , Voyage (ref. 14), 54, 62, 63.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 8, 57.

de Sorbière Samuel , Les vrayes causes des derniers troubles d'Angleterre (Orange, 1653).

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 79; British Library MS Add. 78298, fol. 128, letter dated 31 October 1664, printed in Diary and correspondence of John Evelyn, F.R.S. …, ed. by Bray William (London, 1850), iii, 144–7.

de Sorbière Samuel , Letter to Mons. de Courcelles at Amsterdam concerning the designs of the English in the war against the Dutch (1652) (bound with Sorbière, Voyage (ref. 14)), 184.

Sorbière , Letter (ref. 26), 184–9.

Hunter , “Latitudinarianism” (ref. 5), esp. 203–6.

British Library MS Add. 78298, fol.128, Evelyn to Sprat. Evelyn referred to “receipt of the Doctor's [Wilkins?] letter”, which mentioned Sprat's project against Sorbière. Evelyn stated that his notes were intended as assistance in Sprat's reply to Sorbière. Given that the Observations seems to incorporate some of this material, Sprat may well have amended, or added to, the text after receiving Evelyn's letter, but left the Preface's dating alone. See Douglas Chambers on Evelyn as royalist in Oxford dictionary of national biography.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 5.

Stubbe Henry , Legends no histories: Or, a specimen of some animadversions: Upon the History of the Royal Society (1670), 21.

Tuck Richard , Philosophy and government 1572–1651 (Cambridge, 1993), 51–52; Bouwsma William , The waning of the Renaissance 1550–1640 (New Haven and London, 2002), 86–92, 113–14, 121, 154–6; McCrea Adriana , Constant minds: Political virtue and the Lipsian paradigm in England, 1584–1650 (Toronto, 1997), p. xxvii; Burke Peter , “Tacitism, scepticism, and reason-of-state”, in Burns J. H. (ed.), The Cambridge history of political thought 1450–1750 (Cambridge, 1991), 479–98, pp. 494–6; and Tuck Richard , “Scepticism and toleration in the seventeenth century”, in Mendes Susan (ed.), Justifying toleration: Conceptual and historical perspectives (Cambridge, 1988), 21–35, pp. 23–24.

Dear Peter , “A mechanical microcosm: Bodily passions, good manners, and Cartesian mechanism”, in Lawrence Christopher Shapin Steven (eds), Science incarnate: Historical embodiments of natural knowledge (Chicago, 1998), 51–82, p. 61.

Tuck , Philosophy and government (ref. 32), 91; Pincus Steve , “From holy cause to economic interest: The study of population and the invention of the state”, in Houston Alan Pincus Steve (eds), A nation transformed (Cambridge, 2001), 272–98, p. 284.

Worden Blair , “Constancy”, London review of books, 20 January — 2 February 1983, 13; Skinner Quentin , The foundations of modern political thought (Cambridge, 1978), ii, 279; Salmon J. H. M. , “Stoicism and Roman example: Seneca and Tacitus in Jacobean England”, Journal of the history of ideas, l (1989), 1989–225, esp. pp. 207, 212; and Tuck , Philosophy and government (ref. 32), pp. xiii, 69, 72, 109–10. On Bacon's “Lipsianism”, see Martin Julian , Francis Bacon, the state, and the reform of natural philosophy (Cambridge, 1992).

Gunn J. W. , Politics and the public interest in the seventeenth century (London and Toronto, 1969), 127–28, notes the term “reason of state” was uncommon; the preference was for “public interest”.

Pincus , “From holy cause” (ref. 34), 282, notes that Francis Bacon and others even proposed a Christian war to destroy Turkish pretensions to universal monarchy.

Gunn , Politics and the public interest (ref. 36), 36–37; Tuck Richard , “Grotius and Selden”, in Burns (ed.), Cambridge history of political thought (ref. 32), 499–529, p. 523; Salmon , “Stoicism” (ref. 35), 223–4; Tuck , Philosophy and government (ref. 32), 225–6; and Kenyon J. P. (ed.), The Stuart constitution 1603–1688: Documents and commentary (Cambridge, 1966), 340.

Scott Jonathan , Algernon Sidney and the English republic, 1623–1677 (Cambridge, 1988), 207–9; Gunn , Politics and the public interest (ref. 36), 44–51; Zwicker Steven , “England, Israel, and the triumph of Roman virtue” in Popkin Richard (ed.), Millenarianism and messianism in English literature and thought 1650–1800 (Leiden, 1988), 37–64; Pocock J. G. A. , The Machiavellian moment (Princeton, 1975), esp. pp. 401–5; Pincus Steven , “England and the world in the 1650s”, in Morrill John (ed.), Revolution and Restoration: England in the 1650s (1992), 129–47, esp. pp. 137, 141, 146–7; and idem, Protestantism and patriotism: Ideologies and the making of English foreign policy, 1650–1668 (Cambridge, 1996), esp. chap. 9.

Glanvill added that “as Mr. Hobbs observes, the reason that Mathematical demonstrations are uncontroverted, is; because Interest hath no place in those unquestionable verities …”. Glanvill Joseph , The vanity of dogmatizing … (1661), 133.

South Robert , Twelve sermons preached upon several occasions (1692), 127, a sermon dated 1660; similarly, ibid., 434, a sermon delivered at Westminster Abbey on 30 April 1676. South argued that religion was the “best Reason of State”: ibid., 153ff.

On this question, see most recently Lake Peter Pincus Steven , “Rethinking the public sphere in early modern England”, Journal of British studies, xlv (2006), 270–90.

South , Twelve sermons (ref. 41), 439–40.

Quoted in Gunn , Politics and the public interest (ref. 36), 218–19.

Gunn , Politics and the public interest (ref. 36), esp. pp. 51, 193–98, 226, and 286 note 1.

Charles Davenant explained the term thus: “such have been called Universal Monarchs, or Lords of the whole Earth, who having subdued whatever they thought worth the taking in, did at last sit down in quiet, not meeting with any other opposition.” Davenant Charles , “An essay upon universal monarchy”, in Davenant , Essays … (1701), 233–88, p. 238.

Headley John M. , Tommaso Campanella and the transformation of the world (Princeton, 1997), 183–5. Campanella's Monarchia was probably known in England, in manuscript, after 1607 and available in published English editions of 1654 and 1660: ibid., 197, 212. Campanella added to his intellectual reputation by admiring the anti-Aristotelian science of Telesio and defending Galileo's right to argue a heliocentric view.

Headley , Campanella (ref. 47), 11, 214, 217, 222–5.

Armitage David , The ideological origins of the British empire (Cambridge, 2002), esp. pp. 108ff; Wilson Charles , Profit and power: A study of England and the Dutch wars (1957); and Viera Mónica Brita , “Mare liberum vs. mare clausum: Grotius, Freitas, and Selden's debate on dominion over the seas”, Journal of the history of ideas, lxiv (2003), 2003–77. On the early modern economies of England and Holland, see David Ormrod, The rise of commercial empires: England and the Netherlands in the age of mercantilism, 1650–1770 (Cambridge, 2003), esp. chap. 1. Some English writers continued to favour a Dutch alliance: Marvin Breslow, A mirror of England: English puritan views of foreign nations, 1618–1640 (Cambridge, MA, 1970), 82–83, 85, 91–93.

Amsterdam and her other Hollander sisters put out to sea … (1652), 6, 7, 10; The seas magazine opened … (1653), Epistle; A declaration of the parliament of the Commonwealth of England … (1652), 4; Joyful newes from Holland … (1651). See Chauncy Karen , “The Amboyna massacre in English politics, 1624–1632”, Albion, xxx (1999), 1999–98.

Amsterdam and her sisters (ref. 50), 3, also 9 on Dutch “Machivilian policy”; A true and exact character of the Low-Countreys; especially Holland … (1651), 12, 17, 22; Another bloudy fight at sea … (1652); A declaration of the Hollanders touching the late king … (1652).

Brenner Robert , Merchants and revolution … (2003; first pub. 1993), 623–4; Israel J. , The Dutch republic: Its rise, greatness, and fall 1477–1806 (Oxford, 1995), 714.

Loades David , England's maritime empire: Seapower, commerce and policy 1490–1690 (2000), 172–7, 183; Israel Jonathan , Dutch primacy in world trade, 1585–1740 (Oxford, 1990; first pub. 1989), 208–12; Ormrod, The rise of commercial empires (ref. 49); Braddick M. J. , Parliamentary taxation in 17th century England (Rochester, 1994), 412–13; and Armitage, Ideological origins (ref. 49), 118–19.

See, for example, the monarchist Fell John , The interest of England stated … (1659), 3, 8–9, and the sometime republican Marchamont Nedham, Interest will not lie … (1659), title page, 3, 4ff., 9, 42ff., 46.

See for example, Prynne William , Philanx Protestant … (1663), 2; The King of Spains cabinet councel divulged … for obtaining the universal monarchy (1658), 88.

His Majesties most gracious speech, together with the Lord Chancellors … May, 1662 (1662), 12; Jones J. R. , The Anglo-Dutch wars of the seventeenth century (1996), esp. pp. 151–6; Israel, Dutch primacy (ref. 53), 271; and Paul Seaward, The Restoration, 1660–1688 (1991), 75–76.

Armitage David , “The Cromwellian Protectorate and the languages of empire”, The historical journal, xxxv (1992), 531–55, p. 534. Pepys reflected the political meaning of the new edition: “To Paul's Churchyard to cause the title of my English ‘Mare Clausum’ to be changed and the new title dedicated to the King to be put to it, because I am ashamed to have the other seen dedicated to the Commonwealth”: The diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. by Latham Robert and Matthews William (1971), iv, 105 and note 2.

Loades , England's maritime empire (ref. 53), 216, 202–3; Pincus , Protestantism (ref. 39), 203, 227.

South , Twelve sermons (ref. 41), 196.

Jones , Anglo-Dutch wars (ref. 56), esp. pp. 91–92.

Seaward Paul , “The House of Commons Committee of Trade and the origins of the Second Anglo-Dutch war, 1664”, The historical journal, xxx (1987), 437–52; Israel, Dutch republic (ref. 52), 766; Bliss Robert M. , Revolution and empire: English politics and the American colonies in the seventeenth century (Manchester and New York, 1990), 103–113; Braddick Michael J. , State formation in early modern England, c. 1550–1700 (Cambridge, 2000), 411–13; and Pincus, Protestantism (ref. 39), 234–5.

Mun Thomas , England's treasure by foreign trade (1664), passim, e.g. pp. 9–10, 22, 25–27, 29–31, 186–9.

Jacob J. R. , “The political economy of science in seventeenth-century England”, Social research, lix (1992), 505–32, p. 526; Pepys , Diary (ref. 57), vi, 22–23, for 27 January 1665.

On trade as the key issue, see Wilson , Profit and power (ref. 49), esp. chaps. 5, 8 and 9; Brenner , Merchants and revolution (ref. 52), 598–628; Israel, Dutch republic (ref. 52), 713ff.; Worden Blair , The Rump parliament (Cambridge, 1977), esp. chap. 14; and Seaward , Restoration (ref. 56), 71, 74. The court argument is best seen in Jones, Anglo-Dutch wars (ref. 56), e.g. pp. 149, 151. For arguments proposing an “ideological” basis, see Pincus , “Popery, trade” (ref. 9); Pincus , Protestantism (ref. 39), esp. chap. 4; Pincus S. , “The English debate over universal monarchy” in Robertson John (ed.), A union for empire … (Cambridge, 1995), 37–62, esp. pp. 44–49; Pincus S. , “The making of a great power? Universal monarchy, political economy and the transformation of English political culture”, The European legacy, v (2000), 2000–45; and Armitage , Ideological origins (ref. 49), 139–40.

Davenant , Essays (ref. 46), 18; Hont Istvan , “Free trade and the economic limits to national politics: Neo-Machiavellian political economy reconsidered”, in Dunn John (ed.), The economic limits to modern politics (Cambridge, 1990), 41–120, esp. pp. 57–58. After conversation at the Duke of York's house, Samuel Pepys noted in his diary for 4 April 1664, concerning a Dutch war that “I perceive, the Duke hath a mind it should come to [that] …”. Diary (ref. 57), v, 111, also 59.

Crouch John , Belgica caracteristica, or the Dutch character … (1665), 6.

Quoted in Loades , England's maritime empire (ref. 53), 172.

Seas magazine opened (ref. 50), sigs. A3v—A4; B—B2v, B4ff.

Mun , England's treasure (ref. 62), 202–3; also, 206; Crouch , Belgica (ref. 66), 7; see also Pepys , Diary (ref. 57), v, 49–50, for 15 February 1664.

Evelyn John , Navigation and commerce … with special regard to the ENGLISH nation … to the beginning of our late differences with Holland … (1674), 15–16.

George Savile, Marquis of Halifax, “A rough draft of a new modell at sea (c.1666–67)”, in Brown Mark (ed.), The works of George Savile, Marquis of Halifax (Oxford, 1989), i, 296–7, 300; Armitage, Ideological origins (ref. 49), 137, 143; and Darrell John , A true and compendious narration … (1665), 35–36.

His conclusion was that England sought patronage of the seas, rather than an empire: Worden Blair , “Classical republicanism and the puritan revolution”, in Jones Hugh Lloyd (ed.), History and imagination: Essays in honour of H. R. Trevor-Roper (1981), 182–200, p. 197; Armitage David , “Literature and empire”, in Canny Nicholas (ed.), The origins of empire: British overseas enterprise to the close of the seventeenth century, in The Oxford history of the British empire, i (Oxford, 1998), 99–123, p. 109; Armitage, “Cromwellian Protectorate and languages of empire” (ref. 57), 549–50; and Armitage, Ideological origins (ref. 49), 137–8.

Hawkins Richard , A discourse of the national excellencies of England (1658), 155, 222–3.

Quoted in Pincus , “English debate” (ref. 64), 61; Pincus , Protestantism (ref. 39), 300–1.

Armitage , Ideological origins (ref. 49), 122–4.

Armitage , Ideological origins (ref. 49), 119.

Israel , Dutch primacy (ref. 53), 270, 275–7. Dutch domination of trade was said to cause fewer worries since the Dutch were seen as lacking the military resources necessary to establish hegemony.

Jones J. R. , Country and court: England 1658–1714 (Cambridge, MA, 1978), 102.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 419.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 421.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 421.

Of Sprat's later works, see esp. A sermon preached before the Honourable House of Commons … (1678); A sermon preach'd before the … Lord Mayor, and the Court of Aldermen … (1684); A true account and declaration of the horrid conspiracy … at the Rye-House … (1685).

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 58.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 180–1.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 430.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 153–4.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 158.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 153–4. See, similarly, L'Estrange Roger , Interest mistaken … (1661), 84, that the presbyterian interest was “to undermine the common Interest of the King”. See also Sprat , Horrid conspiracy (ref. 82), 27–32; Sermon … House of Commons 1678 (ref. 82), 183–4; A sermon preached before the Artillery Company of London … April 20, 1682 (1682), 22–23; A sermon preached before the king at Whitehall December the 22. 1678 (1678), 37–38.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 321, 431; Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 291–2. Hunter Michael , Establishing the new science: The experience of the early Royal Society (Woodbridge, 1989), 4, notes Lord Brouncker also spoke of the necessary subordination of private interest to the public interest of the Society.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), e.g., 22–24, 34–36, 48–50, 52–53.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 404, 58–59.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 91.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 53.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 426–7.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 56.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 91. On the development of an “ideal society”, where differences did not represent challenges to authority, see Shapin and Schaffer, Leviathan (ref. 5), esp. 298–307.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 427–9.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 26; see also 17, 20, 61–62, 117, 119.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 341.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), passim, e.g., 73, 99, 102, 115–16.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 427. The significance of the Society's royal charter has perhaps not been fully appreciated.

Lake Pincus , “Rethinking the public sphere” (ref. 42), 270.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), e.g., 64–65.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 37.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 78–79, 81, 270–1.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 120, 122.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 167–8, 78–79, 45.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 169–70.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 286.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 404.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 423. For a general analysis of seventeenth-century opinions of trade as part of national strength, see Hont, “Free trade” (ref. 65).

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 408.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 78, 150, 152.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 401.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 401, 400.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 422–3. See also Pincus , “Popery, trade” (ref. 9), 16, on the similar ideas of Sir William Coventry.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 401. Sprat was not altogether consistent on the question of immigrants. Against Sorbière, he had emphasized that “we have more Foreiners in Norwich, Canterbury and London, who are permitted to Trade, and to injoy the Privilege of Natives, then there are constantly residing in any Twenty Cities of Italy, Spain, or France”. Sprat, Observations (ref. 7), 77.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 89.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 421, 400; Evelyn John , Sylva, or a discourse of forest-trees (1664), sig A4.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 288, 290–2.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 90, also 89–91, 159–66, 290–2; History (ref. 1), 75–76, 110, 423, 400.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 422; similarly, 419.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 64; also 399–400 on the possible difficulties of individual traders. The “forbiddingly conservative” Josiah Child also held that to provide for the general good, a minority might have to suffer “a little”: Gunn, Politics and the public interest (ref. 36), 258.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 73–75, 80.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 86.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 163–70, quotation at p. 165.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 166, 165. On ways in which Charles II and the Royal Society helped to legitimate each other, see Werrett Simon , “Healing the nation's wounds: Royal ritual and experimental philosophy in Restoration England”, History of science, xxxviii (2000), 377–99.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 88.

Carey Daniel , “Compiling nature's history: Travellers and travel narratives in the early Royal Society”, Annals of science, liv (1997), 269–92; Iliffe, “Foreign bodies. Part II” (ref. 6), 38–39.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 88.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 113.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 408.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 126–7.

Avramov Iordan , “An apprenticeship in scientific communication: The early correspondence of Henry Oldenburg (1656–63)”, Notes and records of the Royal Society, liii (1999), 187–201, esp. pp. 187–92.

Hall A. R. Hall M. B. (ed. & transl.), The correspondence of Henry Oldenburg, iv: 1667–68 (Madison, 1967), 168, letter of 10 February 1667/8 to Richard Norwood. Cf. Oldenburg's review of the History in Philosophical transactions, i—iii (1665–68), 506 (no. 27, for September 1667); Iliffe, “Foreign bodies. Part II” (ref. 6), esp. 41–43; and Hunter Michael , “Promoting the new science: Henry Oldenburg and the early Royal Society”, History of science, xxvi (1988), 1988–81.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 88. John Beale had already written to Oldenburg concerning London's potential: Iliffe, “Foreign bodies. Part II” (ref. 6), 41.

Carey , “Compiling nature's history” (ref. 129), esp. 270, 272. In 1664 the Society established a committee to read travel books and in 1667 the Society even printed directions in the Philosophical transactions for sea-captains concerning how to make observations: Hunter, Establishing the new science (ref. 89), 93 and chap. 3.

Iliffe , “Foreign bodies. Part II” (ref. 6), passim, e.g., 30–31 on Oldenburg.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 125, 126.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 86–87, emphasis added; also Sprat, Observations (ref. 7), 290–1.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 251.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 113, 111, 41.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 42.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 265.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 322, 323, 430, 431.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 3, 54.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 63.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 65.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 78–79.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 113–14.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 83.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 82.

See, for example, Hawkins , Discourse (ref. 73), 192, for the alleged contrast with Spanish cruelty in their colonies.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 420.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 429, 428.

Headley , Campanella (ref. 47), 187, 216.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 429–30.

Jacob James R. , “‘By an Orphean charm’: Science and the two cultures in seventeenth-century England”, in Mack Phyllis Jacob Margaret C. , (eds), Politics and culture in early modern England (Cambridge, 1987), 231–49, pp. 237, 242–3.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 35–36, 391–6, 407–10.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 67.

Graunt John , Natural and political observations … made upon bills of mortality (1662), ed. by Willcox Walter (Baltimore, 1939), 6, 4, 7–8, 33–34.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 393–6.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 75–76. See also Iliffe R. , “Material doubts: Hooke, artisan culture and the exchange of information in 1670s London”, The British journal for the history of science, xxviii (1995), 285–318.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 427.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 67.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 403.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 131.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 284–5.

Sprat , Observations (ref. 7), 286.

Sprat , History (ref. 1), 87.