1

# Newton in the Iberian Peninsula

Malet, Antoni

Introduction: A common background for Portugal and Spain?

Was there anything particularly Iberian about the Iberian peninsula? Or, to put it more

sharply, have eighteenth-century Spain and Portugal anything in common? Ostensibly, the

answer is yes, since the geographical, linguistic, and political proximity of the two

countries hardly needs be stressed. In fact, Portugal and Spain are usually lumped together

in the European imagination as well as in much scholarship. There are easy arguments for

packing and selling the two countries together. During the Middle Ages, Portugal and

Castille had construed their identities to lie in the relentless conquest of territories from

Muslim neighbours. In early modern times, they subjugated vast colonial empires in which

greed and Roman Catholicism uncannily mixed. Not only were both kingdoms

homogeneously and aggressively Roman Catholic, but in each of them the Catholic Church

was also enormously influential. Each had its own Holy Office, or Inquisition, to police

social mores but, more particularly, to regulate matters of faith. Indeed, the Iberian

Inquisitions consistently considered the most heinous crimes to be Judaism, crypto-

Judaism, and Protestantism. Last but not least, in the eighteenth century, both countries

shared an acute awareness of being no longer at the centre of contemporary political and

philosophical developments.

Such a feeling of becoming peripheral, declining countries found social expression in

the archetypes of the Portuguese estrangeirado and the Spanish afrancesado. The words

themselves are impossible to translate into English, where not to be one-self and to long to

become similar to or like another, or to renounce to one's identity, carries a negative

burden. Yet this is the primordial meaning of estrangeirado and afrancesado: these terms

were applied to people (and applied to themselves by people) who made a public point of

2

their preference for values, ideas and tastes that were foreign to Portugal or to Spain. That

is to say, they liked to identify themselves with political, philosophical, and artistic

developments that not only originated abroad, but that influential parts of Portuguese or

Spanish society construed as being foreign and, above all, inimical to Portuguese or

Spanish identity. Estrangeirados and afrancesados thought that their backward, declining

countries needed to have grafted on to them the ideas and values that characterized the

most powerful and intellectually advanced nations. Particularly in Portugal, estrangeirados

therefore acted as vectors of Newtonianism. Typically, they had connections with foreign

correspondents and learned societies, and shared an ideology of progress and a reformist

agenda.

For all the similarities, recent scholarship has pointed out substantial differences

between 18th-century Portugal and Spain in crucial matters such as economic

development, the role of the universities, the Church’s influence, and the political and

social role of the landed aristocracy. As a consequence of such distinctions, Newton was

received in the two countries differently as well.

This essay begins with the reception of Newton in Spain (parts 1-5) and then turns to

the reception of his ideas in Portugal (parts 6-11). A short comparison completes the

chapter (part 12). With respect to Spain, the impact of the new philosophy will be

discussed first of all. Then the essay will deal with Benito Feijoo's account of the

Newtonian system, which was probably the most influential depiction of Newton's ideas to

circulate widely in eighteenth-century Spain. Subsequently, the focus will turn to the

controversial evidence that survives about the teaching of Newton's mathematics and

mechanics in military institutions. Next, the chapter will discuss Newtonian lessons in

Jesuit colleges. Finally, it will consider the role of Newtonianism in the Barcelona

Academy of Sciences (which was founded in 1764), a provincial institution that was the

only scientific academy to work regularly and efficiently in eighteenth-century Spain.

3

1 Spain and the new philosophy

As Olga Quiroz's classic study demonstrated, the highly conservative intellectual context

of the mid-seventeenth century was first questioned by the novatores or neoterici, mostly

physicians working in Seville, Zaragoza, and Valencia who began publishing in the late

1680s (Quiroz-Martinez 1949; Ceñal 1945, 1-99). Calling themselves atomists and

iatrochemists, they quoted Bacon, Descartes, Gassendi, Maignan, and Boyle. They

questioned received natural philosophy and its implications for medicine while advocating

a diffuse experimentalism. University professors (almost to a man) strongly resisted them,

as did some sections within the Catholic Church. They were routinely accused of

weakening the foundations of the Catholic faith, and the Inquisition kept a vigilant eye on

them (Sánchez-Blanco 1999; López Piñero 1979; McClelland 1991; Herr 1958; Lopez

1976; Défourneaux 1963). Sometimes the Inquisition took action, but it rarely made an

open accusation of philosophical heterodoxy. Those whom it threatened would refrain

from publication. An example was the physician Diego Mateo Zapata (1664-1745), who

was brought before the Inquisition in 1725 under the charge of crypto-Judaism. His Ocaso

de las formas aristotélicas, which was written in 1720, appeared in print only in 1745, the

year of his death (Pardo 2004; cf. for the circle of Mayans, Lopez 1976, 90-7).

Copernicanism was a subject that the Inquisitors carefully watched. Throughout the

century, it was presented as being merely a hypothesis, rather than a true system. In the

1770s, the unwritten prohibition on Copernicanism was challenged by Jorge Juan’s

prestige and high political standing, nevertheless in the 1780s a convinced Copernican

(Joan Antoni Desvalls), who submitted a memoir to the Barcelona Academy of Sciences,

still had to dissimulate about his cosmological convictions (Peset 1965, 309-24; Iglésies

1964, 245). Under such a climate of fear and suspicion, Spanish novatores never expressed

the view publicly that atomism or Cartesianim were true while Aristotelianism was untrue.

4

Instead, they either declared themselves to be sceptics, or they attempted to synthesize the

old and the new, for example by making modern philosophy probable (in the Aristotelian

sense), by adopting an Aristotelianizing stance, or by presenting as Aristotelian what was

evidently not (Sánchez-Blanco 1999, 15-77; Glick 1965; Quiroz-Martinez 1949, 189-94,

352-8; McClelland 1991). Hence the fascination inspired by the works of Emmanuel

Maignan (1601-76), a French Minim friar, praised as the equal of Descartes, who produced

a synthesis of Aristotelian and mechanical ideas (Whitmore 1967, 163-86; Ceñal 1952).

Typically, novatores denounced astrology or magic as superstitions embraced by ignorant

people (Sánchez-Blanco 1999, 78-97; Quiroz-Martinez 1949, 344-6). They may not have

been wrong. Literacy rates in Spain in the eighteenth century were probably the lowest in

Western Europe. By the end of the nineteenth century, indeed, literacy rates barely

equalled those of England in 1675 (i.e. 45% of males were literate). At the upper social

levels things were not better. According to François Lopez, during the eighteenth century

‘in the upper and middle level of the social structure, the Spanish cultural tissue was one of

the thinnest in Western Europe’ (Lopez 1981, II, 629-71, at pp. 650, 652).

All of this is consistent with Anthony Pagden's thesis that the new philosophy

(including Cartesianism, atomism, Lockean psychology, and Newtonianism) never fully

took root in eighteenth-century Spain (Pagden 1988). This thesis receives strong if indirect

support from the absence of scientific or philosophical journals in Spain (prior to Anales

de Historia Natural, which started in 1799), the lack of original elaborations in Newtonian

topics (including rational mechanics and experimental philosophy in general), and the

scarcity of scientific institutions (Enciso Recio 1992). Nollet's Lecciones de Physica

experimental (1757) and his short essay on the electricity of bodies (1747), or J. A. Sigaud

de la Fond’s Elementos de física teórica y experimental (1787), were the only works of

experimental philosophy translated into Spanish between 1700 and 1800. The Abbé

Pluche's French and English bestseller, El espectáculo de la naturaleza (1753-5), was

5

popular in Spain and went through four printings. Interestingly, this piece of Christian

apologetics was intended for juvenile audiences in France and England but was sold to an

adult audience in Spain (Serrano 2012). To these, may be added Buffon's Historia natural

(1785-1805), two works by Linnaeus (1784-8), and Lavoisier's Tratado elemental de

Química (1798) (Étrienvre 2006; Herr 1958, 35; Lopez 1976, 67-78).

By emphasizing royal patronage, many Spanish historians provide a more positive

view of eighteenth-century Spanish science. Four kings reigned in Spain during the

eighteenth century. There is wide consensus that whatever Enlightenment there was in

Spain came after the death of Philip V (1713-46). Concerned above all in pacifying and

organizing a new state born from civil war (1700-14), he did little to promote science.

Ferdinand VI (1746-1759) patronized the Jesuit colleges in Madrid, and founded both the

Naval Observatory in Cadiz (1753) and the Botanical Garden in Madrid (1755). He

promoted advanced mathematical teaching within the military (if with little success).

Charles III (1759-88) set up chemistry chairs and founded a cabinet of natural history

(1772). A Royal Observatory in Madrid and a Spanish Academy of Sciences (for which a

grand building was raised, which now houses the Museo del Prado) were planned during

his reign, but the Academy was not founded until 1847 and the Observatory did not started

in earnest until the 1790s (Rumeu de Armas 1980b; Lafuente and Pimentel 2002). The

reign of Charles IV (1788-1808) was marked by a conservative reaction to the French

revolution and war with France. The fact remains that Newton left few traces in

eighteenth-century Spain, either in terms of scientific developments or in accounts for the

layman (cf. Lafuente and Peset 1987; Lafuente and Pimentel 2002; Lafuente 1982 and

1985; Navarro 1983; Ten 1980; Lafuente and Peset 1988).

2 Feijoo, the Baconian friar (1676 – 1764)

6

What sets the Benedictine friar, Benito-Jerónimo Feijoo (1676 – 1764), apart from

contemporary Spanish authors is that he provides a sophisticated understanding of

experimental philosophy for a wide non-specialist audience (Maravall 1991; Delpy 1936b;

Sánchez Blanco 1999, 61-122; Browning 1981; Lafuente and Sellés 1980; Flecniakoska

1966). In 1726, he published the first of the nine volumes of his Teatro crítico universal, of

which the last volume appeared in 1740. In a similar genre, the five volumes of his Cartas

eruditas (Learned letters) appeared between 1742 and 1760. These collections of essays

were an instant success. Printings followed hard on one another’s heels until the 1780s. At

a conservative estimate, 200,000 volumes of the Teatro crítico and 150,000 of the Cartas

eruditas had been sold up by 1800 (Delpy 1936b, assuming an average of 3,000 copies per

volume). These are huge figures, unequalled at the time by any other Spanish work.

Feijoo had read widely (in the works of Bacon, Descartes, Gassendi, Fontenelle, and

’s Gravesande), but had no first-hand knowledge of Newton (Feijoo 1786, II, 291, 295).

The Journal de Trévoux and the works of French Jesuits were crucial sources for the

Spanish novatores generally and for Feijoo in particular. He also brought them in as

authorities that supported the new philosophy (Delpy 1936a; Ceñal 1966; cf. Feijoo 1737,

III, 326 (Discurso 13); VII, 321, 323 (Discurso 13); Feijoo 1786, IV, 299-304 (carta 21);

see also Quiroz-Martinez 1949, 357). Feijoo took ‘philosophical scepticism’ for granted on

the part of his readers: ‘to doubt of many things is prudence, although to doubt everything

is madness’.1 He ruled out certainty or true demonstrations in physical things. Yet,

although natural philosophy might not be a ‘science’ (ciencia) in the Aristotelian sense of

‘an evident knowledge of the effect from its cause’, Feijoo claimed that it is possible to

1 ‘assi como dudar de muchas cosas es prudencia, dudar de todas es locura’ (Feijoo 1737, III, 279 (Discurso

13)

7

gain ‘experimental certainty, or knowledge gained from experience’.2 He divided

philosophers into three kinds: ancient, modern, and experimental. Ancient philosophers

(the Platonists and Aristotelians) did not really explain nature, whereas the systems of

modern philosophers (Cartesians and Gassendists) explained too much. Experimental

philosophers were not to be confused with modern philosophers, since the former ‘examine

nature in itself’ and conduct their search through experience (Feijoo 1737, III, 43-4

(Discurso 3)). Typically, Feijoo’s hero was ‘the great and sublime genius of Francis

Bacon’.3

Feijoo opposed the modern, systematic philosophers (such as Descartes, Gassendi

and Maignan) to experimental philosophers (such as Boyle and Newton) by telling the

story of the imaginary kingdom of Cosmosia. Two educators competed for the favours of

its people, wise and simple Solidina and ignorant and garrulous Idearia. Idearia promised

that everybody attending her courses would become learned without making any effort.

The simple, ignorant people of Cosmosia, overcome by Idearia's powerful rhetoric, filled

her school, and were taught chimerical fancies hidden beneath high-faluting words. Idearia

soon convinced most of them that they knew everything that there was to be known. By

contrast, modest Solidina taught useful, certain knowledge, using ordinary and clear

words. Not to deceive her pupils, she taught them that many more things remained to be

2 ‘Lo que afirma el systema Sceptico Physico, es, que en las cosas physicas, y naturales no hai demostracion,

ò certeza alguna cientifica, sì solo opinion. Por consiguiente, a la Phylosofia natural no se debe dar nombre

de ciencia, porque verdaderamente no lo es, … Tomamos aqui la Ciencia en el sentido en que la tomò

Aristoteles, … que la difinen, un conocimiento evidente del efecto por la causa. Por lo qual, no excluìmos la

certeza experimental, ò un conocimiento cierto adquirido por la experiencia, y observacion de las materias de

Physica; antes asseguramos, que este es el unico camino por donde puede llegar a alcanzarse la verdad;

aunque pienso que nunca se arribarà por èl à desenvolver la intima naturaleza de las cosas.’ [stress in the

original] (Feijoo 1737, III, 292 (Discurso 13)).

3 ‘el grande, y sublime genio de Francisco Bacon’ (Feijoo 1730, IV, p. 150-151 (Discurso 7))

8

known, and that even to make small progress in knowledge required strenuous application.

Idearia’s followers denigrated Solidina for being ‘base, mechanic, and rude’. Abandoned

by her public and by the powerful, Solidina found refuge among country people and

craftsmen. Then Idearia, who was now the sole authority in matters of learning, ruled that

what people might see or touch was less important than her teachings.

After a while, however, a new Master appeared in Feijoo’s imaginary kingdom:

‘Papyraceo’. He offered new and more exciting teachings: for example, that all animals

(other than human beings) are dead matter; that only a tiny part of man’s body touches the

soul; that the world is infinite; that space is body; or that the imagination is to be believed

but the senses are not, and so on. He attracted many followers, took new rooms, and set up

his own school. Idearia and Papyraceo battled with each other pugnaciously. Eventually,

people recognized the sterility of their methods and turned their attention back to Solidina,

remembering that her teaching had been cogent and accurate. She was called back to the

town where, according to Feijoo, she continued to teach with ever more credit under the

patronage of illustrious magistrates such as Galindo and Anglosio. Feijoo glossed the story

by pointing out that Solidina stood for ‘experience’, which demonstrated things with

‘solidez’ (cogency); Idearia stood for ‘fancy’; Papyraceo’s name came from papyrus, in

this case alluding not to things that have been written down but to its approximate

synonym in French (the word, ‘carte’), and hence to the author, Descartes. The eventual

patrons of Solidina were supposed to be the kings of France (Gallia) and England (Anglia)

(Feijoo 1733, V, 248-51 (Discurso 11)).

Feijoo’s tale of Solidina belonged to an essay that was devoted entirely to extolling

the role of experience in natural philosophy. Here, Newton’s experiments on colours

exemplified that fact that untutored sense experience might be insufficient to allow the

investigator to make good use of experiments (Feijoo 1733, V, 266 (Discurso 11)).

References to Newton’s optical experiments and to his ‘mysterious’ theory of universal

9

gravitation appeared early in Feijoo's volumes, but he did not discuss Newtonianism in full

until 1745. The delay, according to Feijoo, could be justified by the difficulty of Newton's

work and by ‘the Spanish climate of opinion.’ This was opposed to subtle new ideas such

as Newton’s theories of colours, attraction, or central forces. Feijoo added that the

strongest reason for caution with regard to Newton’s system was that it implied

Copernicanism. Feijoo suggested elsewhere that the reason why this topic excited so much

violent opposition was because of the supposed contradiction between Copernicus and the

literal meaning of the Scriptures, which, he felt, was something that was best avoided

(Feijoo 1786, II, 291-2 (Carta 23, numbers 20-2)). There can be little doubt, in fact, that

Feijoo was a convinced Copernican. For example, his discussion of the velocity of light

rests on the measure of light’s motion by observation of the satellites of Jupiter at different

distances between Jupiter and the earth, which made no sense in a geocentric universe.

Even so, he always presented Copernicanism as hypothetical (Feijoo 1733, V, 292-4

(Discurso 12); see also VII, 5 (Discurso 1); Feijoo 1786, III, 245 (Carta 20)).

Feijoo's essay of 1745, ‘On philosophical systems’, presents Newton the

experimental philosopher in opposition to Descartes and Gassendi, the builders of new

‘systems’ based on ‘first principles’ that might substitute for Aristotle's old one.4 Feijoo

located the origins of the London Royal Society and the Paris Académie Royale des

Sciences in the years ‘between the 60th and the 80th of the last century’, when the quest

for first or metaphysical principles had been abandoned and philosophers had instead

decided to make experiments. This was ‘the time of the birth and infancy of Experimental

4 ‘la máxima general, y transcendente, que en las materias Filosóficas … yo abracé ya ha no pocos años …

[es] la de abandonar la investigación de los principios, suponiéndolos absolutamente inaccesibles al ingenio

humano’ (Feijoo 1786, II, 283-4 (Carta 23)).

10

Physics’.5 Then came Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, which

was ‘a prodigy produced by a prodigious genius’, but which was difficult to appreciate

because it was grounded on the most profound use of geometry. Newton’s system of the

world was not a traditional philosophical ‘system’, according to Feijoo, because it was not

based on ‘first principles.’ He added, however, that in a different sense of the word

‘system’, Newton’s work might be called by that name, since it reduced all phenomena of

Nature to their reciprocal gravity.6 In discussing the phenomenon of gravitation or

attraction, Feijoo adopted an interpretation that echoed that of Richard Bentley and was

sympathetic to natural theology. The essence of universal attraction cannot be understood,

he suggested, yet the existence of a force that might reciprocally move bodies according to

fixed laws cannot be denied. For Feijoo, the force of mutual attraction among bodies was

‘the force of God’s Hand’, which preserved the proportion of masses and distances

according to laws that had been established by the Almighty:

5 ‘el intervalo, que hubo del año de 60, hasta el 80 del siglo pasado, se puede tomar como época del

nacimiento, e infancia de la Física Experimental, ocurriendo felizmente en el mismo tiempo la invención de

aquel instrumento fecundísimo en Experimentos, digo de la Máquina Pneumática’ (Feijoo 1786, II, 286

(Carta 23))

6 ‘Hallándose en este estado las cosas de la Filosofía, salió al público aquella grande Obra de Newton, cuyo

título es : Principios Matemáticos de la Filosofía Natural, parto prodigioso de prodigioso ingenio, pero que

tardó algún tiempo en granjear toda la estimación que merecía […] siendo la basa de la Obra muy

profundísima Geometría […]. [A] la doctrina Newtoniana […] muchos Autores le dan el nombre de Sistema.

Acaso será esta una mera cuestión de nombre. Si por Sistema se quiere entender un complejo, o un todo de

doctrina, cuyas partes están ligadas, o como contenidas debajo de alguna razón genérica, y común a todas,

Sistema es el de Newton, pues cuantos fenómenos hay en la Naturaleza, reduce a la recíproca pesantez de los

cuerpos.’ (Feijoo 1786, II, 287 (Carta 23))

11

this force, which makes one body move relative to another is the force of the Divine

Hand, and… it preserves by its reciprocal tendency the proportion of the masses and

the distances, and is only obedient to the laws which the Almighty has established

for motion.7

Feijoo stressed that by leaving open the question of the precise nature of attraction,

Newtonianism allowed the first Cause to act in nature directly. Thus we might believe that

the Almighty was immediately pushing (‘impeliendo’) bodies, according to the laws that

he had established, and that Newton had discovered. There was therefore no place here for

occult or scholastic qualities (Feijoo 1786, II, 288-89 (Carta 23)). Newton, who was

himself a devoted experimenter, had given us a world system that ‘by computation and

observation’ agreed with phenomena more accurately than did the system of Descartes,

and that must be called experimental because it was grounded on a comprehensive

observation of motion in nature.8

In the first half of the eighteenth century, Feijoo was unique among Spanish writers

in appreciating the originality of experimental philosophy and, in particular, of

Newtonianism, and in distinguishing it from the metaphysical physics of modern

philosophers such as Gassendi and Descartes, Leibniz or Wolff. Contemporary works

about the new philosophy, including those that circulated widely, such as Tomás V.

7 ‘esa fuerza, que hace mover unos cuerpos hacia otros, es la fuerza de la Divina Mano; y [el] guardar en su

recíproca tendencia la proporción de las masas, y las distancias, no es más que obedecer las leyes, que para

ese movimiento estableció el Altísimo’ (Feijoo 1786, II, 287-8 (Carta 23), at p. 288)

8 ‘restará examinar por la observación, y el cálculo a qué leyes corresponden con más exactitud los

fenómenos, si a las que señaló Descartes, o a las que propuso Newton. Y […] creo que los más que han

profundizado la doctrina de uno, y otro Filósofo, hallan grandes ventajas de parte de Newton’. Feijoo adds

later on: ‘la valentía extraordinaria del entendimiento de [Newton] puso en tortura á la Naturaleza, para que

le revelase sus mas íntimos secretos’ (Feijoo 1786, II, 288, 290 (Carta 23)).

12

Tosca's Compendium philosophicum (1721), or Andrés Piquer's Física moderna, racional y

experimental (1745), had a broadly Cartesian or atomistic inspiration, which they

presented under the protective guise of eclecticism (Moreno González 2002, 366-7;

Navarro 1983). One of the most advanced texts of this period, Antonio Herrero's Physica

moderna, experimental and systemática (1738), was more radical than Feijoo had been in

criticizing Aristotelian physics. Herrero, a leading light in the Academia Matritense de

Medicina, and very active in the late 1730s and early 1740s, proclaimed that experiments

needed to be decisive in arbitrating philosophical disputes. However, he added that

because experimental evidence was not fully reliable, clear definitions and geometrical

axioms remained crucial. He may be considered one of Wolff's early followers (see the

chapter on Wolff by Ahnert in this volume). In 1737, the Academia embarked on the

systematic collection of medical data and meteorological observations for publication

(Férnandez Navarrette [n.d.]; see Valverde Pérez 2007). Even if indirect evidence suggests

that, by the 1730s, Newton’s work was already known to the people who founded the

Academia Médica Matritense, the Academia itself appeared to be inclined towards a form

of post-Cartesian mechanism (Sánchez Blanco 1999, 78-94; Santos 1997). Until the

printing in 1757 of a Spanish translation of the Portuguese Verney's Verdadero método de

estudiar (on which see below), Feijoo's interpretation of Newton was the only one

available to non-specialist audiences in Spain.

3 Newton and the military

In the context of the country’s political subordination to France after the War of the

Spanish Succession (1700-14), Spanish possessions in Peru were chosen in 1735 as the

location for geodesic measurements in equatorial latitudes for one of the expeditions

funded by the French Académie Royale des Sciences to settle the issue of the earth’s

shape. By Spanish request, the expedition took along two young naval officers, Jorge Juan

13

y Santacilia (1713-73) and Antonio de Ulloa (1716-95) (Guillén 1936; Lafuente and

Mazuecos 1987; Lafuente and Delgado 1984; Ulloa 1795). Collaboration with French

savants during the ten-year-long expedition gave Juan and Ulloa mathematical and

philosophical competence well above the normal standard of their Spanish contemporaries.

They returned by way of Paris and London, where they befriended leading scientists and

became fellows both of the Royal Society and of the Académie Royale des Sciences. Juan's

Observaciones Astronómicas y Phísicas (1748), published as part of the five-volume

official account of the journey to the Equator, provided a magisterial, first-hand account

not only of the triangulation around Quito but also of advanced experimental research on

the obliquity of the ecliptic; the periods of Jupiter satellites; metal dilation; atmospheric

pressure; the speed of sound, and the periods of pendula (Juan and Ulloa 1748; Merino and

Rodríguez San Vicente 1978). Juan took for granted the motion of the earth, but was

forewarned of potential trouble as a result with the Inquisition. His printed Observaciones

therefore claimed that the Copernican account of celestial motions were simply convenient

hypotheses (Peset 1965).

Juan became a life-long advisor to the Crown on the reform of arsenals and shipyards

and on sundry other technological projects. In 1752, he was appointed as Director of the

Cadiz Naval Academy, where he was able to test some of his new ideas about naval

design. To modernize the Academy, Juan appointed his old acquaintance from the Peru

expedition, Louis Godin, as professor and academic director. In 1753, Juan and Godin set

up an astronomical observatory, for which they bought the necessary instruments from

Paris and London. While some systematic observations were published in the 1770s (under

the name of Vicente Tofiño, Juan's successor as Director of the Academy from 1768), the

Royal Observatory at the Naval Academy was mostly put to didactic rather than research

uses (Tofiño 1776-77; see also Lafuente and Sellés 1988; González González 2005). From

1755, Juan hosted weekly ‘philosophical’ meetings at his home. This informal academy

14

was known as the Asamblea Amistosa Literaria. Its members, mostly lecturers from the

Naval Academy and the Cadiz College of Surgeons, hoped to open the way for a Spanish

Academy of Sciences. Juan, Godin, and another member of the Asamblea, José Carbonell,

drafted bye-laws for a national Academy. Nothing came of it (Guillén 1941; Baíls 1779, I,

43-56; Navarro 1983, 335). In the last few years of his life, Juan settled in Madrid as a

respected political adviser. His two-volume Examen Marítimo Theórico-Práctico (1771)

provided an introduction to advanced mathematics, dynamics and hydrodynamics, and

their application to shipbuilding and navigation. In the year of his death, he published

Estado de la Astronomía en Europa (1773, first printed prefacing the second edition of the

Observaciones Astronómicas y Phisicas; it appeared separately in 1774; cf. Juan 1978 – a

facsimil of the 1773 edition). This parting shot from a dying man criticized the

Inquisition's effective block on the teaching or practice of Copernicanism and respectfully

requested that the Crown should put an end to it (Navarro 1983, 334). Juan presented

Newton’s system as being the culmination of a historical process. Copernicus had shown

that the heliocentric system was the easiest. Tycho Brahe had demonstrated that the

Ptolemaic system could not match his observations. Kepler discovered the laws that

supported the Copernican system. Up to this point, however, the strongest argument for

heliocentrism remained one of simplicity. Then there appeared ‘the great Newton, the

greatest of Philosophers.’ His system, Juan argued, derived necessarily from universally

accepted observations and mathematics that were beyond objection, and was further

corroborated by the work of Clairaut, Euler, and Mayer. As Juan put it, the immobility of

the earth ‘knocked down all the principles of mechanics, of physics, and even of

astronomy.’ He concluded:

[all over Europe] no kingdom fails to embrace Newtonianism, and therefore

Copernicanism; … Even the very ones who convicted Galileo today regret they did

15

so, as is best demonstrated by developments in Italy itself: … Is it appropriate,

therefore, to have our Nation forced (whenever the Newtonian System and

Philosophy are explained) to add to every phenomena that depends on the earth's

motion: ‘but do not believe in such motion, since it goes against Holy Scripture?’ It

cannot be that her Sovereign, all wise and full of love [for his people] as he is,

countenances such a thing.9

Spanish historians accord the military an outstanding role in ‘modernizing’

eighteenth-century Spanish science. According to them, the military academies that the

Bourbons set up in Barcelona (1716), Cadiz (1717), Madrid (1751), and Segovia (1762)

taught advanced mechanics and mathematics, while the Naval Observatory in Cadiz, the

Colleges of Surgeons (in Cadiz and Barcelona), together with the reform of arsenals and

shipyards, mobilized scientists and technicians. They argue that the ‘militarization of

science’ was both ‘necessary’ and ‘perfectly coherent’ with eighteenth-century Spanish

culture (Ten 1980, 299; Lafuente [and others] 1996, 966; see also Capel, Sánchez, and

Moncada 1988; Lafuente and Peset 1982; Lafuente 1985). While the evidence is far from

conclusive, this thesis is itself best understood within the ongoing debate that questions the

role of the Bourbon dynasty as a major reformist and modernizing actor in Spanish history.

According to the traditional interpretation, darkness shrouded eighteenth-century Spain

until enlightened Bourbons came to dispel the shadows cast by benighted Habsburgs. This

9 ‘Estas reflexiones se han hecho ya en casi toda la Europa: no hay Reyno que no sea Newtoniano, y por

consiguiente Copernicano; […] Hasta los mismos que sentenciaron a Galileo se reconocen hoy arrepentidos

de haberlo hecho, y nada lo acredita tanto como la conducta de la misma Italia: […] ¿Será decente con esto

obligar a nuestra Nación á que despues de explicar los Systemas y la Philosophia Newtoniana, haya de

añadir a cada phenomeno que dependa del movimiento de la Tierra: pero no se crea este, que es contra las

Sagradas Letras? No es posible que su Soberano, lleno de amor y de sabiduria, tal consienta.’ (Juan 1978, pp.

[12-13])

16

cliché was fully articulated between the 1750s and 1780s, but seems still to be forcefully

alive (Graef 1996, 113-27; Sempere y Guarinos 1785, 15; cf. Rumeu de Armas 1980a,

108-18; Capel, Sánchez and Moncada 1988). As critics have recently highlighted, this was

precisely the best image that the Spanish Bourbons could project of themselves. To be

perceived as the force driving the modernization of the country was the best political

legitimation available to a foreign dynasty coming to power through civil war (Lopez

1976, 41-2). While it is not appropriate here to enter into the larger historiographical

debate about the nature of the eighteenth-century Bourbon regime, it is necessary to

question the competence and political agenda of this supposedly modernizing dynasty.

Under the Bourbons, Spanish universities were not reformed, the Inquisition was neither

dismantled nor experienced effective checks on its power, and the Crown lacked the

political will to set up an Academy of Sciences (cf. Mestre 1976; Mestre 1990; Fontana

1988; Albareda Salvadó 2004; Albareda Salvadó and García Espuche 2005; Lopez 1981;

Sánchez-Blanco 1999; Sánchez-Blanco 2002; J.L. Peset 2002; Moreno González 2002;

Garma 2002). In general, it is acknowledged that by 1800 the intellectual and scientific

gulf between Spain and the other countries of Western Europe was wider and deeper than

it had been in 1700. As Paul Chaunu put it, it was during the eighteenth century that, to

European eyes, Spain became ‘weird’, ‘ridiculous’, and even ‘outrageous’, so much so that

by 1800 Spain ‘was no longer [considered] part of Europe’ (Chaunu 1982, 38).

Royal patronage for scientific institutions was important in eighteenth-century Spain,

but it is far from clear whether the most effective part of it went through military

institutions. In particular, the evidence concerning the reception of Newton's ideas in those

institutions is scanty. Of course, the Cadiz Guardias-marinas Academy is a significant

exception, but this can be easily explained through the interests of its effective founder,

Jorge Juan, who was anything but representative of eighteenth-century military officers.

Beyond Cadiz, it remains hard to find traces of the teaching of advanced mathematics or

17

mechanics. In 1756, Pedro Padilla, Director of the Madrid Academy of the Guardias de

Corps, published the first introduction to the calculus printed in Spain, as part of the fourth

and final volume of his Curso military de mathematicas. His treatment was competent but

derivative, and did not display much understanding. It appears to have been derived largely

from the writings of Colin MacLaurin and of Wolff (Cuesta Dutari 1985, 134-7).

Moreover, Padilla only taught mathematics in Madrid for a few years before the short-

lived Academy (1751-60) was closed because it had failed to attract enough students

(Lafuente and Peset 1982, 196-7, 199). Another case in point was the military Academy of

Barcelona, founded in 1716 and active through the century. It appears not to have fully

incorporated mathematics into its curriculum until 1736, when Pedro Lucuce (or Lucuze)

was appointed mathematics lecturer (Capel, Sánchez, and Moncada, 1988, 110-31).

Lucuce, the Academy’s Director for forty years from 1739 had responsibility for the

mathematical syllabus. Although some contemporaries praised his mathematical abilities,

he was principally a man of good political standing, whose surviving papers contain

limited and old-fashioned mathematical knowledge (Cuesta Dutari 1985, 148-54; cf.

Capel, Sánchez, and Moncada 1988, 224-7). Moreover, the manuscript mathematical

lessons of the Academy and other contemporary accounts indicate that just arithmetic,

basic geometry, and basic algebra (first and second degree equations) were taught, with no

infinitesimal calculus or transcendent curves (Garma 1988, 102-3; Garma 1980; Cuesta

Dutari 1985, 138-54). Finally, it is also relevant that there was no trace of scientific

collaboration between the military Academy and the Barcelona Academy of Sciences

(which had been founded in 1764). The Barcelona military Academy played its part in the

military occupation following the War of the Spanish Succession, in which Catalonia had

backed the losing Hapsburg pretender: it was first and foremost a Bourbon stronghold

rather than an educational centre (Cuesta Dutari 1985, 153, quoting Archivo de Simancas,

‘Guerra moderna’, leg. 3030: ‘Inventario de los papeles de Lucuze’).

18

The politically reliable Lucuce was also appointed as Director of the Sociedad

Mathemática Militar, founded in 1756. The Society occasionally advised the

administration on technical matters, but its specific purpose was to produce a mathematical

encyclopedia in Spanish. However, not a single page of the encyclopedia had been written

when the Society was dismissed in 1760 (Cuesta Dutari 1985, 188-239; cf. Capel, Sánchez,

and Moncada 1988, 178-84).10 One of its members, the French military engineer, Lemaur

(or Le Maur), also rose to a prominent position in the Spanish Army. His short but

competent treatise on celestial dynamics, Discurso sobre la astronomía (1762), introduced

Newtonian dynamics, together with the solutions of Clairaut, D’Alembert, and Euler to the

three-body problem, and presented Maupertuis’ discussion of Saturn’s rings and the shape

of the earth. It also included Lemaur’s own observations of the 1761 transit of Venus.

Along with the writings of Jorge Juan, Lemaur’s work may be considered the best

Newtonian mechanics and astronomy printed in eighteenth-century Spain (Navarro 1983,

337).

4 The Jesuits

The Jesuit colleges in Madrid and Barcelona were most active in the reception of

experimental philosophy (Navarro 2003; see also Valverde Pérez 2007). As the name

reveals, the Colegio de Nobles in both towns were restricted to the nobility (high and low).

They offered elementary education and up to three years of university-level teaching in

philosophy and arts (Borràs 1965; Borràs 1983; Carrera Pujal 1957; Andújar 2004; Peset,

J.L. 1981; Simón Díaz 1952-59). For ten years from 1756, the highly competent Tomàs

Cerdà (1715-91) taught mathematics at the Jesuit College of Cordelles in Barcelona. A

10 The Society’s fellows were José Datuli (responsible for the volume on machines), Carlos Lemaur

(mechanics), Juan Garland (architecture and fortification), Francisco Cardoso (artillery), Lorenzo Lasso

(cosmography), Antonio de Córdova (algebra), Manuel de Rueda (arithmetic), Bernardo Fillera (geometry).

19

Jesuit since 1740 and a former professor of natural philosophy in the University of

Cervera, Cerdà’s classes at Barcelona discussed the views of Huygens, Gassendi,

Descartes, Newton (but without treating the Principia), Nollet, and Clairaut (Gassiot 1996;

García-Doncel 1998; Clascar 1918; Iglésies 1949; Cerdà 1753). In 1753, Cerdà was sent to

the Marseille Observatory to study for three years with the Jesuit Esprit Pézénas (1692-

1776), Royal Professor of Hydrography there. The translator of MacLaurin, Robert

Smith’s optics, Desaguliers’s experimental physics, and Henry Baker’s microscopy,

Pézénas wrote treatises on vessels, astronomy, and navigation. In the autumn of 1756,

Cerdà started to teach in Barcelona, while the Jesuits formally petitioned the Crown to

endow a mathematical chair in their college. They stressed the availability of a candidate

who had been trained and recommended by Jesuit French mathematicians. Endorsed by the

town and provincial authorities, their petition was granted in 1757, with the important

proviso that any mathematical courses had to be open to town audiences and not be

restricted to the gentlemen pupils of the College. Indirect contemporary evidence indeed

suggests that Cerdà’s lectures were popular (Garcià-Doncel 1998, 35-7).

Cerdà's published and unpublished works, as well as other accounts, show that he

taught updated advanced courses on a variety of mathematical topics including algebra,

calculus, Newtonian mechanics and astronomy, optics, and artillery (see Cerdà 1758,

which includes the work on infinite series and advanced algebra; Cerdà 1760; Cerdà 1764,

which includes the mathematical analysis of projectile motion). In June 1758, he wrote to

Thomas Simpson asking for advice about ‘good English writers’ on mechanics and

astronomy. In 1767, when the Jesuits were expelled from Spain, Cerdà was at work on a

multivolume mathematical encyclopedia. Substantial parts of it have been preserved,

including his drafts for seven treatises on fluxions, analytic geometry, mechanics,

hydraulics, optics, navigation, and astronomy (see Gassiot 1996; García-Doncel 1998, 37-

9; Cerdà’s manuscripts are now mostly in the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid).

20

Cerdà’s treatise on fluxions, which gave a full treatment of differentiation and integration

for algebraic, logarithmic, and exponential functions, as well as considering their

application to problems of rectification, quadrature, and so on, and their relation to series

development, was largely based on Simpson’s Doctrine and Applications of Fluxions

(1750) (Cuesta Dutari 1985, 250-52). Cerdà’s more original work on mechanics included

treatments of the laws of motion, projectiles, circular motion, central forces, pendular

motion, and a chapter devoted to motion in resisting media (García-Doncel 1998, 39;

Cerdà (nd) [Cerdà’s manuscript ‘Elementos generales de Mechánica’]). Cerdà's

Copernican astronomical lessons, based on Benjamin Martin’s Philosophia Britannica

(1747) and probably written in 1760, claimed to theoretically and observationally

‘demonstrate’ heliocentrism (Cerdà 1998).11

Cerdà’s teaching was also socially influential as a result of the solemn Actos

académicos that the College of Cordelles organized each year. These lasted for two to

three days, and filled the College’s theatre-room ‘with the most distinguished noble

families’ of Catalonia. They were often attended by the Capitán General (the senior

political and military official) and members of the Audiencia and the Town Hall (Malet

2007). The Act held on 7 and 8 January 1762 was carefully staged since the heir apparent,

the future Charles IV, was expected to be among the audience (Acto Academico 1761[?]).

The distinguished audiences heard of the systems of Copernicus and Tycho Brahe; the

observations of Hevelius and Flamsteed; Descartes’ vortices, and Gassendi's atoms. These

were critical accounts, since the students analysed on stage the main characteristics of

every system (Acto Academico 1757, 8-9; Acto Academico 1758; Acto Academico 1762).

In December 1757, despite the difficulties associated with public endorsement of

Copernicanism, the student Ignacio Aparisi solved on stage a problem that involved

11 Internal evidence dates the manuscript to 1760, while other evidence corroborates its classroom use around

that year.

21

calculating the distance travelled by the town of Barcelona in every minute as a

consequence of the Copernican diurnal motion of the earth. Aparisi had earlier been

involved in demonstrations of the use of the armillary sphere and the astronomical and

geographical globes (Acto Academico 1757, 9). Students also demonstrated on stage the

working of airpumps, barometers, prisms, telescopes, and electrical machines. They then

derived philosophical consequences from these demonstrations, which included the

existence of the vacuum, the weight of the air, and the validity of Newton's theory of

colours. In 1761, a leaflet was distributed which listed ten ‘theorems of experimental

physics’, which it was hoped would be demonstrated by six students before the heir to the

throne at the 1762 Act. These were as follows:

1 The divisibility of bodies is incomprehensible, as is suggested by the prodigious

division of odoriferous matter and by gold’s ductility. 2 All bodies, hard and liquid,

whether organic or not, are porous. 3 Porosity seems to imply compressibility. Yet

liquids cannot be compressed while solid bodies can. 4 All bodies, big and small,

have their own shape (configuracion). 5 Mobility is essential to all bodies. Yet,

continuous and permanent mechanical motion is physically impossible. 6 All bodies,

including water, are full of fire. 7 All light is true fire. This is why Archimedes was

able to set the Roman navy ablaze at Syracuse. 8 Colours are not modifications of

light, as taught by Descartes, but consist of a variety of the seven rays that compose

[white] light. 9 Air has not only relative but also absolute weight and gravity.10 All

motions that the ancient philosophers attributed to horror vacui should be attributed

to the weight and elasticity of the air.12

12 ‘1. La Division prodigiosa de las materias odoriferas, la ductilidad del oro, y de otras substancias

evidencia, que es incomprehensible la divisibilidad de los cuerpos. 2 Todos los cuerpos duros, y liquidos,

organicos, y no organicos son porosos. 3 Parece, que la compresibilidad se infiere legitimamente de la

22

Since the relevant instruments were not in fact available, printed representations of

them (lienzos) were arranged on the stage (Acto Academico 1758, 5; Acto Academico

1762, 5-7). These philosophical novelties were presented as a major break with traditional

scholastic philosophy:

Even today some scholastics believe it to be hardly an honest philosophical exercise

to deal with experiments, as if the study of man's purely theoretical ideas was more

honourable than that of God's works: [He] who everywhere in nature shows the

traces of his Omnipotent hand and infinite Wisdom. Who can deny that, in the

examination of natural things, experience has progressed more in the last few years

than mere ratiocination achieved in a period of many centuries, with its prolix

speculations by so many excellent geniuses?13

porosidad de los cuerpos; con todo, ni los liquidos, ni todos los fluidos son compresibles, mas si lo son todos

los solidos. 4 Todos los cuerpos, assi grandes, como pequeños tienen su determinada configuracion. 5 La

mobilidad […] es esencial a todos los cuerpos; no obstante es fisicamente impossible un movimiento

mecanico continuo, è inalterable. 6 Todos los cuerpos están llenos de mucho fuego, hasta la misma agua. 7

Toda luz es verdadero fuego, y assi pudo muy bien Archimedes abrasar con unos espejos ustorios la Armada

de los Romanos en el Sitio de Zaragoza [sic] de Sicilia. 8 Los colores […] no consisten como enseñó Renato

Descartes en la varia modificación de la luz, sino en la variedad de los siete rayos, de que la luz se compone.

9 El aire tiene peso, y gravedad, no solo respectiva, sino tambien absoluta. 10 Todos aquellos movimientos,

que los antiguos Filosofos solian atribuir al horror del vacuo, ó vacio se deben atribuir al peso, y elasticidad

del aire.’ (Acto Academico 1761[?], 3-5)

13 ‘Ahun hoi dia son algunos los Escolasticos, que contemplan como exercicio poco decoroso à la nobleza

filosofica el trabajar en los experimentos; como si fuesse ocupacion mas honrosa estudiar las ideas

puramente theoricas de los hombres, que las obras de un Dios, que en toda la naturaleza está mostrando los

rasgos de una mano Omnipotente, y de una Sabiduría infinita. Quien podrá negar, que en el exâmen de las

cosas naturales ha hecho la experiencia mayores progressos de pocos años à esta parte, que los que en

23

Events like these provided strong social legitimation for the new philosophy, which

was publicly celebrated as part of the learning and skills taught to the children of the urban

elites. The new philosophy was presented as knowledge that empowered those students.

These academic events not only made more widely known new physical notions,

cosmological systems, and philosophical apparatus, but they also bestowed implicit

authority on the new philosophy. In Spain, therefore, the new philosophy gained crucially

from its recognition by the Jesuits. Most importantly, the order presented this philosophy

as if it were in harmony with Roman Catholic religious teaching, and thereby forestalled

possible attacks from the Inquisition. And, in 1764, some of Cerdà’s students set up a

scientific academy in Barcelona (see below).

Similar developments took place in Madrid, both in the Real Seminario de Nobles,

founded by Philip V in 1725, and in the old Colegio Imperial (cf. Carrillo 1760; Carrillo

1764 and Carrillo 1766). The King attended some of these Actos académicos, and he

patronized both colleges through the purchase of expensive instruments that were used in

such public events. In 1750, Ferdinand VI had granted privileges to the gentle pupils of the

Seminario who took mathematics courses. These pupils were taught by the Jesuit, Esteban

de Terreros (1707-82), who was also the highly competent translator of Pluche. He was the

author of a four-volume dictionary of scientific and technical vocabulary, Diccionario

castellano (1786-93), which was one of the earliest monuments of European

lexicographical studies (Valverde Pérez 2007). The mathematical chair at the Colegio

Imperial was funded by the Consejo de Indias and traditionally associated with the post of

Cosmógrafo Mayor. In 1752 a Jesuit mathematician, the Bohemian Johann Wendlingen,

was appointed to this post. At his suggestion, the Crown set up an Academia Physico-

espacio de muchos siglos pudo conseguir el mero raciocinio con las prolíxas especulaciones de tantos

excelentes Ingenios?’ (Acto Academico 1762, 5)

24

Mathematica in the college to assist in the teaching of cosmography. It was endowed with

expensive astronomical and mathematical instruments, again bought in Paris and London

(Valverde Pérez 2007). During the 1750s, Wendlingen performed astronomical

observations of eclipses and solar transits, which he sent to Delisle in Paris. But neither

students nor successful results were forthcoming, and the Academia was closed in 1762

(Lafuente and Peset 1988, 198-9; Capel, Sánchez, and Moncarda 1988; Valverde Pérez

2007). A chair of experimental physics was later endowed for Antonio Fernández Solano

in the Colegio Imperial, in around 1780, but its activities remain obscure (Moreno

González 2002, 380-1).

The Jesuit College in Barcelona was closed down when the Spanish Bourbons

expelled the order from their territories in 1767 (Borràs 1988). In Madrid, the Seminario de

Nobles was taken over by the Crown. Lecturers now had to be paid salaries now, so

teaching costs went up, fees spiralled, and enrolment figures fell precipitously. A

procession of directors followed, all complaining of the absence of competent teachers. In

1774, a mathematics professor, Francisco Subirats (or Subirás) resigned, complaining of

pupils’ low motivation and lack of commitment to their studies (Ten 1980, 309-12). In the

1780s, the College became more and more integrated with the military, eventually

becoming an institution for officers and their sons. While the syllabus still mentioned

mathematics and experimental physics, the evidence suggests that no students took lessons

in these subjects (Peset 1981, 533).

5 Newton in Barcelona

During the course of the eighteenth-century, Barcelona became the commercial and

entrepreneurial capital of Spain. With a population growth of 330% between 1714 and

1800 (compared with a 75% increase for Spain as a whole), the town was booming

commercially, industrially and demographically (Fontana 1988; Herr 1958, 73). It had lost

25

its university in 1714 as punishment for Catalonia's military support for the Habsburg

cause. Through the Board of Commerce (Junta de Comercio, 1763), the new

entrepreneurial elites set up a school of pilots (1769) and chairs of ‘noble arts’ (drawing

and painting for the textile industry, 1774), applied mathematics (1787), and chemistry

(1802) (Iglésies 1969; Monés i Pujol-Busquets 1987). Until after 1800, there were close

connections between these chairs and the Physico-Mathematico-Experimental Conference

(Conferencia físico-matemática-experimental), founded by students of Cerdà and others

(Iglésies 1964; see also García-Doncel 1998; García-Doncel 2000; Bofill i Poch 1915;

Balari i Jovany 1895). The President’s opening lecture to the Conference, on January 18,

1764, solemnly declared that Cerdà's teaching and works were to be the foundation for the

new institution. Attendance at its meetings was restricted to Fellows, but Cerdà himself

might attend meetings whenever it pleased him (Balari i Jovany 1895, 34-6). The opening

lecture at the Conference castigated Spanish philosophical conservatism and praised

Bacon, Descartes, and Newton for delivering ‘physics’ from centuries of ‘oppression’ by

‘barbaric Peripatetics’ (Bofill i Poch 1915, 239-252). Perhaps influenced by a reading of

the Essai de physique (1739) of the Dutch Newtonian, Pieter van Musschenbroek, the

crucial role of mathematics for the definition of new notions was emphasized at the

Conference: ‘to calculate central forces, explain the fall of bodies’, to find the motion of

projectiles and of pendula, and so on (Iglésies 1964, 142; Balari i Jovany 1895, 27; García-

Doncel 2000, 90; Bonfill i Poch 1915, 251).

The Conference started its activities by buying instruments (out of Fellows’ own

pockets) and studying Musschenbroek’s textbook (García-Doncel 2000, 44-5). It tried to

obtain royal patronage and financial support, but largely failed. In exchange for nominal

recognition (from 1770 it took the title: Real Academia de Ciencias y Artes de Barcelona),

the Crown required it to teach audiences from the town Newtonian experimental

philosophy and natural history, concentrating on their applications for industry and the

26

arts. No funding for teaching was provided other than that of the mathematical chair from

the Jesuit College, which was transferred to the Academy in 1767. In 1787 the Academia

had 73 fellows (García-Doncel 1998, 63-7). While the memoirs that Fellows submitted

were mostly translations or derivative reports, there were also pieces of original research,

concerned with local fauna, flora, and mineralogy, with some presenting new experimental

results (their titles are listed in Iglésies 1964, 236-90). Newtonian topics were of secondary

importance for this provincial and practical audience, and only eight out of approximately

150 memoirs, which were submitted between 1766 and 1800, deal with them. These eight

memoirs were derivative and published relatively late (between 1786 and 1800). They

were more interesting in what they did not say than for what they contained. For the

memoirs on mechanics were didactic expositions of topics that were already old-fashioned

in the 1780s and 1790s, for example the discovery and application to astronomy of central

forces, or the origins and progress of the vis viva controversy (see the memoirs submitted

by J.-A. Desvalls in 1786 and 1787, F. Capalà in 1788, and F. Santpons in 1799: Iglésies

1964, 245, 250, 280). Optical memoirs and lectures at the Academy, for instance the nine

public lectures deliverd by M. Girona Giralt (in about 1770), were also out of touch with

contemporary research. Girona appears to have had only a second-hand knowledge of

Newtonian optics, since his real sources seem to have been Pluche and the Jesuit

Regnault’s Entretiens physiques (1732). In 1789, J. Vidal’s report on chromatic aberration

ignored the work of Dolland on achromatic lenses (1754), whereas F. Bell in 1796 wrote

about the nature of light as a fluid, simply reporting the work of Bradley and Dortous de

Mairan. In 1800, A. Nicolás Fauverge presented the rival theories of colour of Descartes,

Hooke, and Newton and showed the experiments that supported Newton. He had a first-

hand knowledge of the Opticks from an unspecified French edition (Domènech Pujol 1992,

II.14-22, III.19-21).

27

The relative absence of Newtonian research should not obscure other consequences

of the Academy for the scientific literacy of Barcelona. A comparison of the public view of

Newton given in the Barcelona press and that from elsewhere in Spain seems revealing.

One of the few discussions of Newton to appear in a Spanish periodical is found in El

Censor (a Madrid paper often considered as ‘the most enlightened expression of Charles

III’s reign’) (Aguilar Piñal 1990; Aguilar Piñal 1978; Lafuente and Pimentel 2002, 123;

Caso González 1989, especially 792-9). In 1787, by means of two long Discursos

dedicated to the nature of science (and apparently the only occasion on which it dealt with

the issue) and presenting twelve linked philosophical discussions, El Censor presented

‘attraction’ as an ‘Aristotelian occult quality’, a name for ‘nothing in substance’, ‘a thing

absurd and unthinkable unless it be assumed an immediate effect of the first cause’. Even

this last option was not seriously considered. El Censor also attacked the idea of the ‘void’,

claiming that, if Newton’s system needed a vacuum, then it must be ‘most absurd’. The

journal’s views on ‘space’ also belonged to a metaphysics inspired by mechanistic post-

Cartesianism (Discursos 144 and 145 [January to April 1787), reprinted in El Censor

(1989), 648-68).

By contrast, the main periodical of Barcelona, the Diario de Barcelona (founded

1792), was a daily newspaper with a wide circulation (as opposed to a learned or literary

magazine), which essentially addressed itself to craftsmen and merchants and the growing

urban middle class. It was short, packed with commercial information and announcements,

news of the arrival or departure of boats, requests for help from houses and workshops; in

addition, it featured a single opinion article in each daily issue. This makes it all the more

interesting that science featured prominently in the Diario, and that it offered a less

metaphysical, more sophisticated and updated view of Newton than the supposedly more

enlightened and learned Censor. The Diario wrote about science in short notes as well as in

long articles. Always anonymous, some are brief accounts of experiments or astronomical

28

observations taken from foreign journals.14 Some are complete translations of foreign

articles.15 And some are interesting philosophical articles, such as ‘Sobre la necesidad de

la experiencia en Física’ (11-12 October 1792), which attacked Newtonian attraction as a

metaphysical notion. It suggested that impact or push by contact, whose effects are obvious

everywhere, should be preferred to an immaterial pull, which was ‘a mere conjecture, an

occult quality, an empty word that means nothing’. A thoughtful answer on January 11-12,

1793, that quoted Newton, Musschenbroek, Monge, and others, correctly clarified the

status of Newtonian attraction compared with pre-Newtonian occult forces.16 There are

other similar examples, like the nine articles published in January 1796 (‘Estado de la

14 For instance, note on Mechain’s astronomical observations from the nearby hill of Montjuïc (Diario de

Barcelona, 17 January 1793, num. 17, p. 66-67); note on Priestley’s article on the colors of electrified metals

(23 and 24 Novembre 1793, num. 327, p. 1333-34; num. 328, p. 1337-38); note on Thomas Wedgwood’s

experiments (31 July and 1-2 August 1795, num. 212, p. 845-6; num. 213, p. 849-50; num. 214, p. 853-54);

‘Noticias literarias, sacadas del Diccionario Enciclopédico de Paris, y pertenecientes á la clase de Ciencias

fisicas’, 15-23 March 1799 (not in every issue), num. 74, p. 297-8, num. 75, p. 301 f., num. 77, p.. 309, num.

78, p. 313 f., num. 81, p. 325 f. and num. 82, p. 329 f.

15 For instance, ‘Filosofía-Química, o verdad fundamental de la Química moderna, tratada con nuevo

método, por el Señor Fourcroy’, Diario de Barcelona, 3-5 Decembre 1795, num. 336, p. 1349-50; num. 337,

p. 1353-54; num. 338, p. 1357-58; ‘Astronomía’ (a detailed report on Herschel’s observations [Herschel

1791, 1792a and 1792b]), 26-31 Octobre 1797, num. 299-304, p. 1257-8, 1261-2, 1265-6, 1269-70, 1273-4,

1277-81; ‘Física. Extracto de una Memoria sobre él influxo de la Luna en la atmósfera terrestre: su Autor el

Ciudadano Lamarck’, 27-28 Octobre 1798, num. 299-300, p. 1213-4, 1217-8.

16 Diario de Barcelona, 11-12 Octobre 1792, num. 11, p. 41-3; num.12, p. 45-6. The article attacks

metaphysical notions generally, among which it includes Newtonian attraction. It claims the notion of impact

or push by contact, whose effects are obvious everywhere, is to be preferred to an immaterial pulling, which

is ‘a mere conjecture, an occult quality, an empty word that means nothing’ (Diario, 11 Octobre 1792, num.

11, p. 42: ‘una simple conjetura, una qualidad oculta, una palabra vacía y sin sentido’). The answer appeared

on 11, 12 January 1793 (num. 11, p. 41-3; num. 12, p. 45-7).

29

Física’) that explained the differences between Newtonian science and natural philosophies

grounded on metaphysics, such as that of Descartes (Diario 1796, num. 3-11).

6 Newton in Portugal: The first decades of the century

What were the conditions for the reception of Newton’s work in the other Iberian kingdom,

Portugal? During the relatively prosperous and peaceful reign of Joâo V (1706-50), the

King bought instruments for and otherwise supported the Jesuit and Oratorian colleges in

Lisbon, both of which taught the new experimental philosophy. He also patronized the

philosophical endeavours of some of the estrangeirados. He set up a Royal Academy of

History (1720), where the new philosophy had a place too. The effective prime minister of

José I (1750-77), the ruthless Marquis of Pombal (1699-1782), who had previously served

as ambassador in London, checked the power of the landed aristocracy, launched radical

reforms of the country’s industry, commerce, and universities, and weakened the influence

of the Catholic Church in matters of education and censorship. The significance of his

reforms is still hotly debated. The reign of Maria I (1777-1816) saw a backlash against

Pombal and some of his policies, but the Crown continued to support university and

educational reforms, among which figured prominently the foundation of Portugal’s

Academy of Sciences (1780). By the end of the century, Newtonianism had a strong

institutional presence there.

During the first decades of the century, the role of estrangeirados and academies was

particularly significant. From 1695, the fourth Count of Ericeira (1673-1743), a prominent

estrangeirado, convened ‘Learned Conferences’ (Conferências Eruditas) in his Lisbon

mansion to discuss the new experimental philosophy and promote a utilitarian

understanding of knowledge. Those who worked under Ericeira's patronage included the

scholar Rafael Bluteau (1638-1734), the engineer Manuel de Azevedo Fortes (1660-1749),

and also, until 1721 when he left Portugal for the London Jewish community, the physician

30

Jacob (Henrique) de Castro Sarmento (1691-1762). They wrote books that introduced

contemporary theories of language, method, and logic into Portugal, as well as dealing

with Newton's mechanics and cosmology (Coxito 1981; Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999, 7-

8; Goldish 1997). From 1717, the private meetings in the palace of Ericeira were formally

called the Academia Portuguesa. Shortly thereafter, the Crown founded the Real Academia

de História Portuguesa (1720), of which Ericeira became one of the directors.

The works and life of Castro Sarmento, the author of the first Newtonian Portuguese

treatise, offer a key to Newton's reception in Portugal. His parents were conversos (that is

Jews who had embraced Roman Catholicism). The Portuguese Inquisition had nevertheless

accused his father of secretly remaining a Jew. In 1710, he was convicted, imprisoned, and

lost all of his possessions. In 1721, Sarmento himself left Portugal before being arrested

under the same charges, never to return. Settling in London, he changed his Christian

forename, Henrique, to Jacob, openly embraced Judaism, and briefly became physician to

the poor of the town's Portuguese-Jewish community. He attended Desagulier's lectures on

the new experimental philosophy, and, in 1725, became a Licentiate of the Royal College

of Physicians and, five years later, a Fellow of the Royal Society. In 1737, under the

somewhat misleading title of Theorica verdadeira das mares, conforme a philosophia do …

incomparavel cavalhero, Isaac Newton, he published in Portuguese in London one of the

first works to explain the gist of the Principia to non-mathematical audiences. It contrasted

Descartes’ ‘romance filosófico’, fruit of a ‘fertile imagination’, to Newton's permanent or

‘immutable’ (‘imutável’) system.

For Sarmento, Newton’s work could not be compared to that of Aristotle or

Descartes because its foundations were experimental and mathematical. He stressed that

Newtonian philosophy had spread without resistance throughout Europe, with the

exceptions of Spain and Portugal. He extolled the practical usefulness of Newtonianism

and made a plea that it should be promoted within the Royal Academy of History.

31

Sarmento tried to promote the new philosophy in other ways, many of which testified to

the delicate balancing acts in which he engaged as he looked for patronage and a

livelihood. He acted as intermediary at various times between the global community of

Portuguese letters and English natural philosophers, between English modernity and the

ambitions of the Portuguese state, and between avant-garde Jewish theology and the new

science. In 1731, he urged the President of the University of Coimbra to reform the study

of medicine by setting up a botanical garden and promoting microscopy. Sarmento

presented him with a draft plan for the gardens and a Culpeper microscope. He translated

Bacon's Novum Organum and an epitome of Newton's chronology (to which he had

referred in his Theorica verdadeira das mares), one of which was intended to be dedicated

to King Joao, the other to Prince José (see the essay by Mandelbrote in this volume). Sent

to Portugal in 1737, neither of these works was printed. The impact of Sarmento's Theorica

verdadeira is still debated, but it seems not to have circulated widely (Carvalho 1991, 450-

2; Araújo 2003, 43-4; Calafate 2001, 147-8; Martins 2004, 141).

During the 1720s and 30s, Ericeira remained in contact with Sarmento. Probably

through his good offices, Ericeira himself became a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1738,

on which occasion he declared himself a Newtonian (Carvalho 1991, 452).

Notwithstanding its official name, the Royal Academy of History dealt also with matters

philosophical. In the 1730s, Ericeira made extracts for it from the books that it had

received from the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences, many of which were about physics,

astronomy and mathematics. In this context, he proclaimed Newton to be the greatest of

English philosophers, who best proved by mathematical principles everything that might

be proved in natural philosophy (Araújo 2003, 46-7).

In Porto during the late 1740s, the Academia Medica Portopolitana, also known as

the Academia dos imitadores da naturaleza (‘those who imitate nature’) or dos escolhidos

(‘the chosen ones’), was founded under the patronage of the Bishop of Braga. In his

32

inaugural lecture to the Academy, the physician João Mendes Sachetti Barbosa (1714-

73/4?) placed the Academy under the principles of the new experimental philosophy.

References to Newton in its correspondence and publications abound. Its statutes

established that membership should be offered by preference to those who were ‘learned in

the Newtonian system’ (Piwnik 1987, 28-49, quotation at 29). The short-lived Academy

also attempted to further collaboration between Spanish and Portuguese physicians and

natural philosophers. By 1751, it counted among its fellows some ninety Spaniards, some

of them distinguished personalities like the eclectic physician Andrés Piquer or the botanist

José Quer y Martínez. However, the extent of this collaboration did not go beyond a brief

exchange of correspondence (Piwnik, 32, 34).

7 Portuguese public lectures on experimental philosophy

In 1725, a certain Luis (sic) Baden, ‘native of Great Britain’, published a leaflet to

announce his course of thirty lectures on experimental philosophy. He claimed that this

would teach the foundations of the experiments of the ‘modern philosophers, but

particularly of the renowned Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton, the most celebrated natural

philosophers (naturalistas) of the last century’ (Martins 1997, 121-7). The course was

divided into five parts: mechanics, hydrostatics, pneumatics, optics, and mineralogy. The

leaflet ended with an impressive list of twenty-nine kinds of instruments that would be

used in these public lectures. Each lecture was to be offered three times: once for ‘the

noble and gentle public’; once for the rest of the Portuguese public (these two were to be

given in Portuguese); and once for foreigners (to be given in English) (Martins 1997, 122-

6). No information survives about the success of Baden's lectures, but there must have

been a clear demand for them to judge by indirect evidence. At about the same time, other

lectures in ‘natural science’ were offered under the patronage of Rafael Bluteau, and public

lectures in experimental philosophy were announced as early as in 1720 (Araújo 2003, 40;

33

Carvalho 1982, 65). An entry in Ericeira's diary for 1733 mentioned the presence in Lisbon

of an Englishman who owned a good collection of philosophical instruments and who

would show them to the public (Carvalho 1982, 68). In the 1740s, a workshop (owned by a

certain M. Angelo Vila or Villa) was set up in Lisbon, which catered to a public interested

in physical and mathematical instruments (Carvalho 1982, 69-71).

There is also evidence from a little later in the century that the Oratorians offered

lectures (‘conferências’) on ‘Experimental Philosophy’ in their Lisbon College, which

were highly successful. The Oratorian Joao Baptista (1705-61) began these in 1752. They

attracted crowds of hundreds of people, including courtiers and the members of the new

urban commercial elites (Domingues 1994, 38-54). Baptista's principal student, Teodoro

de Almeida, successfully continued the lectures. Some noble houses, such as the Count of

Cantanhede's, also opened their salons to ‘experimental sessions’, for example with

electrical apparatus (Araújo 2003, 42).

8 Portuguese Jesuits and the Oratorians

It is hard to overestimate the influence that the Jesuits had over Portugal's educational

institutions from the mid-sixteenth century up until their expulsion from Portugal by

Pombal in 1759. They ran almost every college in the country and one of its two

universities, Évora. In addition, they had enormous influence at the University of Coimbra

(Carvalho 1986, 144-6). There is no consensus among historians concerning the contents

and character of the education offered by the Portuguese Jesuits. The traditional view is

that their colleges were strongholds of outdated neo-scholastic philosophy, even if there

were some modern Jesuit lecturers, such as Inácio Monteiro and Manuel de Campos

(Carvalho 1986, 146-7; Carvalho 1982, 34-41; Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999, 5).

Some authors have recently challenged this picture (especially Martins 1997 and

Domingues 1994). They indicate that there were many Jesuit lecturers who cautiously but

34

steadily introduced the ideas, instruments, and methods of the new philosophy, for

example, I. Soares, or A. Vieira, or S. Abreu, or J. Leitao, or I. Vieira (Martins 2004, 143-

148; Martins 2000, 202-13). Similarly, they stress that the ex-Jesuit astronomer José

Monteiro da Rocha was an inspirational force for the scientific modernization of Coimbra

in 1772. They conclude that the Jesuit natural philosopher Inácio Monteiro (1724-1812)

was the visible part of an iceberg rather than a unique exception to a rule. Educated in

Évora, Monteiro taught at the Jesuit College in Coimbra in the late 1740s. There, he

published a two-volume mathematical encyclopedia, Compendio dos elementos de

mathemáticas (1754-6), which covered pure mathematics, mechanics, optics and

astronomy, and explained in modern terms the crucial role that mathematics needed to play

in natural philosophy. Monteiro’s wide erudition and mature eclecticism were more fully

apparent in the seven-volume philosophical encyclopedia, Philosophia libera seu ecletica

(1766), which was written at Coimbra before 1759 and reflected his teaching there. As this

title suggests, Monteiro's philosophy was quite free from adherance to particular

philosophical schools. He was well informed, however, and criticized neo-scholasticism,

while advocating observation, mathematics, and experiments, and finding much to praise

in Gassendi, as well as in Descartes, Newton, and Leibniz. He also published works on

logic, metaphysics, and ethics in Italy (Silva 1973; Martins 1997, 141-51; Calafate 2001,

177-89).

The traditional, negative view of the Jesuit colleges may also be challenged on the

basis of the work and publications of the Jesuit astronomers who ran the observatories of

the Royal Palace and of the Lisbon Jesuit Collegio de Santo Antao, both set up in the early

1720s (Carvalho 1985; Osório 1986). Both were richly endowed with telescopes, clocks,

quadrants, and other instruments sent from Paris and London thanks to King Joao’s

generous patronage, itself to some extent the product of the influence of the King’s Jesuit

tutor, Luis Gonzaga (Martins 1997, 106-7, 115). The Italian Jesuit astronomers, Domenico

35

Capassi (1694-1736) and Giovanni Battista Carbone (1694-1750), arrived in Lisbon in

1722 to be appointed ‘royal mathematicians.’ They were bound for Brazil, to perform

cartographical and astronomical measurements, and, in particular, to fix key Brazilian

longitudes and latitudes. They set up the two Lisbon observatories and many of their

observations were published in the Philosophical Transactions and the Acta Eruditorum in

the 1720s and 1730s (Carvalho 1956a and 1956b). While Capassi did go on to Brazil,

Carbone stayed to tutor the heir to the throne and the infanta, and later to become secretary

to the King and Rector (Principal) of S. Antao College (Martins 1997, 107-13). The

Portuguese Jesuit mathematician, Manuel de Campos (1681-1758), a founding member of

the Royal Academy of History, also worked at the S. Antao observatory in the 1720s. In

the 1750s, he was part of a network involving the French astronomer Joseph-Nicolas

Delisle, and the Portuguese astronomer José Joaquim Soares de Barros (1721-93), both of

whom were working in Paris, the Bohemian Jesuit, Wendlingen, at the Colegio Imperial of

Madrid, and others working at S. Antao, such as Eusebio da Veiga (1718-98) (Martins

1997, 116-20).

Despite the eclecticism and awareness of contemporary endeavours to be found in

many courses taught at the Jesuit colleges, it seems that in Portugal the order of the

Oratory was even more open to the new philosophy. The Casa das Necessidades (the

Oratorian college in Lisbon) educated many figures of the Portuguese enlightenment,

including the distinguished mathematician José Anastácio da Cunha. From the late 1730s,

Joao Baptista taught natural philosophy there. His work was characteristic of the manner

by which many teachers in the Catholic orders tried to make room for experimental

philosophy without overthrowing the foundations of the received philosophical framework.

He published a two-volume work, Philosophia Aristotelica restituta (1748), whose key

point was that the moderns were usually right, but that, if Aristotle had been properly

understood, there would have been no contradiction between the two sides. Baptista

36

presented Descartes, Newton, and others as providing methods for the rediscovery of the

true Aristotle, whose work had been defiled by centuries of scholastic commentary

(Carvalho 1982, 51-57).

The Oratorian college also featured a substantial library (which contained the works

of Desaguliers, Musschenbroeck, and ’s Gravesande); a rich cabinet for experimental

philosophy, and a printing shop. Joao V was even-handed in his patronage of both Jesuits

and Oratorians, generously endowing the Lisbon colleges with astronomical, physical, and

mathematical instruments, many of them bought in Paris and London. His heir, José I

continued to support Oratorian efforts to teach experimental philosophy. The Oratorian

cabinet of experimental philosophy became ‘the pleasant theatre where father Teodoro [de

Almeida] entertained King José I and his court with innocent and admirable spectacles of

Nature, and the King José himself […] many times with his own hands operated the

machines’ (Martins 2004, 141; Carvalho 1986, 150; Carvalho 1982, 73-5).17

During the 1750s, the astronomical instruments in the Casa das Necessidades were

helpful to the Oratorian Joao Chevalier (1722-1801), who became a Fellow of the Royal

Society in 1754. The Philosophical Transactions published many of his observations in the

second half of the 1750s. In 1760, however, he had to leave Lisbon for political reasons.

Settling in Brussels in 1762, as librarian of the Bibliothèque Royale, he did little further

scientific work (Osório 1986, 125-6; Martins 2001, 337). Over the course of the 1760s, a

number of Oratorians published important works explaining the superiority of

Newtonianism over older philosophical systems. Among these was the Historia da creaçao

do mundo conforme as ideas de Moizes, e dos filozofos: ilustrada com hum novo sistema

(1762) of Manuel Alvares, which updated the Mosaic account given in the biblical book of

17 ‘o theatro deliçioso onde o P. Theodoro entertinha o Snr Rey D. Joze I e a sua corte com os innocentes, e

admeraveis espectáculos da Natureza, e o m. Snr. Rey D. Joze […] com suas Reaes Maos muitas vezes

manejava as maquinas.’ (quoted in Carvalho 1982, 73-74)

37

Genesis by the incorporation of a Copernican view of a universe that is kept in orderly

working by Newtonian gravitation. António Soares Barbosa's Discurso sobre o bom e

verdadeiro gosto na filosofia (1766) dwelt on the opposition between Newtonianism and

earlier philosophical schools, in particular that of Descartes, who was presented both as a

forerunner of Newton and as ‘system builder’. Barbosa claimed that Newton shaped

natural philosophy in a manner that would survive eternally (Carvalho 1991, 456; Calafate

2001, 142-46).

According to the historian Rómulo de Carvalho, the contributions of the Oratorians

‘were among the most valuable… if not the most valuable ones … [to the task of] opening

up [Portuguese mentalities] to the new paths of progress that had been discovered on the

other side of the Pyrenees’ (Carvalho 1986, 149-51; Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999, 20).

This assessment is based on the teaching offered by the Oratorian colleges; on the

scientific contributions of many Oratorian fathers; and also on their crucial role in

explaining the experimental philosophy, and Newton's ideas in particular, to wide lay

audiences. In this connection, the name of Teodoro de Almeida stands out.

9 Verney and Almeida

One of the main works that made Newton's ideas widely familiar to a Portuguese literate

audience was the estrangeirado Verney's controversial and hugely popular Verdadeiro

Metodo de Estudar, para ser util a Republica, e a Igreja (1746) (Andrade 1965; Andrade

1980). Of French origins, Luís António Verney (1713-92) studied in Lisbon, first with the

Jesuits, and then with the Oratorians, moving on to the University of Évora, and eventually

to Rome, where he settled when he was just twenty-three, never to return to Portugal. For a

few years he was secretary to the Portuguese ambassador to the Holy See. Verney’s True

method of study, for the use of the Republic and the Church was a pedagogical manifesto

that sought to improve Portugal's colleges and universities. It attacked Jesuit education

38

harshly and attempted to redraw the boundaries of morals, reason, and the Catholic faith.

In particular, it offered a cogent exposition of the new philosophical foundations required

if one was to accommodate the works of Newton and Locke (Araújo 2003, 51-9; Calafate

2001, 132-42, 149-56). A strong expression of the importance of an understanding of

natural theology pervaded the work.

Verney’s book was successful in Spain as well as Portugal, although sixteen years

had to pass before its translation was authorized. It was also translated into French and

Italian. It proved highly controversial, and scores of books and tracts in response to it

appeared both in Spain and Portugal. Attempts were made to suppress the book, but the

Portuguese Crown provided discreet support. In truth, Verney had been secretly

encouraged to write the Verdadeiro metodo, which provided strong ammunition for

absolutist educational reforms.

By declaring himself a Newtonian and stressing the epistemological value of

experimental natural philosophy, Verney highlighted his differences with the

‘hypothetical’ philosophies of Descartes and Gassendi. In the tenth of the sixteen letters

that make up his work, Verney claimed that all phenomena could be reduced to matter in

motion, but that to discover the true effects and properties of matter it was necessary to

make proper observations (Verney 1949-52). As was typical for a writer of enlightened

philosophical discourse, Verney decried ‘systems’ in a lapidary sentence: ‘the true modern

system is not to have a system, and it is only in this way that any truths have been

discovered’.18 One of the many virtues of Verney’s encyclopaedic work was his plain,

concise, and highly effective style. He chose this deliberately to fight against what he saw

as the baleful influence of the Spanish Baroque, in over-ornate and imprecise prose (Rossi

1966).

18 ‘Este é o verdadeiro sistema moderno: nâo ter sistema, e só assim é que se tem descoberto alguna verdade.’

(Verney 1949-52, III, 203)

39

The Oratorian, Teodoro de Almeida (1722-1804), a student of Baptista, and his

successor as lecturer at the public ‘Experimental Conferences’ in Lisbon, was strongly

influenced by his attempt to salvage traditional philosophy by mixing it with the new

philosophy. As was the case with Feijoo in Spain, Almeida was the author of one of the

compendious bestsellers of the eighteenth century, a ten-volume popularization of the

results and methods of the new philosophy, which was reprinted seven times. The

excellence of experimental philosophy, according to Almeida, came from its description of

the beauty of nature; from its usefulness in improving human material conditions, and from

its provision of a deeper understanding of divine creation (Carvalho 1982, 57-63; Martins

1997, 128-41; Calafate 2001, 142-46, 330-5). Almeida was one of the founding members

of the Lisbon Academy of Science, and delivered the lecture at its inauguration in 1780,

mounting a scathing attack on the policies of Pombal.

The most popular book by Almeida, Recreaçaõ filosofica, ou, dialogo sobre a

filosofia natural, was written over two, separate periods. The first six volumes were

published between 1751 and 1762, before Almeida went into exile, and focussed on natural

philosophy proper. The first volume dealt with mechanics; the second with light, sound

and heat; the third with the four elements; the fourth with instruments; the fifth with the

animal kingdom, and the sixth with the system of the world. After his return to Portugal

following years of exile, Almeida resumed the publication between 1768 and 1778, adding

four more volumes. A final volume appeared in 1800. The seventh volume dealt with logic

and method; the eighth with metaphysics; the ninth with natural theology and the harmony

of religion and reason in general; and the tenth with ethics (Domingues 1988). Almeida

also wrote a three-volume compilation of memoirs in physics and mathematics, Cartas

fisico-mathematicas (1784-98), which was meant to be a complement to the Recreaçao

filosofica. Although he remained eclectic in his philosophy, and was ultimately committed

to making Catholic theology relevant in metaphysics and ethics, in many senses Almeida

40

was the person who ‘by his conviction and lucidity [established] … Newtonian

philosophy’ in Portuguese culture.19

Verney and Almeida successfully addressed their works to a lay readership, for

which they provided a mature and sophisticated understanding of the distinctions between

experimental philosophy and previous schools of philosophy. Together with Feijoo, they

were among the few real intellectual bridges between Spain and Portugal, as well as being

intermediaries between their respective countries and a wider intellectual world (Piwnik

1992; Andrade 1980, 180-200). Each of these writers found important audiences, including

many critics, in both Iberian kingdoms, thus suggesting the existence of deep similarities

between the interests, concerns, and education of the learned elites of both countries.

10 The mixed blessings of Pombal’s reforms

Portugal’s great enlightened reformer, the Marqués de Pombal, was the chief minister of

José I from 1755 until 1777 (Real 2005; Domingues 2002; Maxwell 1995; Thielemann

2001). His draconian reforms reshaped teaching institutions, including the universities.

Some proved short-lived and unsuccessful, but others helped to create conditions in which

experimental philosophy might take root in the country. For all his support for

experimental philosophy, however, and despite his commitment to modernize curricula,

Pombal did not hesitate to gaol or exile philosophers and engineers whom he suspected of

being his political enemies. Thus the engineer, natural philosopher, and projector Bento de

Moura Portugal (1702-76) spent the last eighteen years of his life in jail. Acclaimed by his

contemporaries as the Portuguese Newton, Portugal left twenty-eight manuscript

notebooks of prison writings (most now lost) before he turned mad (Araújo 2003, 47-8;

Martins 2004, 141-3; Almeida 1784-98). Joâo Jacinto Magalhâes (1722-90) (or Magellan,

19 ‘ao padre Teodoro de Almeida […] coube o honroso papel, na historia cultural portuguesa, de impor, pela

sua convicçao e pela lucidez do seu espirito […] a filosofia newtoniana.’ (Carvalho 1991, 453)

41

as was internationally known), the London based intelligencer, natural philosopher, and

instrument dealer, and a Fellow of the Royal Society from 1774, also had to leave Portugal

in 1756 for political reasons (Malaquias and Thomaz 1994; Malaquias 1994). Verney too

suffered even in Italy as a result of the long hand of Pombal, despite the fact that his work

proved crucial in Pombal’s struggle against the Jesuit order. In 1759, Pombal banished the

Jesuits from Portugal and his colonies and closed down all the schools and colleges that

they ran, including the University of Évora. This used to be presented as a necessary step

for Portugal on the road to modernity. However, from 1760, Pombal also harassed the

Oratorians in Lisbon. Most of the lecturers at the college were compelled to leave, and

some of them had to go into exile, among them Chevalier and Almeira. It was eventually

closed in 1768 (Martins 2004, 161-68). Pombal punished Oratorians for opposing his

views on the supremacy of the Crown over the Church, and, by doing so, helped to ensure

that one of his pet projects, the Colégio de Nobres (College for the Nobility) in Lisbon, had

no real competition.

Founded in 1761, the Colégio de Nobres was effective only after 1766. The new

Colégio, according to Pombal’s plans, was supposed to instil values and knowledge in the

sons of the aristocracy that would turn Portugal and its overseas colonies into a major

commercial and political empire. Its foundation responded to the advanced educational

programme of the converso estrangeirado, António Nunes Ribeiro Sanches (1699-1783),

which had been published in his influential Cartas sobre a educaçao de mocedade (Letters

on the education of the youth, 1760). The Colégio’s curriculum emphasised that pupils

should acquire productive, social virtues (such as punctuality), but also stressed the

teaching of mathematics and experimental philosophy. Pombal hired many Italian

lecturers, perhaps because he had gaoled or exiled all the competent Portuguese ones.

Some quickly returned to Italy, but those in charge of chemistry and natural history

(Domingos Vandelli (1735-1816)), and physics (Giovanni Antonio Dalla Bella (1730-c.

42

1823)) stayed (Carvalho 1954). Musschenbroeck’s Elements of Physics was followed in

the teaching of experimental philosophy. The college had a cabinet with more than 560

instruments for experimental philosophy and astronomy, most of which probably came

from the Oratorian college (Carvalho 1986, 152-4; Martins 2001, 336-8, Martins 1997,

134-5).

The new college was a failure. Few sons of the nobility enrolled, and those who did

showed remarkably little interest in mathematics, the new philosophy, or its applications,

the teaching of which lasted for only two years. Recognizing this failure, Pombal

redirected his efforts towards a major reform of the University of Coimbra, which he

launched in 1772. The result was a major overhaul, not only of the University's curriculum

and teaching methods, but also of its very structure. The old Faculty of Arts was closed,

and alongside the traditional four faculties of theology, canon and civil law, and medicine,

Pombal created new faculties of mathematics and philosophy. The Faculty of Mathematics

was endowed with four professorships, in geometry, algebraic and infinitesimal analysis,

mechanics (labelled ‘Phoronomy’), and astronomy. Newtonian topics figured prominently

in the phoronomy and astronomy courses. In the Faculty of Philosophy, pride of place was

given to experimental physics, chemistry, agriculture, and natural history. This faculty

received the philosophical instruments previously allocated to the Colégio de Nobres,

whose lecturers were transferred to it. In the 1770s and 1780s, courses of experimental

physics at Coimbra again followed Musschenbroeck's works (Vlahakis [and others] 2006;

Martins 2000, 213-33).

The old Faculty of Arts was a minor (menor) faculty, and had less prestige and fewer

entitlements than the higher (mayores) faculties of theology, law and medicine. The new

faculties of mathematics and philosophy were higher ones, with the same status as the

Faculty of Medicine, indeed medicine was declared to be one of the parts of natural

philosophy (Martins 2004, 133-6). It was hoped that an elevation in the status and prestige

43

of philosophy and mathematics would enable these disciplines to attract bright young

people, who might thereafter apply themselves to increasing the wealth of the country. To

promote attendance at the Faculty of Mathematics, those who registered were entitled to

wear the habits of one of the military orders and, if they were of noble status, to count the

years spent in the Faculty as military service (Albuquerque 1986).

The reformed statutes of Coimbra required that subjects be taught through a

combination of theoretical and practical approaches. Useful applications should be

highlighted, as well as the historical progress of knowledge (Albuquerque 1986; Teixeira

2006, 177). Students enrolled at the Faculty of Mathematics were required to take natural

history and experimental philosophy courses from the Faculty of Philosophy; conversely,

philosophy students had to follow courses in geometry, analysis, and phoronomy from the

Faculty of Mathematics. Medical students were required to take courses from both the

mathematics and philosophy faculties (Martins 2000, 225-8; Calafate 2001, 153-56).

The excellent collection of instruments that the Faculty of Philosophy received from

the Colégio de Nobres grew to become one of the richest public collections in Europe, with

more of 600 instruments (Martins and Fiolhais 2003; Carvalho 1986, 152-4). Pombal also

planned new buildings, an astronomical observatory, a natural history museum, and a

botanical garden for the university, but some of these facilities only came into being many

years afterwards.

11 The institutionalization of Newtonianism in Portugal

The reform of the University of Coimbra was a mixed success. Dalla Bella's teaching of

experimental philosophy (as exemplified in his three-volume Physices Elementa (1790))

was not more advanced than what had been on offer in the Oratorian college in Lisbon

during the 1750s. It seems that the faculties of mathematics and philosophy failed to attract

students, and that they suffered from absenteeism, internal power struggles, and nepotism

44

(Martins 2001, 339; Carvalho 1986, 164-65; Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999, 12). On the

other hand, the reforms implied the official establishment of Newtonianism in Portugal's

colleges and at the University of Coimbra, which became an active centre for the new

philosophy. Among those who worked there were the military officer, poet, and

mathematician José Anastácio da Cunha, who regarded Newton as his ‘teacher’ (mestre),

or the astronomer José Monteiro da Rocha (1734-1819), who organized the Faculty of

Mathematics, and collaborated in drawing up the statutes of the reformed university, and

later supervised the building of the observatory (Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999, 23).

Shortly after Pombal's fall, the creation of the Lisbon Academy of Science helped to

complete this national institutionalization of experimental philosophy (Domingues 1993).

Notwithstanding its name, the Academia Real das Ciências was the national academy for

both science and letters. It was divided into three classes: mathematical sciences (including

mechanics and astronomy), natural and experimental sciences (including chemistry,

anatomy, botany, and mineralogy), and Portuguese language and literature. It published the

Memorias de matemathica e phisica, of which two volumes appeared in the eighteenth

century (in 1797 and 1799). Although Newtonian influence was obvious in the papers in

mathematics, mechanics, optics, and astronomy, the papers did not represent innovative

developments in these fields (unlike those in chemistry or natural history) (Agudo 1986;

Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999, 16-18; Carvalho 1996).

The mathematician José Anastácio da Cunha (1744-1787), whose chequered life

illustrated the mixed legacy of Pombal’s reforms, made one of the most original scientific

contributions to come from Portugal in the eighteenth century. Born in Lisbon and

educated at the Oratorian college, he was appointed in 1764, when not yet twenty, as a first

lieutenant in the notorious artillery regiment of Porto, which had been newly created in

1762 as part of a major reform of the Portuguese army. He attended regimental classes in

mathematics and artillery (Veira 1990). The Porto regiment was staffed by foreign

45

mercenary officers, most of them Protestant in religion. The local establishment was

shocked by their open, free discussions on matters of religion and philosophy. Anastácio

da Cunha made friends with many of his fellow officers, learned their languages and fully

participated in their intellectual discussions. A gifted man of letters, he translated into

Portuguese contemporary foreign literature, including some of Alexander Pope’s verse

(Anastácio da Cunha 1994; Ferro 1987).

As part of his university reforms, Pombal appointed Anastácio da Cunha in 1772 as

Professor of Geometry in the Faculty of Mathematics at Coimbra. Shortly after Pombal's

fall from power, however, in July 1778, the Portuguese Inquisition put Anastácio da Cunha

under arrest. He was convicted in a public auto de fé of having embraced the errors of

‘libertinism, deism, being tolerant of everything (tolerantismo), and indifferentism.’ His

sentence included mandatory public penance and prayer, the confiscation of all his

possessions, and confinement for three years in the Congregation of the Oratory in Lisbon,

to be followed by four years of exile in Évora, 500 km from Coimbra. He lost his

possessions, and was never allowed to return to his chair at Coimbra, but the three years of

internment were shortened to two and his exile rescinded (Ferro 1987, xi-xvii). The last

years of Anastácio da Cunha’s life were mostly devoted to finishing his Principios

mathematicos (Lisbon 1790), a book that he had begun in Coimbra in the 1770s with a

pedagogical aim that was then at the cutting edge of contemporary mathematical

knowledge (Giusti 1990; Duarte and Silva 1990a). Anastácio da Cunha provided original

foundations for the exponential and logarithmic functions, and particularly for the general

definition of irrational exponents. He used Newtonian fluxions with Leibnizian notation

and organized his work to minimize the need for demonstrations. The result, as Ivor

Grattan-Guinness puts it, is ‘impressive but odd, powerful but cryptic’ (Grattan-Guinness

1990, 59-61). Anastácio da Cunha’s Principios was translated into French in 1811, praised

by Gauss in his private correspondence, and reviewed several times (Youschkevitch 1978;

46

Mawhim 1990; de Oliveira 1990). The similarities between Anastácio da Cunha’s work

and Cauchy’s articulation of some fundamental notions of the calculus are intriguing,

although the connexion between the two remains a moot point (Youschkevitch 1973; de

Oliveira 1988; Queiró 1988). Anastácio da Cunha never became a fellow of the Portuguese

Academy of Sciences (Duarte and Silva 1990b, 133-34; Simoês, Carneiro, Diogo 1999,

19).

12 Conclusion: Newton in Portugal and Spain

Eighteenth-century Portugal and Spain displayed important similarities in their reception

of Newtonianism. In both countries, the religious orders (the Oratorians in Portugal, the

Jesuits and Benedictines in Spain) were important vectors of Newton’s ideas. Advanced

religious thinkers (Verney and Almeida in Portugal, Feijoo in Spain, indeed all three in

both countries) contributed decisively to the dissemination of philosophical novelties. In

particular, they packaged Newton's ideas with those of the experimental philosophy and

declared that old philosophical systems, based on metaphysics or first principles, were

obsolete. In both countries, the Inquisition obstructed the circulation of new ideas, and did

so in an indirect, almost haphazard way. In both lands (but more markedly in Spain)

advanced mathematics and rational mechanics were subjects that scarcely interested the

learned elites. Cultural unease found expression in the social figures of afrancesados and

estrangeirados. As revealed by the words themselves, while Spanish afrancesados

essentially responded to French influences, Portuguese estrangeirados were attuned to and

influenced by a wider range of foreign enlightened sources, among which English contacts

played an outstanding role. There are more differences between the Spanish and

Portuguese experiences. The influence of afrancesados in Spanish society was noticeable

at a markedly later date than that of estrangeirados in Portuguese society. The former are

hardly noticeable in the first half of the eighteenth century, yet the estrangeirados were

47

active from the opening decades of that century. Moreover, estrangeirados played a

prominent role in the introduction of new trends in science and technology, of

Newtonianism in particular, whereas the influence of afrancesados was felt largely in

literature, the arts, and politics.

Nevertheless, Portugal and Spain displayed important differences in the way that

they reacted to philosophical novelties that came from across the Atlantic and Pyrenees. To

simplify, Portugal can be said to have displayed a much more decidedly reformist cultural

agenda. In the first half of the century the Portuguese Crown already supported the

advanced teachings of the Oratorians and their public lectures in experimental philosophy

also promoted within the Royal Academy of History. Nothing similar happened under

Philip V of Spain. From the 1750s, Pombal’s enlightened agenda of curtailing the old

nobility's power, promoting mercantilism, and checking religious influence had no real

counterpart in eighteenth-century Spain. All contemporary attempts to reform the Spanish

administration, economy, and universities, and to reduce the influence of the landed

aristocracy, the Catholic Church, and the Inquisition were short-lived and ultimately

ineffectual. On the whole, Portugal seemed to be more open and more attuned to new

intellectual and social developments that were occurring elsewhere in Europe. This found

expression not only in the many Portuguese intellectuals who were elected Fellows of the

Royal Society or who published in the Philosophical Transactions and other European

journals, but also in the production of Portugal’s own popular Newtonian books. In part,

this was a reflection of the historical ties that existed at a political and diplomatic level

between Portugal and England. Portugal sent many of its intellectuals into exile or to jail,

just as Spain did, but Portuguese networks for the exchange of ideas, information, and

instruments with foreign countries remained nevertheless somehow more open and more

active than Spanish ones. Finally, in the second half of the century, and thanks to Pombal’s

university reforms, and, later on, to the foundation of the Academy of Sciences,

48

Newtonianism and the experimental philosophy gained in Portugal an official, institutional

basis that they never had in Spain during the eighteenth century.

49

Bibliography

Acto Academico (1757) Acto Academico, con que los colegiales del Imperial, y Real

Seminario de Nobles de Cordelles, que en Barcelona está baxo la direccion de la

Compañia de Jesus, manifestaron los progressos, que han hecho en las buenas

Letras, y Exercicios proprios de un Caballero; dedicado al Excelentissimo Señor …

Dn. Jayme Miguel de Guzman, … Marqués de la Mina, … Gobernador, y Capitan

General del Exercito, y Principado de Cathaluña, y Presidente de su Real Audiencia,

etc. etc. En los dias 29 y 30 de Deciembre de 1756, Barcelona: Juan Nadal.

Acto Academico (1758) Acto Academico, con que los colegiales del Imperial, y Real

Seminario de Nobles de Cordelles, que en Barcelona está baxo la direccion de la

Compañia de Jesus, consagraron a la muy ilustre ciudad … de Barcelona, y su

nobilissimo Ayuntamiento los adelantamientos, que han hecho en las Buenas Letras,

y Exercicios proprios de un Caballero. En los dias 27, 28, y 29 de Deciembre de

1757, Barcelona: Juan Nadal.

Acto Academico (1761[?]) Acto Academico de Buenas Letras, y Exercicios Caballerosos,

que el Imperial, y Real Seminario de Nobles de Barcelona dedica al Serenissimo

Principe de las Asturias nuestro Señor, Barcelona: Juan Nadal.

Acto Academico (1762) Acto Academico de Buenas Letras, y Exercicios de Caballeros,

…[en] el Real Seminario de Nobles de Barcelona, Que está à cargo, y direccion de

los PP. de la Compañia de Jesus, En los dias 7, y 8 de Enero del año de 1762,

Barcelona: Juan Nadal.

Agudo, Fernando Roldão Dias (1986) ‘Contribuiçâo da Académia para o desenvolvimento

das Ciências’, in Peixoto, José Pinto, Fernando Roldão Dias Agudo and José Tiago

de Oliveira (eds) História e desenvolvimento da ciéncia em Portugal: I Colóquio–até

50

ao século XX: Lisboa, 15 a 19 de abril de 1985, vol 1, Lisboa: Academia das

Ciéncias, pp. 1301-1340.

Aguilar Piñal, Francisco (1978) La prensa española en el siglo XVIII, Madrid: CSIC.

Aguilar Piñal, Francisco (1990) ‘Ilustración y periodismo’, Estudios de historia social

[Madrid], 52-53 [special volume: Periodismo e Ilustración en España]: 9-17.

Albareda Salvadó, Joaquim and Albert Garcia Espuche (2005) 11 de setembre de 1714,

Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya.

Albareda Salvadó, Joaquim (2004) ‘Felipe V y Cataluña. Balance de un reinado’, in

Serrano Martín, Eliseo (ed.) Felipe V y su tiempo, vol. 2, Zaragoza: Institución

Fernando el Católico, pp. 91-118.

Albuquerque, Luis de (1986) ‘O ensino da Matemática na Reforma Pombalina’, in Peixoto,

José Pinto, Fernando Roldão Dias Agudo and José Tiago de Oliveira (eds) História e

desenvolvimento da ciéncia em Portugal: I Colóquio–até ao século XX: Lisboa, 15 a

19 de abril de 1985, vol 1, Lisboa: Academia de Ciéncias, pp. 19-25.

Almeida, Teodoro de (1784-98) Cartas Físico-mathemáticas, Lisboa: A.R. Galhardo.

Andrade, António Alberto Banha de (1965) Vernei [sic] e a cultura do seu tempo,

Coimbra: Universidade [de Coimbra].

Andrade, António Alberto Banha de (1980) Verney e a projecçâo da sua obra, Lisboa:

Instituto de Cultura Portuguesa.

Andújar Castillo, Francisco (2004) ‘El Seminario de Nobles de Madrid en el siglo XVIII.

Un estudio social’, Cuadernos de Historia Moderna. Anejos, 3: 201-225.

Araújo, Ana Cristina (2003) A cultura das Luzes em Portugal: temas e problemas, Lisboa:

Livros Horizonte.

Baíls, Benito (1779) Elementos de matemáticas, vol. 1, Madrid: Ioachin Ibarra.

Balari i Jovany, José (1895) Historia de la Real Academia de Ciencias y Artes, Barcelona:

L'Avenç.

51

Bofill i Poch, Arturo (ed.) (1915) Fiestas científicas celebradas con motivo del CL

aniversario de la fundación de la Real Academia de Ciencias y Artes, Barcelona:

Robert.

Borràs, Antoni (1965) ‘El Col·legi de Santa Maria i Sant Jaume, dit vulgarment de

Cordelles’, Analecta sacra Tarraconensis [Barcelona], 37: 399-465.

Borràs, Antoni (1983) ‘El Col·legi de Nobles de Barcelona durant el segle XVIII’,

Contribució a la història de l’Església catalana, Barcelona: Publicacions Abadia de

Montserrat, pp. 51-89.

Borràs, Antoni (1988) ‘L’expulsió del jesuïtes de la Ciutat de Barcelona en el marc general

del seu desterrament d’Espanya per Carles III’, Pedralbes [Barcelona], 10: 403-430.

Browning, John D. (1981) ‘“Yo hablo como newtoniano”: El P. Feijoo y el

newtonianismo’, in Jean-Louis Flecniakoska (ed.) El Padre Feijoo y su siglo,

Ponencias y comunicaciones presentadas al Simposio celebrado en la Universidad

de Oviedo del 28 de septiembre al 5 de octubre de 1964, vol. 1, Oviedo: Universidad

de Oviedo, pp. 221-230.

Calafate, Pedro (2001) História do pensamento filosófico portugués, vol. 3: As luzes,

Lisbon: Editorial Caminho.

Capel, Horacio, Joan-Eugeni Sánchez, Omar Moncada (1988) De Palas a Minerva. La

formación científica y la estructura institucional de los ingenieros militares en el

siglo XVIII, Barcelona: El Serbal.

Carrera Pujal, Jaume (1957) La enseñanaza profesional en Barcelona en los siglos XVIII y

XIX, Barcelona: Bosch.

Carrillo, Leandro (1760) Conclusiones mathematicas defendidas en el Real Seminario de

Nobles, en presencia de sus Magestades Catholicas, Madrid: Joachin Ibarra.

52

Carrillo, Leandro (1764) Ejercicios Literarios ò Examen que haran algunos Caballeros

Seminaristas de las Facultades que se enseñan en este Real Seminario de Nobles en

Madrid, Madrid: Joachin Ibarra.

Carrillo, Leandro (1766) Egercicios literarios, ó Examen, que han de hacer algunos

caballeros seminaristas de las Facultades que se enseñan en este Real Seminario de

Nobles de Madrid, … de Latinidad, Rhetorica, Poesia. Lengua griega. Historia

Sagrada. Lengua Francesa. Philosophia Contenciosa, Geographia general, y Uso de

Globo, Physica Experimental, Mathematica y Jurisprudencia, Madrid: Joachin

Ibarra.

Carvalho, Rómulo da (1956) ‘Portugal nas Philosophical Transactions, nos séculos XVII e

XVIII’, Revista filosófica [Coimbra], 15: 231-260 and 16: 94-120.

Carvalho, Rómulo da (1982) A física experimental em Portugal no século XVIII, Lisbon:

Instituto de Cultura.

Carvalho, Rómulo da (1985) A astronomia em Portugal no século XVIII, Lisbon, 1985.

Carvalho, Rómulo da (1986) ‘La Fisica na reforma pombalina’, in Peixoto, José Pinto,

Fernando Roldão Dias Agudo and José Tiago de Oliveira (eds) História e

desenvolvimento da ciéncia em Portugal: I Colóquio – até ao século XX: Lisboa, 15

a 19 de abril de 1985, vol. 1, Lisboa: Academia de Ciéncias, pp. 143-168.

Carvalho, Rómulo da (1991) ‘A aceitaçao em Portugal da Filosofia Newtoniana’, Revista

da Universidade de Coimbra [Coimbra], 36: 445-457.

Carvalho, Rómulo da (1996) ‘A actividade pedagógica da Académia das Ciências de

Lisboa nos séculos XVIII e XIX’, in Carvalho, Rómulo da (ed.) Actividades

científicas em Portugal no século XVIII, Évora: Universidade de Évora, pp. 433-602.

Carvalho, Rómulo de (1954) História da Fundaçâo do Colégio Real dos Nobres de Lisboa

(1761- 1772), Coimbra: Livraria Editora.

53

Caso González, José M. (1989) ‘“El Censor” ¿periódico de Carlos III?’, in Caso González,

José M. (ed.) El Censor >facsimile@, Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo, pp. 777-799.

Ceñal, Ramón (1945) Cartesianismo en España. Notas para su historia (1650-1750)

(special issue of Revista de la Universidad de Oviedo. Facultad de Filosofía y

Letras), Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo.

Ceñal, Ramón (1952) ‘Emmanuel Maignan: su vida, su obra, su influencia’, Revista de

Estudios Políticos 46: 111-149.

Ceñal, Ramón (1966) ‘Fuentes jesuíticas francesas de la erudición filosófica de Fejoo’, in

Flecniakoska, Jean-Louis (ed.) El Padre Feijoo y su siglo, Ponencias y

comunicaciones presentadas al Simposio celebrado en la Universidad de Oviedo del

28 de septiembre al 5 de octubre de 1964, vol. 2, Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo,

pp. 285-314.

El Censor (1989) >facsimile@, ed. José M. Caso González, Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo.

Cerdà, Tomás (nd) ‘Elementos generales de Mechánica’ (Madrid, Academia de la Historia,

Ms Cortes 9/2788).

Cerdà, Tomás (1753) Iesuiticae philosophiae theses: contentiosam et experimentalem

philosophandi methodum complectentes, quas … deffendet … Gabriel Pellizer,

patrono Thoma Cerdà, Cervera: Barbèr.

Cerdà, Tomás (1758) Liciones [sic] de mathematica, o Elementos generales de arithmetica

y algebra, 2 vols, Barcelona: Surià.

Cerdà, Tomás (1760) Lecciones de Mathemática, o elementos generales de Geometría,

Barcelona: Surià.

Cerdà, Tomás (1764) Leccion de artilleria, Barcelona: Surià.

Cerdà, Tomás (1998) Tratado de astronomía. Curs dictat l'any 1760 a la Reial Càtedra de

Matemàtiques del Collegi de Sant Jaume de Cordelles, ed. L. Gassiot, Barcelona:

RACAB.

54

Chaunu, Pierre (1982) La civilisation de l'Europe des lumières, París: Flammarion.

Clascar, Frederic (1918) Estudi sobre la filosofia a Catalunya en el segle XVIII, Barcelona:

La Revista.

Coxito, Amândio (1981) ‘O compêndio de lógica de Manuel de Azevedo Fortes e as suas

fontes doutrinais’, Revista de História das Ideias [Coimbra], 3: 9-36.

Cuesta Dutari, Norberto (1985) Historia de la invención del análisis infinitesimal y de su

introducción en España, Salamanca: Ed. Universidad de Salamanca.

Défourneaux, Marcelin (1963) L’Inquisition espagnole et les livres français au XVIII

siècle, Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

Delpy, Gaspard (1936a) Bibliographie des sources françaises de Feijoo, Paris: Hachette.

Delpy, Gaspard (1936b) Feijoo et l’Esprit Européen, Paris: Hachette.

Diario de Barcelona [Barcelona].

Domènech Pujol, Xavier (1992) ‘La ciencia experimental en la Barcelona ilustrada: las

actividades sobre óptica de la RACAB’ (Master thesis, Universitat Autònoma de

Barccelona).

Domingues, Francisco Contente (1988) ‘Um projecto enciclopédico e pedagógico: A

Recreação Filosófica de Teodoro de Almeida’, Revista de História das Ideias

[Coimbra], 10: 235-248.

Domingues, Francisco Contente (1993) ‘Science and nationalism: Portugal in the late 18th

century’, History of European Ideas [Amsterdam], 16: 91-96.

Domingues, Francisco Contente (1994) Ilustraçao e Catolicismo. Teodoro de Almeida,

Lisbon.

Domingues, Mário (2002) Marqués de Pombal: o homem e a sua época, Lisbon: Préfacio.

Duarte, António Leal and Jaime Carvalho e Silva (1990b) ‘Sobre a influência da obra

matemática de José Anastácio da Cunha’, in Lurdes Ferraz, Maria de, José-Francisco

55

Rodrigues and Luís Saraiva (eds) Anastácio da Cunha 1744/1787. O Matemático e o

Poeta, Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda, pp. 133-145.

Duarte, António Leal and Jaime Carvalho e Silva (1990a) ‘Os Principios mathematicos de

José Anastácio da Cunha’, in Lurdes Ferraz, Maria de, José-Francisco Rodrigues and

Luís Saraiva (eds) Anastácio da Cunha 1744/1787. O Matemático e o Poeta, Lisboa:

Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda, pp. 81-96.

Enciso Recio, Luis Miguel (1992) ‘La prensa y la opinión pública’, in Jover Zamora, José

María (ed) Historia de España por Ramón Menéndez Pidal, vol. 31.1: la época de la

ilustracion: el estado y la cultura (1759-1808), 3rd edn, Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, pp.

57-128.

Estrada, Maria Fernanda (1994) ‘Introduction’, in José Anastácio da Cunha, Ensaio sobre

as minas, ed. F. Estrada, Braga: Universidade do Minho, pp. 1-37.

Étienvre, Françoise (2006) ‘Traducción y renovación cultural a mediados del s. XVIII en

España’, in Fernández Albaladejo, Pablo (ed.) Fénix de España. Modernidad y

cultura propia en la España del s. XVIII (1737-1766), Madrid: Marcial Pons, pp. 93-

117.

Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo (1730) Teatro crítico universal, vol. 4, Madrid: Joachin Ibarra.

Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo (1733) Teatro crítico universal, vol. 5, Madrid: Joachin Ibarra.

Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo (1737) Teatro crítico universal, 9 vols, Madrid: Joachin Ibarra.

Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo (1786) Cartas eruditas, y curiosas, en que, por la mayor parte,

continua el designio del Teatro crítico universal, Impugnando, ó reduciendo á

dudosas varias opiniones comunes…, 5 vols, Pamplona: Imp. de B. Cosculluela.

Fernández Navarrete, Francisco (nd) Ephemerides del barometro y thermometro,

ilustradas con las observaciones médico-anatómicas [N.p., n.d.].

Ferro, João Pedro (ed.) (1987) O processo de José Anastácio da Cunha na Inquisiçao de

Coimbra (1778), Lisboa: Palas Editores.

56

Fiolhais, Carlos and Décio Ruivo Martins (2003) ‘A place of pilgrimage. The Coimbra

Physics Museum’, Europhysics News [Berlin], 34.4: 154-156.

Flecniakoska, Jean-Louis (ed.) (1966) El P. Feijoo y su siglo: Simposio celebrado en la

Universidad de Oviedo, 28 Septiembre al 5 Octubre 1964, 3 vols, Oviedo:

Universidad de Oviedo.

Fontana, Josep (1988) Història de Catalunya, vol. 5: La fi de l´Antic Règim i la

industrialització: 1787-1868, ed. Pierre Vilar, Barcelona: Edicions 62.

García-Doncel, Manuel (1998) ‘Los orígenes de nuestra Real Academia y los jesuitas’,

Memorias de la RACAB [Barcelona], 57.3: 31-88.

García-Doncel, Manuel (2000) ‘Els quatre enfocaments inicials de l’Acadèmia’, in Nieto-

Galan, Augustí and Antoni Roca Rosell (eds) La Reial Acadèmia de Ciències i Arts

de Barcelona als segles XVIII i XIX, Barcelona: RACAB-IEC, pp. 81-124.

Garma, Santiago (1980) ‘Los matemáticos españoles y la historia de las matemáticas de los

siglos XVIII y XIX’, in Garma, Santiago (ed.) El científico español ante su historia,

Madrid: Diputación Provincial, pp. 59-72.

Garma, Santiago (1988) ‘Cultura matemática en la España de los siglos XVIII y XIX’, in

Sánchez Ron, José Manuel (ed.) Ciencia y sociedad en España, Madrid: CSIC, pp.

93-127

Garma, Santiago (2002) ‘La enseñanza de las matemáticas’, in García Ballester, Luis (ed.)

Historia de la ciencia y de la técnica en la Corona de Castilla, vol. 4, Valladolid:

Junta de Castilla y León, pp. 311-346.

Gassiot, Lluís (1996) ‘Tomàs Cerdà i el seu “Tratado de Astronomía”’, (Master thesis,

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona).

Giusti, Enrico (1990) ‘Quelques reflexions sur les Principios de da Cunha’, in Lurdes

Ferraz, Maria de, José-Francisco Rodrigues and Luís Saraiva (eds) Anastácio da

57

Cunha 1744/1787. O Matemático e o Poeta, Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional-Casa da

Moeda, pp. 33-52.

Glick, Thomas F. (1965) ‘El escepticismo en la ideología científica del doctor Martín

Martínez y del padre Feijoo’, Asclepio [Madrid] 18: 255-269.

González González, Francisco José (2005) El Real Observatorio de la Armada, Madrid:

Ministerio de Defensa.

Graef, Juan Enrique de (1996) ‘Discurso preliminar’ (1 Octuber 1755), in Graef, Juan

Enrique de Discursos mercuriales económico-políticos (1752-1756), ed. Francisco

Sánchez-Blanco, Sevilla: Fundación El Monte, pp. 113-127.

Grattan-Guinnes, Ivor (1990) ‘Da Cunha's calculus in its time’, in Lurdes Ferraz, Maria de,

José-Francisco Rodrigues and Luís Saraiva (eds) Anastácio da Cunha 1744/1787. O

Matemático e o Poeta, Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda, Lisboa: Imprensa

Nacional-Casa da Moeda, pp. 53-62.

Guillén, Julio F. (1936) Los Tenientes de Navío Jorge Juan y Santacilia y Antonio de

Ulloa y de la Torre-Guiral y la medición del Meridiano, Madrid: [s.n.].

Guillén, Julio F. (1941) ‘Juan y Ulloa y los precedentes del siglo XVIII de la Real

Academia de Ciencias’, Revista de la RACEFN [Madrid], 34: 440-448.

Herr, Richard (1958) The Eighteenth-century revolution in Spain, Princeton: Princeton

University Press.

Herschel, William (1791) ‘On Nebulous Stars, Properly So Called’, Philosophical

Transactions [London], January 1, 81: 71-88.

Herschel, William (1792a) ‘Miscellaneous Observations’, Philosophical Transactions

[London], January 1, 82: 23-27.

Herschel, William (1792b) ‘On the Ring of Saturn’, Philosophical Transactions [London],

January 1, 82: 1-22.

58

Iglésies, Josep (1949) Mateu Aymerich, 1715-1799, i la seva História Geográfica y

Natural de Cataluña, Barcelona: Quaderns de Geografía.

Iglésies, Josep (1964) La Real Academia de Ciencias Naturales y Artes en els siglo XVIII,

Barcelona: RACAB.

Iglésies, Josep (1969) L'obra cultural de la Junta de Comerç 1760-1847, Barcelona:

Rafael Dalmau.

Juan, Jorge (1978) ‘Estado de la Astronomía en Europa’, in Juan, Jorge Observaciones

astronómicas y phísicas [facsimil of 1773 edition], intro. and ed. José P. Merino

Navarro and Miguel M. Rodríguez San Vicente, Madrid: Fundación Univ. Española,

pp. [1]-[13].

Juan, Jorge and Antonio de Ulloa (1748) Relación Histórica del Viaje a la América

Meridional, 5 vols, Madrid: Marín.

Juan, Jorge and Antonio de Ulloa (1978) Relación Histórica del Viaje a la América

Meridional, 5 vols, intro. and ed. José P. Merino Navarro, Madrid: Fundación

Universitaria Española [reprint of Juan and de Ulloa (1748)].

Lafuente, Antonio (1982) ‘La enseñanza de las ciencias durante la primera mitad del siglo

XVIII’, in Universidad de Valencia (ed.) Estudios dedicados a Juan Peset

Aleixandre, vol 2, Valencia: Universidad de Valencia, pp. 477-495.

Lafuente, Antonio (1985) ‘Militarización de las actividades científicas en la España

ilustrada’, in Peset, José L. (ed.) La ciencia moderna y el nuevo mundo, Madrid:

CSIC, pp. 127-147.

Lafuente, Antonio and Antonio J. Delgado (1984) La geometrizacion de la tierra:

observaciones y resultados de la expedicion geodesica hispano-Francesa al

virreinato del Peru (1735-1744), Madrid: CSIC.

Lafuente, Antonio and Antonio Mazuecos (1987) Los Caballeros del Punto Fijo, Madrid:

Serbal/CSIC.

59

Lafuente, Antonio and José Luis Peset (1982) ‘Las Academias Militares en la España

ilustrada’, Dynamis [Granada] 2: 193-208.

Lafuente, Antonio and José Luis Peset (1987) ‘El conocimiento y el dominio de la

naturaleza: la ciencia y la técnica’, in Batllori, Miguel and José María Jover Zamora

(ed.) Historia de España Menéndez Pidal, vol 31.1: La época de la Ilustración: El

Estado y la cultura (1759-1808), Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, pp. 347-394.

Lafuente, Antonio and José Luis Peset (1988) ‘Las actividades e instituciones científicas

en la España ilustrada’, in Sellés, Manuel, José Luis Peset and Antonio Lafuente

(eds) Carlos III y la ciencia de la Ilustración, Madrid: Alianza, pp. 29-78.

Lafuente, Antonio and Juan Pimentel (2002) ‘La construcción de un espacio público para

la ciencia: Escrituras y escenarios en la Ilustración española’, in García Ballester,

Luis (ed.) Historia de la ciencia y de la técnica en la Corona de Castilla, vol 4,

Valladolid: Junta de Castilla y León, pp. 111-157.

Lafuente, Antonio and Manuel Sellés (1980) ‘La física en Feijoo: Tradición y renovación’,

in Garma, Santiago (ed.) El científico español ante su historia, Madrid: Diputación

Provincial, pp. 169-188.

Lafuente, Antonio and Manuel Sellés (1988) El Observatorio de Cádiz (1753-1831),

Madrid: Ministerio de Defensa.

Lafuente, Antonio [and others], Miguel Ángel Puig-Samper, Encarnación Hidalgo, José

Luis Peset, Francisco Pelayo and Manuel Sellés (1996) ‘Literatura científica

moderna’, in Aguilar Piñal, Francisco (ed.) Historia literaria de España en el siglo

XVIII, Madrid: Trolta-CSIC, pp. 965-1029.

López Piñero, José María (1979) Ciencia y técnica en la sociedad española de los siglos

XVI y XVII, Barcelona: Labor.

Lopez, François (1976) Juan Pablo Forner et la crise de la conscience espagnole au XVIII

siècle, Bordeaux: Université de Bordeaux.

60

Lopez, François (1981) ‘Rasgos peculiares de la Ilustración en España’, in Mayans y la

Ilustración, vol 1, Valencia: Ayuntamiento de Oliva, pp. 629-671.

Malaquias, Isabel Maria (1994) ‘A Obra de João Jacinto de Magalhães no Contexto da

Ciência do Século XVIII’ (Ph.D. Diss., Universidade de Aveiro).

Malaquias, Isabel Maria and Manuel Fernandes Thomaz (1994) ‘Scientific

Communication in the XVIIIth century: The case of John Hyacinth de Magellan’,

Physis [Florence], 31: 817-34.

Malet, Antoni (2007) La recepció de la ciència moderna a Catalunya: Isaac Newton a la

Barcelona del set-cents, Barcelona: Institut de Cultura de Barcelona.

Maravall, José Antonio (1991) ‘El primer siglo XVIII y la obra de Feijoo’, in Iglesias,

M.C. (ed.) Estudios de la historia del pensamiento español, siglo XVIII, Madrid:

Mondadori, pp. 85-116.

Martí Franquès, Antoni (1907 [1790]) ‘La cantidad de aire vital que se halla en el aire

atmosférico y sobre varios métodos de conocerla’, Memoria sobre los varios

métodos de medir la cantidad de aire vital de la atmósfera presentada … el dia 12

de Mayo de 1790, Barcelona: RACAB.

Martins, Décio Ruivo (1997) ‘Aspectos da cultura científica portuguesa até 1772’ (doctoral

thesis, Physics Department, University of Coimbra).

Martins, Décio Ruivo (2000) ‘As ciências Físico-matemáticas em Portugal e a Reforma

Pombalina’, in Araújo, Ana Cristina (ed.) O Marquês de Pombal e a Universidade,

Coimbra: Impresa da Universidade, pp. 193-262.

Martins, Décio Ruivo (2001) ‘A Reforma Pombalina da Universidade de Coimbra: Que

inovaçâo no ensino das ciências Físico-matemáticas?’, in Congresso O Marquês de

Pombal e a sua época, Oeiras: Câmara Municipal de Oeiras, pp. 323-339.

Martins, Décio Ruivo (2004) ‘O florescimento dos novos paradígmas científicos no

iluminismo português’, Anais da Universidade de Évora [Evora], 13: 133-164.

61

Mawhin, Jean (1990) ‘Le concept de différentielle chez da Cunha et ses successeurs’, in

Lurdes Ferraz, Maria de, José-Francisco Rodrigues and Luís Saraiva (eds) Anastácio

da Cunha 1744/1787. O Matemático e o Poeta, Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional-Casa da

Moeda, pp. 97-106.

Maxwell, Kenneth (1995) Pombal, paradox of the Enlightenment, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

McClelland, Ivy Lillian (1991) Ideological hesitancy in Spain, 1700-1750, Liverpool:

Liverpool University Press.

Mestre, Antonio (1976) Despotismo e Ilustración en España, Barcelona: Ariel.

Mestre, Antonio (1990) Mayans y la España de la Ilustración, Madrid: Espasa Calpe.

Monés i Pujol-Busquets, Jordi (1987) L’obra educativa de la Junta de Comerç, 1769-

1851, Barcelona: Cambra de Comerç.

Moreno González, Antonio (2002) ‘La física moderna’, in García Ballester, Luis (ed.)

Historia de la ciencia y de la técnica en la Corona de Castilla, vol. 4, Valladolid:

Junta de Castilla y León, pp. 347-403.

Musschenbroek, Pieter van (1739) Essai de physique, Leyden: Luchtmans.

Navarro, Víctor (1983) ‘La física en la España del siglo XVIII’, in Real Academia de

Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales (ed.) Historia de la física hasta el siglo XIX:

Curso de conferencias sobre historia de la física hasta el siglo XIX: desarrollado

durante los meses de abril y mayo de 1983, Madrid: RACEFN, pp. 327-342.

Navarro, Víctor (2003) ‘Tradition and scientific change in Early Modern Spain: The role

of the Jesuits’, in Feingold, Mordechai (ed.) Jesuit Science and the Republic of

Letters, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, pp. 331-387.

Oliveira, Augusto José Franco de (1988) ‘Anastácio da Cunha and the Concept of

Convergent Series’, Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 39: 1-12.

62

Oliveira, Augusto José Franco de (1990) ‘Anastácio da Cunha e a metafísica do Cálculo’,

in Lurdes Ferraz, Maria de, José-Francisco Rodrigues and Luís Saraiva (eds)

Anastácio da Cunha 1744/1787. O Matemático e o Poeta, Lisboa: Imprensa

Nacional-Casa da Moeda, pp. 107-124.

Osório, José Joaquim Pereira (1986) ‘Sobre a história e desenvolvimento da astronomia em

Portugal’, in Peixoto, José Pinto, Fernando Roldão Dias Agudo and José Tiago de

Oliveira (eds) História e desenvolvimento da ciéncia em Portugal: I Colóquio–até ao

século XX: Lisboa, 15 a 19 de abril de 1985, vol 1, Lisboa: Academia de Ciéncias,

pp. 111-142.

Padilla, Pedro (1756) Curso militar de mathematicas, vol 4, Madrid: Antonio Marín.

Pagden, Anthony (1988) ‘The reception of the “new philosophy” in eighteenth-century

Spain’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes [London], 51: 126-140.

Pardo, José (2004) El Médico en la palestra. Diego Mateo Zapata, 1664-1745, y la ciencia

moderna en España, [Valladolid] : Consejería de Cultura y Turismo.

Peset, José Luis (1981) ‘Ciencia, nobleza y ejército en el Seminario de Nobles de Madrid’,

in Mayans y la Ilustración, vol. 2, Valencia: Ayuntamiento de Oliva, pp. 519-535.

Peset, José Luis (2002) ‘La disputa de las Facultades’, in García Ballester, Luis (ed.)

Historia de la ciencia y de la técnica en la Corona de Castilla, vol 4, [León] : Junta

de Castilla y León, Consejería de Educación y Cultura, pp. 11-22.

Peset, Vicente (1965) ‘Acerca de la difusión del sistema copernicano en España’, in Actas

del Segundo Congreso Español de Historia de la Medicina, vol. 1, Salamanca:

Sociedad Española de Historia de la Medicina, pp. 309-24.

Piwnik, Marie-Hélène (1987) Echanges érudits dans la péninsule ibérique, 1750-1767,

Paris: Fondation Calouste Gulbenkian, Centre culturel portugais.

63

Piwnik, Marie-Hélène (1992) ‘Une entreprise lucrative: les traductions en espagnol du

Père Teodoro de Almeida’, Arquivos do Centro Cultural Português > Lisbon @, 31:

199-206.

Queiró, João Filipe (1988) ‘José Anastácio da Cunha: A Forgotten Forerunner’, The

Mathematical Intelligencer >Berlin@, 10: 38-43.

Quiroz-Martínez, Olga Victoria (1949) La Introducción de la Filosofía Moderna en

España. El Eclecticismo Español de los Siglos XVII y XVIII, México D.F.: Colegio

de México.

Real, Miguel (2005) O Marques de Pombal e a cultura portuguesa, Matosinhos: Quidnovi.

Regnault, Noël (1732) Entretiens physiques, Paris: Clouzier.

Rossi, Giuseppe Carlo (1966) ‘España (y Feijoo) en motivos culturales y eruditos

portugueses del siglo XVIII’, in Flecniakoska, Jean-Louis (ed.) El P. Feijoo y su

siglo. Simposio celebrado en la Universidad de Oviedo, 28 Septiembre al 5 Octubre

1964, vol. 2, Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo, pp. 389-406.

Rumeu de Armas, Antonio (1980a) Ciencia y tecnología en la España ilustrada, Madrid:

Turner.

Rumeu de Armas, Antonio (1980b) Origen y fundación del Museo del Prado, Madrid:

Instituto de España.

Sánchez-Blanco, Francisco (1999) La mentalidad ilustrada, Madrid: Taurus.

Sánchez-Blanco, Francisco (2002) El absolutismo y las luces en el reinado de Carlos III,

Madrid: Marcial Pons.

Santos, José (1997) ‘El padre Sarmiento y la introducción de Newton en España’, Llull

[Zaragoza], 20: 697-733.

Sempere y Guarinos, Juan (1785) Ensayo de una Biblioteca de los mejores escritores del

reynado de Carlos III, vol 1, Madrid: Imprenta Real.

64

Serrano, Elena (2012) ‘The Spectacle de la Nature in Eighteenth-Century Spain: From

French Households to Spanish Workshops’, Annals of Science [London], 69.2: 257-

282.

Silva, Lucio Craveiro da (1973) ‘Inácio Monteiro – significado da sua vida e da sua obra’,

Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia >Braga@, 29.3: 220-249.

Simoês, Ana, Ana Carneiro and Maria Paula Diogo (1999) ‘Constructing knowledge: 18th-

century Portugal and the new sciences’, in Gavroglu, Kostas (ed.) The sciences in the

European periphery during the Enlightenment, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic

Publishers, pp. 3-64.

Simón Díaz, José (1952-59) Historia del Colegio Imperial de Madrid, 2 vols, Madrid:

CSIC.

Teixeira, Francisco Gomes (2006) História das matemáticas em Portugal, Lisbon:

Arquimedes Livros.

Ten, Antonio (1980) ‘“No hay reyno que no sea newtoniano…” Sobre la introducción del

newtonianismo en España’, Revue d’Histoire des Sciences >Paris@, 43: 293-319.

Thielemann, Werner (ed.) (2001) Seculo XVIII: seculo das luzes: seculo de Pombal,

Frankfurt a.M.: TFM.

Tofiño, Vicente (1776-77) Observaciones astronómicas hechas en Cádiz, en el

observatorio real de la Compañía de Cavalleros Guardias-Marinas, 2 vols, [Cadiz]:

Compañía de Cavalleros [sic] Guardias-Marinas.

Ulloa, Antonio de (1795) Conversaciones de Ulloa con sus tres hijos en servicio de la

marina, instructivas y curiosas, sobre las navegaciones, Madrid: Sancha.

Valverde Pérez, Nuria (2007) Actos de precisión. Instrumentos científicos, opinión pública

y economía moral en la Ilustración española, Madrid: CSIC.

Verney, Luís António (1949-1952) Verdadeiro método de estudar, 5 vols, ed. A. S. Júnior,

Lisbon: Sá da Costa.

65

Vieira, Belchior (1990) ‘O ensino científico-militar em Portugal no século XVIII –

Anastácio da Cunha, discípulo da Aula de Artilharia na Praça de Valença do Minho’,

in Lurdes Ferraz, Maria de, José-Francisco Rodrigues and Luís Saraiva (eds)

Anastácio da Cunha 1744/1787. O Matemático e o Poeta, Lisboa: Imprensa

Nacional-Casa da Moeda, pp. 7-17.

Vlahakis, George N. [and others], Isabela Maria Malaquias, Nathan M. Brooks, François

Regourd, Feza Gunergun, David Wright (2006) ‘The development of science in

Portugal and colonial Latin America (Brazil)’, in Vlahakis, George N. Imperialism

and science: social impact and interaction, Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, pp. 56-89.

Whitmore, Patrick James Stigant (1967) The Order of Minims in Seventeeth-century

France, The Hague: Nijhof.

Youschkevitch, Adolf P. (1973) ‘J. A. da Cunha et les fondements de l'Analyse

Infinitésimale’, Revue d'histoire des sciences [Paris], 26: 3-22.

Youschkevitch, Adolf P. (1978) ‘C. F. Gauss et J. A. da Cunha’, Revue d'histoire des

sciences [Paris], 31: 327-332.