ROBERT HOOKE FRS (/hʊk/ ; 28 July 1635 – 3 March 1703) was an
English natural philosopher , architect and polymath .
His adult life comprised three distinct periods: as a scientific
inquirer lacking money; achieving great wealth and standing through
his reputation for hard work and scrupulous honesty following the
great fire of 1666 , and eventually becoming ill and party to jealous
intellectual disputes (the latter may have contributed to his relative
At one time he was simultaneously the curator of experiments of the
Royal Society , a member of its council, Gresham Professor of Geometry
, and Surveyor to the City of
London after the Great Fire of London
(in which capacity he appears to have performed more than half of all
the surveys after the fire). He was also an important architect of his
time – though few of his buildings now survive and some of those are
generally misattributed – and was instrumental in devising a set of
planning controls for
London whose influence remains today. Allan
Chapman has characterised him as "England's Leonardo ".
Robert Gunther 's Early
Science in Oxford, a history of science in
Oxford during the Protectorate, Restoration and Age of Enlightenment,
devotes five of its fourteen volumes to Hooke.
Hooke studied at
Wadham College, Oxford
Wadham College, Oxford during the Protectorate where
he became one of a tightly knit group of ardent Royalists led by John
Wilkins . Here he was employed as an assistant to
Thomas Willis and to
Robert Boyle , for whom he built the vacuum pumps used in Boyle's gas
law experiments. He built some of the earliest Gregorian telescopes
and observed the rotations of
Mars and Jupiter. In 1665 he inspired
the use of microscopes for scientific exploration with his book,
Micrographia . Based on his microscopic observations of fossils, Hooke
was an early proponent of biological evolution . He investigated the
phenomenon of refraction , deducing the wave theory of light , and was
the first to suggest that matter expands when heated and that air is
made of small particles separated by relatively large distances. He
performed pioneering work in the field of surveying and map-making and
was involved in the work that led to the first modern plan-form map,
though his plan for
London on a grid system was rejected in favour of
rebuilding along the existing routes. He also came near to an
experimental proof that gravity follows an inverse square law , and
hypothesised that such a relation governs the motions of the planets,
an idea which was independently developed by
Isaac Newton . Much of
Hooke's scientific work was conducted in his capacity as curator of
experiments of the
Royal Society , a post he held from 1662, or as
part of the household of Robert Boyle.
* 1 Life and works
* 1.1 Early life
* 1.4 Hooke and Newcomen
* 2 Personality and disputes
* 3.2 Gravitation
* 3.3 Horology
* 3.3.2 Watch balance spring
* 3.5 Palaeontology
* 3.6 Astronomy
* 4 Architecture
* 5 Likenesses
* 6 Commemorations
* 7 Works
* 8 See also
* 9 References
* 10 Sources
* 11 Further reading
* 12 External links
LIFE AND WORKS
Hooke's microscope , from an engraving in Micrographia.
Much of what is known of Hooke's early life comes from an
autobiography that he commenced in 1696 but never completed. Richard
Waller mentions it in his introduction to The Posthumous Works of
Robert Hooke, M.D. S.R.S., printed in 1705. The work of Waller, along
with John Ward 's Lives of the Gresham Professors and
John Aubrey 's
Brief Lives, form the major near-contemporaneous biographical accounts
Memorial portrait of
Robert Hooke at
Alum Bay ,
Isle of Wight
Isle of Wight ,
his birthplace, by Rita Greer (2012).
Robert Hooke was born in 1635 in Freshwater on the
Isle of Wight
Isle of Wight to
John Hooke and Cecily Gyles. Robert was the last of four children, two
boys and two girls, and there was an age difference of seven years
between him and the next youngest. Their father John was a Church of
England priest, the curate of Freshwater\'s Church of All Saints ,
and his two brothers (Robert's uncles) were also ministers. Robert
Hooke was expected to succeed in his education and join the Church.
John Hooke also was in charge of a local school, and so was able to
teach Robert, at least partly at home perhaps due to the boy's frail
health. He was a
Royalist and almost certainly a member of a group who
went to pay their respects to Charles I when he escaped to the Isle of
Wight. Robert, too, grew up to be a staunch monarchist.
As a youth,
Robert Hooke was fascinated by observation, mechanical
works, and drawing, interests that he would pursue in various ways
throughout his life. He dismantled a brass clock and built a wooden
replica that, by all accounts, worked "well enough", and he learned to
draw, making his own materials from coal, chalk and ruddle (iron ore
On his father's death in 1648, Robert was left a sum of forty pounds
that enabled him to buy an apprenticeship; with his poor health
throughout his life but evident mechanical facility his father had it
in mind that he might become a watchmaker or limner (a decorator of
illuminated manuscripts ), though Hooke was also interested in
painting. Hooke was an apt student, so although he went to
take up an apprenticeship, and studied briefly with Samuel Cowper and
Peter Lely , he was soon able to enter
Westminster School in London,
Richard Busby . Hooke quickly mastered Latin and Greek,
made some study of Hebrew, and mastered Euclid\'s Elements . Here,
too, he embarked on his lifelong study of mechanics .
It appears that Hooke was one of a group of students whom Busby
educated in parallel to the main work of the school. Contemporary
accounts say he was "not much seen" in the school, and this appears to
be true of others in a similar position. Busby, an ardent and
Royalist (he had the school observe a fast-day on the
anniversary of the King's beheading), was by all accounts trying to
preserve the nascent spirit of scientific inquiry that had begun to
flourish in Carolean England but which was at odds with the literal
Biblical teachings of the Protectorate. To Busby and his select
students the Anglican Church was a framework to support the spirit of
inquiry into God's work, those who were able were destined by God to
explore and study His creation, and the priesthood functioned as
teachers to explain it to those who were less able. This was
exemplified in the person of
George Hooper , the Bishop of Bath and
Wells , whom Busby described as "the best scholar, the finest
gentleman and will make the completest bishop that ever was educated
at Westminster School".
In 1653, Hooke (who had also undertaken a course of twenty lessons on
the organ ) secured a chorister's place at Christ Church ,
He was employed as a "chemical assistant" to Dr
Thomas Willis , for
whom Hooke developed a great admiration. There he met the natural
Robert Boyle , and gained employment as his assistant from
about 1655 to 1662, constructing, operating, and demonstrating Boyle's
"machina Boyleana" or air pump. He did not take his Master of Arts
until 1662 or 1663. In 1659 Hooke described some elements of a method
of heavier-than-air flight to Wilkins, but concluded that human
muscles were insufficient to the task.
Hooke himself characterised his
Oxford days as the foundation of his
lifelong passion for science, and the friends he made there were of
paramount importance to him throughout his career, particularly
Christopher Wren . Wadham was then under the guidance of John Wilkins
, who had a profound impact on Hooke and those around him. Wilkins was
also a Royalist, and acutely conscious of the turmoil and uncertainty
of the times. There was a sense of urgency in preserving the
scientific work which they perceived as being threatened by the
Protectorate. Wilkins' "philosophical meetings" in his study were
clearly important, though few records survive except for the
experiments Boyle conducted in 1658 and published in 1660. This group
went on to form the nucleus of the
Royal Society . Hooke developed an
air pump for Boyle's experiments based on the pump of Ralph Greatorex
, which was considered, in Hooke's words, "too gross to perform any
It is known that Hooke had a particularly keen eye, and was an adept
mathematician, neither of which applied to Boyle. Gunther suggests
that Hooke probably made the observations and may well have developed
the mathematics of Boyle\'s law . Regardless, it is clear that Hooke
was a valued assistant to Boyle and the two retained a mutual high
A chance surviving copy of Willis' pioneering De anima brutorum, a
gift from the author, was chosen by Hooke from Wilkins' library on his
death as a memento at
John Tillotson 's invitation. This book is now
Wellcome Library . The book and its inscription in Hooke's hand
are a testament to the lasting influence of Wilkins and his circle on
the young Hooke.
Royal Society was founded in 1660, and in April 1661 the society
debated a short tract on the rising of water in slender glass pipes,
in which Hooke reported that the height water rose was related to the
bore of the pipe (due to what is now termed capillary action ). His
explanation of this phenomenon was subsequently published in
Micrography Observ. issue 6, in which he also explored the nature of
"the fluidity of gravity". On 5 November 1661, Sir Robert Moray
proposed that a Curator be appointed to furnish the society with
Experiments, and this was unanimously passed with Hooke being named.
His appointment was made on 12 November, with thanks recorded to Dr.
Boyle for releasing him to the Society's employment.
In 1664, Sir John Cutler settled an annual gratuity of fifty pounds
on the Society for the founding of a Mechanick Lecture, and the
Fellows appointed Hooke to this task. On 27 June 1664 he was confirmed
to the office, and on 11 January 1665 was named Curator by Office for
life with an additional salary of £30 to Cutler's annuity.
Hooke's role at the
Royal Society was to demonstrate experiments from
his own methods or at the suggestion of members. Among his earliest
demonstrations were discussions of the nature of air, the implosion of
glass bubbles which had been sealed with comprehensive hot air, and
demonstrating that the Pabulum vitae and flammae were one and the
same. He also demonstrated that a dog could be kept alive with its
thorax opened, provided air was pumped in and out of its lungs, and
noting the difference between venous and arterial blood. There were
also experiments on the subject of gravity, the falling of objects,
the weighing of bodies and measuring of barometric pressure at
different heights, and pendulums up to 200 ft long (61 m).
Instruments were devised to measure a second of arc in the movement
of the sun or other stars, to measure the strength of gunpowder , and
in particular an engine to cut teeth for watches, much finer than
could be managed by hand, an invention which was, by Hooke's death, in
In 1663 and 1664, Hooke produced his microscopy observations,
subsequently collated in
Micrographia in 1665.
On 20 March 1664, Hooke succeeded Arthur Dacres as Gresham Professor
Geometry . Hooke received the degree of "Doctor of Physic" in
HOOKE AND NEWCOMEN
There is a widely reported story that Dr Hooke corresponded with
Thomas Newcomen in connection with Newcomen's invention of the steam
engine. This story was discussed by Rhys Jenkins, a past President of
the Newcomen Society, in 1936. Jenkins traced the origin of the story
to an article "Steam Engines" by Dr. John Robison (1739–1805) in the
third edition of the "Encyclopædia Britannica”, which says There
are to be found among Hooke's papers, in the possession of the Royal
Society, some notes of observations, for the use of Newcomen, his
countryman, on Papin's boasted method of transmitting to a great
distance the action of an mill by means of pipes, and that Hooke had
dissuaded Newcomen from erecting a machine on this principle. Jenkins
points out a number of errors in Robison's article, and questions
whether the correspondent might in fact have been Newton, whom Hooke
is known to have corresponded with, the name being misread as
Newcomen. A search by Mr. H W Dickinson of Hooke's papers held by the
Royal Society, which had been bound together in the middle of the 18th
century, i.e. before Robison's time, and carefully preserved since,
revealed no trace of any correspondence between Hooke and Newcomen.
Jenkins concluded ... this story must be omitted from the history of
the steam engine, at any rate until documentary evidence is
In the intervening years since 1936 no such evidence has been found,
but the story persists. For instance, in a book published in 2011 it
is said that in a letter dated 1703 Hooke did suggest that Newcomen
use condensing steam to drive the piston.
PERSONALITY AND DISPUTES
Hooke was irascible, at least in later life, proud, and prone to take
umbrage with intellectual competitors, though he was by all accounts
also a staunch friend and ally and was loyal always to the circle of
ardent Royalists with whom he had his early training at Wadham College
Christopher Wren . His reputation suffered after his
death and this is popularly attributed to a dispute with Isaac Newton
over credit for his work on gravitation, the planets and to a lesser
degree light. His dispute with Oldenburg about whether Oldenburg had
leaked or passed on details of Hooke's watch escapement to others is
another well-known example.
Newton, as President of the Royal Society, did much to obscure Hooke,
including, it is said, destroying (or failing to preserve) the only
known portrait of the man. It did not help that the first life of
Wren, Parentalis , was written by Wren's son, and tended to exaggerate
Wren's work over all others. Hooke's reputation was revived during the
twentieth century through studies of
Robert Gunther and Margaret
'Espinasse. After a long period of relative obscurity he has now been
recognised as one of the most important scientists of his age.
Hooke was apt to use ciphers and guard his ideas. As curator of
Experiments to the
Royal Society he was responsible for demonstrating
many ideas sent in to the Society, and there is evidence that he would
subsequently assume some credit for these ideas. Hooke also was
immensely busy and thus unable – or in some cases unwilling, pending
a way of profiting from the enterprise via letters patent – to
develop all of his own ideas. This was a time of immense scientific
progress, and numerous ideas were developed in several places
None of this should distract from Hooke's inventiveness, his
remarkable experimental facility, and his capacity for hard work. His
ideas about gravitation, and his claim of priority for the inverse
square law, are outlined below. He was granted a large number of
patents for inventions and refinements in the fields of elasticity,
optics, and barometry. The Royal Society's Hooke papers (recently
discovered after disappearing when Newton took over) will open up a
modern reassessment. Diagram of a louse from Hooke's Micrographia
Much has been written about the unpleasant side of Hooke's
personality, starting with comments by his first biographer, Richard
Waller, that Hooke was "in person, but despicable" and "melancholy,
mistrustful, and jealous." Waller's comments influenced other writers
for well over two centuries, so that a picture of Hooke as a
disgruntled, selfish, anti-social curmudgeon dominates many older
books and articles. For example, Arthur Berry said that Hooke "claimed
credit for most of the scientific discoveries of the time." Sullivan
wrote that Hooke was "positively unscrupulous" and possessing an
"uneasy apprehensive vanity" in dealings with Newton. Manuel used the
phrase "cantankerous, envious, vengeful" in his description. More
described Hooke having both a "cynical temperament" and a "caustic
tongue." Andrade was more sympathetic, but still used the adjectives
"difficult", "suspicious", and "irritable" in describing Hooke.
The publication of Hooke's diary in 1935 revealed other sides of the
man that 'Espinasse, in particular, has detailed carefully. She writes
that "the picture which is usually painted of Hooke as a morose and
envious recluse is completely false." Hooke interacted with noted
craftsmen such as
Thomas Tompion , the clockmaker, and Christopher
Cocks (Cox), an instrument maker. Hooke often met
Christopher Wren ,
with whom he shared many interests, and had a lasting friendship with
John Aubrey . Hooke's diaries also make frequent reference to meetings
at coffeehouses and taverns, and to dinners with Robert Boyle. He took
tea on many occasions with his lab assistant, Harry Hunt. Within his
family, Hooke took both a niece and a cousin into his home, teaching
Robert Hooke spent his life largely on the Isle of Wight, at Oxford,
and in London. He never married, but his diary shows that he was not
without affections, and more, for others. On 3 March 1703, Hooke died
in London, and a chest containing £8,000 in money and gold was found
in his room at Gresham College. Although he had talked of leaving a
generous bequest to the
Royal Society which would have given his name
to a library, laboratory and lectures, no will was found and the money
passed to an illiterate cousin, Elizabeth Stephens. He was buried at
St Helen\'s Bishopsgate , but the precise location of his grave is
Hooke's drawing of a flea
In 1660, Hooke discovered the law of elasticity which bears his name
and which describes the linear variation of tension with extension in
an elastic spring. He first described this discovery in the anagram
"ceiiinosssttuv", whose solution he published in 1678 as "Ut tensio,
sic vis" meaning "As the extension, so the force." Hooke's work on
elasticity culminated, for practical purposes, in his development of
the balance spring or hairspring, which for the first time enabled a
portable timepiece – a watch – to keep time with reasonable
accuracy. A bitter dispute between Hooke and
Christiaan Huygens on the
priority of this invention was to continue for centuries after the
death of both; but a note dated 23 June 1670 in the Hooke Folio (see
External links below), describing a demonstration of a
balance-controlled watch before the Royal Society, has been held to
favour Hooke's claim. Cell structure of Cork by Hooke
It is interesting from a twentieth-century vantage point that Hooke
first announced his law of elasticity as an anagram . This was a
method sometimes used by scientists, such as Hooke, Huygens,
and others, to establish priority for a discovery without revealing
Hooke became Curator of Experiments in 1662 to the newly founded
Royal Society, and took responsibility for experiments performed at
its weekly meetings. This was a position he held for over 40 years.
While this position kept him in the thick of science in Britain and
beyond, it also led to some heated arguments with other scientists,
such as Huygens (see above) and particularly with
Isaac Newton and the
Henry Oldenburg . In 1664 Hooke also was appointed
Gresham College in
London and Cutlerian
Lecturer in Mechanics.
On 8 July 1680, Hooke observed the nodal patterns associated with the
modes of vibration of glass plates. He ran a bow along the edge of a
glass plate covered with flour, and saw the nodal patterns emerge.
In acoustics, in 1681 he showed the
Royal Society that musical tones
could be generated from spinning brass cogs cut with teeth in
While many of his contemporaries believed in the aether as a medium
for transmitting attraction or repulsion between separated celestial
bodies, Hooke argued for an attracting principle of gravitation in
Micrographia of 1665. Hooke's 1666
Royal Society lecture "On gravity"
added two further principles – that all bodies move in straight
lines till deflected by some force and that the attractive force is
stronger for closer bodies.
Dugald Stewart , in his Elements of the
Philosophy of the Human Mind, quoted Hooke's own words on his system
of the world.
"I will explain," says Hooke, in a communication to the Royal Society
in 1666, "a system of the world very different from any yet received.
It is founded on the following positions. 1. That all the heavenly
bodies have not only a gravitation of their parts to their own proper
centre, but that they also mutually attract each other within their
spheres of action. 2. That all bodies having a simple motion, will
continue to move in a straight line, unless continually deflected from
it by some extraneous force, causing them to describe a circle, an
ellipse, or some other curve. 3. That this attraction is so much the
greater as the bodies are nearer. As to the proportion in which those
forces diminish by an increase of distance, I own I have not
Hooke's 1670 Gresham lecture explained that gravitation applied to
"all celestial bodies" and added the principles that the gravitating
power decreases with distance and that in the absence of any such
power bodies move in straight lines.
Hooke published his ideas about the "System of the World" again in
somewhat developed form in 1674, as an addition to "An Attempt to
Prove the Motion of the Earth from Observations". Hooke clearly
postulated mutual attractions between the Sun and planets, in a way
that increased with nearness to the attracting body.
Hooke's statements up to 1674 made no mention, however, that an
inverse square law applies or might apply to these attractions.
Hooke's gravitation was also not yet universal, though it approached
universality more closely than previous hypotheses. Hooke also did
not provide accompanying evidence or mathematical demonstration. On
these two aspects, Hooke stated in 1674: "Now what these several
degrees are I have not yet experimentally verified" (indicating that
he did not yet know what law the gravitation might follow); and as to
his whole proposal: "This I only hint at present", "having my self
many other things in hand which I would first compleat, and therefore
cannot so well attend it" (i.e. "prosecuting this Inquiry").
In November 1679, Hooke initiated a remarkable exchange of letters
with Newton (of which the full text is now published). Hooke's
ostensible purpose was to tell Newton that Hooke had been appointed to
manage the Royal Society's correspondence. Hooke therefore wanted to
hear from members about their researches, or their views about the
researches of others; and as if to whet Newton's interest, he asked
what Newton thought about various matters, giving a whole list,
mentioning "compounding the celestial motions of the planetts of a
direct motion by the tangent and an attractive motion towards the
central body", and "my hypothesis of the lawes or causes of
springinesse", and then a new hypothesis from Paris about planetary
motions (which Hooke described at length), and then efforts to carry
out or improve national surveys, the difference of latitude between
London and Cambridge, and other items. Newton's reply offered "a fansy
of my own" about a terrestrial experiment (not a proposal about
celestial motions) which might detect the Earth's motion, by the use
of a body first suspended in air and then dropped to let it fall. The
main point was to indicate how Newton thought the falling body could
experimentally reveal the Earth's motion by its direction of deviation
from the vertical, but he went on hypothetically to consider how its
motion could continue if the solid Earth had not been in the way (on a
spiral path to the centre). Hooke disagreed with Newton's idea of how
the body would continue to move. A short further correspondence
developed, and towards the end of it Hooke, writing on 6 January
167980 to Newton, communicated his "supposition ... that the
Attraction always is in a duplicate proportion to the Distance from
the Center Reciprocall, and Consequently that the Velocity will be in
a subduplicate proportion to the Attraction and Consequently as Kepler
Supposes Reciprocall to the Distance." (Hooke's inference about the
velocity was actually incorrect)
In 1686, when the first book of Newton's 'Principia ' was presented
to the Royal Society, Hooke claimed that he had given Newton the
"notion" of "the rule of the decrease of Gravity, being reciprocally
as the squares of the distances from the Center". At the same time
Edmond Halley 's contemporary report) Hooke agreed that
"the Demonstration of the Curves generated therby" was wholly
A recent assessment about the early history of the inverse square law
is that "by the late 1660s," the assumption of an "inverse proportion
between gravity and the square of distance was rather common and had
been advanced by a number of different people for different reasons".
Newton himself had shown in the 1660s that for planetary motion under
a circular assumption, force in the radial direction had an
inverse-square relation with distance from the center. Newton, faced
in May 1686 with Hooke's claim on the inverse square law, denied that
Hooke was to be credited as author of the idea, giving reasons
including the citation of prior work by others before Hooke. Newton
also firmly claimed that even if it had happened that he had first
heard of the inverse square proportion from Hooke, which it had not,
he would still have some rights to it in view of his mathematical
developments and demonstrations, which enabled observations to be
relied on as evidence of its accuracy, while Hooke, without
mathematical demonstrations and evidence in favour of the supposition,
could only guess (according to Newton) that it was approximately valid
"at great distances from the center".
On the other hand, Newton did accept and acknowledge, in all editions
of the 'Principia', that Hooke (but not exclusively Hooke) had
separately appreciated the inverse square law in the solar system.
Newton acknowledged Wren, Hooke and Halley in this connection in the
Scholium to Proposition 4 in Book 1. Newton also acknowledged to
Halley that his correspondence with Hooke in 1679–80 had reawakened
his dormant interest in astronomical matters, but that did not mean,
according to Newton, that Hooke had told Newton anything new or
original: "yet am I not beholden to him for any light into that
business but only for the diversion he gave me from my other studies
to think on these things "The example of Hooke" serves "to show what a
distance there is between a truth that is glimpsed and a truth that is
Hooke made tremendously important contributions to the science of
timekeeping, being intimately involved in the advances of his time;
the introduction of the pendulum as a better regulator for clocks, the
balance spring to improve the timekeeping of watches, and the proposal
that a precise timekeeper could be used to find the longitude at sea.
In 1655, according to his autobiographical notes, Hooke began to
acquaint himself with astronomy, through the good offices of John
Ward. Hooke applied himself to the improvement of the pendulum and in
1657 or 1658, he began to improve on pendulum mechanisms, studying the
Giovanni Riccioli , and going on to study both gravitation and
the mechanics of timekeeping.
Henry Sully, writing in Paris in 1717, described the anchor
escapement as an admirable invention of which Dr. Hooke, formerly
professor of geometry in
Gresham College at London, was the inventor.
William Derham also attributes it to Hooke.
Watch Balance Spring
Hooke recorded that he conceived of a way to determine longitude
(then a critical problem for navigation), and with the help of Boyle
and others he attempted to patent it. In the process, Hooke
demonstrated a pocket-watch of his own devising, fitted with a coil
spring attached to the arbour of the balance. Hooke's ultimate failure
to secure sufficiently lucrative terms for the exploitation of this
idea resulted in its being shelved, and evidently caused him to become
more jealous of his inventions.
Hooke developed the balance spring independently of and at least 5
Christiaan Huygens , who published his own work in
Journal de Scavans in February 1675.
In 1665 Hooke published
Micrographia , a book describing observations
made with microscopes and telescopes , as well as some original work
in biology . Hooke coined the term cell for describing biological
organisms, the term being suggested by the resemblance of plant cells
to cells of a honeycomb. The hand-crafted, leather and gold-tooled
microscope he used to make the observations for Micrographia,
originally constructed by Christopher White in London, is on display
at the National Museum of Health and Medicine in Washington, DC.
Micrographia also contains Hooke's, or perhaps Boyle and Hooke's,
ideas on combustion. Hooke's experiments led him to conclude that
combustion involves a substance that is mixed with air, a statement
with which modern scientists would agree, but that was not widely
understood, if at all, in the seventeenth century. Hooke went on to
conclude that respiration also involves a specific component of the
air. Partington even goes so far as to claim that if "Hooke had
continued his experiments on combustion it is probable that he would
have discovered oxygen ".
Drawings of the
Moon and the
Pleiades from Hooke's
One of the observations in
Micrographia was of fossil wood , the
microscopic structure of which he compared to ordinary wood. This led
him to conclude that fossilised objects like petrified wood and fossil
shells, such as
Ammonites , were the remains of living things that had
been soaked in petrifying water laden with minerals. Hooke believed
that such fossils provided reliable clues to the past history of life
on earth, and, despite the objections of contemporary naturalists like
John Ray who found the concept of extinction theologically
unacceptable, that in some cases they might represent species that had
become extinct through some geological disaster.
Charles Lyell wrote the following in his Principles of Geology
'The Posthumous Works of
Robert Hooke M.D.,'... appeared in 1705,
containing 'A Discourse of Earthquakes'... His treatise... is the most
philosophical production of that age, in regard to the causes of
former changes in the organic and inorganic kingdoms of nature.
'However trivial a thing,' he says, 'a rotten shell may appear to
some, yet these monuments of nature are more certain tokens of
antiquity than coins or medals, since the best of those may be
counterfeited or made by art and design, as may also books,
manuscripts, and inscriptions, as all the learned are now sufficiently
satisfied has often been actually practised,' 'and though it must be
granted that it is very difficult to read them and to raise a
chronology out of them, and to state the intervals of the time wherein
such or such catastrophes and mutations have happened, yet it is not
Hooke noted the shadows (a and b) cast by both the globe and the
rings on each other in this drawing of
One of the more-challenging problems tackled by Hooke was the
measurement of the distance to a star (other than the Sun). The star
Gamma Draconis and the method to be used was parallax
determination. After several months of observing, in 1669, Hooke
believed that the desired result had been achieved. It is now known
that Hooke's equipment was far too imprecise to allow the measurement
Gamma Draconis was the same star
James Bradley used in
1725 in discovering the aberration of light .
Hooke's activities in astronomy extended beyond the study of stellar
Micrographia contains illustrations of the
cluster as well as of lunar craters . He performed experiments to
study how such craters might have formed. Hooke also was an early
observer of the rings of
Saturn , and discovered one of the first
observed double-star systems,
Gamma Arietis , in 1664.
A lesser-known contribution, however one of the first of its kind,
was Hooke's scientific model of human memory . Hooke in a 1682 lecture
Royal Society proposed a mechanistic model of human memory,
which would bear little resemblance to the mainly philosophical models
before it. This model addressed the components of encoding, memory
capacity, repetition, retrieval, and forgetting—some with surprising
modern accuracy. This work, overlooked for nearly 200 years, shared a
variety of similarities with
Richard Semon 's work of 1919/1923, both
assuming memories were physical and located in the brain. The
model's more interesting points are that it (1) allows for attention
and other top-down influences on encoding; (2) it uses resonance to
implement parallel, cue-dependent retrieval; (3) it explains memory
for recency; (4) it offers a single-system account of repetition and
priming, and (5) the power law of forgetting can be derived from the
model's assumption in a straightforward way. This lecture would be
published posthumously in 1705 as the memory model was unusually
placed in a series of works on the nature of light. It has been
speculated that this work saw little review as the printing was done
in small batches in a post-Newtonian age of science and was most
likely deemed out of date by the time it was published. Further
interfering with its success was contemporary memory psychologists'
rejection of immaterial souls, which Hooke invoked to some degree in
regards to the processes of attention, encoding and retrieval.
Church of St Mary Magdalene at Willen,
Portrait thought for a time to be Hooke, but almost certainly Jan
Baptist van Helmont .
Hooke was Surveyor to the City of
London and chief assistant to
Christopher Wren , in which capacity he helped Wren rebuild London
after the Great Fire in 1666, and also worked on the design of
London's Monument to the fire , the
Royal Greenwich Observatory
Royal Greenwich Observatory ,
Montagu House in Bloomsbury , and the
Bethlem Royal Hospital (which
became known as 'Bedlam'). Other buildings designed by Hooke include
Royal College of Physicians (1679),
Ragley Hall in Warwickshire,
Ramsbury Manor in Wiltshire and the parish church of St Mary
Willen in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire . Hooke's
Christopher Wren also included St Paul\'s Cathedral
, whose dome uses a method of construction conceived by Hooke. Hooke
also participated in the design of the
Pepys Library , which held the
Samuel Pepys ' diaries, the most frequently cited
eyewitness account of the Great Fire of London.
Hooke and Wren both being keen astronomers, the Monument was designed
to serve a scientific function as a telescope for observing transits ,
though Hooke's characteristically precise measurements after
completion showed that the movement of the column in the wind made it
unusable for this purpose. The legacy of this can be observed in the
construction of the spiral staircase , which has no central column,
and in the observation chamber which remains in place below ground
In the reconstruction after the Great Fire, Hooke proposed
redesigning London's streets on a grid pattern with wide boulevards
and arteries, a pattern subsequently used in the renovation of Paris ,
Liverpool, and many American cities. This proposal was thwarted by
arguments over property rights, as property owners were
surreptitiously shifting their boundaries. Hooke was in demand to
settle many of these disputes, due to his competence as a surveyor and
his tact as an arbitrator.
For an extensive study of Hooke's architectural work, see the book by
No authenticated portrait of
Robert Hooke exists. This situation has
sometimes been attributed to the heated conflicts between Hooke and
Newton, although Hooke's biographer Allan Chapman rejects as a myth
the claims that Newton or his acolytes deliberately destroyed Hooke's
portrait. German antiquarian and scholar Zacharias Conrad von
Uffenbach visited the
Royal Society in 1710 and his account of his
visit specifically mentions him being shown the portraits of 'Boyle
and Hoock' (which were said to be good likenesses), but while Boyle's
portrait survives, Hooke's has evidently been lost. In Hooke's time,
Royal Society met at Gresham College, but within a few months of
Hooke's death Newton became the Society's president and plans were
laid for a new meeting place. When the move to new quarters finally
was made a few years later, in 1710, Hooke's
Royal Society portrait
went missing, and has yet to be found.
Two contemporary written descriptions of Hooke's appearance have
survived. The first was recorded by his close friend
John Aubrey , who
described Hooke in middle age and at the height of his creative
powers: "He is but of midling stature, something crooked, pale faced,
and his face but little below, but his head is lardge, his eie full
and popping, and not quick; a grey eie. He haz a delicate head of
haire, browne, and of an excellent moist curle. He is and ever was
temperate and modera.te in dyet, etc."
The second is a rather unflattering description of Hooke as an old
man, written by Richard Waller: "As to his Person he was but
despicable, being very crooked, tho' I have heard from himself, and
others, that he was strait till about 16 Years of Age when he first
grew awry, by frequent practising, with a Turn-Lath ... He was always
very pale and lean, and laterly nothing but Skin and Bone, with a
Meagre Aspect, his Eyes grey and full, with a sharp ingenious Look
whilst younger; his nose but thin, of a moderate height and length;
his Mouth meanly wide, and upper lip thin; his Chin sharp, and
Forehead large; his Head of a middle size. He wore his own Hair of a
dark Brown colour, very long and hanging neglected over his Face uncut
Time magazine published a portrait, supposedly of Hooke, on 3 July
1939. However, when the source was traced by
Ashley Montagu , it was
found to lack a verifiable connection to Hooke. Moreover, Montagu
found that two contemporary written descriptions of Hooke's appearance
agreed with one another, but that neither matched the Time's portrait.
In 2003, historian
Lisa Jardine claimed that a recently discovered
portrait was of Hooke, but this claim was disproved by William Jensen
University of Cincinnati
University of Cincinnati . The portrait identified by Jardine
depicts the Flemish scholar
Jan Baptist van Helmont
Jan Baptist van Helmont .
Other possible likenesses of Hooke include the following:
* A seal used by Hooke displays an unusual profile portrait of a
man's head, which some have argued portrays Hooke.
* The engraved frontispiece to the 1728 edition of Chambers\'
Cyclopedia shows a drawing of a bust of Robert Hooke. The extent to
which the drawing is based on an actual work of art is unknown.
* A memorial window existed at St Helen\'s Bishopsgate in London,
but it was a formulaic rendering, not a likeness. The window was
destroyed in the
1993 Bishopsgate bombing .
In 2003 history painter Rita Greer embarked on a self-funded project
to memorialise Hooke. The Rita Greer
Robert Hooke project aimed to
produce credible images of him, both painted and drawn, that fitted
his contemporary descriptions by
John Aubrey and Richard Waller.
Greer's images of Hooke, his life and work have been used for TV
programmes in UK and US, in books, magazines and for PR.
Hooke memorial plaque in
3514 Hooke , an asteroid (1971 UJ)
* Craters on the
Moon and on
Mars are named in his honour.
* The Hooke Medal
Science Centre, Westminster School, London
List of new memorials to Robert Hooke 2005 – 2009
Boyle-Hooke plaque in
Micrographia full text at
Project Gutenberg , with illustrations
at Internet Archive
* Collection of Lectures: Physical, Mechanical, Geographical and
Astronomical. 1679. includes An Attempt to prove the Annual Motion of
the Earth, Animadversions on the Machina Coelestis of Mr. Hevelius, A
Description of Helioscopes with other instruments, Mechanical
Improvement of Lamps, Remarks about Comets 1677, Microscopium,
Lectures on the Spring, etc.
* The Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke
* The posthumous works of Robert Hooke, M.D. S.R.S. Geom. Prof.
Gresh. etc. containing his Cutlerian lectures, and other discourses,
read at the meetings of the illustrious Royal Society... illustrated
with sculptures. To these discourses is prefixt the author\'s life,
giving an account of his studies and employments, with an enumeration
of the many experiments, instruments, contrivances and inventions, by
him made and produced as curator of experiments to the Royal Society
published by Richard Waller, R.S. Secr.
Great red spot
Great red spot
* Hooke\'s atom
List of astronomical instrument makers
* Hooke\'s law
* ^ Chapman, Alan (1996). "England\'s Leonardo: Robert Hooke
(1635–1703) and the art of experiment in Restoration England".
Proceedings of the Royal Institution of Great Britain. 67: 239–275.
Archived from the original on 6 March 2011.
* ^ Drake, Ellen Tan (2006). "Hooke's Ideas of the Terraqueous
Globe and a Theory of Evolution". In Michael Cooper; Michael Hunter.
Robert Hooke: Tercentennial Studies. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate. pp.
135–149. ISBN 978-0-7546-5365-3 .
* ^ Drake, Ellen Tan (1996). Restless Genius:
Robert Hooke and His
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-506695-1 .
Encyclopædia Britannica , 15th Edition, vol.6 p. 44
* ^ A B Martin, Rob (2000). "The Tragedy of Robert Hooke\'s
Brother". Retrieved 9 March 2010. Robert is given forty pounds, a
chest and all the books
* ^ Jardine, Lisa (2003). The Curious Life of Robert Hooke: The Man
London (1st ed.). New York: Harper Collins Publishers. p.
23. ISBN 0-00-714944-1 .
* ^ A B C O'Connor, J J & Robertson, E F (August 2002). "Hooke
biography". School of Mathematics and Statistics University of St
Andrews, Scotland. Retrieved 9 March 2010. He was left £40 by his
father, together with all his father's books (the often quoted figure
of £100 is a much repeated error)
* ^ Jardine, Lisa (2003). The Curious Life of Robert Hooke: The Man
who Measured London. New York: Harper Collins Publishers. p. 65. ISBN
* ^ Shapin, Steven; Schaffer, Simon (1985). "2". Leviathan and the
Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the Experimental Life. Princeton:
Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-08393-2 . Retrieved 11
* ^ Fulton, John F. (1960). "The Honourable Robert Boyle, F.R.S.
(1627–1692)". Notes and Records of the
Royal Society of London. 15:
119–135 (123). doi :10.1098/rsnr.1960.0012 .
* ^ Sir John Cutler and Hooke were at odds in the following years
over monies due to Hooke. Following Cutler's death, Hooke enlisted the
aid of friends of the Cutler family, including Master of The
Haberdashers Company Sir
Richard Levett , for whom Hooke was involved
in a building commission, to help recover the funds owed by Cutler.
Jardine, Lisa (2005). The Curious Life of Robert Hooke: The Man Who
Measured London. HarperCollins. pp. 244–. ISBN 978-0-06-053898-9 .
* ^ A B C Waller, Richard (1705). The Posthumous Works of Robert
Hooke, M.D. S.R.S. London: Sam. Smith and Benj. Walford.
* ^ De Milt, Clara (November 1939). "Robert Hooke, Chemist".
Journal of Chemical Education. 16 (11): 503–510. Bibcode
:1939JChEd..16..503D. doi :10.1021/ed016p503 .
* ^ “The Heat Engine Idea in the Seventeenth Century” Rhys
Jenkins, Paper read to the Chartered Institute of Patent Agents, 21
* ^ Rosen, William (2012). The Most Powerful Idea in the World: A
Story of Steam, Industry and Invention. University of Chicago Press.
pp. 74, 331. ISBN 978-0226726342 .
* ^ See, for example, the 2003 Hooke meeting at the University of
Robert Hooke Day at Christ Church, Oxford". Retrieved 23
* ^ Berry, Arthur (1898). A Short History of Astronomy. London:
John Murray. p. 221. - See also the reprint published by Dover in 1961
* ^ Sullivan, J. W. N. (1938).
Isaac Newton 1642–1727. New York:
Macmillan. pp. 35–37.
* ^ Manuel, Frank E. (1968). A Portrait of Isaac Newton. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 138.
* ^ More, Louis Trenchard (1934). Isaac Newton. New York: Charles
Schribner's Sons. pp. 94–95.
* ^ Andrarde, E. N. De C. (1950). Isaac Newton. New York:
Chanticleer Press. pp. 56–57.
* ^ Hooke, Robert (1935). Robinson, H. W.; Adams, W., eds. The
Diary of Robert Hooke, M.A., M.D., F.R.S., 1672–1680. London: Taylor
* ^ 'Espinasse, Margaret (1956). Robert Hooke. London: William
Heinemann Ltd. p. 106.
* ^ Inwood 2002 , pp. 1,2.
* ^ Robert Hooke, De Potentia Restitutiva, or of Spring. Explaining
the Power of Springing Bodies, London, 1678.
* ^ "Hooke Folio Online". Webapps.qmul.ac.uk. Retrieved 10
* ^ 'Espinasse, Margaret (1956). Robert Hooke. London: William
Heinemann Ltd. p. 187.
* ^ Ernst Florens Friedrich Chladni, Institute for Learning
Oxford Dictionary of Scientists,
Oxford University Press, 1999,
p. 101, ISBN 7810802259 .
* ^ Clive Greated. "Robert Hooke". In L. Root, Deane. Grove Music
Oxford Music Online .
Oxford University Press. (subscription
* ^ Thomas Birch, The History of the
Royal Society of London, …
(London, England: 1756), vol. 2, pages 68-73; see especially pages
* ^ Stewart, Dugald (1877) Elements of the Philosophy of the Human
Mind, T. & T. Clark, Vol. 2, Ch. 2, Section 4.2 (pp. 304 ff.)
* ^ A B Hooke's 1674 statement in "An Attempt to Prove the Motion
of the Earth from Observations", is available in online facsimile
* ^ Wilson, p. 239
* ^ Iliffe, Rob (2007). Newton:A Very Short Introduction. Oxford
University Press. pp. 140–. ISBN 978-0-19-157902-8 .
* ^ A B C D E Turnbull, H W (ed.) (1960), Correspondence of Isaac
Newton, Vol. 2 (1676–1687), Cambridge University Press, giving the
Hooke-Newton correspondence (of November 1679 to January 1679/80) at
pp. 297–314, and the 1686 correspondence over Hooke's priority claim
at pp. 431–448.
* ^ Turnbull, H W (ed.) (1960), Correspondence of Isaac Newton,
Vol. 2 (1676–1687), Cambridge University Press, p. 297.
* ^ Several commentators have followed Hooke in calling Newton's
spiral path mistaken, or even a 'blunder', but there are also the
facts: (a) that Hooke left out of account Newton's specific statement
that the motion resulted from dropping "a heavy body suspended in the
Air" (i.e. a resisting medium), see Newton to Hooke, 28 November 1679,
document #236 at page 301, 'Correspondence' vol.2 cited above, and
compare Hooke's report to the
Royal Society on 11 December 1679 where
Hooke reported the matter "supposing no resistance", see D Gjertsen,
'Newton Handbook' (1986), at page 259; and (b) that Hooke's reply of 9
December 1679 to Newton considered the cases of motion both with and
without air resistance: The resistance-free path was what Hooke called
an 'elliptueid'; but a line in Hooke's diagram showing the path for
his case of air resistance was, though elongated, also another
inward-spiralling path ending at the Earth's centre: Hooke wrote
"where the Medium ... has a power of impeding and destroying its
motion the curve in wch it would move would be some what like the Line
AIKLMNOP also Wilson, p. 242 showing Hooke\'s 1679 diagram including
two paths, closed curve and spiral. Newton pointed out in his later
correspondence over the priority claim that the descent in a spiral
"is true in a resisting medium such as our air is", see
'Correspondence', vol.2 cited above, at page 433, document #286.
* ^ See page 309 in 'Correspondence of Isaac Newton', Vol 2 cited
above, at document #239.
* ^ Wilson, p. 244.
* ^ Gal, Ofer (2002) Meanest foundations and nobler
superstructures: Hooke, Newton and the 'Compounding of the Celestiall
Motions of the Planetts, Springer, p. 9, ISBN 1402007329 .
* ^ Whiteside, D T (1991). "The pre-history of the 'Principia' from
1664 to 1686". Notes and Records of the
Royal Society of London. 45:
JSTOR 531520 . doi :10.1098/rsnr.1991.0002 .
* ^ See for example the 1729 English translation of the
'Principia', p. 66.
* ^ The second extract is quoted and translated in W.W. Rouse Ball,
"An Essay on Newton's 'Principia'" (
London and New York: Macmillan,
1893), at page 69.
* ^ The original statements by Clairaut (in French) are found (with
orthography here as in the original) in "Explication abregée du
systême du monde, et explication des principaux phénomenes
astronomiques tirée des Principes de M. Newton" (1759), at
Introduction (section IX), page 6: "Il ne faut pas croire que cette
idée ... de Hook diminue la gloire de M. Newton", "L'exemple de
Hook" "à faire voir quelle distance il y a entre une vérité
entrevue & une vérité démontrée".
* ^ Sully, H and Le Roy, J (1737) Regle artificielle des tems, G.
Dupuis, Paris, ch. 1, p. 14
* ^ Derham, William (1734) The artificial clock maker, James, John
and Paul Knapton. at the Crown, in Ludgate Street., p. 97.
* ^ Ian Sample, "Eureka! Lost manuscript found in cupboard", The
Guardian , 9 February 2006
* ^ Hooke, Robert (1665). Micrographia: Or Some Physiological
Descriptions of Minute Bodies Made by Magnifying Glasses, with
Observations and Inquiries Thereupon. Courier Dover Publications. p.
113. ISBN 0486495647 . Retrieved 22 July 2014.
* ^ See particularly Observation 16 of Micrographia.
* ^ Partington, J. P. (1951). A Short History of Chemistry (2nd
ed.). London: Macmillan and Company. pp. 78–80.
* ^ Rudwick, Martin J.S. (1976). The Meaning of Fossils. The
University of Chicago Press. p. 54.
* ^ Bowler, Peter J. (1992). The Earth Encompassed. W. W. Norton.
* ^ Hirshfeld, Alan W. (2001). Parallax, The Race to Measure the
Cosmos. New York: W. H. Freeman. pp. 144–149. ISBN 0716737116 .
* ^ Ashbrook, Joseph (1984). The Astronomical Scrapbook. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Sky Publishing Corporation. pp. 240–241. ISBN
* ^ Alexander, A. F. O'D. (1962). The Planet Saturn. Londin: Faber
and Faber Limited. pp. 108–109.
* ^ Aitken, Robert G. (1935). The Binary Stars. New York:
McGraw-Hill. p. 1.
* ^ Singer, B. R. (1979). "
Robert Hooke on memory: Association and
time perception (I)". Notes & Records of the
Royal Society of London.
31 (1): 115–131.
JSTOR 531553 . PMID 11609928 . doi
* ^ A B Hintzman, D. L. (2003). "Robert Hooke's model of memory".
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 10 (1): 3–14. PMID 12747488 . doi
* ^ Semon, R. (1923). Mnemic psychology (B. Duffy, Trans.). London:
George Allen & Unwin. (Original work published 1919)
* ^ Schacter, D. L. (2001). Forgotten ideas, neglected pioneers:
Richard Semon and the story of memory. Philadelphia: Psychology
Press/Taylor Eich, J. E. & Tulving, E. (1978). "Richard Semon's theory
of memory". Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior. 17 (6):
721–743. doi :10.1016/S0022-5371(78)90443-7 .
* ^ Inwood, Stephen (28 February 2011). The Man Who Knew Too Much
(Kindle Location 8290). Macmillan Publishers UK. Kindle Edition.
* ^ Hyam, R. (1982). Magdalene Described. Sawston, Cambridgeshire,
U.K.: Crampton & Sons Ltd.
* ^ Cooper, Michael (2003). A More Beautiful City:
Robert Hooke and
the Rebuilding of
London after the Great Fire. Sutton Publishing Ltd.
ISBN 0-7509-2959-6 .
* ^ A B Allan Chapman, "England\'s Leonardo: Robert Hooke
(1635–1703) and the art of experiment in Restoration England",
lecture from \'Proceedings of the Royal Institution of Great
Britain\', 67, 239 – 275 (1996), also given at
Westminster School as
the 1997 Sir Henry Tizard Memorial Lecture
* ^ Montagu, M. F. Ashley (1941). "A Spurious Portrait of Robert
Hooke (1635–1703)". Isis. 33: 15–17. doi :10.1086/358521 . See
also 3 July 1939 issue of Time (page 39).
* ^ Jardine, Lisa (2003). The Curious Life of Robert Hooke. Harper
Collins. pp. 15–19.
* ^ "Source- The UC Libraries Newsletter". Libraries.uc.edu. 4
February 2011. Retrieved 10 September 2012.
* ^ "Robert Hooke". she-philosopher.com. 17 August 2007. Retrieved
10 September 2012.
* ^ Rod Beavon (26 March 1999). "Robert Hooke".
Rod.beavon.clara.net. Retrieved 10 September 2012.
* ^ Aubrey, John. Brief Lives. Boydell Press; New edition (5 March
* ^ Burgan, Michael (2008).
Robert Hooke Natural Philosopher and
Scientific Explorer. Compass Point Books, Minneapolis, Minnesota. pp.
Cover, pp. 88, 21, 26, 45, 65, 77, 88, 96, 98, 99, 101. ISBN
* ^ Fekany Lee, Kimberly (2009). Cell Scientists: from Leeuwenhoek
to Fuchs. Compass Point Books, Minneapolis, Minnesota. ISBN
* ^ Chapman, Allan (2005). England's Leonardo
Robert Hooke and the
Seventeenth-Century Scientific Revolution. Institute of Physics
Publishing Ltd. pp. Portrait of
Robert Hooke inside dust jacket and
last page of plates. ISBN 0-7503-0987-3 .
* ^ "
Gresham College memorial portrait of Robert Hooke". Dome, the
magazine of the Friends of St. Paul's Cathedral (46): 17.
* ^ Chapman, Allan. "Robert Hooke: the forgotten genius of
Institute of Physics
Institute of Physics (April 2005).
* ^ "Rita's portraits of Hooke sought after across UK". Petersfield
Post (21 May): 13. 2008.
* ^ "Unveiling of memorial portrait of
Robert Hooke as astronomer
and inventor". Openhouse. Newspaper for the staff of the Open
University (421). 2009.
* ^ "BSCB :: The British Society for Cell Biology". www.bscb.org.
Retrieved 10 September 2012.
* Wilson, Curtis (1989), Ch. 13 "The Newtonian achievement in
astronomy", pp. 233–274 in Planetary astronomy from the Renaissance
to the rise of astrophysics: 2A: Tycho Brahe to Newton, Cambridge
University Press, ISBN 0521242541 .
* Andrade, E. N. De C. (1950). "Wilkins Lecture: Robert Hooke".
Proceedings of the
Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological
Sciences. 137 (887): 153–187.
Bibcode :1950RSPSB.137..153A. JSTOR
82545 . doi :10.1098/rspb.1950.0029 .
* Aubrey, John (1898). Clark, Andrew, ed. Brief Lives. Oxford:
Clarendon Press. pp. 409–416.
* Bennett, Jim; Michael Cooper; Michael Hunter;
Lisa Jardine (2003).
London's Leonardo: The Life and Work of Robert Hooke. Oxford
University Press. ISBN 0-19-852579-6 .
* Chapman, Allan (2004). England's Leonardo:
Robert Hooke and the
Seventeenth-century Scientific Revolution. Institute of Physics
Publishing. ISBN 0-7503-0987-3 .
* Chapman, Allan; Kent, Paul, eds. (2005).
Robert Hooke and the
English Renaissance. Gravewing. ISBN 0-85244-587-3 .
* Cooper, Michael (2003). 'A More Beautiful City':
Robert Hooke and
the Rebuilding of
London after the Great Fire. Sutton Publishing Ltd.
ISBN 0-7509-2959-6 .
* Cooper, Michael; Michael Hunter (2006). Robert Hooke:
Tercentennial Studies. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate.
* Gunther, Robert, ed. (1923–67). Early