INFORMATION TO USERS

This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.

The foUoiving explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy.

Universify Micrxjfilms International SAUNDERS, ELMO STEWART

THE DECLINE, AND REFORM OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES A PARIS, 1676-1699

The Ohio State University PH.D. 1980

University Microfilms intern ât ions!300 N. Zœb Road, a m Aitor, MI 48106 18 Bedford Row, London WCIR 4EI. England

Copyright i9go by

SAUNDERS, ELMO STEWART

All Rights Reserved THE DECLINE AND REFORM OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES A PARIS,

1676-1699

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Elmo Stewart Saunders, B.A., M.A.

The Ohio State University

1980

Reading Committee: Approved By

Professor John C. Rule

Professor John Rothney [/ Adviser Professor Franklin Pegues Department of History ACKNOWLEDGl-lENTS

I wish to acknowledge the support and direction of my disserta­ tion advisor. Professor John C. Rule, whose high standards of histori­ cal research aj;id writing always demanded my best efforts. I wish to thank also the members of my reading committee. Professors John Roth­ ney and Franklin J. Pegues, and Professor Charles G. Williams who represented the Graduate School, for their examination and remarks on this dissertation.

Many friends and colleagues have likewise made valuable contri­ butions in the evolution of my ideas. Foremost among them have been

Professor June Z. Fullmer of Ohio State University, Professor Rene*

Taton of the Ecole Practique des Hautes Etudes, Professor Raymond Birn of the University of Oregon, Dr. Gary McCollim of the U. S. Department of State, and Dr. Thomas Schaeper of Saint Bonaventura College.

I am also indebted to my present employer, Purdue University

Libraries, and my past employer. The Ohio State University Libraries, for the cooperation and encouragement which made completion of this dissertation possible. I particularly thank Professor Eleanor Devlin and Professor Larry Besant of Ohio State, and Professor Laszlo Kovacs of Purdue.

My research experience in France has led me to appreciate the ex­ tensive support which the French government provides for archival and library services in France. I reserve a warm appreciation for M.

Pierre Berthon and Mile Claudine Cottin, archivists of the Académie

des sciences, for their willing assistance in my use of the archives,

and I thank the perpetual secretaries of the Académie des sciences

for granting me permission to use the archives of the Académie.

My wife, Margaret 0. Saunders, deserves my strongest appreciation.

She shared the joys of life in Paris and the long months it has taken

to complete the writing. After completing her own dissertation, she has helped to edit the several versions of this manuscript, in addi­

tion to work and parenthood responsibilities. My parents, Warren and

Irene Saunders, and my parent-in-law, Lawrence and Maria Overholt, have provided both moral and material support to see this goal achieved.

For the neat and clean appearance of this manuscript, I thank

Ms. Melodie McBride, who prepared the final draft. April 3, 1936 ...... Born - Bradenton, Florida

1959 ...... A.B., DePauw University Greencastle, Indiana

1962 ...... M.A., Ball State University Muncie, Indiana

1964 ...... M.A., Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana

1964-1977 ...... Librarian, Ohio State University Libraries, Colnmbus, Ohio

1976-1977 ...... Research in Paris

1978- ...... Librarian, Purdue University Libraries, West Lafayette, Indiana

PUBLICATIONS

"The Archives of the Académie des Sciences," French Historical Studies. X (Fall 1978) 696-702.

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Early Modern Europe. Professor John C. Rule

History of Science. Professor June Z. Fullmer

Tudor and Stuart England. Professor R. Clayton Roberts

Demography. Professor William Peterson TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... il

VITA ...... iv

LIST OF TABLES ...... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ...... ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... x

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

PART ONE: THE DECLINE OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES ...... 10

Chapter

I. TWO STYLES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF SCIENCE: COLBERT AND LOUVOIS ...... 11

II. THE DECLINE OF THE ACADEMIE AFTER COLBERT ...... 37

A. The Decline of Scientific Productivity ...... 38 B. Internal Cohesion in the Acad^ie ...... 58

III. LOUVOIS AND THE DECLINE OF THE ACADEMIE ...... 64

A. Louvois and the Decline in Scientific Productivity. 65 1. Anatomy and Natural History ...... 66 2. Astronomy ...... 77 3. Mathematics and Mechanics ...... 91 B. The Decline of Internal Cohesion under Louvois .... 104

PART TWO: THE REFORM OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES ...... 131

Chapter

IV. FAMILY TIES IN CULTURAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER THE PHELYPEAUX...... 132 Page V. EARLY REFORMS IN THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES: 1691-1698.. 153

VI. THE REGLEMENT OF 1699 ...... 175

A. The Problems of Membership and Financial Support .. 179 1. Financial Support ...... 184 2. Honoraires ...... 186 3. Pensionnaires ...... 195 4. Associés ...... 202 5. Elèves ...... 205 6. Method of Appointment ...... 206 B. The Problem of Internal Cohesion ...... 208 C. The Problem of Scientific Productivity ...... 212

VII. THE REFORM OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES IN THE CONTEXT OF GENERAL CULTURAL "r If ORM ...... 221

CONCLUSION ...... 249

APPENDICES

A. Selected Documents ...... 260

1. Speech made by Henri Bessie, sieur de la Chapelle, on 30 January 1686 to the Académie des Sciences ... 254 2. Estât des Ouvrages de l'Académie des Sciences et de ceux qui la composent, 7 Aoust 1691, avec les Gra­ tifications qu'ils recevoient par an ...... 256 3. Letter from Louis Pontchartrain to Abbé Bignon, 28 January 1699 ...... 260 4. Letter from Louis Pontchartrain to the Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 3 December 1710. 261 5. Letter from Louis Pontchartrain to the Académie des Sciences, 20 February 1714 ...... 262

B. Règlement Ordonné Par le Roi Pour l'Académie Royale des Sciences, 26 January 1699 ...... 263

C. Publications of the Académie des sciences and its members, 1676-1699 ...... 273

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 279 LIST OF TABLES

Tab If

1. Number of Meetings of the Académie and Number of Individual Scientific Presentations made by Academi­ cians, arranged by Year and by Protector,...... 47

2. A Comparison of Individual Scientific Presentations by Academicians for the Period 1689-1691 to those for the Periods 1676-1683 and 1684-1688 ...... 48

3. Number of Articles in the Journal des scavans which reported the Discoveries and Activities of the Académie . 55

4. Number of Monographs published by Members of the Académie by Date of Publication and by Date of Research ...... 55

5. Number of Monographs published by Members of the Acad^ie which received Reviews in the Journal des sçavans ...... 57

6. Number of Collective Decisions made by the Académie ..... 62

7. Number and Percentage of Scientific Presentations at Meet­ ings of the Académie in three Subject Areas during three Different Protectorships ...... 67

8. Number of Scientific Presentations made by Members of the Académie in Anatomy and Natural History by Year and by Protector ...... 70

9. Number of Scientific Presentations made by Members of the Académie in Astronomy by Year and by Protector ...... 83

10. Number of Scientific Presentations made by Members of the Académie in Mathematics and Mechanics by Year and by Protector ...... 93

11. Number of Scientific Presentations made by Rolle and by Varignon under the Protectorships of Louvois and Pont­ chartrain ..... 94

vii Table Page

12. Number of Collective Decisions made by the Aca­ démie. by Protector and by Year ...... 128

13. Number of Times each Year the Protector brought a Matter before the Académie ...... 129

14. Number of Scientific Presentations by Protector and by Year ...... 169

15. Number and Percent of Scientific Presentations by Protector and by Scientific Area ...... 172

16. Number of Inventions submitted to the Académie des Sciences for Approval by Year ...... 198

17. Total Number of Scientific Presentations during the Protectorship of Pontchartrain by Year ...... 215 LIST OF FIGURES

Number of Scientific Presentations in Anatomy and Natural History by Protector and by Year ......

Number of Scientific Presentations in Astronomy by Protector and by Year ......

Number of Scientific Presentations in Mathematics and Mechanics by Protector and by Year ...... ABBREVIATIONS

Manuscript procès-verbaux. Académie des sciences.

Bibliothèque nationale

Fonds français

Royal Society Archives INTRODUCTION

The Académie des sciences a Paris experienced fundamental changes between Its creation In 1666 and Its official and legal establishment In 1699. The exact nature of these changes has been the subject of two different Interpretations of the events that tran­ spired In this thirty-three year period. The older Interpretation, which had Its origin In Bernard Fontenelle's account of the renewal of the Académie In 1699 [1] and the elaboration of Fontenelle's work by two nineteenth century French historians, Joseph Bertrand [2] and

Alfred Maury [3], asserts that the Académie underwent a decline of scientific activity after the death of Its founder, Jean-Baptlste

Colbert, In 1683 followed by a renewal In 1699 when the Académie received a règlement designed to rehabilitate Its scientific activity. The more recent Interpretation, put forth by Roger Hahn

[4] In the 1970's, states that the Académie underwent a basic change

[1] Académie des sciences, Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences , avec les mémoires de mathématique et de physlcue. Tires des registres de cette académie MDCXCIX (Paris: Jean Boudot, 1702), pp. 1-16.

[2] Joseph Bertrand, L'Académie des sciences et les académiciens de 1666 a^1793 (Paris: J. Hetzel, 1869)

[3] L. F. Alfred Maury, L'Ancienne Académie des sciences, 2® ed. (Paris: Didier et Ole., 1864)

[4] Roger Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution: the Paris Academy of Sciences 1666-1803 (Berkeley: University of Califor­ nia Press, 1971) 2 of purpose during these years, which redirected its efforts from col­ lective research to the collective appraisal of the research of indi­ vidual scientists, that is, from the creation of scientific knowledge to the judgement of scientific knowledge. As a corollary Hahn opposes the thesis of decline and reform enunciated by Fontanelle and others of this school. The results of my own investigations into the early history of the Académie give strong support for the thesis of decline and reform advanced by Fontanelle and Bertrand; the thesis of a change in the function of the Académie, as formulated by Hahn, while not disproved, is an insufficient explanation of the changes which occurred in these formative years.

Jean-Baptiste Colbert, who served as Louis XIV's Controller Gen­ eral and surintendant des bâtiments, advised the king to create the

Académie des sciences in 1666. [5] The Académie was comprised of 15 or 16 scientists, half of whom were devoted to the experimental sci­ ences, anatomy, botany, and chemistry, and half of whom were devoted to the mathematical sciences, mechanics and astronomy. They met twice weekly in the King's Library, with one meeting devoted to the mathematical sciences and the other to the experimental sciences.

The agenda for a meeting might call for the performance of a

[5] There are a number of accounts of the creation of the Acadenie, which all tend to agree on the essentials of the early history of the Académie. See Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences depuis son établissement en 1666 jusqu'a 1686 (Paris: Gabriel Martin, 1733) pp. 1-16; René~Taton, Les Origines de l'Académie royale des sciences (n.p.: Imprimerie Alencon- naise, 1966); and John M. Hirshfield, "The Académie royale des sciences (1666-1683): Inauguration and Initial Problems of Method" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago, 1957). 3 mechanical or chemical experiment, the dissection of an animal, the

reading of a treatise, or just the discussion of a problem. In the

early years the academicians carried out their daily research rou­

tines as a group, but by 1676, the beginning date of my study, this

practice was already disappearing.

The academicians received pensions from the king ranging from

1,200 Livres to 9,000 Livres per year [6]. In return they were

expected to devote full time to scientific endeavors. Most of their

time was given to pure research, but they were often consulted by

Colbert and other ministers of the government for advice on inven­

tions, problems of engineering, medical cures, maritime projects, or

similar practical problems. Underlying the founding of the Academic

was a belief that progress in knowledge came by way of experimenta­

tion rather than through philosophic debate. This was a gentlemen's

agreement, however, for there was no official charter or rules of

procedure which defined the goals, status, or operations of the

Académie. Although the Académie was allowed to run its own affairs,

it was closely monitored by Colbert himself and t»y his advisors

including Pierre Carcavi, Charles and Claude Perrault, and Jean

Chapelain.

The Académie had no periodic publication of its own at that time

equivalent to the Philosophial Transactions which reported the work

of the Royal Society in London. In fact much of its work was kept

[6] Hereafter the monetary unit. Livres, will be denoted by the sym­ bol H". 4 secret, which excited the public's curiosity. Important discoveries

were published in the Journal des sçavans, whose editor during most

of that period was the Abbe Gallois, a member of the Académie. In

addition, the Imprimerie royale occasionally published collections of

papers written by academicians, and the academicians also published

monographs independent of the Académie.

The administrative offices and the policy decisions of French

government were dominated by three families during the 55-year reign

of Louis XIV. These were the Colbert family, the Le Tellier family,

and the Phelypeaux family. What is most striking for this study is

that the heads of these three families served successively as the

protectors of the Académie des sciences during the periods in which

each family was ascendant in the favor of Louis XIV. Jean-Baptiste

Colbert was protector from 1666 until his death in 1683. He was fol­

lowed by Francois Michel Le Tellier, marquis de Louvois, who func­

tioned in this capacity from 1683 until his death in 1691, and then

by Louis Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain, from 1691 until the

reform of the Académie in 1699. Under the règlement of 1699, the

king became the official protector of the Académie, although Louis

Pontchartrain and his son, Jerome, continued to supervise its activi­

ties until 1715. Given the rivalry between these great families and

the related system of patronage, one would be surprised to see the

Académie entirely escape the effects of their competition for influ- 5 Jean-Baptiste Colbert had initially intended not to create an

Académie des sciences, but rather a General Academy embracing all the

branches of learning. Such a body was in fact established in 1666,

but was opposed by a number of special interest groups such as the

theological faculty of the Sorbonne, the Paris Faculty of Medicine,

and the Académie française. Colbert was forced to withdraw this pro­

ject, and he created the Académie des sciences in its place. His

experience with the abortive General Academy, however, convinced Col­ bert that any new company would need protection from the established

interests. The role of protector was not a formal office, but rather a position of patronage which could be exercised effectively only by someone with many political connections and much social influence.

After the death of Colbert in 1683, Francois Michel Le Tellier, marquis de Louvois, assumed the preeminence in Louis XIV's government which formerly had been enjoyed by Colbert. At the time of Colbert's

death Louvois acquired the surintendance des bâtiments which was the administrative unit through which the members of the Académie des

sciences received their pensions. Hence it was only natural that

Louvois should follow Colbert as the protector of the Académie.

Louvois' premier commis for the surintendance, Henri de Bessie, sieur

de la Chapelle, became his representative to the Académie and

transmitted Louvois' directives to that body. In 1686 Louis XIV com­

missioned Colbert de Villacerf [7] to direct the operations of the

surintendance des bâtiments under Louvois' directions, but Villacerf

[7] Villacerf was a Colbert by birth but was allied to the Le Tellier family by marriage. never involved himself in the activities of the Académie.

In 1689 Louis Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain, replaced

Claude Le Peletier as Controller General; in 1690 he followed Colbert de Seignelay as secretary of state with responsibility for the maison du roi. When Louvois died in 1691, the Académie des sciences was transferred from the jurisdiction of the surintendance des bâtiments to that of the maison du r o i , and Louis Pontchartrain assumed the role of protector of the Académie. He appointed his nephew, the Abbé

Jean-Paul Bignon, to act as president of the Académie and to serve as a liaison between himself and the Académie.

On 4 February 1699 the Abbé Bignon read to the Académie a règle­ ment promulgated in the king's name. The new règlement consisted of fifty articles which defined the goals, assured the status, and esta­ blished the correct procedures for all activities of the Académie des sciences. The promulgation of this règlement has come to be termed the renewal or the reform of the Académie des sciences.

When Fontanelle wrote his account of the renewal of the

Académie, published in 1702, he established the traditional theme of decline and reform which has been accepted by most later historians of the Académie. Fontanelle merely alluded to a period of decline prior to the règlement of 1699, giving full credit for the reform to

Louis Pontchartrain and the Abbé Bignon. [8] Joseph Bertrand and

Alfred Maury both amplified Fontenelle's account. Through a close

[8] Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences MDCXCIX, pp. 1-16. 7 reading of the manuscript procès-verbaux of the Académie, both scho­ lars concluded that the marquis de Louvois was personally responsible for the decline and that his policy of demanding practical applica­ tion of the scientific talent of the academicians brought about the paralysis of true scientific activity. In this view, the règlement of 1699 reversed this situation by removing the Académie from the patronage and personal whims of a political figure and by giving it a formal position in the hierarchy of French government. The règlement likewise gave the Académie a role in choosing its own members, increased the size of the membership, and forced the members to be diligent in their attendance and in their research and publications.

In the 1970's Roger Hahn introduced a differing view of the events of those years. He sees the changing fortunes of the Académie between 1666 and 1699 as a result of the redirection of the goals of the Académie. The original goal of the Académie, says Hahn, was to discover truths about nature based on observation and experiment.

Observations and experiments were conducted collectively by members of the Académie with the expectation that a consensus would thereby be achieved regarding the results of such endeavors, allowing great certainty for the conclusions reached in this collective fashion.

Unfortunately, however, individual members sometimes claimed

personal credit for discoveries made by the Académie as a body which

led to quarrels within the Académie. In addition the government was making continuous demands on the Académie for technical advice.

Given the difficulties caused by group research and the natural inclinations of scientists to pursue interests which would redound to their personal credit, Hahn concludes that the Academia gradually arrived at a new set of procedures. Collective research declined and individual academicians undertook research projects of their own.

The role of the Academia then came to be that of judging the research performed by individual scientists, and that of advising the govern­ ment on technical matters. These changes in function required the creation of new rules for the Académie in such matters as determining the proprietorship of knowledge.

In Hahn's view it was these new operating procedures which were eventually codified as the règlement of 1699. Hahn looks at the evi­ dence for decline cited by Joseph Bertrand and other historians and interprets them not as a decline in scientific activity but as a reordering of the goals and procedures of the Académie. Consequently in Hahn's view the règlement of 1699 represents official recognition of these changed goals and procedures rather than revitalization of an institution in decline.

In this dissertation I weigh both of these interpretations of the events leading to the new regulations issued for the Académie in

1699 against an array of new evidence. Central to my appraisal is the detailed analysis of the scientific activity of the Académie des sciences for a period of twenty-four years under three protectors; Colbert, Louvois, and Pontchartrain. Having begun my research inclined to accept Hahn's interpretation, I found evidence that there had indeed been a decline of scientific activity during 9 the protectorship of the marquis de Louvois. Furthermore my data indicate that Louvois was himself responsible for the decline, although for reasons differing from those ascribed by Bertrand. I show that Hahn is correct in asserting that many of the articles in the règlement of 1699 had their origin in procedures worked out in the twenty years prior to the issuing of the règlement. But I also show that Louis Pontchartrain and the Abbé Bignon, who framed the règlement, intended not simply to codify those procedures but to revitalize the Académie des sciences and to encourage its scientific productivity. I also hope to demonstrate that the reform of the

Académie des sciences was consistent with Pontchartrain's approach to the administration of other royal academies.

The body of the dissertation is divided into two parts. Part I will compare the activities of the Academic under its first two pro­ tectors, Colbert and Louvois, in order to Lecurmine the nature and extent of decline under the latter. Part II will examine various attempts to revive the Académie during the protectorship of Louis

Pontchartrain. THE DECLINE OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES Chapter I

Two Styles in the Administration of Science:

Colbert and Louvois

The view that the Académie des sciences suffered a decline dur­

ing the years of the protectorship of the marquis de Louvois is not merely a fabrication of Fontanelle or of nineteenth century his­

toriography. This interpretation may in fact be found as early as

1699, the year of the renewal of the Académie. Writing from Paris in

June of that year, the Englishman, J. Monroe, described a tour of the

Paris Observatory given by the Cassini's, father and son, and a visit

to the display cases of Joseph Pitton Tournefort. Monroe's favorable

comparison of the Abbé Bignon with the memory of Colbert and his

deprecation of the marquis de Louvois as the "scourge of the Sci­

ences" are both of interest:

In my last I told you as well as I could remember, what pleased in the publick assembly of the Académie royal des Sciences, for no other reason, but to give some idea of the method of the proceedings of the Learned Gentlemen that Compose it, and especially of Monsr L'Abbe Bignon the president, [w]ho is certainly a great man, as Monsr Colbert was the first establisher, he may justly pretend to the honour of being Revivor of that Society. Monsr de Louvois is called still the Scourge of the Sciences. When he was spoke to, about the Charges of the Edition of a book that might be usefull to the public, he used to aske, if it could be serviceable to the king to take a town, or gain a Battle, and 'tis said the present ministry is as little inclinable to favor Learning, and that nothing was able to procure it that Encouragement it now has, but the great

11 interest of M L'Abbe Bignon and monsr Pontchartrain [w]ho is much employed by him in the affairs of the . . . and they with those of the Academy . . . .[1]

Bernard Fontanelle in his history of the renewal of the

Academia, written at about the same time as Monroe's letter, simply alludes to a period of decline prior to the règlement of 1699. He states, "Sa Majeste voulut bien I'honorer [the Académie] d'une atten­ tion toute nouvelle, et lui donner une seconde naissance, . . ."[2] and "Car et les anciens Académiciens, dont quelques-uns n'etoient pas fort assidus, . . ."[3] Fontenelle's account is public, while

Monroe's is private. Fontanelle could not openly condemn the marquis de Louvois in a published work of the Académie. Not only was open, public conflict an anathema to the orderly rules by which society conducted iself in the France of Louis XIV, but the marquis' youngest son, the Abbé Camille Louvois, had been admitted to the Académie as an honorary member. Monroe's private condemnation of Louvois may, however, have had wide currency at the time; indeed it could have come from the Abbé Bignon himself, since Monroe mentions having visited Bignon.[4]

The first published criticism of the marquis de Louvois comes in the nineteenth century when the first histories of the Académie other

than those of the perpetual secretary appeared. Joseph Bertrand

[1] J. Monroe to Mr. Martin, 17 June 1699, RS LBC XII 254-260.

[2] Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie . . . MDCXCIX, p.

[3] Ibid., p. 13.

[4] J. Monroe to Mr. Martin, 17 June 1699, RS LBC XII 254-260. 13 found evidence for scientific decline under Louvois in the manuscript

volumes of the procès-verbaux of the Académie.

. . . le travail en commun devenu une gêne pour tous était abandonné peu a peu, et l'on avait peine bien souvent â occuper les deux heures de la séance. Les procès-verbaux qui naguère remplissaient chaque année deux volumes, l'un pour les samedis, l'autre pour les mercredis, se réduisirent au point que les comptes rendus des années 1688 à 1691, toujours écrits par DuHamel avec la meme exacti­ tude, n'occupent plus ensemble qu'un seul volume qui les réunit sans distinction.(5]

Ail of the meetings from 1688 to 1691 filled but a single volume,

with no distinction between Saturday and Wednesday meetings. Each

academician was doing his own research and concerned himself little with the work of the Académie. The projects which used to be the

joint endeavors of all the academicians, and which accounted for the

numerous volumes of the procès-verbaux during Colbert's administra­

tion, have been abandonned for private research in Bertrand's view.

As Bertrand expresses it:

Les mathématiciens empiétaient peu a peu sur tout le rest. Cassini, 1'Hôpital, Varignon, LaHire et Homberg, sans s'astreindre plus longtemps a chercher la vérité en commun, produisent isolément et sans grand éclat, d'instructifs et nombreux travaux; mais ils ont peine à remplir les séances, les sciences d'observation n'y occupent plus qu'une très- petite place; tout semble aller à l'abandon. Le labora­ toire est délaissé . . . .[6]

For Bertrand this baneful stats of affairs is the consequence of

Louvois' neglect and misunderstanding of the Académie. "L'Impérieux

Louvois, second protecteur de l'Académie, s'occupa fort peu d'elle et

[51 Bertrand, L'Académie des sciences, £. 44.

[6] Ibid., p. 46. 14 fort mal," Bertrand wrote.[7] Louvois' lack of understanding is

demonstrated by his disinterest in simple curiosities and his desire

for practical results from scientific research. Quoting from the

procès-verbaux for 30 January 1686, Bertrand notes the speech given

by De la Chapelle to the Académie on behalf of the marquis de

Louvois.

Henri de Bessi, Sieur de la Chapelle, was a commis for Louvois

and filled the same role that Charles Perrault had filled for Col­

bert. Hence in that speech he was clearly speaking for Louvois, as

the text itself indicates:

J'ai déjà eu l'honneur de dire a l'Académie que Mgr de Louvois demande ce que l'on peut faire au laboratoire; il m'a odonne d'en parler encore. Ne peut-on pas considérer ce travail ou comme une recherche curieuse ou comme une recherche utile? J'appelle recherche curieuse ce qui n'est qu'une pure curiosité ou qui est pour ainsi dire un amuse­ ment des chimistes; cette compagnie est trop illustre et a des applications trop sérieuse pour ne s'attacher ici qu'a une simple curiosité. J'entends une recherche utile celle qui peut avoir rapport au servie du roi et de l'état.[8]

Another cause for decline, according to Bertrand, was the depar­

ture from the Académie in the 1680's of two of its most productive members, both foreigners and both protestants: Huygens and Roeraer.

In Bertrand's view, both left France as a consequence of the revoca­

tion of the Edict of Nantes, an action which was a project of the

marquis de Louvois.[9]

[7] Ibid. . p. 40.

[8] Ibid.. pp. 40-41.

[9] Ibid. , pp. 43-44. 15 Alfred Maury, who prepared a history of the Académie des sci­

ences just five years before Bertrand published his work, noted a

number of the same themes later stressed by Bertrand. However Maury

did not emphasize the political dimensions of scientific activity to

the same degree as did Bertrand. Jean-Baptiste Colbert, says Maury,

gave strong support to the Académie and was responsible for its early

successes.[10] Louvois, on the other hand, brought about a decline of

true scientific research through his demands on the academicians for

their participation in the engineering projects of the govern­ ment. [11]

When Martha Ornstein wrote her dissertation on the European

academies of science in the seventeenth century in 1913, [12] she

relied for the most part on published sources. For the history of

the Académie des sciences she drew on Maury and Bertrand. Not

surprisingly her interpretation of the Colbert and Louvois years is

very similar to theirs.[13]

Writing in 1957, John Hirshfield is perhaps even more disparag­

ing in his comparison of Colbert and the marquis de Louvois as pro­

tectors of the Académie:

[10] Maury, L'Ancienne Académie des sciences, pp. 11-13.

[11] Ibid., pp. 37-41.

[12] Published in 1928 as The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seventeenth Century.

[13] Martha Ornstein, The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seven­ teenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago press, 1928), pp. 156-159. In striking contrast with the patience and insight of Col­ bert was the impatience of his successor and one-time rival, Francois-Michel Le Tellier, Marquis de Louvois, who almost immediately on taking charge of the Academy delegated his aide Henri de Bessie, Seigneur de la Chapelle-Milan (usually called de la Chapelle) to inform the Company that it had better get down to work on some­ thing practical and stop wasting time on trivia. And not long afterward the Academy began to have an excessive number of administrators bringing attendant annoyances.[14]

One virtue of Hirshfield's dissertation was his extensive research in

the archives of the Royal Society in London, where he found evidence which corroborated the citations from the proces-verbaux used by Ber­

trand. The letter from J. Monroe to Mr. Martin of 17 June 1699, which is cited above, is of principle interest in this regard.

A. Rupert Hall dismisses the importance of academies for the progress of science in the seventeenth century. Louvois' attempt to

enforce practical work on the academicians had no real effect for good or bad, in his view. After Claude Perrault and Claude Bourdelin

responded to his plea for useful science with some outlandish experi­ ments, Louvois simply gave up hope for useful work and turned his

back on the Académie. [15]

Arthur Birembaut attaches little significance to Louvois'

attempt to regulate scientific production. He quotes De la

Chapelle's speech of 30 January 1686 in full only to comment that it may have had an effect on the chemical laboratory:

[14] Hirshfield, "L'Académie Royale des Sciences," p. 64.

[15] A. Rupert Hall, From Galileo to Newton 1630-1720 (New York: Harper, 1963), p. 151. 17 Par la maniéré dont elles étaient formulées, les vues de Louvois constituaient une critique des buts de recherche envisages du temps du Colbert. Tout au plus pouvait-elles entraîner une modification du program d'analyses du labora­ toire de chemie. ^ partir du 1®~ Janvier 1687,^ Bourdelin est autorise a''traveiller a domicile pour l'Académie. [16 ]

A more perceptive and original interpretation of the changes occuring in the Académie after Colbert's death is to be found in

Roger Hahn's The Anatomy of £ Scientific Institution; the Paris

Academy of Sciences, 1666-1803, published in 1971. These changes are not to be explained by the succession of protectors, in his view.

Indeed, says Hahn, there was no decline in scientific activity, if such can be measured, during the years of Louvois' protection, but only some lessening of activity in the late 1690's after Louis

Pontchartrain became protector.[17]

This is not to say that the Académie was not having problems, but rather to deny that ministerial action or inaction was at the root of these difficulties. In Hahn's view the real cause of changes in the Académie was a change in the fundamental role and function of the Academic between its founding and the Louvois era. The Baconian ideal of a group of self-effacing scientists working in union to col­ lect and verify the facts needed to write a "History" of nature pro­ vided the founding philosophy and program of the Académie. But as

the years passed the collective projects waned and members began to

[16] Birembaut, Arthur. "Les Caractères originaux de l'Académie roy­ ale des sciences de 1666 à“ 1698," Les Sociétés savantes, leur histoire. Actes du 100® Congrès national des Sociétés savantes. (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1976) p. 18.

[17] Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, pp. 19-20. 18 do research privately and report the results in the bi-weekly meet­ ings. The function of the Académie thus changed from that of organ­ izing and conducting collective research to one of passing post hoc judgement on the completed research of individuals, whether members or outsiders. As can be expected personal rivalry and conflict became part of the daily life of the Académie in its new role.[18]

Much of the debate over the existence and cause for a decline within the Académie centers on the policies and personalities of its first two protectors, Colbert and Louvois. The extent to which Col­ bert contributed to the fortunes of the Académie has only been broached in a number of specialized studies; the concept of Louvois' role has been little altered since his day. The comparison of the two men made by Joseph Bertrand and subsequent writers do not do jus­ tice to the abilities and policies of either.

Before we can approach any understanding of these two ministers of state in their relations with the Académie des sciences, however, we must understand first their roles within the context of the government of Louis XIV, and secondly, their policies for the surinr

tendance des bâtiments, which administered the pensions received by most of the intellectuals who did not have permanent appointments as royal professors.

In most historical accounts of the reign of Louis XIV, the period of Colbert's influence, 1661 to 1683, stands forth as a symbol

[18] Ibid., pp. 20-34. 19 of all chat was good in Louis' reign. In contrast the decade of the

1680's is pictured as a period of religious intolerance following the

revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, and as a period of war

perpetrated by France. As Louis' chief advisor during this decade,

the marquis de Louvois has inherited the general opprobrium for these

policies.

Behind the public reputations of these two men stood a long-term

competition for influence and offices within the royal government.

At issue were both the power to bestow patronage and the influence to

shape government policy. For example, by 1669 Colbert held the posi­

tions of surintendant des bâtiments, minister for the marine, and

Controller General. The control of these three posts not only gave

Colbert great power to place friends and relatives in government

jobs, but also enabled him to develop a consistent commercial policy.

The marine was responsible for overseas trade and for colonies, the

contrôle général directed internal trade, and the bâtiments regulated

manufactures. Following Colbert's death in 1683 these three posi­

tions passed into the hands of three different ministers, making the

co-ordination of commercial policy difficult.

Although Colbert had worked on military affairs for Michel Le

Tellier, minister for the army and father of the marquis de Louvois,

he began his rise to prominence in 1651 when he became an intendant

in Cardinal Mazarin's service. When Cardinal Mazarin died in 1661,

Louis XIV decided to have no formal first minister. This meant that

the king had final say in policy in all areas. Hence if one minister 20 wished to direct overall policy, he must combine the king's favor with the control of as many government ministries as possible. Col­ bert began to accumulate positions, beginning with that of Intendant

of Finance in 1661; he later became surintendant des bâtiments in

1664 and secretaire d'état in 1669 with responsibilities for the marine, the maison du roi, and the galleys. In essence he controlled

every aspect of government except the army and foreign affairs, the

two areas in which Louis himself took personal interest.

Colbert apparently worked reasonably well with the young marquis

de Louvois during the first ten years of Louis XIV's reign. Louvois

had a survivance for his father's charge of secretaire d'etat for the

army and was already working with his father in these years. The

beginning of the Dutch War in 1672, however, caused the two men to

clash over policy and Louvois subsequently came to oppose Colbert

openly.[19]

Colbert's reputation is built on three major accomplishments.

First, as Controller General, he reorganized the French fiscal system

with such success that he eliminated most of the graft among fiscal

officers and doubled the king's revenues. Secondly, he created a

thorough mercantile policy which protected French manufactures and

commerce and created new industries and trading companies. Thirdly,

he so generously supported the arts and sciences of France that Vol­

taire called Louis' reign a golden age.

[19] Charles W. Cole, Colbert and a Century of French Mercantilism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1939) I, 293. 21 A number of factors contributed to the success of the Académie des sciences under Colbert's tutelage. First of all, Colbert was renowned for hard work and an infinite capacity for detail.

Secondly, he was well-informed by an extensive network of dependable advisors. Thirdly, he took a personal interest in the achievements of the Académie, not only because of the potential economic benefits of scientific progress and the gloire significant new discoveries might reap for the king, but also because Colbert took adelight in learn­ ing as an end worthy in its own right.

Within a year of assuming the office of Intendant of Finances,

Colbert began to seek out men of letters who could advise him in literature, the arts, and the sciences. One of these advisors was the poet and member of the Académie française, Jean Chapelain, who in

1662 addressed a mémoire to Colbert on the means of preserving the king's reputation or gloire. [20] In 1663 Chapelain gave Colbert a list of men who deserved pensions from the king, and in that same year Colbert selected four men to form a council or petite académie to advise him on the advancement of the king's gloire. The four advisors were Jean Chapelain, the Abbé Amable de Bourzeis, the Abbé

Jacques Cassagnes, and Charles Perrault, who was introduced to Col­ bert by Chapelain. The Abbé Bourzeis in turn brought Pierre de Car- cavi, a mathematician and friend of Pascal and Fermat, to Colbert's attention. [21]The four members of the petite académie, plus Carcavi,

[20] Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Lettres, instructions, et mémoires (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1861-73), V, 585.

[21] H. L. Bussard, "Pierre de Carcavi," Dictionary of Scientific 22 selected the Initial members of the Académie des sciences. [22]

Colbert's contacts with the Académie des sciences were not lim­ ited to a single advisor; rather he relied on a number of people. He received advice from the Perrault brothers, Charles and Claude.

Charles Perrault was Colbert's premier commis for the surintendance des bâtiments, and his brother Claude was both an advisor to Colbert on architectural matters and a member of the Acadâmie des sciences.

The Académie initially met in the Bibliothèque du roi where Carcavi, acting as Royal Librarian, took charge of the early meetings. The

Abbe Gallois, a long-time faithful of Colbert, was included in the membership and for two years, 1668-1669, acted as the secretary of the Académie. In addition to these men, several other members of the

Académie dés sciences had entré to Colbert.[23]

There can be little doubt that Louis' reputation figured as a major motive for Colbert's support of science and other cultural affairs. Colbert once said that he regretted every sou expended for a banquet but would gladly spend millions to enhance the king's gloire. [24]

It would have been a great boon to French maritime commerce or to French naval strategy to be able to determine longitudes at sea.

Biography (New York: Charles Scribners, 1970), III, 63.

[22] Hirshfield, "L'Académie Royal des Sciences," p. 30.

[23] Taton, Les Origins, pp. 27-40.

[24] Cole, Colbert. I, 291-292. 23 It is no accident that the two academicians whose research held the greatest promise for achieving these results, Jean Dominique Cassini and Christiaan Huygens, had been eagerly recruited by Colbert for the

Académie. Although both were foreigners, they received the highest pensions of all the academicians. Cassini received 9,000 >T per year and Huygens 6,000 JrT per year while the range for other members was

1,500 JHT to 2,000 i T p e r year.[25]

Colbert's interest in science was not, however, purely utili­ tarian. One day Colbert invited Huygens to perform experiments on the vacuum before himself, Mme Colbert, his daughter, and his son- in-law, the Duchesse and Due de Chevreuse. [26] The accolades of the

Mercure galant may be suspect, but they present the general view of

Colbert as a man imbued with a true sense of the importance of sci-

Pour aimer ainsi les gens d'esprit, il faut être parfaite­ ment honnête homme. Il faut se détacher de la grandeur et du bien pour se regarder en philosophe et chercher la vér­ itable solidité dans les sciences. Il est certain qu'on ne peut les aimer davantage que M. Colbert. [27]

It is not surprising then to observe Colbert monitoring the

[25] For details of Colbert's negotiations for the services of these two savants, see Jean Dominique Cassini (III), mémoires pour ser­ vir £ l'histoire des sciences et celle de l'Observatoire (Paris: Bleuet, 1810), pp. 288-291] and Christian Huygens, Oeuvres (The Hague: Nifhoff, 1888-1950), V, pp. 13, 111, 231, 267, and 375.

[26] Henri Brugman, Séjour de Christiaan Huygens é’ Paris (Paris: E. Droz, 1935), p. 70.

[27] Mercure galant, October 1677, quoted in Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Lettres, Instructions, et Mémoires, V, 560. 24 weekly activities of the Académie des sciences, taking a personal interest in the details of expeditions, or giving open invitation to discuss recent observations. One contemporary account goes so far as to suggest that Colbert's detailed regulation of the Académie was at times inimical to its operation:

As for his [Cassini's] other invention about Apogees and excentricities, that will not be digested soe suddainly for hee tells mee it depends upon the orders and determinations of Monsieur Colbert upon whom all the motions of the Royal Académie are to bee calculated; for the measure of their times are sett by him.[28]

That Colbert worked closely with the Academia may be seen in a series of events concerning Cassini's observation of unusual spots on the sun: [29]

II [Cassini] découvert aussi au mois d'août de la mesme annee [1671] des nouvelles taches dans le soleil qui n'avoit point paru depuis un grand nombre d'années; et après en avoir fait trois observations M. Cassini eut asses de confidence pour avertir les astronomes par un imprimie que cette tache après avoir parcouru l'emisphere du soleil auroit pu retourner le 3 Septembre ce qui arrive de la maniéré qu'il auroit prévu. M. Colbert averti du retour de cette tache la voulut voir et il observe avec plaisir dans la bibliothèque avec une lunette de 17 pieds de Campani que m. Cassini avoit porte d'italie. En ayant connu la honte il donna ordre a M. Cassini d'écrire a Campani d'envoir au plutost la plus grande et la plus excellente lunette qu'il eut et de travailler a perfectioner cet art pour avoir de ces verres dans l'observatoire royal. [30]

[28] Vernon to H. Oldenburg, Paris, 25 February 1670, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VII, pp. 7-13, #1795.

[29] Handwritten letters which were not copied by a secretary are often missing the accent marks. This is also true of the manuscript volumes of the proces-verbaux of the Académie des sci­ ences before 1698.

[30] On travailloit alors a 1'Académie, Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris C 1.13. 25 In a separate mémoire Cassini relates how Colbert showed his treatise on the spots of the sun to the king who was greatly pleased. Cassini had written it in Latin, but on the advice of the Académie it was translated into French by Carcavi.[31]

When Jean Picard went to Denmark in 1671 to verify the observa­ tions made by Tycho Brahe a century earlier at Uranibourg, he sent back the results of his observations of the same sun spots. His observations agreed closely with those taken by Cassini, and the results were reported to M. Colbert as chough it were a matter of

M Colbert, a qui M. Perrault a communique la lettre, a témoigné un grande satisfaction de cette conformité et du bon success de votre Voyage. [32]

Colbert showed a like interest in scientific areas that had lit­ tle potential for expanding French naval prowess. On Colbert's ord­ ers seventeen fish from the coast of Brittany were dissected by the anatomist Joseph DuVermay and sketched by Philippe de la Hire. [33]

Once again the results were shown to Colbert:

DuVernay a dit a la Compagnie que de la Hire et iuy ont fait voir a M. Colbert les desseins des poissons qu'ils ont disséqué. Ils les feront voir a la Compagnie Mercredi prochaine. [34]

[31] Jean Dominique Cassini, "Plusieurs Travaux." Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris D 1.13.

[32] Jean Dominique Cassini to Jean Picard, 3 September 1671, Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris A 4.2.

[33] Joseph Shiller, "Les laboratoires d'anatomie et de botanique a l'Académie des sciences au XVII® siècle," Revue d'histoire des sciences XVII (April 1964) 109.

[34J P. V., T. 11, 10 January 1680. 26 In sum, Colbert's personal involvement in the activities of the

Académie des sciences is well documented. Although he had certain projects which he wished to see accomplished, he also allowed a great deal of freedom and initiative to the academicians. He was always interested, ready to listen, ready to judge, ready to make a deci-

The Académie des sciences did not prosper as well under the mar­ quis de Louvois as it had under Colbert. The defense of this state­ ment is the burden of the next two chapters and need not concern us here. However an overview of Louvois' policy concerns, administra­ tive style, and personal interests as seen in his role of advisor to

Louis XIV and in his administration of the surintendance des bâti­ ments gives some foundation for understanding the events documented in the following chapters.

There is no doubt that Louvois, like Colbert, was a hard worker.

He even showed a great concern for detail in matters of importance to the king. [35] But in general his extensive responsibilities often left Louvois little time except for the affairs of the army. [36]

Louvois may have seen the potential in cultural matters to glorify or please the king, but his interests in the Academic des

[35] Roger Guillemet, Essai sur la surintendance des bâtiments du roi sous le râgne personnel de Louis XIV (1662-1715) (Paris ; Arthur Rousseau, 1912), p. 168.

[36] Charles W. Cole, French MercanLxlism 1683-1700 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943), p. 142. 27 sciences did not go beyond this. He showed no personal interest in science, and his economic policy, such as it was, required no pro­ gress in technology or science. As noted above [37] the three offices which supervised French economic affairs were divided among three different ministers at Colbert's death. Since Louvois did not control the marine, new astronomical aids to navigation and overseas commerce were not of direct concern. Louvois' policy toward indus­ try, which was under his control, was to strengthen existing indus­ tries rather than to create new industries.[38] The advice he received on scientific and cultural affairs was often not well informed; in fact he seems not to have respected his own advisors.

Louvois' principle motives for seeking the surintendance des bâtiments were to increase his own patronage, to increase his favor with the king, and to decrease the power of the Colbert family.

According to Mme de Maintenon, Seignaley, the eldest son of Jean-

Baptiste Colbert, requested of the king within four days of his father's death that he be endowed with all of the offices held by the

elder Colbert. These included the secretariate d'etat for the maison

du roi, the charge of the marine, the Controller Generalship, and the

surintendance des bâtiments. [39] Indeed Seignaley had been signing

for his father on naval affairs since 23 March 1672— some ten years

[37] See p. 19.

[38] Cole, French Mercantilism 1683-1700, p. 116.

[39] Pierre Clement, Gouvernement de Louis XIV ou la cour, l'administration, les finances, et le commerce de 1683 1689 (Paris: Guillaumin, 1848), p. 21. earlier.[40]

Louis, however, was not willing to concentrate so much power in another Colbert. Seignaley obtained the positions of secretaire d'etat for the maison du roi and the marine. Le Peletier became Con­ troller General, and Ormois, the due de Blainville, the fourth son of

Colbert, was named surintendant des bâtiments. Ormois had no liking for this post and gladly resigned it for a position in the army almost at once. The position of surintendant then passed to Louvois on 6 September 1683. [41]

When Louvois assumed the responsibility for the bâtiments he dismissed several of Colbert's appointees in order to replace them with his own family and "creatures." The rivalry between the Colbert and Le Tellier families was well documented in court circles.

According to Clement, Louvois gained the support of Mme de Maintenon in 1680. [42] At about this time Colbert's popularity with the king began to decline. Rousset cites two reasons. First rumors of embez­ zlement were directed against Colbert. This was a tactic similar to that used by Colbert himself against Fouquet, and one no doubt that

Louvois was happy to support. Secondly, Colbert had created at his estate at Sceaux an independent court which aroused the ire of the king. Louvois in a letter to le Peletier warns him not to do the

[40] Pierre Clement, L'Italie en 1671 (Paris: Didier, 1867), p. 26.

[41] AN q I 27 Fol. 270-272 .

[42] Clement, Le Gouvernement de Louis XIV, pp. 71-72. 29 J'ai souvent connu que 1'affluence du monde qui alloit a Sceaux ne plaisoit pas au maistre. [43]

In addition to the two causes cited by Rousset, it should be noted that Louis was tired of the rivalry between Colbert and Louvois and was also tired of begging Colbert for money.

After Le Peletier became Controller General, Louvois had him ferret out information that could lead to charges of embezzlement against the former creatures of Colbert. Nicolas Desmaretz was forced into retirement, Bellinzani was sent to prison, suits were brought against others of Colbert's associates. [44]

Louvois made a number of changes in the official hierarchy of the surintendance des bâtiments. At the time of Colbert's death

Jerome Bignon, the father of the future Abbe Jean-Paul Bignon, was maître de la librarie and the Abbe Louis Colbert was garde de la bibliothèque. Louvois forced both to resign and combined the two offices for his own son, the Abbé Camille Louvois. Since the Abbe

Louvois was only nine years old in 1684, the actual administration of

the Royal Library fell to the marquis de Louvois' brother, the

Archbishop of Rheims. [45]

De Mairan relates an annecdote about this affair. Jerome Bignon

went to his son, Jean-Paul, to ask forgiveness for resigning his

[43] Quoted in Camille Rousset, Histoire de Louvois et de son administration politique et militaire (Paris: Didier, 1862-63), III, 359.

[44] Clement, Le Gouvernement de Louis X I V , p. 31.

[45] Henri-Jean Martin, Livre, Pouvoirs, et Société, II, 671-672. 30 charge, which he had intended for his son. His apology was that the marquis de Louvois had made such violent threats that he felt he had

no recourse. [46]

The Abbe Varese and later Melchisedech Thevenot were appointed

to handle the daily operations of the Royal Library. Doctor

Rainssant took over the collection of medals formerly guarded by Car­

cavi, one of Colbert's closest advisors.[47]

Louvois' policy of "decolbertization" never reached deeply into

the membership of the Academic es sciences itself. However, Louvois was well aware of Colbert's role in its creation. Colbert had pro­ vided a meeting room for the Académie in the Bibliothèque du roi,

located in the rue Vivienne not far from his own hotel. The building

which housed the Bibliothèque was owned by Colbert's son, the Abbé

Colbert, and was rented to the king. [48] In the summer Colbert would

sometimes invite the members of the Académie des sciences, the

Académie française, and the petite académie to this estate in Sceaux

for an intellectual soiree. [49]

It was obvious to Louvois that events of this nature formed a

[46] Jean-Jacques de Mairan, "Eloge de M. 1'Abbe Bignon," Historié de l'Académie royale des sciences . . . année MDCCXLIII, pp. 185- 194.

[47] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 371-73.

[48] Hirshfield, "L'Académie Royale des Sciences," p. 97.

[49] Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres. Exposition organi­ sée £ 1'occasion de son tricentenaire. Archives de France. Hotel de Rohan, avril-juin 1693. (Paris: 1963), p. 12. 31 personal tie between Colbert and the Académie, which he, as the fol­

lowing administrator, must deal with. When he began draughting plans

for the proposed buildings for the place Vendôme he included a meet­

ing place for the Académie des sciences in the plans, [50] which were

not completed. Likewise Louvois invited the academicians to Meudon

for soirees despite his general disinterest in scientific or intel­

lectual matters. [51] Gary McCollim has reported the existence of an

of the Archives nationales, across which was written in Louvois' handwriting, "C'est Colbert." [52]

It has been claimed that Huygens left the Académie des sciences

after Colbert's death because of the growing anti-Protestantism of

the 1680's, a policy clearly attributable to Louvois. Such a view makes Louvois responsible for the Académie's loss of its most rek-

nowned member, which has been suggested as one factor leading to a

decline of the Académie. [53] Let us examine this incident more

closely.

The evidence indicates that Louvois was in fact responsible for

Huygen's severance from the Académie des sciences, but Huygen's Pro­

testant faith may have had little to do with it. Huygens, more than

most members of the Académie, had been closely associated with the

[50] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 416.

[51] Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres. Exposition, p. 12.

[52] Gary McCollim, personal communication, Paris, November 1976.

[53] Bertrand, L'Académie des sciences, p. 43. 32 Colbert family and with the Perrault's at Viry. When Colbert died,

Huygens was not in Paris but at home in the Dutch Republics.

Although Huygens had left on less than cordial terms, when he learned of Colbert's death he hastened to write to Louvois for permission to return to his post at the Académie des scienes. [54]

Time passed and Huygens received no answer, so he asked his friend. De Behringen, to intercede in his behalf. De Behringen was unable to help Huygens; he was only able to report that he apparently had enemies in the Académie. [55] Huygens never received a clear explanation of this apparent exclusion from the Académie des sciences or for Louvois' opposition to his return. Nevertheless Huygens interpreted the situation in political terms rather than religious terms. In 1684 he wrote to Louvois seeking the letter's protection and offering to dedicate his next publication to the marquis, again without result. [56] In sum, while religion may have been a factor, other factors were also involved.

The marquis de Louvois not only wished to defuse the influence of the Colbert family, he also viewed the surintendance as another means of pleasing the king and gaining royal favor. Louis complained that he always had to beg Colbert for money to build, while Louvois gave it to him much more freely. [57] In 1680 Colbert spent slightly

[54] Brugmans, Le Séjour, pp. 93-94.

[55] Ibid.

[56] Louvois to Huygens, 28 May 1684, A^ 713 fol. 560, Archives de la Guerre, Vincennes.

[57] Guillemet, Essai, p. 165. 33 over 8,000,000 for salaries and projects of the surintendance; by

1685 Louvois had raised the level of spending to 14,000,000.if. [58]

Louvois' most ambitious attempt to please the king was no doubt his celebrated project to bring the waters of the Eure to Versailles via an aqueduct. The Académie was consulted on the type of aqueduct to build and troops were used for construction workers, but in the end the project proved so costly in both money and lives that it was left incomplete. [59]

Whatever Louvois' motives in accepting the surintendance des bâtiments, his experience in the areas it supervised was limited. His only experience in construction had been the erection of the invalides. [60] His artistic preferences can be compared to those of a wholesale grocer. In the process of furnishing his estate at Meu­ don he wrote to La Tuilliere in Rome,

je vous prie de ménager ma bourse sur les statues en ne les prenant pas extrêmement mauvises, de ne pas aussi chercher une extrême beauté qui les renchérit considérablement. Si vous trouvez deux douzaines de bustes à un prix raisonable, ou que fussent antiques ou qui fussent bien copies, vous me feriez plaisir de me les acheter aussi. [61]

Louvois' administration of the surintendance is best summarized

[58] Ibid., pp. 156-159.

[59] Clement, Le Gouvernement de Louis X I V , pp. 163-177.

[60] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 369.

[61] Louvois to La Tuilliere, 30 March 1682, quoted in Rousset, His­ toire de Louvois, III, 369. 34 as efficient but without vision or innovation. Toward the end of his life Colbert had been lax in his accounts of the bâtiments. At the time of his death the accounts for 1680, 1681, 1632, and the first eight months of 1683 had not been settled before the Chambre des comptes. Louvois was prompt in settling these accounts and when he died in 1691 only the accounts for 1690 had not been settled. [62]

Colbert had relied on an officer of the prev&te to police petty crimes occurring in the surintendance. One of Louvois' first acts [5

October 1683] was to create a prevdt des bâtiments to conduct crimi­ nal proceedings within the surintendance. [63] He even went so far as to threaten artists with prison if their work was not of satisfactory quality. [64] The use of fifteen battalions of infantry [22,000 sol­ diers] to work on the aqueduct from the Eure to Versailles is typical

of Louvois' methods.

An efficient administration together with some personal atten­

tion to detail might have compensated for Louvois' lack of vision,

but he could not give such close attention as had Colbert even if he had been personally interested. Louvois was often away from Paris and Versailles or completely absorbed in the adminitration of the army. [65]

[62] Guillemet, Essai, pp. 164-165.

[63] Ibid. , 169-170.

[64] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 380.

[65] Guillemet, Essai, p. 168. 35 Louvois appointed Henri Bessi, Sieur de la Chapelle, as his premier commis for the bâtiments, the role previously held by Charles

Perrault and then by Colbert's son Ormois. De la Chapelle, however, never had the confidence of Louvois in the same way that Perrault held the trust of Colbert. In his correspondence Louvois sometimes berates De la Chapelle and treats him as a lackey. De la Chapelle was often at the meetings of the Académie des sciences, but his influence was so slight that his functions were sometimes superceded by the Abbe Gallois or the Abbé I'Annion. Thus the Académie had no contact who could effectively represent its interests to Louvois.

In 1686 Louvois delegated responsibilities for the execution of day-to-day matters of the surintendance to Colbert de Villacerf.

Villacerf was given lettres patents giving him the title of inspec­ tion générale and the following powers :

o . députons par ces présentes Signées de notre main, pour pendant trois ans, en l'absence dud. Sr Marquis de Louvois et sous son autorité en sa presence avoir une inspection generale sur tout ce qui se fera dans notre batimens, recevoir nos ordres et les donner a ceux qui les devront executer. . . [66]

Villacerf ran the surintendance without distinction. Not caring to look after details himself, he often delegated responsibility to oth­ ers, especially to his first commis. [67] After Louvois' death Vil­ lacerf was appointed surintendant des bâtiments by commission but was forced to resign in 1699 when his premier commis was caught embezzel-

[66] BiTFF. 21675 fol. 34.

[67] Guillemet, Essai, p. 187. 36 ing funds. [68] Villacerf's name appears only once in the records of the meetings of the Académie des sciences ; when he had to make arrangements for the visit to the Académie of James, King of England.

[69]

The contrast could not be greater. Colbert was an administrator who had personal interest in the progress of the arts and sciences.

He monitored projects underway in the Académie des sciences in great detail, and he gave financial support when he was convinced of the value of a project. Colbert also represented the interests of the

Académie to the king. Among Colbert's trusted advisors were such men as Charles and Claude Perrault and Carcavi, who represented the interests of the Académie to Colbert. At least three academicians,

Huygens, Cassini, and Claude Perrault, seem to have had open entre to audiences with Colbert when the projects of the Académie required his support. The marquis de Louvois had neither knowledge nor interest in the arts and sciences. De la Chapelle, who informed Louvois on the activities of the Académie, himself had no great understanding of the sciences and furthermore he lacked the confidence of Louvois.

Louvois' overall style of administering the surintendance was heavy- handed, and as the pressure of other responsibilities became heavier,

Louvois withdrew from much of the adminitration of this office leav­ ing Villacerf to handle daily routine.

[68] Ibid., p. 189.

[69] PV, t. 13, 27 August 1690. Chapter II

The Decline of the Académie after Colbert

Did the Académie in fact decline under Louvois' administration?

In responding to this question, one is confronted with the more gen­ eral problem: what constitutes decline? Roger Hahn has argued, speaking specifically about the Académie des sciences, that "... in fact no acceptable criteria for measuring scientific activity have ever been devised."[1] No acceptable measure of scientific activity exists because the term "activity" itself is sufficiently vague to create confusion. It may refer equally to such quantitative measures of activity as the frequency of meetings, the number of scientific publications, and the quantity of research accomplished, or to such qualitative measures as group morale, group cohesion, and the signi­ ficance of scientific knowledge gained. In addition the term decline implies a preceding period of high scientific activity.

In this chapter I intend to demonstrate that a "decline in scientific activity" did in fact occur during the years of the pro­ tectorship of the marquis de Louvois. First, however, it is neces­ sary to clarify the terms "scientific activity" and "decline." In

Part A of this chapter I shall examine a number of quantitative meas­ ures of scientific activity, namely the quantity of research and pub-

[1] Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, p. 20.

37 38 lication completed by the academicians, during the last eight years of Colbert's protectorship and the eight years of Louvois' protector­ ship. When referring to measurable amounts of research and publica­ tion, I shall use the more precise term, "scientific productivity."

Within the context of "scientific productivity" the term "decline" refers to a statistically significant numerical decline of produc­

tivity between the last eight years of Colbert's protectorship and

the entire eight years of Louvois' protectorship. In part B, I shall

present evidence for a qualitative decline of group morale and inter­

nal cohesion with the Acadeinie des sciences. Within this context the

term "decline" will necessarily represent a subjective judgement.

Indeed it was on the basis of evidence of the type presented in Part

B that Roger Hahn concluded that the Académie was not undergoing a

decline but a redefinition of its true goals.

Part A

The Decline of Scientific Productivity

A comparison of the quantity of research and publication issuing

from the membership of the Académie des sciences during the last eight

years of Colbert's administration (1676-1683) and the following eight

years of Louvois' administration (1684-1691) indicates a substantial

decline of these two activities during the latter time period. The

figures presented in this chapter show that publication declined to a

greater degree than did research, but the decline in research was 39 perhaps more serious than these figures indicate. A stronger case for the decline in research will be presented in the following chapter. Before presenting the data for a decline in scientific pro­ ductivity, however, we must address certain methodological problems concomitant to the quantitative analysis of cultural phenomena.

Any attempt to justify a given measure of scientific activity leads one into a quagmire of logical and philosophical questions from which there is no easy escape. If one chooses a quantitative approach, treating for example the published scientific paper as the unit of analysis, one is forced to equate works of vastly different quality, such as those of a Pierre Borelli with those of a Christiaan

Huygens. The works of such men simply are not equal; yet if one is using numbers of published papers as a measure of productivity, the works are roughly grouped as equals. On the other hand if one attempts to segregate the publications by quality, the process can continue indefinitely until each paper occupies a unique category, leaving one with the old problem of adding apples and oranges. Qual­ itative differences within the units of measurement are always a stumbling block to measuring cultural phenomena.

There are, however, a number of counter-arguments which justify attempts to quantify scientific activity. One may argue that what is

true at the micro level of cultural phenomena is not necessarily true

at the macro level. There will always be qualitative differences

between the works of individual scientists, but one may compare the

quanity of work of two populations of scientists by assuming that 40 quality is normally distributed within each population. The problem of quality is thus eliminated and quantity becomes a valid criterion of scientific productivity.

A second line of argument suggests that neither history nor sociology is an exact science. The historian is not seeking exact measurements of scientific work but a general pointer or weathervane to indicate the general direction and force of scientific activity.

Measurements of the quantity of activity are supplements to the trad­ itional investigative and synthesizing skills of the historian.

Quantitative measures of scientific activity are treated as cir­ cumstantial evidence for the decline and reform of the Académie des sciences, not as self-sufficient proofs in themselves.

Several historians have used quantitative measurements of scien­ tific activity to support their assessments of differential levels of scientific accomplishment. Robert K. Merton classified articles from the Philosophical Transactions and persons mentioned in the Diction­ ary of National Biography to support his arguments relating scien­ tific advance to puritan cultural values in England.[2] In a recent study Michael Hunter analysed the membership of the Royal Society in terms of attendance records, financial support, class background, and

scientific skills as evidence for decline and renewal of that body in

the seventeenth century.[3]

[2] Robert K. Merton, Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth Century England in Osiris, IV (1938) 360-632.

[3] Michael Hunter, "The Social basis and changing fortunes of an early scientific institution. An analysis of the membership of 41 The manuscript volumes of the procès-verbaux of the Académie des sciences for the years 1675 to 1699 form a major source of quantita­ tive data for this study. This period includes the last eight years

(1676-1683) of Colbert's administration of the Académie, the full eight years (1684-1691) of the marquis de Louvois' administration, and the first eight years (1692-1699) of the administration of Louis

Pontchartrain. In this chapter only comparative data for the Colbert and Louvois administrations will be presented. Tables in the follow­ ing chapter will also include data for Louis Pontchartrain's protec­ torship in order to show that the work of the Académie under Louvois different not only from that under Colbert but also from that under

Pontchartrain.

This time span was selected primarily to provide comparative data on the Académie des sciences under each of these three adminis­ trators in order to reveal any possible effects that a change in pro­ tector may have had on the activities of the Académie. Secondly, the manuscript volumes of the procès-verbaux are complete for these years. Volumes after the year 1699 are also complete and could

theoretically have been included, but a number of volumes for the

years prior to 1676 are missing, thus making it difficult to include

earlier years. The use of eight-year time spans for each protector

also simplified statistical comparison.

My analysis is based on a total of 1,679 meetings of the

the Royal Society, 1660-1685," Notes and Records of the Royal Society, XXXI (July 1976), 9-76. 42 Académie, including every meeting which was recorded in the procès- verbaux for the twenty-four years in question. These 1,679 meetings represent about 80 percent of the maximum number of meetings which theoretically could have occurred during this period. According to the rules of procedure set forth at the first meeting of the Académie in 1666, the academicians were to meet twice a week, on Wednesday to discuss "Physique" and on Saturday to discuss "Mathématique."[4]

Although there is no recorded statement on vacation, during the entire period under discussion (1676-1699), the Académie did not assemble between mid-September and mid-November. Frequently the first meeting recorded is November is identified in the procès- verbaux as the first meeting since vacation. Thus about 88 meetings, rather than 104, were theoretically possible each year. This gives a

total of 2,112 possible meetings in 24 years, in contrast to the

1,679 (79.5 percent) which were actually recorded.

The "missing" meetings either were never held or were never recorded in the procés-verbaux. There are occasional references in

the minutes to meetings not being held due to cold weather or to

religious holidays. Some of the discrepancy is, however, probably due to unrecorded meetings. The secretary of the Académie, responsi­ ble for maintaining the procès-verbaux, was a rather stable position held by only two incumbents between 1676 and 1740; the Abbé DuHamel

from 1676 to 1697 and Fontanelle from 1698 until 1740. It is doubt­

ful that either purposely failed to record a meeting. The procedure

[4] P.V., T. 1, 22 December 1666. 43 used for keeping these records was such, however, that the record of an individual meeting might be lost. Notes were taken on loose sheets of paper called plumatifs and only later, sometimes two or three years later, entered into the bound register of the proces- verbaux.[5]

Even if some meetings which were held were not recorded, their number is not sufficiently great to alter the outcome of this study unless the missing meetings were all concentrated in two or three years. Table One demonstrates that this is not the case, even though considerably fewer than the average of seventy meetings per year were recorded in certain years.

Every recorded event for each of these 1,679 meetings was included in the following analyses.[6] These data, therefore, are not a sample but rather a complete tabulation of the entire universe of recorded meetings and events for the years included. Four categories of data were typically recorded for these meetings :

1) corporate decisions made by the Académie as a body;

2) communications between the protector and the Académie;

3) the presentation of inventions for the approval of the Académie;

4) the scientific matters brought before the Académie.

Both academicians and the occasional non-member who might be present

[5] Arthur Birembaut, "Les Caractères originaux de l'Académie royale des sciences de 1666 à 1698," Les Sociétés savantes; leur his­ toire, Actes du 100® Congrès national des sociétés savantes (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1976), p. 9.

[6] A record of who attended meetings was not recorded until 1694. These data were therefore not included in the analysis. could be involved in the last category.

For statistical analysis, I coded each recorded event in such a way that a unique number was assigned to each academician, each area of scientific activity, and each type of event such as reading a treatise, performing an experiment, criticising another academician's treatise, and so forth. Each meeting was treated as a single case, with the events for that meeting occupying two 80-column keypunch

Several efforts were required before the final coding scheme was adopted, as I attempted to be as detailed and precise as possible in the coding. For example different codes were assigned to various subdivisions of the major scientific fields. Rather than a single heading for chemistry, distinct numbers were assigned for various

chemical studies of the era, such as work dealing with mercury, with acids and bases, distillation of plants, and experiments with phos­

phorus. Ultimately 246 distinct classifications were used for the

scientific activities of the Acadeinie.

This approach allows for maximum flexibility in analysis.

Detail not preserved at the coding stage cannot be added later without extensive recoding and repunching, but the computer can

readily combine categories to create larger units from smaller ones.

To return to the example of chemistry, one can either examine the

various activities being reported on by chemists of the day, topic,

by topic, or one can group all chemistry-related research into a sin­ 45

gle new category if one wishes to compare chemistry with other fields

of science. For most analyses, the 246 total categories were reduced

to 10 or 11 broad classes of activity which correspond to the major

fields of science of the day such as astronomy, anatomy, and mathematics.

Other sources of quantitative data do not need the same methodo­

logical explanation as the above analysis of the procès-verbaux. One

principle source of information on the publications of the academi­

cians was the Journal des sçavans, for the years 1676 to 1700. This

journal appeared without interruption during these years except for

1687. The other major source was Pierre Conlon's definitive bibliog­

raphy of all works published in France from 1680 to 1715, Prelude au

siècle des lumières : répertoire chronologique de 1680 S 1715. These

two sources were supplemented with references from the author catalog

of the Bibliothèque nationale and from archival materials concerning

the Imprimerie royale.

While the publication of a work is a discrete entity which can

easily be counted, research is a continuous activity which has to be

segmented into discrete units in order to be measured. The bi-weekly

meetings of the Académie perform this service. The principle

activity at each of these meetings was the presentation of research

results for discussion and clarification. This might take the form

of reading a treatise, dissecting an animal, performing an experi­

ment, or simply commenting on a colleague's work. It must be under­

stood that any measure of these activities is but an index to the 46 level of research productivity. The unit chosen to measure research productivity is the scientific presentation. This is quite simply defined as any scientific matter presented by a member at any given meeting. No attempt was made to separate the presentation from the topic. If the same topic was discussed at three successive meetings, it was counted three times. Since the continuation of a topic from one meeting to the next is an indication of its current interest to the Académie, our means of measure automatically gives this topic greater weight. It is in this sense that our unit of measure, the scientific presentation, is an index of research productivity and that the presentation of \results of an essentially continuous activity at a meeting segments research into measurable units.

Research productivity among members of the Académie des sciences declined moderately in the last three years, 1689 to 1691, of the protectorship of the marquis de Louvois. This may be seen from the data in Tables One and Two below. Table One shows the number of scientific presentations and the number of recorded meetings for each year from 1676 to 1691, that is for the last eight years under Col­ bert and the entire eight years under Louvois. The total number of scientific presentations and the total number of meetings in each of the eight-year periods does not differ substantially. However, a glance at Table Two shows that the average number of scientific presentations per year and the average number of scientific presenta­ tions per meeting both declined for the period 1689-1691 when com­ pared to the same data for 1676-1683 [the Colbert years] and 1684- TABLE 1

Number of Meetings of the Académie and Number of Individual Scientific Presentations made by Academicians, arranged by Year and by Protector

Colbert's Protectorship

Year number of Number of scientific meetings presentations

1676 60 138 1677 72 189 1678 70 202 1679 72 174 1680 75 172 1681 57 123 1682 74 152 1683 69 176

Total 550 1 ,3 2 6

Louvois' Proctorship

Year Number of Number of scientific meetings presentations

1684 74 202 1685 71 196 1686 63 157 1687 76 172 1688 70 160 1689 61 119 1690 75 145 1691 60 123

Total 550 1 ,2 7 6 A Comparison of Individual Scientific Presentations by Academicians for the Period 1689-1691 to those for the Periods I676-I683 and 1684-1688

Period Number Number Number Average Number Average Number Protector Meetings Scientific Scientific Scientific Presentations Presentations Presentations per Year per Meeting

1676 to 8 550 1,326 . 165.7 2.41 Colbert 1683

1684 to 1688 5 354 887 177.4 2.50 Louvois

1689 to 1691 3 196 387 129.0 1.97 Louvois 49 1688 [the early Louvois years]. The decline in the number of presen­ tations per year could stem from a failure to record some meetings in

the years 1689-1691, but the number of scientific presentations per meetings, a measure which eliminates this possible defect in the data, also declines.[7]

Publication offers another measure of scientific productivity.

It is quite possible for a scientific organization to fulfill the formal aspects of its duties by meeting on a regular schedule and by

reading treatises or performing experiments on demand. However pub­ lication, and scholarly reaction to published material, are better

tests for distinguishing verbiage from authentic scientific achieve­ ment. In the following few pages we will compare the publications, and the scholarly reviews of these publications, for the two time

periods 1676-1683 and 1684-1691.

The members of the Académie published two types of books at this

time. One type consisted of the "official" publications of the

Académie des sciences. These volumes were the collective works of

the academicians. Although edited by individuals within the

Académie, their authorship belongs to the Académie as a whole or to a

subsection of the Académie such as "Messieurs les anatomists" or

[7] The reader may wonder why a t-test was not used to validate the significance of the differences in average scientific presenta­ tions in the two time periods. A t-test is unnecessary, since the data represent from 80 to 100 percent of the entire universe rather than a sample of meetings. A t-test is a statistical measure which determines whether or not the differnce between two averages is due to real differences between the two populations or to a distorted sample of data. 50 "Messieurs les mathématiciens." The expense of these collective works was always underwritten by the king and the Imprimerie royale was always the publisher.

The second type consisted of works published by the individual members of the Académie. These carried the personal authorship of the individual responsible, were seldom subsidized by the king, and were usually printed by a private publisher.[8] The research for the

"official" publications occupied much of the discussion in the bi­ weekly meetings of the Academie. while works being prepared by the academicians under individual authorship received only occasional consideration at these meetings.

The collective "official" publications of the Académie were few in number at any time period, but each is a substantial work contain­ ing often half a dozen or more treatises or covering the results of several years of research. Four such works were published during the last eight years of Colbert's protectorship. These were:

1. Mémoires pour servir à~l'histoire naturelle des animaux, dressez

par M. Perrault. In Folio. Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1676.

This volume represented the collective work of the anatomists of the

Académie. A work issued in 1671 under the same title reported on research concerning seventeen animals, ranging from dissection to studies of habitat and behavior. The re-edition of 1676 contained

[8] The exception to this generalization is the works published by members in the 1690's. They were often subsidized by the king and published by the Imprimerie royale. 51 material on seventeen additional animal species. The Histoire des animaux is recognized as one of the great works of the Académie des sciences in the seventeenth century. These anatomists, says one of the leading historians of anatomy, "laid the foundations of our modern knowledge of comparative anatomy."[9]

2. Mémoires pour servir a 1'histoire des plantes dressez par M.

Dodart. In Folio. Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1676.

This volume presented the results of research performed by the botan­ ists and the chemists of the Académie. The 1676 edition was in part an outline of principles to be followed in future research; it also contained descriptive treatises and chemical analyses of some rather rare plants. Although a notable work, it did not acquire a reputa­ tion equal to that of the Histoire des animaux.

3. Recueil de plusieurs traitez de mathématiques de l'Académie roy­

ale des sciences. In Folio. Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1676.

This is a collection of six treatises authored by Mariotte, Picard,

Blondel, and Frenicle on various aspects of mathematics and mechan­ ics.

4. Mémoires pour servir a l'histoire des plantes. In-12. Paris,

Imprimerie royale, 1679.

This volume was more than a reissue of the 1676 edition of the same

[9] Francis Joseph Cole, A History of Comparative Anatomy (London: MacMillan, 1944), p. 395. 52 title. It contained the organized program for future research and

also appended the analyses of a number of additional plants.

In contrast to the years just covered, no collective works were

issued by the Académie during Louvois' protectorship. The reasons

for this lack of collective publication will be analysed more fully

in Chapter Three. For now let us note that such publications

required not only a productive program of research within the

Académie, but also the sponsorship of the government, which bore the

cost for their publication. As Henri-Jean Martin has noted, such

publications were costly and a private publisher could not recoup his

expenses on such scholarly scientific publications unless they were

destined for a wider audience such as the text book market. [10] The

failure to produce works of this type could hence result from a

government unwilling to bear the expense, from an Académie unp-roduc-

tive in its research, or from both. Which seems to be the case?

If the research of the Académie continued to be productive dur­

ing the years of Louvois' administration, but the government was

reluctant to bear the cost of "official" publications, then one might

reasonably expect that the academicians would seek other ways to

bring their work to scholarly attention. In England Henry Oldenburg,

the secretary of the Royal Society, published the Philosophical Tran­

sactions , which served as a semi-official journal for the Royal

Society and a ready means for publishing the work of the society's

[10] Henri-Jean Martin, Livre Pouvoirs et Société à Paris au 17± siè- cle (1598-1791), (Geneve: Droz, 1969) II, 869-874. 53 members. The Académie des sciences had no such "official" journal,

but it had close ties with the Journal des sçavans, which served as a

general purpose review for all types of scholarly books. A member of

the Académie des sciences could announce a new discovery to the

learned world by sending a short article to the Journal des sçavans,

where it appeared in print within a month. This is not to say that

new discoveries were never published as books issued by private

printers, for occasionally research was announced by such means. But

for the most part the books published individually by academicians

tended to fall into one of three categoires: major treatises which

synthesized past research into some sort of philosophical system;

restatements of past work designed to vanquish an opponent in scien­

tific dispute; or textbooks.

Hence if Louvois was not financially supporting "official" pub­

lications during his administration as Colbert had done, one may then

turn to the publications of the academicians as a gauge of both the

level and the quality of scientific productivity under Louvois' pro­

tectorship. If the research carried out between 1684 and 1691 was

equal in significance to that done between 1676 and 1683, then one

would expect one of the following publication patterns:

1. the number of notices by academicians appearing in the Journal

des sçavans during the years 1684-1691 would equal or exceed the

number appearing in the preceeding eight years;

2. the number of books published privately by academicians during

the latter period would equal or exceed that of the earlier period; 3. some combination of the above might be found, indicating active publication by the academicians under Louvois' administration.

On the other hand, if a decline in such individual publications can be documented, in addition to that documented above for "official" publications, then further doubt is cast on the scientific produc­ tivity of the Academia under Louvois.

An analysis of notices appearing in the Journal des scavans and of books published privately by members of the Académie during the two time periods indicates that both declined under Louvois. Tables

Three and Four below present the relevant data. Between 1676 and

1683, 48 notices of discoveries or other research reports submitted

by academicians appeared in the Journal des sçavans. Only 22 such notices appeared between 1684 and 1691, a decline of more than 50

percent. The number of books published by members of the Acadeinie

des sciences during Louvois' administration underwent a drop of 30 to

50 percent in comparison with the previous eight years. Similar

results are obtained whether one examines the date of publication of

the book or the dates during which the research for the book was car­

ried out. [11] A complete list of titles is found in appendix C.

[11] In using any analysis of publication as an index of scientific productivity, one must eventually address the problem of time lags between the date at which the research was carried out and the ultimate date of publication. For example, the title Traite du mouvement des eaux et des autres corps fluides by Edme Mariotte was published in 1686. Mariotte had died in 1684 and the research on which the book was based was done in 1682. it is usually fairly easy to establish the date of publication for a book or monograph. For works produced by academicians, the date of the research itself can usually be determined either through TABLE 3

Number of Articles in the Jourml des sçavans which reported the Discoveries and Activities of the Acadeinie

Date of Jou 'Colbert's Protectorshio Louvois' Protectorship 1676 to 1683 1684 to 1691

Number of 48 22 Articles

Number of Monographs published by Members of the Académie by date of publication and by date of research

Colbert's Protector ship Louvois' Protectorship 1676 to 1683 1684 to 1691

Number of Monographs 20 14 by date of Publication

Number of 17a Monographs 11^ hy date of Research

There were three titles for which it wasimpossible to establish the dates of research.

^ There was one title for which itwas impossible to establish the dates of research. 56

One would also like to compare the quality of books published in these two time periods. It might be possible to make an impres­ sionistic comparison based upon published contemporary reviews of the titles from each period, but one can also use as a rough and ready measure of quality the number of titles by academicians which were even reviewed at all in the standard sources for each period.

All of the relevant volumes of the Journal des sçavans were searched to arrive at a rough index of quality of published works by members of the Académie in the two time periods. I determined which of those titles for which research was accomplished by academicians between 1676 and 1683 or between 1684 and 1691 were actually reviewed in this journal. As Table Five indicates, many of the published works based on research conducted in the later time period did not even merit a review in the Journal, compared to the number of works based on research conducted under Colbert which were reviewed.

The data presented here indicate a decline in scientific produc­ tivity during the eight years for which the marquis de Louvois served as protecteur of the Académie des sciences. While it is clear that the Académie was able to maintain a schedule of biweekly meetings, with various kinds of scientific matters presented at these meetings, there was a decline in the number of individual scientific presenta­ tions between 1689 and 1691, at the end of Louvois' protectorship.

The number of reports submitted to the Journal des sçavans, the

biographical works on the member himself, or through comments in the procès-verbaux of the Académie. TABLE 5

Number of Monographs published Members of the Académie which received Reviews in the Jourral des scavans

Years during which Research for Monograph was accomplished

Colbert's Protectorship Louvois' Protectorship 1676 to 1683 1684 to 1691

Number of Monograph Titles 14 6 Reviewed in Journal des sçavans 58 number of both collective and individual titles published, and the number of scholarly reviews devoted to works of the 1684-1691 period indicate a decline in the quality as well as the quantity of scien­ tific productivity under Louvois. We may say that a decline, but not a total collapse, occurred in the scientific productivity of the

Académie des sciences under Louvois.

Part B. Internal Cohesion in the Académie

At some point in the latter two decades of the seventeenth cen­ tury, the Académie des sciences ceased to function as a cohesive body. The philosophy of collective research, a philosophy which had its inspiration from Francis Bacon, had been a founding faith of the

Académie. The secrets of nature were such that one individual might easily err in his observations, but a group of individuals working together would readily correct each other's errors. The theory assumed that each individual was committted to empirically derived facts as the basis of true knowledge, that none were propounding an a priori theory of truth to which one obstinately clung in the face of opposing facts, and that each was serving the interests of truth, the glory of the king, and the best interests of the Acadeinie above his own personal acclaim and reputation.

The fact that by the 1680's the academicians were no longer engaged in collective research and publication but were pursuing per­ sonal research goals and building personal reputations has become part of the argument for decline during the protectorship of Louvois. 59

Bertrand summarizes the philosophy of collaboration in research and its eventual demise as follows :

La lutte entre les deux systems, commencées des les prem­ ieres années de l'Académie, s'était renouvelée a plusieurs reprises, et se déclarait de plus an plus. L'Académie, dans 1'intention des fondateurs, devait absorber complète­ ment en elle 1'individualité de ses membres, produire l'unité des esprits dans la science et dans la doctrine et paraître seul au dehors, non seulement pour prendre part aux découverts de chacun et s'en glorifier, mais en se les appropriant sans citer aucune nom.[12]

Les mathématiciens empiétaient peu a peu sur tout le reste. Cassini, l'HSpital, Varignon, LaHire et Homber, sans s'astreindre plus longtemps a chercher la vérité en commun, produisent isolément et sans grand éclat, d'instructifs et nombreux travaux. . . . Les sciences d'observation n'y occupent plus ou'une très petite place; tout semble aller à l'abandon. Le laboratoire est délaissé . . .[13]

As evidence for a drift toward personal accomplishment at the expense of the Académie as an institution, Bertrand cites the proces-verbaux for 18 August 1688, which states that henseforth an acadamician must submit to the Académie for review any research which he intends to publish under his own name. The implication is that certain members had been publishing manuscripts in their own name for which research data gathered by the Académie was used to enhance the reputation of the individual member. In Bertrand's view, of course, such problems arose because of Louvois and Louvois' complete

indifference to the true needs of science.

In contrast Roger Hahn does not view the decline of communal

research and publication as an indication of decline of the Académie,

[12] Bertrand, L'Académie des Sciences, p. 44.

[13] Ibid., p. 46. 60 certainly not a decline of the making of Louvois. It represents rather a natural change in the true function of a collective body.

The two original functions of the Acad^ie, according to Hahn, had been one, to discover the truths of nature through collective research and two, to advise the government on the matters of technol­ ogy. As time passed it became apparent that a collectivity functions best as a judge of technological innovation and scientific endeavor, and not as the discoverer of scientific truth. Scientific discovery is a creative act done by the individual. Therefore, what began as an advisory function to the government on problems of technology evolved into a judgemental function on the quality of scientific research, and the other function, that of the collective discovery of truth was set aside in favor of individual research and publication.

The ruling of 18 August 1688 requiring collective review of manuscripts published by the academicians privately may be seen in

this light as a step in this direction, an acknowledgement of collec­

tive review rather than collective discovery as the true function of

the Acade^mie. [14]

The interpretations made by both Bertrand and Hahn are based on rather slim evidence: the resolution of 18 August 1688 on collective review and a perhaps impressionistic reading of the proces-verbaux.

Was there in fact a decline in collective activity? Collective research would be difficult to define, much less to measure from the available data. Collective publication never really existed to any

[14] Hahn, Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, pp. 20-30. 61 extent except in the form of edited works. The Mémoires pour servir

^ 1'histoire des animaux (1671) is the example usually cited of col­ lective research by academicians, but one needs to look hard to find other examples. Can we perhaps find a better index of communal effort?

A measure of the possible change in collective authority and decisions-making concerning any matter of importance to the Acade^mie offers such an index. If the Académie is functioning as a vital entity, absorbing the time, interest, and participation of its members and in turn promoting both science and the interests of its members, one may expect its corporate vitality to be reflected in the extent to which the Académie makes collective decisions. A decline in the number of collective decisions made by the Académie des sci­ ences may indicate that: one, the authority of the Académie has been impaired; two, the institutional framework provided by the Académie has become less important to scientific needs; or three, that matters requiring collective decisions have been referred elsewhere. What­ ever the reason, this spells a decline in the importance of the

Académie as an institution.

The number of collective decisions made by the Académie des sci­ ences in any given year may be derived from the data coded on each of the 1,679 meetings in the 24-year period under study. Any matter that is the subject of a corporate decision will carry such an indi­ cation in the proces-verbaux through such phrases as "la Compagnie a arreste," "on a résolu," "on est d'accord," and the like. As Table TABLE 6

Number of Collective Decisions made by the Acadeinie

Period during which Decisions were made

Colbert's Protectorship Louvois' Protectorship 1676 to 1683 1684 to 1691

Number of Collective 64 34 Decisions 63 Six below indicates, the number of collective decisions made by the

Académie declines rather sharply during the eight years of Louvois' protectorship.

In the absence, as Hahn noted, of generally accepted standards for scientific decline versus achievement, I have devised a number of statistical measures to serve as a yard-stick of scientific activity in the Académie des sciences under Colbert and under Louvois. All such indicators which I have been able to employ with the data avail­ able to me indicate that there was a decline of the Académie during

Louvois' protectorship. Can the blame be attributed to the adminis­

tration of the marquis de Louvois? Chapter III

Louvois and the Decline of the

Académie

The change in the protector of the Académie in 1683 proved to be the major cause for the decline of the Académie in the decade of the

1680's. The comparison of Colbert and Louvois made in Chapter One shows a striking contrast in how these two men administered the cul­ tural and artistic institutions which were under the king's jurisdic­ tion. Chapter Two then shows how the scientific productivity and the internal cohesion of the Académie des sciences differed during their respective administrations. The burden of this chapter is to demon­ strate that the decline pointed out in the last chapter came as a consequence of Louvois' administration of the Académie.

In contrast to my own interpretation, Roger Hahn offers the view

But on the surface of things it is quite evident that the parade of ministers and the legal alternation of academic practices in 1699 were not fundamentally responsible for the changing fortunes of the institution. [1]

Given the evidence available to Hahn at the time, this relegation of the influence of the protector to a minor role is a perfectly plausi-

[1] Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, p. 20.

64 65

ble assessment of the situation in the Académie. Hahn was more aware

of the crumbling of the instituion's internal cohesion than of any abatement of scientific productivity. But even the evidence for dec­

lining scientific productivity measured in research and publication which I have presented does not in itself indicate that the political

administration of the Académie was in any way responsible for this

decline. One could reasonable assume that scientific productivity

follows a cyclical course, as do many other social phenomena, so that

certain decades are more prone to show scientific genius than are

others. Therefore it is necessary to show that specific decisions made by the marquis de Louvois had direct consequences which were

detrimental to the scientific productivity and internal cohesion of

the Académie des sciences. The effects of Louvois' administration on

each of these aspects of the work of the Academic are discussed in

Part A and Part B of this chapter respectively.

Part A. Louvois and the Decline in Scientific Productivity

The scientific productivity of the Académie declined during

Louvois' protectorship basically because he promoted research and

publication in certain areas of science and neglected them in others.

This resulted in a decline of research in the slighted areas and a

misapplication of time and resources in the favored areas. The end

result was that the Académie completed no collective publications and

the members published but little on their own. 66

The effects of Louvois' decisions are best seen in three areas

of science: l)anatomy and natural history; 2) astronomy; and 3) mathematics and mechanics. Anatomy and natural history are treated

as one subject, as are mechanics and mathematics, because they are so

often linked in the work of the academicians in the seventeenth cen­

tury. The research effort devoted by the academicians to anatomy and

natural history increased dramatically under Louvois' administration, while work in mechanics and mathematics almost disappeared. Work in

astronomy also declined and this section of the Académie lost its

earlier vitality. How each of these fields of science fared under

each protector may be seen in Table 7 below, which shows the numbers

of presentations made under each. For comparative purposes the first

eight years of Pontchartrain's protectorship, following the death of

Louvois, are also included. Comparative data for all areas of sci­

ence appear below in Table 15.

I. Anatomy and Natural History

The marked increase in the number of scientific presentations on

anatomy and natural history during Louvois' protectorship and their

subsequent decline after his death were a direct result of decisions

made by Louvois. No significant change in the membership of the sec­

tion of the anatomists occurred during the 1680's. Jean Meri was

added to the group in 1684, but Meri was not the stimulus behind the

increased productivity of this field. He usually took second place

to Claude Perrault and Joseph DuVernay. Neither can the change be

attributed to changing interests in the scientific community The Number and Percent of Scientific Presentations at Meetings of the Academic in Three Subject Areas during Three different Protectorships

Protectorship Anatomy and Natural Astronomy MathematiLes and History Number ’Percent* Number Percent* Number Percent*

Colbert 133 10% 207 15% 124 10%

Louvois 404 33% 130 10% 37 3%

Pontchartrain 163 13% 170 13% 183 14%

* Scientific presentations in this field as a percentage of the total number of scientific presentations made during the given protectorship 68 represented by the Académie, as a year-by-year examination of the work in anatomy and natural history readily reveals.

If the apparent growth of interest in this field were due to a change in the focus of scientific concerns, then one would expect to

find a gradual increase in work in anatomy and natural history during

the later years of Colbert's protectorship, reaching a peak in a given year of Louvois' protectorship, and gradually declining again

in the late Louvois years and under Pontchartrain's administration.

In this case a graph of the number of scientific presentations in

this field in each year would have a staircase appearance following

the general shape of a normal distribution, the bell-shaped curve.

If on the other hand such a change is stimulated by policy decisions

from above, one would expect a precipitous increase in work in this

field in the year in which the policy was instituted and an equally

precipitous decline if the policy were later reversed. Figure 1

presents a graph of actual scientific presentations during the entire

period from 1676 to 1699, year by year. The graph has the abrupt

box-like shape which would be expected if the change were wrought by

outside policy. There is a dramatic increase in the quantity of work

in anatomy and natural history during the first year of Louvois' pro­

tectorship and a sharp decline in the year 1691, when his protector­

ship ended.

What specific actions on the part of Louvois produced this

plethora of work in anatomy and natural history, and why did Louvois

advocate such work? The first question can be answered from the Figure 1, Number of Scientific Presentations in Anatomy and Natural History by Protector and by Year ÎJumbsr of Scientific Presentations made by Members of the Académie in Anatomy and Natural History by Year and by Protector

Protector

Colbert Louvois Pontchartrain

Year Number of Year Number of Year Number of Presentations Presentations Presentations

1676 7 1684 70 1692 37

1677 10 1685 62 1693 11

1678 20 1686 36 1694 21

1679 15 1687 48 1695 17

1680 22 1688 55 1696 16

1681 20 1689 48 1697 16

1682 17 1690 58 1698 16

1683 22 1691 26 1699 29

Total 133 Total 404 Total 163 71 procès-verbaux of the Académie des sciences: Louvois wanted to pub­ lish a new edition of the Mémoires pour servir â l'histoire des animaux. Just why Louvois was interested in this project is less clear, but one may conjecture that this was the type of handsomely illustrated book which would please Louis XIV.

The second volume of the Histoire des animaux was published in

1576, under Colbert's protectorship. The anatomists of the Académie continued their dissections, with the assumption that with a suffi­ cient number of new dissections the Académie would be ready to pub­ lish a third volume of the Mémoires. One of their more celebrated performnances was the dissection of an elephant from the royal menagerie at Versailles following the animal's death; it was carried out in the presence of the king. [2]

On 10 March 1683 Perrault showed to the Académie the latest ana­ tomical engravings by LeClerc which were to be used in the next volume. At this point the Académie asked Perrault to prepare a pro­ posal for submission to Colbert:

M^ Perrault est prie de faire un mémoire pour 1'impression d'un second livre de l'histoire des animaux, de la correc­ tion des anciennes planches et de la graveur des nouvelles qu'il donnera a Mons^ l'Abbe Gallois pour presenter a Mon­ seigneur Colbert. [3]

This mémoire, recommending a continuation of the Mémoires pour servir i l'histoire des animaux, was prepared about six months before

[2] Schiller, "Les Laboratoires d'anatomie," p. 104.

[3] P.V., T. 10, 10 March 1683. 72

Colbert's death. The records of the procès-verbaux do not indicate whether Colbert had approved the project before his death.

Louvois' succession to the protectorship meant that the Académie had to petition once again for approval to publish a new edition of the Histoire des animaux. The process was further complicated by the fact that Louvois now turned to his brother, the Archbishop of

Rheims, for advice on books and publication. Louvois wrote to the

Archbishop on 7.4 October 1683:

L'imprimerie royale est sous la direction du surintendant des bâtiments, dans laquelle j'ai oui dire que l'on a imprime de fort mauvais livres depuis plusieurs années. J'espère que vous voudriez bien m'aider à faire cette par­ tie de ma charge, en m'indiquant les livres que vous jugerez a" propos qui soient imprimes dorénavant. [4]

On the 27th of October Louvois wrote again to thank the Archbishop for his support. [5] Unfortunately the Archbishop's response is not available, nor is there any indication of Louvois' criteria for judg­ ing a book to be "fort mauvais."

In any case it was now necessary to petition both Louvois and

the Archbishop of Rheims for permission to publish the new work. The procès-verbaux of the Académie for 8 March 1684 records not only the approval of the Archbishop but his enthusiasm for the project;

M^ DuVernay a fait son rapport de ce que de la Chapelle luy a dit de la part de Monseigneur 1'Archevesque de Reims que l'on presse 1'impression de l'histoire des animaux. [6]

[4] Quoted in Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 373.

[5] Ibid.

(63 P. V., T. 11, 8 March 1684. 73 Louvois was no less enthusiastic. At the very next meeting of the

M. I'Abbe I'Annion a dit a la Compagnie que Monseigneur de Louvois luy avoit dit que l'on travaillast a plutôt a 1'impression de 1'histoire des animaux. [7]

The Académie clearly took Louvois at his word when he said £ plutôt. In 1684 there were 70 serious presentations by academicians dealing with anatomy and natural history as compared with only 22 such presentations in 1683. [8] One reason for the large volume of presentations is that the anatomists were not only discussing dissec­ tions of new animals but were also reviewing and correcting their earlier work:

Perrault a continue la lecture des Mémoires de l'histoire des animaux comme M^ DuVernay a fait ses remarques particuliers sur les animaux disséqués. On a arreste qu'il les lira a la Compagnie en mesrae temps qu'on lira les Mémoires pour y insérer ce qu'on jugera a propos. [9]

This quotation gives some idea of the procedure involved in reading and correcting materials being prepared for publication. For presen­ tations of this type, the procés-verbaux often states only that "on a continue 1'histoire des animaux."

By 1685 the first galleys were being pulled from the presses of

the Imprimerie royale and submitted to the Académie for inspection.

[7] P.V., T. 11, 11 March 1684; emphasis added.

[8] See Table 8.

[9] P.V., T. 11, 21 February 1685. 74 [10] The first pages were printed, in folio, in 1686, but two years

later, in 1688, the printing ceased with only 124 pages and 7 plates

completed. Not until 1700 were these plates and text issued as a work, and then by Librarie Lamy. [11]

Just what went wrong in 1688 is not certain. F. J. Cole attri­

butes the dropping of work on the Histoire des animaux to the death

of Perrault in October of 1688, and to the lack of hard work by his

successor DuVernay. [12] But this is pure conjecture on the part of

Cole. Indeed orders were expressly given to the Imprimerie royale to

stop printing the pages and illustrations of the Histoire des

animaux; this occurred in either 1689 or 1690. [13] It is almost cer­

tain that these orders were issued by Louvois, whose administrative

duties included supervision of the Imprimerie royale as we have seen

During 1689 and 1690 many of the meetings of the Académie con­

tinued to be occupied with reading and correcting the proofs of the

Histoire des animaux as if the academicians expected publication to

be resumed. Then in 1691 work on this project ceased. The last men­

tion of it which appears in the proces-verbaux for this time period

[10] P.V. , T. 11, 19 May 1685 and 16 January 1686.

[11] Johann Graesse, Trésor de livres rares et précieux, (Milan: Gorlich, 1950), V. 206-207.

[12] Cole, History of Comparative Anatomy, p. 397.

[13] Estât des ouvrages de 1'Académie des sciences et de ceux qui la composent, 7 aoust 1691, avec les gratifications qu'ils recevoient par an. BN Clairambault 566 fol. 251-252. 75 occurred on 30 May 1691: "M. du Vernay apportera mercredi la feuille pour continuer l'histoire des animaux." [14] Two weeks later, on 16

June 1691, Louvois died.

Why did Louvois support this particular endeavor, as he clearly did for a number of years? Louvois' brother, the Archbishop of

Rheims, may have had his own motives for promoting the publication of the Histoire des animaux, but it is probable that Louvois was motivated primarily by a desire to impress the king with a handsomely illustrated folio edition on natural history. Under Richelieu the

Imprimerie royale had been devoted to sumptuous editions befitting the tastes of a king, but after the Fronde this tradition disap­ peared. In 1661 Colbert revived the custom of preparing elegant, expensive volumes for Louis' pleasure. Although the Imprimerie roy­ ale sometimes published the works of members of the Académie des sci­ ences , its prime function in the late seventeenth century was to pub­ lish beautiful editions of works which glorified the campaigns and fêtes of Louis XIV. [15]

Hence the Imprimerie royale dealt with scientific works pri­ marily when they could be fitted into the framework of sumptuous edi­ tions for the pleasure of the king. The Bibliothèque nationale holds a manuscript inventory of works published by the Imprimerie. [16]

[14] P.V. , T. 13, 30 May 1691.

[15] Martin, Livre, Pouvoirs et Société, II, 672-673.

[16] Liste chronologique des editions de Louvre ou de 1'Imprimerie royale. BN FF n.a. 4653. 76 The notes on scientific works appearing in this list often include such remarks as "en grand papier" or "Grand in folio."

The first edition of the Mémoires pour servir ^ 1'histoire des animaux, which first appeared in 1671, was just such a work, as con­

temporary reports make clear:

I am assured from thence of a Booke wch yt Society hath lately printed in ye Louvre conteyning ye Anatomyes of ye Rarer Animals, and an exact dimension of ye globe wee tread upon; but yt is intended only as a present to princes and Benefactors. [17]

Volume II of the Mémoires appeared in 1676 in folio, and in another

edition which combined the two volumes. Alexander Pitfield

translated the two volumes and published them in English in 1687.

His preface to the English edition tells much the same story:

These famous Mémoires containing the Anatomical Description of Several Animals (and these all Exotic and scarce to be procured) together with very excellent observations thereon, are some of the first fruits and accurate perfor­ mances of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris. They were by them some time since so magnificiently as well as Curiously set forth in two Volumes that (as they seemed not to be designed foi common sale, so) they became presents from the king or Academy, to persons of the greatest Qual­ ity, and were thereby rendered unattainable by the ordinary Methods for other books. [18]

In sum, Louvois appears to have been motivated by a desire to con­

tinue this tradition of sumptuous editions of scientific works when

he encouraged the Académie des sciences to prepare a new volume of

[17] Bernard to Oldenburg, Oxford, 4 February 1671/2; in Henry Olden­ burg, Correspondence, (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1965- ), VIII, p. 523, No. 1887.

[18] Académie des sciences, Mémoires For £ Natural History of Animals, (N.P., 1687), p. i. the Histoire des animaux.

2. Astronomy

Turning to other fields of science, Louvois did not support work

in astronomy nearly as much as Colbert had done. Colbert after all

had been minister of the marine which included responsibilities for

the colonies and for overseas commerce. He favored a policy of

expanding the navy and merchant fleets, and of developing overseas

trading companies; thus there is an obvious basis for his interest in

astronomy as an aid to navigation. Louvois on the other hand was minister for the army and fortifications; he perceived the strength

of France to lie in her territorial position. Perhaps as a conse­

quence, his support of scientific research in astronomy was minimal.

From the foundation of the Acadanie, astronomy and astronomical

aids to navigation were among the foremost concerns of members of the

Académie. Foreign voyages and the Paris Observatory were both cen­

tral in the astronomical program of the Académie des sciences. For

example in October 1666, before the Académie was organized, the

astronomers who were to be incorporated into the new Académie were

planning to send one of their number to Madagascar to measure the

paralax of the sun and moon and to determine the island's longitude.

[19]

[19] R. HcKeon, "Un lettre de M. Thévènot sur les débuts de l'Académie royale des sciences," Revue d'histoire des sciences, XVIII (January/March 1965), 1-3. 78 This project was not carried out, but in March 1668 the Académie sent De la Voye, en elève of the Académie, with Admiral Beaufort of the Atlantic fleet to test Huygen's pendulum clock at sea. [20]

Because of inconclusive results. De la Voye was sent to Crete in 1669 to test the clock once more. [21] In the same year De la Haye, a mil­ itary commander, was planning a three-year cruise to Ceylon and the

Dutch East Indies and the Académie planned to send the same astrono­ mer, De la Voye, along to again test Huygen's clock. But at the last minute Colbert made a change in plans and sent Richer to Acadia in

1670 to test Huygen's clock and compare it with other devices for telling time at sea. [22]

Foreign voyages continued throughout Colbert's protectorship.

In 1671 the Académie des sciences sent Picard to Uranibourg in Den­ mark to determine the exact latitude and longitude of that locale in order to better use the observations made there by Tycho Brahe a cen­

tury earlier. In 1672 Jean Richer was sent by the Acadanie to Cay­

enne in South America to cetermine its latitude and longitude and the paralax of the planet Mars. [23]

Voyages to make astronomical observations occur again in the

[20] John S. Olmsted, "The Voyage of Jean Richer to Acadia in 1670 : a Study in the Relations of Science and Navigation under Colbert." American Philosophical Society, Proceedings, CIV, 618.

[21] Ibid., pp. 618-619.

[22] Ibid.. p. 620.

[23] John W. Olmsted, "The Scientific Expedition of Jean Richer to Cayenne (1672-1673)," Isis, XXXIV (1942), 123-124. 79 last few years of Colbert's protectorship. In 1681 Colbert was plan­ ning to send Varin and Des Hayes, both minor figures in the Académie des sciences, to the Canaries, but because of problems with pirates he sent them to Goree and Cape Verde instead. Goree is another island off the Guinea coast of West Africa. [24] In 1682 Picard was preparing to go to Alexandria, Egypt to establish its exact latitude and longitude, but his sudden death halted that project. [25]

Colbert had also asked the Académie des sciences to prepare a better map of France. For this purpose Cassini made plans to extend the Meridian of Paris both north and south. [26] Similar work had been undertaken somewhat earlier, in 1681 and 1682, by De la Hire, who travelled about France locating the positions of various towns with respect to the Meridian of Paris. [27] In February 1683, De la

Hire showed to the Académie a map of France with more accurate loca­ tions of her ports. [28] Only weeks before Colbert's death in Sep­ tember 1683, a team of astronomists including Cassini, Varin, Des

Hayes, Sedileau, Chazelles, and Perrin left Paris for the Midi in

order to extend the measurement of the Meridian of Paris southward.

[29]

[24] P.V. , T. 10, 17 January 1682.

[25] Olmsted, "The Scientific Expedition of Jean Richer," p. 123.

[26] P.V. , T. 9, 19 June 1683.

[27] J. D. Cassini to Philippe De la Hire, 6 November 1681 and 9 November 1682. Bibliothë'que de l'Observatoire de Paris, Dl.ll.

[28] P.V., T. 11, 23 February 1682.

[29] P.V., T. 11, 7 August 1683. 80 The history of these later expeditions has yet to be investi­ gated in the detailed manner that Olmsted has provided for the ear­ lier scientific expeditions. A good study would help one understand the events which took place at Colbert's death. Varin and Des Hayes had completed their project, but the astronomers sent out to extend the Meridian had not. The project of extending the Meridian of Paris was halted in midstream when Louvois became protector of the Académie in September 1682. [30] Two months later, in November, Cassini made a report to the Académie on the work which had been completed on the extension of the Meridian, [31] and in March of the following year the proces-verbaux records that :

Cassini a fait son rapport de 1'entretien qu'il a eu 'hier avec M. de Louvois pour continuer le travaille com­ mence pour tirer une ligne méridienne a travers la France. [32]

The content of Cassini's interview with Louvois is not reported, but the project is not mentioned again in the proces-verbaux, which indi­ cates that work was not resumed. As far as can be determined by the negative evidence of the proces-verbaux, royally sponsored foreign voyages for other scientific purposes by members of the Académie also came to a halt at Colbert's death.

The quantitative evidence provided by the numbers of scientific presentations recorded in the procés-verbaux indicates that a decline

[30] Justell to Acton, n .d., R.S. LBC IX, 37-38.

[31] P.V., T. 11, 20 November 1683.

[32] P. V . , T. 11,4 March 1684. 81

occurred in the number of presentations in astronomy after Louvois

became protector of the Académie in 1683. A year-by-year review of

presentations in astronomy does not reveal, however, the dramatic

change that was observed in anatomy and natural history in 1684/85.

[33] The contrast is clear from a comparison of Figure 1, which con­

cerns anatomy and natural history, and Figure 2, on astronomy. In

astronomy one finds a gradual decline beginning in 1685 and lasting until 1692, the year in which Pontchartrain assumed the protector­

ship. In that year there is a sharp increase in astronomical presen­

tations, as though the astronomers saw new possibilities for support

for their work under a new regime.

For several years under Louvois' protectorship, the astronomical work of the Académie was sustained by reports from the Jesuit fathers

in China and Siam. Cassini also carried on a fairly active

correspondance with other astronomers in Europe. He worked on a

number of treatises and made daily observations at the Paris Observa­

tory. After 1688, when the Observations physiques et mathématiques

pour servir a l'histoire naturelle ^ ^ ^ a perfection de l'astronomie

et de la géographie, envoyées de Siam à l'Académie royale des Sci­

ences à Paris par les peres jésuites . . . was published, the work

in astronomy fell to its lowest level for the entire 24-year period I

have examined.

Although astronomical work declined, an interest was still

there. At the first meeting of the Académie after Louvois' death and

[33] See Figure 2. Figure 2. Number of Scientific Presentations in Aatroncray by Protector and by Year Number of Scientific Presentations made by Members of the Académie in Astronomy by Year and by Protector

Protector

Colbert Louvois Pontchartrain

Ihmber of Number of Year Number of Presentations Presentations Presentations

1676 16 1684 30 1692 28

1677 31 1685 24 1693 30

1678 33 1686 22 1694 23

1679 29 1687 18 1695 14

1680 15 1688 12 1696 17

1681 23 1689 7 1697 19

1682 25 1690 9 1698 14

1683 25 1691 10 1699 25

Total 207 Total 130 Total 170 84 the appointment of Pontchartrain as protector, Cassini read a mémoire to those assembled:

Cassini apporta un projet pour la continuation de la méridienne, et pour les observations des longitudes dans les different lieux de la terre pour la perfection de la géographie et de la navigation. [34]

Such projects had not been proposed before the Académie in the preceeding eight years.

Just as Louvois failed to support astronomical and geodetic research by the Académie, he also failed to underwrite astronomical publications. At the time of Colbert's death the astronomers were busily preparing two works for publication, the manuscripts of Tycho

Brahe and an account of the voyages undertaken by the astronomers of the Académie. What became of these projects under Louvois?

The project of publishing Brahe's manuscripts has a long and interesting history. In 1671 Jean Picard was sent to Uranibourg to determine its exact latitude and longitude with respect to Paris.

With this knowledge it would have been possible to make use of

Brahe's astronomical observations which had been collected over a lifetime at Uranibourg and which were the most accurate in existence at this time, some seventy years after Brahe's death in 1601. There had been a German edition of Brahe's observations, but only for the years 1581 to 1601, leaving those for 1563 to 1580 unpublished. This edition also contained many errors. Sometime around 1660 the Brahe manuscripts had come into the possession of the Royal Library of

[34] P.V., T. 13, 1 September 1691. 85 Denmark, and Erasme Bartholin began preparations for publishing them.

When Picard arrived in Denmark he discovered, however, that the plans

for a Danish edition to be edited by Bartholin had been dropped. [35]

In the same year, 1671, Picard wrote a letter to Carcavi sug­

gesting that perhaps the king would like to publish Brahe's

manuscripts. Carcavi was greatly excited by the idea and pressed

Colbert to undertake the project. [36] The project must have been

accepted, because Picard returned to Paris with the manuscripts.

There were many interruptions in the preparation of the manuscripts for publication, but by 1680 the project was finally

nearing completion. The proces-verbaux of the Académie des sciences

records the following:

Sur ce que Mr Perrault le contrôleur des bastimens a dit a la Compagnie de la Part de Monseigneur Colbert qu'on deli- berast si les manuscripts de Tycho Brahe que Messieurs Picard et Romer ont apporte de Dannemarc meritoient d'estre imprimer, qu'on y travaillest incessament. La Compagnie a este d'avis que l'ouvrage meritoit d'estre imprime comme contenant les observations de Tycho, et cela d'autant plus cet ouvrage a este imprime en Allemagne sur une faute copie, et cet plein de fautes. On a arreste que l'ouvrage seroit imprime en un ou deux volumes in folio. Mr Picard s'est charge d'impression. [37]

Having received Colbert's approval, printing of the first volume

began in 1681. Ninety-six pages were completed when the printing

[35] Joseph-Nicolas Delisle, "Collection d'observations astronomiques pour I'usage de 1'Académie," BN FF na 5156 fol. 63-64V.

[36] Cassini to Picard, 8 October 1671, Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris, A4.2.

[37] P.V. , T. 9, 7 December 1680. 86 suddenly ceased. The explantory note found next to the entry for

Brahe's Thesaurus observatlonum astronomicarum in the bibliography of the imprints of the Imprimerie royale attributes this cessation to the deaths of Colbert and Picard. [38] The project was to be left unfinished under both Louvois and Pontchartrain.

Another publishing project was apparently being formulated by the astronomers of the Académie late in Colbert's administration, but no formal recommendation had gone to Colbert before his death. This was the publication of an account of the scientific voyages sponsored by the Académie. As early as 1677 Cassini and Picard were charged with the publication of the voyages of Richer. [39] In 1683 De la

Hire read a treatise on the determination of latitude and longitude in the Antibes, Toulon, and Lyon to which the secretary of the

Académie added the remark, "qu'il fera imprimer avec les relations des autres voyages." [40]

Louvois showed no real objections to the publication of an account of the voyages of the Académie, but he did not give it the same strong endorsement which he had given to the Histoire des animaux prior to its abrupt halt in 1688. Louvois granted permission to procédé with the editorial work on an edition of the voyages, but this publication had difficulties from the start. Whether due to

[38] Liste chronologique des editions du Louvre ou de 1'Imprimerie royale, BN FF na 4653 fol. 51.

[39] P.V., T. 7, 14 August 1677.

[40] P.V., T. 10, 23 January 1683. 87

disagreements within the Académie or from external objections is not

certain. On 12 February 1684 Philippe de la Hire read an outline for

a preface to the work, [41] but at the very next meeting the status

of the project became confused:

Mr I'Abbe de I'Annion a dit que Mr de la Chapelle ne peu­ vent travailler a un preface generale, on deliberast a qui on la donnerait a faire. On a arreste que Mess. Cassini et de la Hire conferercient ensemble de ce qui devait entrer dans la preface. [42]

De la Chapelle must have been solicited to prepare the preface to the work, perhaps out of deference to his position as premier commis to

Louvois and to his supposed influence with the protector although he

actually had little influence with Louvois, as noted in Chapter One.

His rejection of the honor may reflect lack of time or lack of

interest in the project. One may suggest, however, that if Louvois

had given enthusiastic support to this publication. De la Chapelle

would be doing his best to help in the effort.

A few months later the proces-verbaux records

M. Blondel ayant fait rapport de l'Examen qu'il a fait de la preface a dit qu'il ne falloit rien supprimer de la matière, mais qu'il falloit seulement la traiter un peu plus succinctement. [43]

Since Blondel, being a mathematician, would be unlikely to be examin­

ing the preface to the Histoire des animaux, we must assume this has

reference to the voyages. Work on this project continued for another

[41] P.V., T. 11, 12 February 1684.

[42] P.V., T. 11, 16 February 1684.

[43] P.V., T. 11, 9 December 1684. six months, but once again it failed to reach fruition. In June of

1685 the proces-verbaux notes, "on a leu une partie de la preface sur les voyages;" [44] and a month later we find that "on a continue la lecture de la preface qu'on doit mettre au commencement des voyages."

[45]

After this we hear practically no mention of a publication on the voyages of the Académie. Both Cassini and De la Hire turned to other publishing projects. In July 1685 Cassini announced his inten­ tion to publish some of his own works;

Mr Cassini a promis de faire imprimer un volume de ses ouvrages astronomiques et il mettra a la teste ce preface de l'histoire de l'Astronomie. [46]

De la Hire turned to the publication of manuscripts which had fallen into his possession by the death of several academicians:

Mr de la Hire a leu un mémoire pour presenter a M. de Louvois touchant plusieurs ouvrages que quelqu'une de 1'Académie ont laisse et qui meritoit d'estre imprime. [47]

Louvois apparently preferred the idea of publishing the works of individual members on astronomy and mathematics to the publication on a grand scale of a volume on the voyages of the Académie, as he answered De la Hire's proposal positively :

II [Henri de la Chapelle] a aussi dit de la part de mondit

[44] P.V., T. 11, 16 June 1685.

[45] P.V., T. 11, 14 July 1685.

[46] P .V., T. 11, 18 July 1685.

[47] P.V., T. 11, 17 November 1685. 89 Seigneur [Louvois], qu'il etoit d'avis qu'on imprimast plusieurs petits ouvrages des particuliers de 1'Académie, tant de ceux qui sont mort que de ceux qui sont vivant. [48]

Over the next few years Cassini composed a number of short treatises on astronomy which were printed by the Imprimerie royale but were not published, that is, did not appear for public sale.

Then in 1689/90 orders were issued to the Imprimerie royale to stop all printing of works destined to be parts of the work on the voyages of the Académie, that is, on Cassini's essays, just as had been done in the case of the Histoire des animaux. [49] In 1693, after Louvois' death, these works by Cassini were bound with some other essays on astronomy and issued as the Recueil d'observations faites en plusieurs voyages par ordre de Sa Majesté pour perfectionner

1'astronomie et la géographie.

It can be demonstrated that although he never gave it strong support, Louvois was still considering a publication on the voyages of the A c a d ^ i e in late 1684. Upon assuming the surintendance des bâtiments Louvois discovered that the Imprimerie royale had a great stock of unsold books which he considered useless. He therefore decreed that they be sold ^ gros at an auction to be held on 22 Sep­ tember 1684. [50] The highest bid which could be obtained from the booksellers of Paris was 60,000 If. At this point Sebastien

[48] P.V., T. 11, 12 December 1685.

[49] Estât des ouvrages de l'Académie, BN Clairambault 566 fol. 251- 252.

[50] Pardevant les Notaires gardemottes du Roy au Chateles de Paris . . . BN FF n.a. 5843, fol. 1. 90 Cramoisy, the Imprimeur royale, offered 61,000 K' to buy them on his own account, to which the king agreed.

Ultimately Cramoisy paid only 35,465 JdT". The remainder of his bid was deducted for the following purposes. 1) A debt of 10,097 which the king owed to Cramoisy was cancelled. This happened to be the exact amount reported as the cost for printing that part of Tycho

Brahe's manuscripts which the Imprimerie royale had completed. [51]

From this information we can gather that Colbert was unable to pay cash for the publication of the Brahe manuscripts and had had to ask

Cramoisy to undertake the work on credit. Louvois was apparently unwilling to continue its publication on a deficit basis. 2) The king wanted a credit of 20,000 M with Cramoisy for the publication of several books. The two specifically mentioned in the notary's account were the Histoire des animaux and the Voyages de l'Académie des sciences. Here we have proof that a publication on the voyages had been tentatively funded in 1684. 3) The king also wished to reserve 16 bundles of books to be used as he please; for his he credited Cramoisy with 5,368 jrl". [52]

We may note that Louvois could have given further credit to

Cramoisy from the proceeds of the sale of the books to continue the work on Brahe's manuscripts, had the king so desired. Clearly this project was considered less important than the Histoire des animaux and the Voyages de 1'Académie des sciences, which were both intended

[51] Ibid.

[52] Ibid. 91 to appear in sumptuous editions. Had Colbert overseen the sale of books, he could probably have convinced the king to finance the Brahe project with credits from the sale.

3. Mechanics and Mathematics

The decline in the number of scientific presentations on mathematics and mechanics made at the meetings of the Académie in

1684 was just as precipitous as had been the increase in scientific presentations in anatomy and natural history. [53] They stayed at this low level throughout the protectorship of the marquis de Louvois and made a strong resurgence in the year of his death.

Although the Académie des sciences lost a few of its more able mathematicians and physicists at this time, this in itself does not

explain the low level of productivity in these areas. Both Huygens

and Roeraer left the Académie in the early 1680's; Harriot died in

1684 and Blondel died in 1686. This left Philippe de la Hire, but he

did not remain the sole mathematician for long. In 1685 Louvois

appoined Michel Rolle and in 1688 Varignon also joined the ranks of

the academicians. Rolle had been a tutor to the Abbe Camille

Louvois, son of the protector, and had served Louvois briefly in the

administration of the army. [54] What is striking is that both of

these mathematicians participated only slightly in the meetings of

the Académie during the 1680's, but suddenly became very active when

[53] See Figure 3.

[54] Jean Itard, "Michel Rolle," Dictionary of Scientific Biography, XI, 512. ho

1676 77

figure 3. Number of Scientific Presentations in Mathematics and Mechanics by Protector and by Year l'îumber of Scientific Presentations na.de by Members of the Académie in Mathematics and Mechanics by Year and by Protector

Protector

Colbert Louvois Pontchartrain

Year Number of Year Number of Year Number of Presentations Presentations Presentations

1676 9 1684 9 1692 26

1677 10 1685 7 1693 25

1678 18 1686 0 1694 8

1679 9 1687 0 1695 39

1680 8 1688 2 1696 23

1681 25 1689 4 1697 26

1682 18 1690 1 1698 16

1683 27 1691 14 1699 20

Total 124 Total 37 Total 183 Number of Scientific Presentations made by Rolle and by Varignon under the Protectorships of Louvois and Pontchartrain

Protector

Louvois Pontchartrain

Presentations iiade by Rolle 2^ 18

Presentations made by 13^ 97 Varignon

' Rolle vra.s a member for seven of the eight years of Louvois' Protectorship.

Varignon was a member for four of the eight years of Louvois' protectorship. 95

Pontchartrain succeeded Louvois as protector. [55] Neither can we attribute the nearly total eclipse of mechanics and mathematics in the Académie to a declining interest in these subjects. It need only be recalled that the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century was founded on the rapid progress of these subjects. This is con­ firmed when we look at the titles of books published by the indivi­ dual academicians between 1684 and 1691. [56] Most were in the areas of astronomy, mechanics, and mathematics.

The most puzzling aspect of this decline of productivity in mathematics and mechanics is that the marquis de Louvois gained a reputation among science historians because of his insistance that the activities of the Académie have a practical value for the state.

Two examples often cited in support of this contention are the speech made to the Académie des sciences on 30 January 1686, by Louvois' commis, Henri Bessie, Sieur de la Chapelle, [57] and also the advice requested of the Académie on the construction of an aquaduct to bring water from the Eure River to Versailles. [58] Joseph Bertrand has cited Louvois' alleged narrow-minded preoccupation with practical research as the chief cause for the decline of the Académie. [59]

Surely if Louvois stressed practicality to this degree, one would

[55] See Table 11.

[56] See Appendix C,

[57] See Appendix A for full text.

[58] P.V., T. 11, 21 March 1685.

[59] Bertrand, L'Académie des sciences, pp. 40-42. 96 expect an increased rather than decreased emphasis on both mathemati­ cal and applied mechanics in the Académie. The data just presented contradict such a proposition. Let us examine a few more points.

First we should set the record straight on the matter of requests for technical advice from the Académie. Colbert undoubtedly made more such requests than did Louvois, but this does not seem to have impeded the academicians' activities in pure research. The academicians themselves seem to have taken great delight in their role as technical advisors. The expeditions arranged by Colbert to test Huygens' marine clock [60] attest not only to his interest in practical benefits of science but to the academicians' interest in geodetic matters. In this instance the same research activities offered benefits for both science and the nation. Colbert engaged the labors of the Académie in two other projects of noteworthy signi­ ficance. In the early 1680's [61] he obtained their assistance in a project to bring water to Versailles. [62] In 1668 Colbert also charged the Académie to make a study of mineral waters to determine their medicinal value. [63]

Colbert's views on mercantile policy have been traced in great detail, [64] but the views of the marquis de Louvois on this subject

[60] See p. 78 above.

[61] P.V., T. 10, 21 April 1683.

[62] Jules Guiffrey, e d., Comptes des B'atiments du Roi sous le régne de Louis X I V . (Paris: Imprimerie national), I, 24 January 1681, Column 1342.

[63] BN FF n.a. 5133 Fol. 30.

C.6AJ See Cole, Colbert and a Century of French Mercantilism. 97 have only been broached indirectly. It is not in fact clear that he had any consistant policy, even though as surintendent des bâtiments he was also ordinateur des arts et manufactures. Charles Cole has pointed out that Louvois tended to support existing industry in

France rather than encourgaging new industries. [65] In contrast Col­ bert showed a clearcut concern for innovation in arts and industries in both his industrial policy and in his dealing with the Acadanie des sciences ;

M Perrault a propose de la part de M Colbert qu'il souhait- toit qu'on travaillast a un traite de mechanique qui fust utile aux ingénieurs, on a arreste que M Roverval apportera Samady son traite des mechaniques et on résoudra après la desposition de l'ouvrage. [66]

This project was approached in two ways. Blondel, Huygens,

Mariette and Picard were to undertake a theoretical treatise on the best principles by which machines operate, while Buot was to create a catalog of machines with descriptions of how they operated. Buot was quite diligent in his efforts, but work on the catalog stopped with his death in the same year. The theoretical treatise moved slowly; it was published twenty years later by Philippe de la Hire as Traite de mécanique, ou 1'on explique tout ce qui est nécessaire dans la pratique des arts et les propriétés des corps pesants, lesquelles ont un plus grand usage dans la physique (Paris, 1695, Jean Annison).

[67] As in his attempt to find a means to determine longitude at sea.

[65] Cole, French Mercantilism, 1683-1699, p. 142.

[66] P.V., T. 8, 15 May 1675.

[SjJ Claire Salomon-Bayet, "Un préambule théorique a une académie des 98 so Colbert's attempt to create a science of machines came to naught, at least in his lifetime.

■Colbert's son, Ormois due de Blainville, used a different tac­ tique. In the summer of 1683, when he was signing for his father on the accounts of the surintendance des bâtiments, Ormois backed an exposition of models of machines which was to be independent of the

Académie des sciences. A short catalog was printed to explain the machines on display, under the title Explication des modèles des machines et forces mouvants que 1'on expose ^ Paris dans la rue de la

Harpe, vis a^ vis Saint Cosme. An exposition was a novel way to pro­ mote industrial innovation, certainly different from the approach used by Colbert with the Académie. As the preface of the catalog stated, "et qui ne sont pas d'humeur d'aller de Province en Province s'en instruire sur les lieux. . ."

Arthur Birembaut has studied this small event in the history of technology and found that no one mentions it in either diaries or journals, the Journal des sçavans and the Mercure galant included.

He explains this strange silence about such a novel event by turning to the political sphere. Louvois assumed control of the Surinten­

dance des bâtiments in September of 1683, and Birembaut believes he

cancelled the affair. [68] Only the circumstantial evidence of the

arts," Revue d'histoire des sciences, XXIII (July/September 1970), 230-231.

[68] Arthur Birembaut, "L'Exposition des modèles de machines a" Paris en 1683," Revue d'histoire des sciences XX (April/June 1967), 141-158. 99 timing of the exposition and of Louvois' rise to the surintendance support this assertion. Nevertheless his analysis adds weight to what is definitely known about Louvois' indifference to progress in mechanics and mathematics and Louvois' apparent lack of any policy on arts and manufactures.

Why was Louvois indifferent to the work of the Académie des sci­ ences in mechanics and mathematics? Was it because Colbert had failed to derive immediate practical benefits from the Académie, or was it due to Louvois' conservative policy on industry? Regardless of the explanation, Louvois' attitude toward this area of science must be made consistant with his well-documented directives that the work of Académie be useful. As Hirshfield has pointed out, the mathematical section of the Académie carried out more government pro­

jects than did the biological section, [69] which nevertheless seems

to have received more support from Louvois.

Historians sometimes mistakenly interpret the utterances of pol­

itical figures as general policy, when in fact a given remark may

stem from a specific incident or problem and not have been intended

as a general statement. This seems to have been the case with

Louvois' famous emphasis on practical research for the Académie des

sciences. When Joseph Bertrand quoted the speech in which De la

Chapelle called on the academicians to be practical in their

research, he reproduced in his Académie des sciences et les académi­

ciens de 1666 ^ 1793 only the first few lines of what actually

[69] Hirshfield, "The Acadènie Royale des Sciences," p. 119. 100 appears in the procès-verbaux. Shortened in this way, it has the appearance of a general policy. [70]

A similar statement was made by the Abbe Gallois and Blondel as a statement of general policy when Louvois first assumed the role of protector:

Mess I'Abbe Gallois et Blondel ont dit que l'intention de M de Louvois estoit qu'on travaillast particulièrement aux matiers qui peuvent estre utile au public et contribuer a la Gloire du Roy. [71]

There is no touch of vehemence or disapproval in this statement. It is almost a platitude that could have come from Colbert or any member of the Académie.

In contrast let us look at the full statement made by De la

Chapelle on 30 January 1686. [72] All of the examples found in the speech refer to the shortcomings of the work done in the chemical laboratory. Arthur Birembaut is the only other historian to note that Louvois' quarrel was with the work of the laboratory, not with

the entire Académie. [73] He too reproduced the full speech.

This observation is sustained not only by the text of the speech but by the reaction of the academicians. In the three months follow­

ing De la Chapelle's speech several treatises were presented on the

[70] See above p. 14.

[71] P.V. T. 11, 17 November 1683.

[72] See Appendix A for complete text.

[73] Birembaut, "Le Caractère originaux," p. 18. methodology and the overall program in chemistry:

M de la Chapelle a presente a la Compagnie un mémoire pour travailler a la Chymie. [74]

M Borel a leu un mémoire pour traviller a la Chymie. [75]

M Dodart a commence a lire ses mémoires touchant le tra­ vaille qu'on peut faire dans la Chymie. [76]

Le Secretaire de 1'Académie a mis entre les mains de mon­ sieur de la Chapelle un mémoire des travaux qu'on peut entreprendre dans la Chymie. [77]

M Borel a leu son mémoire pour choisir les operations chy- miques. [78]

The sudden profusion of programmatic and methodological treatises on chemistry was not matched in other subjects. In one case De la

Chapelle, though not a chemist, presented such a mémoire; one may wonder whether it was given to him by someone from outside the

Académie. In another case the secretary of the Académie gave such a

treatise to De la Chapelle, presumably to be returned to Louvois for

comment and approval.

Is it more reasonable to assume that Louvois was reacting to

specific provocation in this incident rather than to any need for a

government policy on the aims and methods of chemistry? De la

Chapelle read this speech on 30 January 1686, shorthly after the

[74] P.V. , T. 11, 2 March 1686.

[75] P.V., T. 11, 13 March 1686.

[76] P.V., T. 11, 17 April 1686.

[77] P.V. T. 11, 3 April 1686.

[78] P .V., T. 11, 6 April 1686. 102 onset of the major illness of Louis XIV's life. Just two weeks ear­ lier, on 15 January, the king had first complained of a small fis- tual. [79] Rousset has written the following about Louvois' role in the king's illness:

Personne n'a été plus avant que Louvois dans la confiance de ce mal. Désireux de contribuer, pour sa part au soulagement du roi, il se fit médecin, pour ainsi dire, tout au moins auxiliaire des médecins. [80]

As Rousset points out, Louvois was quite agitated, seeking advice both from doctors and from proponents of home remedies. He probably also turned to the Académie des sciences only to find it occupied with "simple curiosities."

As we noted above, [81] members of the Académie had undertaken a study of the medicinal value of various mineral waters for Colbert in

1668. In 1675 Samuel Cottereau du Clos, a chemist from the Académie, published his Observations sur les eaux minérales de plusieurs pro­ vinces de France, faites en l'Académie royale des sciences en l'année

1670 et 1671 par le sieur de Clos (Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1675).

From such work under DuClos, the work of the laboratory under Claude

Bourdelin had become almost exclusively devoted to the fractional distillation of botanical specimens. [82] The incident of the king's

[79] C. D. O'Malley, "The Medical History of Louis XIV: Intimations of Mortality." In John C. Rule, ed., Louis XIV and the Craft of Kingship (Columbus, Ohio State University Press, 1969), p. 148.

[80] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 396.

[81] See p. 96.

[82] BN FF n.a. 5133-5146. 103 illness resulted in a challenge to this focus. De la Chapelle made special reference to DuClos' work in his speech of 30 January 1686.

In February 1686 several physicians recommended the waters at

Bareves as a remedy for the king's fistula. They conviced Louvois to test the medical possibilities of this product. [83] De la Chapelle became involved in this effort, for the procès-verbaux of the

Académie records

M de la Chapelle ayant envoya de l'eau de Basuile elle s'est trouve fort limpide estant melee avec l'eau Mereu- vielle. [84]

This note has been lined out in the procès-verbaux. In the end,

Louvois entrusted a test of the waters not to the Academia but to the surgeon, Gervais; he sent Gervais to Bareges with several malades on whom to test the curative powers of the waters. [85]

In this context, the speech made by De la Chapelle on 30 January

1686, takes on a different significance. Most of the examples of

"useful research" given by De la Chapelle in his speech to the

Académie on 30 January 1686 refer to the medicinal effects of various chemical substances. Even the mention of coffee is in reference to its medicinal qualities. In sum, this speech cannot be taken as the expression of a policy favoring applied or practical research con­ sistently applied by Louvois. The specific circumstances which produced

[83] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 397.

[84] P.V., T. 11, 27 February 1686.

[85] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois, III, 397-98. 104 the speech, as well as the pattern of support and non-support

for specific areas of science within the Académie des sciences which

we have documented here, support this conclusion. Clearly a non­

existent policy cannot be considered the real cause of decline in the

scientific activity of the Académie under Louvois. The decline is

instead a sympton of an underlying indifference to scientific matters

in general and the affairs of the Académie in particular on the part

of Louvois.

Part B. The Decline of Internal Cohesion Under Louvois

The decline of institutional cohesion within the Académie as measured by the decline in collective decisions made by this body

during Louvois' protectorship offers circumstantial evidence that the

administrative style of Louvois and the lack of support for the

Académie by this minister may have aided this decline. The decline

in collective research and publication noticed by previous historians

of the Académie is but the most visible aspect of a more general

malaise in institutional integrity.

Viewed as simply the retreat of collective research, it is easy

to accept Roger Hahn's opinion that the academicians came to see the

creative act of discovery as essentially a private affair, inaccessi-

able to collective effort. But when viewed as one facet of a general

decline in collective decisions made in all areas of concern to the

Académie, then a reassessment of the cause seems in order. It is one

matter to attribute the abandonment of collective research to a simple ficult to explain the decline of collective decision making in all areas by this reasoning.

In order to understand how the collective functions of the

Acadmnie could be affected by ministerial neglect and indifference, we need to examine the circumstances under which the Academic func­

tioned for the first thirty years of its existence. Three facts are

salient to this appraisal;

1. Despite the ideal of collegiality which opposed factional and

scholastic dispute in the Académie, internal conflict did arise.

2. The Académie was created without benefit of a formal royal

decree, nor did it have fixed rules to govern daily operations.

3. The first protector of the Académie, J. B. Colbert, used his own

authority to settle disputes in the Académie. In a sense, his

authority provided the constitutional framework within which the

Académie was able to act as a collective body which could make and

enforce decisions.

When Soubier wrote to Colbert in 1663 to suggest that the king

might wish to provide financial support for a group of scientists, he

had one major complaint about the Montmor Académie, of which he was

then secretary. This was the bitter disputes between members of dif­

ferent philosophic schools. Soubier wished to see a group of scho­

lars created which would engage in observation and avoid philosophic 106 dispute. As the only patron wealthy enough to supply the equipment

necessary for observation, Soubier sought the support of the king.

[86]

Colbert was surely not insensitive to the appeal of dispas­

sionate observation. As Suzanne Delorme says of the period, "Vers le milieu du siecle les esprits étaient plus préoccupées d'agitation pol­

itiques que d'activités scientifques, et Montmor ne put y échapper

entièrement." [87] Indeed Montmor had allied with Parlement against

the king. Colbert himself was prosecuting the trial of Fouquct, a

move opposed by many of the writers and intellectuals of the day.

Hence a call for observation, rather than philosophic debate and pol-

icital activism, could be expected to appeal to Colbert.

Fontenelle expressed this as the ideal by which the meetings of

the Académie des sciences were conducted when he said:

Rien ne peut plus contribuer ^ l'avancement des Sciences, que l'émulation entre les Savans, mais renfermée dans de certaines bornes. C'est pourquoi l'on convint de donner aux Conferences Académiques une forme bien différent des exercises publiques de Philosophie, ou il n'est pas ques­ tion d'éclaircir la vérité, mais seulement de n'etre pas réduit a"se taire. Ici, l'on voulut que tout fût simple, tranquille, sans ostentation d'espirt ni de science, que personne ne se crut engagé a avoir raison, et que l'on fût toujours en état de céder sans honte: surtout qu'aucune système ne dominât dans l'Académie à' 1'exclusion des autres, et qu'on laissât toujours toutes les portes ouvertes a la Vérité. [88]

[86] Suzanne Delorme "Un Cartésien ami de Gassendi: Henri-Louis Habert de Montmor," Revue d'histoire des sciences XXVII (1974)

[87] Ibid., p. 69.

[88] Académie des sciences. Histoire de 1 'Académie royale des science 107

However, there were few formal provisions for meeting this ideal state of affairs within the Académie. The only formal rule of the

Académie was stated at its first meeting on 22 December 1666, regard­ ing the schedule of meetings :

Ce 22 Décembre 1666 il a este arreste dans la Compagnie qu'elle s'assemblera deux fois la semain, le Mecredy et le Samedy, que l'un de ces deux jours, scavoir le mercredy on traitera des mathématiques, le samedy on travillera a la physique. Comme il y a une grande liaison entre ces sci­ ences , on a juge a propos que la Compagnie ne se partage point, et que tous se trouvent a 1'assembles les mesmes jours. [89]

There were no rules for the appointment of new members or the exclu­ sion of old members. No provisions were made for the creation of officers nor were there any rules of order for conducting meetings.

There were no norms for the proper conduct of members towards their fellow academicians.

The appointment of members proceeded by Colbert's authority, as did the occasional dismissal or exclusion of a member. Colbert apppointed a permanent secretary on his own authority, but created no other officers. One scholar, Trevor McClaughlin, has tried to show that an unofficial constitution for the Académie des sciences did exist. This is a proposal for a future academy, found in Huygen's papers and annotated in Colbert's hand, entitled "Ebouche du projet de ce que doit faire la Compagnie a l'avenir." [90] It is quite

depuis son établissement en 1666 jusqu'en 1686, p. 11.

[89] P.V., T. I, 22 December 1666.

[90] Trevor McClaughlin, "Sur les rapports entre la Compagnie 108 possible that some of the principles outline in the "Ebouche" were

adopted by the Academic des sciences, but it was not strictly adhered

to. For instance, it called for a president "pour conduire les

assemblées et y faire garder la bienseance et le silence, a laquelle

on déférera sans aucune opposition, et sans la permission de laquelle

on ne pourra rien faire n'y parler d'aucune chose." [91] But the

Academic in fact had no president for many years.

It is difficult to judge from available records just how the

early meetings of the Académie were conducted. On routine occasions,

it appears that DuHamel, the permanent secretary, may have presided.

At other times the Abbe Gallois, who was also secretary for two years

in DuHamel's absence [1668-1669], may have conducted meetings. Car-

cavi may also have presided at times. In any case the meetings seem

to have run rather smoothly, with no clear need for a presiding off­

icer, to judge from a perusal of the procès-verbaux. Open disagree­

ment is found only occasionally in this record, and philosophic

disputes are never encountered.

It would be a simple matter to argue that the Académie, founded

as it was on a philosophy of observation and self-restraint, needed

no formal rules. But the lack of any formal organization probably

reflects instead the low profile required by the company in its first

years of existence. Recall that the Académie des sciences was

Thevenot et l'Académie des sciences," Revue d'histoire de sci­ ence, XXVIII (July 1975) 235-242.

[91] Ibid., p. 237. 109 created at the end of 1666, some six or nine months after Colbert's

ill-fated attempt to create an Academia generale. Based on the

design of Charles Perrault, [92] the proposed General Academy was to

include men of letters, historians, and philosophers as well as

mathematicians. As pointed out in Chapter Two above, this General

Academy was opposed by the established scholarly bodies which saw in

it a rival to their own prerogatives, and it lasted only a few months. [93] These enemies included the Académie française, the Paris

Faculty of Medicine, and the Theological faculty of the Sorbonne.

[94]

As Fontenelle tells it, the Académie des sciences was formed

from the mathematicians of the abortive General Academy, who contin­

ued to make astronomical observations at the Bibliothèque royale

through the summer and fall of 1666. [95] But having once burned his

fingers, Colbert moved slowly in the creation of another academy. On

16 October 1666, Melchisedech Thevenot wrote the following to Prince

Leopold;

[92] Note de Charles Perrault a" Colbert pour 1'establissement d'une Académie generale, in Colbert, Lettres, V. 512.

[93] Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences depuis son établissement, p. 5.

[94] Charles Perrault, Mémoires de ma vie (Paris: Renouard, 1909), p. 48; Hahn, Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, pp. 52-53; Har- court Brown, Scientific Organizations in Seventeenth Century France (1620-1680) (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1934) pp. 147-148.

[95] Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences depuis son établissement, p. 5. Il n'est pas encore sorti de declaration ouverte du roi en faveur de 1'Académie et on ne sait pas non plus s'il lui permet d'en prendre le nom d'Académie. [96]

Indeed not until 5 February 1672, was the Compagnie referred to in the Journal des sçavans as the Académie royale des sciences. Prior

to this date they were simply designated as "the pensioners of the king who meet in the royal library." [97] Such secrecy sometimes raised public suspicions as to what transpired at these meetings.

Given the low profile during these early years, which appears to be a deliberate policy on the part of Colbert designed to avoid confronta­

tion with established interest groups, it is not surprising that the

Académie had no founding charter.

Did the Académie meet the ideal described by Fontenelle when he

said "l'on voulut que tout fut simple, tranqille, sans ostentation d'esprit ni de science, . . .?" Compared to the academic and theolog­

ical disputes of the day, the rather modest disagreements within the

Académie were no doubt mild stuff. But disagree they did. Differ­

ences of personality were more important than differences of scien­

tific opinion in much of the rivalry which developed within the

Académie.

Christiaan Huygens observed many of the squabbles of the

Académie and was often at the center of dispute. In 1670 he summoned

[96] Quoted from Robert McKeon, "Une lettre de Melchisédech Thévènot sur les débuts de l'Académie royale des sciences," Revue d'histoire des sciences, XVIII (January/March 1965) 1-3.

[97] Hirshfield, "The Académie Royale des Sciences (1666-1683), p. 21. Ill Francis Vernon to his sickbed in order to deliver to him a packet of papers on motion. He instructed Vernon to deliver the packet to the

Royal Society of London in the event of his death. Huygens then pro­

ceded to eulogize the Royal Society by way of an invidious comparison with the Académie, which I shall cite at length:

Then hee fell into a discourse concerning the Royal Society in England wich hee said was an assembly of the Choisest Witts in Christendoms & of the finest Parts. . . . because hee judged the Seat of Science to bee fixed there & that the members of it did embrace & promote Philosophy not for interest, not through ambition or a vanity of excelling others not through fancy or a variable curiosity, butt out of naturall principles of generosity, inclination to learn­ ing & a sincere respect & love for the truth, which made him judge that their constitution would bee therefore more durable . . .

Whereas hee said hee did foresee the dissolution of this académie because it was mixt with tinctures of Envry because it was supported upon suppositions of profitt . . . . [98]

Several authors have suggested that Huygens may have come to

Paris with the expectation that he was to become president of the newly formed Académie. Such an interpretation is found even in the

observations of his contemporaries. Moray wrote in 1666 that "le Roy de France I'a convie d'aller demeurer a Paris pour y "établir une académie pour la Philosophie naturelle comme la société royale." [99]

Bouillard makes a similar assumption in a letter to

Hevelius; "Omnium caput est Illustrissimus Christiaan Huygens qui ex

Batavia evocatus sex millium florinorum Poloniorum annua Pensione

[98] Francis Vernon to H. Oldenburg, 25 February 1670, Paris, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VII, pp. 11-12, #1795.

[99] R. Moray to Christiaan Huygens, 18 January 1666, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VI pp. 9-12, #1518. 112

fruitur." [100] If this was Indeed the case, it would certainly help

to explain Huygens' dissatisfaction with the Académie des sciences

and his unfavorable comparison of the Académie with the Royal

Society.

Among his close friends Huygens counted the Perrault family. He

sometimes visited the Perrault estate, Viry, for a week or longer.

[101] Huygens also attended the reception of Charles Perrault into

the Académie française. [102] Furthermore the third Perralut

brother, Pierre, dedicated his book De l'Origine des fontaines

(Paris: Pierre le Petit, 1674), to Huygens. [103] Huygen's relations with J. D. Cassini, the other leading light of the Académie des sci­

ences , were cool and distant, however. Cassini had been recruited in

1669 to leave the service of the Pope and come to Paris with the

understanding that he would head the Observatory which was then under

construction. [104] For this he was offered a pension of 9,000 H ' per

year, 3,000 if more than the 6,000 received by Huygens.

Cassini never received an official appointment as director of

the Observatory, [105] which is in keeping with the general lack of

[100] Bouillard to Hevelius, February 1667, quoted in Brugraan, Le séjour, p. 68.

[101] Christiaan Huygens to Lodewijk Huygens, Paris, 22 September 1671, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VII, pp. 104-105, #1844.

[102] Ibid., VII, pp. 122-123, #1857.

[103] Brugman, Le Séjour, p. 91.

[104] Cassini, Mémoires pour servir a I'histoire des sciences et s' celle de 1'Observatoire royale de Paris, pp. 288-291.

[Ï05] Charles Wolf, Histoire de l'Observatoire de Paris de sa fonda­ tion a 1793 (Paris: Gauthier-Villars, 1902), p. 7. 113 formal officers already noted within the Académie. It is probable that Huygens nevertheless resented Cassini's assumption of preemi- nance in the Académie, a position held by Huygens until Cassini's arrival. Slighting comments about Cassini can be found in Huygen's correspondance on several occasions. In 1671 he complained that his predictions about the disappearance of the rings of Saturn had been ready for two months but that Cassini had held up their publication.

[106] He dismissed Cassini's discovery of another satellite of Saturn as nothing more than a comet. [107] But when Cassini named the satel­ lites of Saturn for Louis XIV, Huygens quarrelled with Cassini again for taking all of the credit for their discovery.[108]

The anatomist, Claude Perrault, was a third leader of the

Académie. His position of leadership derived both from his personal influence with J. B. Colbert and his brother's position as premier commis to Colbert. In 1668, Adrian Auzout, who was probably the best astronomer then in the Académie, was dismissed from that body. Evi­ dence indicates that Claude Perrault used his influence with Colbert to have Auzout dismissed. [109]

[106] Christiaan Huygens to H. Oldenburg, 28 October 1671, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VII, p. 313, #1807.

[107] Christiaan Huygens to Constantyn Huygens, Paris, 4 December 1676, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VII, p. 120-122, #1856.

[108] Christiaan Huygens to Claude Perrault, 26 September 1686, in Huygens, Oeuvres, IX, pp. 99-100, #2437.

[109] Hishfield, "The Académie Royale des Sciences," p. 81. . l U The reason for the Auzout-Perrault quarrel is not known with certainty. However both men had submitted plans to Colbert for the construction of an observatory for the use of the astronomers of the

Academic and ill will broke out after the acceptance of Perrault's plan. [110] An observatory based on Perrault's plan was nearing com­ pletion when J. D. Cassini arrived in Paris in 1669. Cassini immedi­ ately found fault with a number of technical features of Perrault's plan and went to Colbert to request major changes; he was able to obtain only some changes on the second level of the building. [Ill]

Thus from the moment of Cassini's arrival, Perrault found him­ self in opposition to the great astronomer. In a sense Cassini served as Auzout's replacement. Indeed Cassini and Auzout had become friends; when Auzout was dismissed from the Academic in 1668 he went to live in Italy where he established a cordial relationship with

Cassini. The two men continued a correspondence after Cassini's arrival in Paris. It is therefore likely that Cassini was aware of

Perrault's role in his dismissal. [112]

According to early plans, the Observatory was to be not only an area for astronomical observation but a meeting place for the whole

Académie des sciences; it was to include chemical laboratoires and dissection rooms. Hirshfield reports that Cassini, acting in the capacity of leader of the astronomers and mathematicians, was able to

[110] Ibid., p. 84.

[111] Wolf, Histoire de l'Observatoire, pp. 19-25.

[112] Hirshfield, "The Académie Royale des Sciences," p. 85. 115

reserve the Observatory for their exclusive use, even creating apart­ ments there for the astronomers. He successfully relegated the ana­

tomists, who were led by Perrault, to the Bibliothèque du roi. [113]

Thus the antagonisms between these two leaders of the Académie were

incorporated into a permanent division of research location and even

residence.

There were of course other rivalries within the Académie. Edme

Harriot published his discovery of the blind spot of the eye in Phi­

losophical Transactions for 18 Hay 1668. The same issue carried a

letter by Pecquet criticising Harriot's interpretation of his

discovery. This quarrel lasted for several years, erupting occasion­

ally during the meetings of the Académie. [114]

The hostility between Perrault and Blondel was both more impor­

tant and longer lasting. The two men avoided each other when possi­

ble and Perrault never attended the meetings of the Académie

d'architecture, of which Blondel was president and Perrault a member.

In his Cours d'architecture Blondel never associated Perrault's name

with the east facade of the Louvre nor with the Observatory, and

Blondel scathingly condemned the Porte Saint Antoine. [115] As a

result of this hostility, Huygens, who was on close terms with Per­

rault, likewise took up a hostility toward Blondel. [116]

[113] Ibid.. pp. 99-102.

[114] Ibid., pp. 138-141.

[115] Ibid.. p. 88.

[116] Ibid.. pp. 86-87. 116

How did the Académie survive these personal jealousies and rivalries? The division of research and residence between the ana­ tomists and the astronomers probably facilitated the smooth operation of daily research. But all members of both sections attended the biweekly meetings of the Académie and some business matters such as the preparation of manuscripts for publication required a certain level of cooperation among all members.

There is evidence to indicate that J. B. Colbert was able to mediate personal conflits and maintain the collective authority of the Académie, while the marquis de Louvois was too preoccupied with other concerns, especially after 1686, to notice or head off such conflicts before they surfaced in ways that damaged collective authority. Once the animosity engendered of personal conflict reached the level of public debate, the outward cooperation necessary for the collective decision-making within the Acadëinie became impaired.

Colbert was skilled in negotiating such conflicts before they

-eached the level of Académie politics and he was well aware of the disruptive potential of petty squabbles. VThen Huygens left Paris in

1670 for a visit to the Low Counties, Pierre Carcavi and his son, from whom Huygens was renting living quarters, asked to buy his

Calèche for 100 ecus. Huygens refused the offer, but during his absence the younger Carcavi took it and replaced it with another

calèche, perhaps expecting that Huygens would not return. When

Huygens did return in 1671 he was furious : Lors que je parlay au vieux Carcavy de cet affaire il eust l'affronte^rie de dire que il ne s'en estoit point mesle, et de donner le démenti a ceux qui disoient le contraire, quoique sa femme et du depuis aussi le fils ayant avoué qu'il y estoit present. [117]

Colbert asked Charles Perrault to negoitate the affair before it caused trouble in the Académie, of which the senior Carcavi was also

II apprehende que si nous en venons a une rupture ouverte cela ne soit de grand préjudice a nostre Académie, ce qui fait que par respect s' luy j'évite tant que je puis de faire de 1'éclat. [118]

Colbert was likewise involved in settling a dispute between Cas­ sini and Borelli over the quality of a telescope developed by

Borelli. On 12 May 1673, Colbert visited the Observatory for a com­ parison of lenses made by Borelli, Compani, and Divini. That of

Borelli got the worst of the comparison and he quarrelled the next day with Cassini during the meeting of the Académie. [119] That this caused a disruption in the routine of the Observatory is seen from a note in Cassini's journal;

Querellae D. Borelli in Academia vehementer me pertu- barient, ita ut per muttos dies voluptatem observandi non senserium. [120]

It is doubtful that Colbert personally decided on the best tele-

[117] Christiaan Huygens to Loewijk Huygens, Paris, 23 July 1671, in Huygens, Oeuvres, VII, pp. 83-85, #1835.

[118] Ibid.

[119] Pierre Chabbert, "Jacques Borelly," Revue d'histoire des sci­ ences , XXIII (July/September 1970), 209.

[120] Ibid. 118 scope to use; it is more likely that he came to the Observatory to see to it that the decision of the other astronomers would be respected. He was quite willing to have the Académie assume author­ ity in scientific matters in other cases. For example, when Picard wrote to Colbert from Uranibourg for permission to return to Paris,

Colbert turned the decision over to the Académie with the injunction that he could return when the Académie was satisfied that his work was complete. [121]

Other conflicts were settled within the Académie and never reached Colbert for mediation. On 23 February 1674, Cassini presented a treatise on a new type of surveying instrument. Roberval objected that he had presented a treatise on the identical instrument and deserved credit for its invention. The Académie collectively decided during the meeting that the Abbé Gallois should compare the two treatises and report back to the assembly. After reading both,

Gallois reported in Roberval's favor. [122]

When a decision of the Académie involved some expense to the government, as did all decision to publish, for example, the Académie

referred its decision to Colbert for approval. Dodard asked that the

Académie to consider one of his treatises for publication in 1675; in

response, "On a délibéré si on le devoit faire imprime après qu'on

l'avoit monstre a M. Colbert." [123]

[121] Cassini to Picard, Paris, 31 May 1672, Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris, A4.2.

[122] P.V., T. 7, 23 February and 2 March 1675.

[123] P.V., T, 7, 7 September 1675. 119 The agenda of the biweekly meetings might also be determined by the Acadeimie as a collective decision. One finds in the procès- verbaux such entries as the following: "on a arreste que Mr Cassini

continuera la Senelographie," [124] at a time when Cassini had been

reading excerpts from his work on the moon.

Decisions collectively made by the Académie during its early years were respected by its members, even by a "prima donna" like

Cassini. In a letter to Picard written in 1671, Cassini exults that

their joint report on the spots of the sun was presented to the

Académie and that the Académie chose to change only one or two words of the report. [125] That Cassini accepted the right of the Académie

to intervene in his scientific research is clear from another letter

to Picard dating from the following year. Discussing his work on the first satellite of Jupiter, Cassini reported matter-of-factly that:

L'Académie veut a l'avenir intervenir dans ces obsersations d'eclipse, m'ayant enjoint de l'avertir du temps ou elles devoient arrives, afin d'en estre plus assurée et de pouvoir s'y trouver la premier nuit qu'il en doit arriver. [126]

Soon after he continued.

Quoique 1'Académie ait arreste que quelques-uns de ses Mes­ sieurs assisteroient a ces sortes d'observations, cela n'a

[124] P.V. T. 7, 9 November 1675.

[125] Cassini to Picard, Paris, 5 September 1671. Bibliothèque de 1'Observatoire de Paris, A4.2.

[126] Cassini to Picard, Paris, 14 January 1672, Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire, de Paris, A4.2. pas encore eu lieu, a cause d'incommodités qui se trouvent encore a l'Observatoire. [127]

Fifteen years later the situation is quite different. The years

1686 to 1688 represent the crucial turning point in the vitality of the Académie, for at this time the old working relationship between the Académie and the protecteur fell apart. As a consequence, the ad hoc procedures which were effective under Colbert's administration became unviable and the authority of collective decisions made by the

Académie disappeared. In the mid-1680's, overt animosity and rivalry broke out in the meetings of the Académie, and authority within the

Académie became confused. Rules for handling potential conflict replaced the unspecified procedures of the early years. Collective decision-making all but disappeared, and the biweekly meetings became simply formal sessions at which academicians read their treatises and then went home.

There is no better example of the collapse of working relations between protecteur and Académie and the resulting confusion of authority within the Acadeinie than the case of the Abbe I'Annion,

"president" of the Academie des sciences. The Abbe I'Annion had been appointed to membership in the Academie by Colbert on 9 December

1679. The following notice appeared in the January 1684 issue of the

Mercure galant, shortly after Louvois became protector of the

Academie;

Je viens d'apprendre que M de Louvoys a nomme Mr 1'Abbe de

[127] Cassini to Picard, Paris, 21 January 1672, Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris, A4.2. 121

I'Annion pour présider a 1'Académie des Sciences. [128]

No announcement is found in the procès-verbaux of the Academie for either 1683 or 1684 to confirm that the Abbe was to act in this capa­ city. However it is true that when De la Chapelle was absent, the

Abbe de I'Annion did at times speak for him or for Louvois. [129]

A year later confusion about who is to report to Louvois on the affairs of the Academie is apparent. In June 1685 the Academie passed the following resolution:

II a este arreste que quand on aura examine quelque matiere, ou fait quelque deliberations, les Particuliers n'eut feront pas leur rapport a Monseigneur de Louvois a moins qu'il ne leur demand ou que cela ne se fasse concert avec la Compagnie. [130]

It is evident from the procès-verbaux that the problem of the posi­

tion of the Abbe de I'Annion came to a head eight months later:

Mr Cassini a fait voie ce qu'il a represente avec M. de la Hire tous deux deputes par 1'Academie a M de Louvois la 15® Février 1686.

Ces messieurs representerent a Mondit Seigneur de Louvois que 1'Academie les avoit envoyés pour apprendre de quelle maniéré Sa Grandeur vouli que l'on executast ses ordres que Mr 1'Abbe de I'Annion avoit dit de porter de sa part a 1'Academie pour examiner les livre des sciences avant qu'on en accordast le privilege.

Monseigneur de Louvois repondit que il ne luy avoit jamais donne d'ordre et il adjousta que Mr de I'Annion luy avait faits divers rapports de 1'Academie. Ils repondirent que 1'Academie ne l'avoit jamais charge de luy rien rapporter. Monseigneur de Louvois desaprouva fort la conduite que

[128] Mercure galant, January 1684, p. 335.

[129] P.V., T. 11, 8 August 1685; T. 11, 16 February 1684.

[130] P. V . , T. 11, 23 June 1685. 122 ledit Sr Abbe de I'Annion avoit tenue. [131]

A few weeks following this incident Louvois dismissed I'Annion from the Academie des sciences.

It is possible to reconstruct several features of the breech between Louvois and the Academie from this episode. First, the Abb^ de I'Annion was claiming to represent the wishes of Louvois to the

Academie. He was likewise reporting the affairs of the Acade^mie to

Louvois despite the Academie's injunction of June 1685 forbidding such reports without the permission of the Academie. During the interview with Cassini and De la Hire cited above, Louvois denied having given any such authority to I'Annion; whether this is true is difficult to know. The resolution of 23 June 1685 forbidding unau­ thorized reports to Louvois without the marquis' specific request leads one to conclude that the Academie was unhappy about what was being reported to Louvois by I'Annion.

Is it possible that the Abbi I'Annion could claim to represent the marquis before the Academie without Louvois being aware of this actions? We must assume either that: one, Louvois was too preoccu­ pied with affairs of state to concern himself with a group of savants; or two, Louvois had given such instructions to the Abb^ but was unwilling to acknowledge the fact when it proved unpopular with the Academie. If I'Annion made frequent reports to Louvois on the activities of the Academie, Louvois may indeed have used him to

transmit messages back to the Academie. The Abbé I'Annion may have

[131] P.V., T. 11, 27 February 1686. 123

used such a position of intermediary to assume an authority that

Louvois had not intended to give him.

Although there is no clear proof of such a chain of events, it may well be that the impressions of the Academie fostered by

I'Annion's unauthorized reports to Louvois strongly influenced

Louvois' opinion of the Academie. The date on which Cassini and De

la Hire had this interview with Louvois, 15 February 1686, is just

two weeks after the famous speech in which De la Chapelle, speaking

for Louvois, criticized the Academie for not undertaking projects

useful to the state.

Several conclusions about the operation of the Academie in the

1680's can be drawn from this series of events:

1. The Acadfflnie was unhappy about the unauthorized reports to the

Protector.

2. Louvois was dissatisfied with the program of the Academie, to

the point of eventually cancelling publication of its works.

3. There was confusion over who spoke for Louvois and for the

Academie.

4. Louvois was clearly not paying close attention to the weekly

functioning of the Academie.

In sum, the working relationship between Louvois and the Academie had

broken down. 124 This breakdown raised new issues for the Academie, particularly as regards to conflict within its own membership. Given the lack of any formal charter or other specific rules for dealing with internal conflict, the Academie had previously relied upon the protector's intervention. In contrast to Colbert, Louvois was not disposed to iron out petty squabbles; he was probably unaware of them. One might predict that the Academie would first have attempted to create formal rules to regulate the conduct of its members, thereby controlling internal conflict. If such efforts failed, one would expect a decline of the cooperation among members, which would be reflected in a decrease in collective decisions made by the Academie as well as in other areas. After 1686 both responses seem to occur simultaneously: the Academie attempted to regulate the behavior of academicians to reduce conflict, but collective decisions declined none the less.

On 18 August 1688, the Academie established a rule concerning appropriate behavior for members.

La Compagnie, pour eviter que dorénavant les personnes qui la composent n'insèrent dans leurs ouvrages particuliers les observations et les nouvelles découverts qui sont faites dans les assemblées, a statue d'un commun consentem- ment qu'a l'avenir chacun de ceux qui voudront faire impri­ mer de leurs ouvrages sera oblige d'en donner avis a la Compagnie et d'y apporter son manuscrit pour y etre exam­ ine, ou par les commission qu'elle nomme pour cet effet. A 1'égard des ouvrages qui ont ete imprimes par ceux qui la composent, la Compagnie a résolu de revendiquer ce qui lui appartient toutefois et quand l'occasion s'en présentera. La Compagnie a prie Monsieur de la Chapelle de savior sa volonté a Monseignier de Louvois protecteur de 1'Academie avant que d'insérer le present règlement dans les regis­ tres. [132]

(132] P.V., T. 12, 18 August 1688. 125 This is the rule cited by Bertrand to illustrate the conflict between

the principle of collective research and the desire for individual publications and recognition which was, in his view, sapping the strength of the Académie, [133] Roger Hahn cites the same new regu­ lation to demonstrate that the Academie had recognized that collec­ tive research and publication were unworkable and had adopted a new rule of individual responsibility for this process with a procedure to insure against plagiarism. [134]

The new regulation in fact resulted from a very specific instance of conflict over the individual publication of collective research: that between Philippe de la Hire and J. D. Cassini over

the publication of De la Hire's Tabulorum astronomicarum (Paris,

1687/1688). Nevertheless Bertrand and Hahn are not wrong in making a more general interpretation of the rule, which does attempt to deal with the problem of plagiarism in a group which engaged in collective research. What should be emphasized here is simply that a specific conflict arose within the Academie, and the Academie responded by creating a new rule. Louvois had no hand either in settling the dispute or in instituting the regulation, since the text of the regu­ lation states that it is to be referred to Louvois for his approval before being entered into the register— but after being acted upon by

the Academie itself.

[133] Bertrand, l'Académie des sciences, pp. 44-45.

[134] Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, pp. 27-28. 126 Cassini and perhaps others were highly indignant toward Philippe de la Hire for having published his Tabulorum without having first gained the approval of the Academie» Cassini was also indignant that the Tabulorum included material gathered collectively at the Observa­ tory, but for which De la Hire took personal credit. [135] The imprint date on the book is 1687. Although it received its privilege on 22 March 1687, it is most likely that the book did not appear until 1688, as the Journal des sçavans, which reviewed such works promptly, did not review it until 25 October 1688. Thus it was prob­ ably published during the summer of 1688.

There can be little doubt that it is this event that led to the adoption of the new regulation by the Academie, given the facts just outlined: chat the Tabulorum was published in mid-1688, Cassini and others reacted with accusations that it plagiarized work done by the astronomers as a group, and in August of 1688 the Academie adopted a rule requiring corporate approval of any future work written by a member before its publication. Cassini's charges against De la Hire outlined in his letter to De la Hire parallel all to exactly the pro­ visions of the new regulation.

As we demonstrated above in the episode of the Abbe I'Annion,

1686 witnessed the collapse of any cooperation between Louvois and

the Academie. In an attempt to deal with internal conflict on its own the Academie then began to formulate its own rules, such as that

[135] J. D. Cassini to Philippe de la Hire, no date. Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris A4.2. 127 of August 1688. Did the absence of strong ministerial support have

any other effect on the operation of the Academie?

Collective decision-making is an area which might be expected to reflect internal cohesion in the Academie. In Chapter Two we showed

that the number of collective decisions made by the Academie declined

sharply after Louvois became protector. Can this decline be a“tri- buted to any specific year? Table 12 below represents the number of

collective decisions by year for each of the twenty-four years under

three ministers which I have examined. In fact the drop in collec­

tive decision-making occurs precisely in 1687, which is of course the year following the disruptions of 1686. This contrasts with the

first three years of Louvois' administration, 1684-1686, when the

Academie continued to make collective decisions at a rate equivalent

to that found during Colbert's administration.

One additional type of evidence indicates that 1686 was the year

in which Louvois ceased to have any effective relationship with the

Academie. Among the items coded for computer analysis from the biweekly meetings was each instance of the protector of the Academie

presenting matters to that body. Ordinarily the protector did this by sending a representative, usually his premier commis, to a meet­ ing. When matters were presented to this Academie in the manner,

they are clearly discernable in the procès-verbaux by the use of cer­

tain phrases such as "M. de la Chapelle a represente de la part de

Monseigneur de Louvois que. . ." Table 13 reports these events by

year and by protector. Number of Collective Decisions made by the Academie, by Protector and by Year

Colbert Louvois ■ Pontchartrain

Year Number of Ye»r Number of Number of Decisions Decisions Decisions

1676 15 1684 9 1692 4

1677 15 1685 8 1693 1

1678 8 1686 7 1694 2

1679 3 1687 1 1695 2

1680 7 1688 1 1696 1

1681 3 1689 4 1697 1

1682 6 1690 2 1698 2

1683 7 1691 2 1699 36

Total 64 34 Total 49 Number of Times each Year the Protector brought a Matter before the Academie

Colbert Louvois Pontechartrain

Number Year Number Year Number

1683* 2 1691* 3 1676 1 1684 3 1692 0

1677 6 1685 9 1693 3

1678 2 1686 5 1694 3

1679 3 1687 0 1695 1

1680 5 1688 1 1696 2

1681 2 1689 0 1697 1

1682 2 1690 1 1698 1

1683 3 1691 0 1699 3

25 21 Total 17

■ Louvois became Protector in September 1683 and Pontchartrain in June 1691. The Number of Matters presented for the starred Years represent matters brought before the Academie after these dates. 130 From this table itis apparent that Louvois was closely involved with the Academie in 1684, 1685, and 1686; he took time on 17 dif­ ferent occasions to present matters to this body through his representative. After 1686 his involvement vanishes; only twice does he bother to present any matter to the Academie in the following five years. Note that meetings were recorded by the same permanent secre­ tary, DuHamel, throughout the time period under study.

In Part I of this dissertation I have presented the case for the decline of the Academie in the 1680's. Given the fact that the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century rested on progress in astronomy, mechanics, and mathematics, one should not be surprised

to see a decline in scientific productivity when the marquis de

Louvois slighted these areas of research in favor of support for ana­

tomy and natural history. The lack of any leadership coming from

Louvois after 1686 likewise contributed to a collapse of cooperation and a rise of open conflict, a fact which no doubt had a debiliating effect on the productivity of the Academie. Louvois died on 16 June

1691. It is evident that in order to reverse this situation, his

successor would have toassume a more active role in the direction of

the Academie and show a better understanding of the role of science

in government and society if the Academie were to regain an accept­

able level of scientific productivity and counter the centrifugal

forces inherent in any organization devoted to critical scientific

debate. THE REFORM OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES Chapter IV

Family Ties in Cultural Administration under the Phelypeaux

The Acadaaie des sciences assumed a new vigor when the direction of the Academie passed into the hands of Louis II Phelypeaux, comte

de Pontchartrain, and Pontchartrain's nephew and deputy, the Abbé

Jean-Paul Bignon, in 1691. This new vigor was a result of their per­

sonal intervention in the operations of the Academie, an intervention

which revived the scientific productivity and resolved the drift and

confusion in the governance of the Academie. Their intervention

resulted in a series of reforms of the leadership, procedures, goals,

membership, and organization of the Academie. These reforms were

begun in 1691 and culminated in the reorganization of the Académie in

1699 by means of a règlement consisting of fifty articles. In Part

II we will examine these reforms as an attempt to resolve the prob­

lems of low scientific productivity and malgovernance inherited from

the protectorship of the marquis de Louvois.

The end of the decade of the 1680's witnessed a major change in

the ministers of state who directed the government of Louis XIV.

Claude Le Peletier, the Controller General and a protégé of the mar­

quis de Louvois, resigned in 1689, and the position of Controller

General was given to Louis Pontchartrain. Jean-Baptiste Colbert, the

marquis de Seignelay, died in 1690 and his responsibilities for the

132 133 marine and the maison du roi likewise passed to Louis Pontchartrain.

The marquis de Louvois died in 1691. The ministry of the army passed to his son, the marquis de Barbezieux, and the surintendance des bâtiments was given to Edouard Colbert, the marquis de Villacerf, another protege of Louvois. At this time the Academie des sciences was detached from the surintendance des bâtiments and transferred to the administration of the maison du roi; Louis Pontchartrain thus became the new protector of the Academie.

In the new government which emerged at this time and was to remain intact until the end of the century, the lines of power were

ill-defined. Villacerf was not influential; in fact he held the surintendance des bâtiments as a commission and not as an office. [1]

Barbezieux was not even a member of the conseil d'en haut. Louis

Pontchartrain emerged with many of the same offices which had prév­

is ouly been held by Jean-Baptiste Colbert senior, but his administra­

tion has not been studied sufficiently to give us a precise idea of

the power he exercised. Yet he is no doubt the key figure in the

government of Louis XIV during the decade of the 1690's.

Louis Pontchartrain and the whole network of his relatives and

clients whom he placed in positions of responsibility have assumed a

central role in what is currently termed the second period of reform

in the government of Louis XIV. [2] The reforms effected by

[1] Edit du Roy portant suppression de la Charge de Surintendant des Bâtiments, Arts et Manufactures de France, Août 1726, BN FF 21675

[2] Ragnhild M. Hatton, "Louis XIV: Recent Gains in Historical 134 Pontchartrain and Bignon in the Academie des sciences are thus but a

part of a larger picture. After an examination of the reforms of the

Academie des sciences in Chapters Five and Six, in Chapter Seven we

will view the reform of the Acade^mie as part of a series of reforms

affecting several cultural institutions.

The Phelypeaux were not newcomers to royal office. Paul Phe­

lypeaux became a secretaire d'etat under Henri IV, and the family maintained one of its members as a secretaire d'etat throughout most

of the seventeenth century. [3] At a very early date the family split

into two branches, the Pontchartrain branch and the La Vrilliere

branch. [4] During much of Louis XIV's early reign, the marquis de

Châteauneuf, a descendant of the La Vrilliere branch, was the Phe­

lypeaux with the office of secretaire d'etat. He held no ministries

and had little influence in the government. [5] When Louis II Phe­

lypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain, became secretaire d'etat in 1690,

this represented a return of the Pontchartrain branch to high royal

service. Among the family members whom Louis Pontchartrain brought

to office with him were his son, Jerome Phelypeaux, and his nephew.

Knowledge," Journal of Modern History XLV (June 1973), 286 and passim; John C. Rule, "Royal Ministers and Government Reform dur­ ing the Last Decades of Louis XIV's Reign," in Claude C. Stur­ gill, ed., The Consortium of Revolutionary Europe 1750-1850 (Gainesville: University of Florida press, 1975), pp. 1-13 .

[3] J. L. Bourgeon, "Balthazar Phelypeaux," in Roland Mousnier, ed., Le Conseil du roi de Louis XII a la revolution (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1970), pp 133-143.

[4] Ibid., p. 131.

[5] ibid., p. 145. Jean-Paul Bignon.

Jérôme Phelypeaux began to sign for his father concerning affairs of the marine as early as 1694 [6] and he succeeded his

father both to this post and to the maison du roi in 1699 when Louis

Phelypeaux was named Chancellor. [7]

Jean-Paul Bignon was the son of Louis Pontchartrain's sister,

Suzanne, and Jerome Bignon, who held the position of maître de la

librarie. Pontchartrain appointed his nephew to direct the activi­

ties of the Academie des sciences and the Academie des inscriptions

almost immediately upon taking office in 1691. From these :ositions

Bignon came to dominate much of the cultural life of France by the

turn of the century. Hence he played a central role in cultural

affairs in the later years of the reign of Louis XIV.

Louis Pontchartrain's conception of reform does not differ sub­

stantially from the traditional, somewhat conservative Anglo-American

concept of good government. In essence reform is the creation of

good laws and their punctilious enforcement on all concerned, most

especially on those public servants who are obliged to fulfill their

duties both to the king and to the citizenry. The inevitable con­

flicts within society will thus be settled with the least disturbance

[6] AN 37 fol. 238-241.

[7] G. Depping, "Lettres de Phélypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain, secrétaire d'état sous le règne de Louis XIV, â des littérateurs et à des amis de la littérature de son temps," France. Comité historique des arts et monuments. Bulletin de histoire, sci­ ences , et lettres, II (1850) 53. of the social fabric.

Pontchartrain had spent his formative years as conseiller aux requêtes and as president of the parlement at Rennes. [8] This legal formation no doubt shaped his concept of the governmental process.

Patrice Berger has aptly described Louis Pontchartrain when he says,

"... in Pontchartrain we find a man who took seriously the conven­ tional pieties . . ." [9] The strategies of Richelieu or the chambre de justice of Colbert were probably alien to his approach to govern­ mental problems.

Pontchartrain's respect for correct legal procedure is evident in his execution of the affairs of government. When shortfalls in the grain crops first occurred in 1692, Pontchartrain realized that

the government would have to intervene in the buying and selling of grain in order to maintain supply and lower prices. This function, however, fell within the jurisdiction of the parlements of France.

Pontchartrain was scrupulous in observing the perogatives of these

courts and aided them in every way possible to achieve their goals although it was obvious that the Controller General through his net­ work of intendants could have accomplished the task more promptly and

efficiently. [10]

[8] Pierre Clement, "Les Successeurs de Colbert: Pontchartrain." Revue des deux mondes, 2. ser. XLVI (1863) 918-919.

[9] Patrice Berger, "Rural Charity: the Pontchartrain Case." French Historical Studies X (1978) 410.

[10] Patrice Berger, "The Famine of 1692-1694 in France, a Study in Administrative Response," (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1972) pp. 33-107. 137 In a dispute which arose between the president of the cour des

comptes, aydes et finances of Montpellier and several of its members,

Pontchartrain tells the members to adhere strictly to the rules. He

Sa Majesté m'a paru très mal satisfait de leur conduite et Elle m'a chargé de les avertir que son intention est qu'ils ayent pour M. le Pre. President tous le respect qui luy est deu comme chef de la Compagnie, qu'ils observent exact- ment la déclaration de 1594 . . . et qu'ils ne s'écartent en rien de tous ce qui est prescris par les autres règle- mens." [11]

As Chancellor Pontchartrain did not interpose his own authority or

that of the king when a settlement could be obtained by law. In

responding to a conflict between two different courts he says,

Je ne puis'decider de mon autorité privée le différent que vous avez avec le parlemens de Toulouse sur la réception de conseillers de votre siège, cela dois faire entre vous la matière d'un règlemens, et comme ces sortes de règlemens entre les Compagnies ne se peuvent faire que par les voyes ordinaires, c'est a' dire en connoissance de cause, et sur un contestation réglée, c'est a vous à" vous pourvoir suivant les règles de la procédure . . ." [12]

Pontchartrain was especially concerned that public servants ful­

fill their obligations to the public and to the king precisely as

spelled cut by the terms of their positions. This theme occurs

repeatedly, as we shall see in the following chapters, in his deal­

ings with the various academic institutions, but it is also part of

his larger view of the duties of a public official. He tells the

[11] Louis Pontchartrain to M. de Vignes, pro Gnal de la Compagnie des Comptes, Aydes, et Finances de Montpellier, 30 June 1700, BN FF 2119 fol. 608-609.

[12] Louis Pontchartrain to Mrs les Officiers du Senechal et Siege Preal de Montpellier, 14 July 1700, BN FF 21119 fol. 921. 138 juges consuls of Besancon that if they wish to receive the king's protection they must be assiduous in their duties of rendering jus­ tice to his subjects: "Par la vous rendrez utile au public

1'établissement de votre jurisdiction . . [13] In a letter to M.

Dousseau, professor of French law at Nantes, Pontchartrain tells him that his salary may be low and if he wishes more he must address him­ self to M. Chamillart, but that he cannot use it as an excuse not to fulfill his duties. He must either perform his duties or resign his position. [14]

From this brief sketch of Louis Pontchartrain his approach to

the reform of academic institutions may seem quite predictable. He brought about reforms by issuing règlements which stated in legal format the procedures of the organization concerned and the obliga­ tions of its members, thereby providing an instrument by which to measure and enforce the accomplishments and duties of said members.

One essential question remains, however: why should Pontchartrain bother to concern himself with the Academie des sciences and other cultural institutions?

Pontchartrain bothered because he had a personal interest in the progress of learning and in its benefits for a civilized state. This respect for learning is manifested not so much in his correspondence as in the political and financial support which he gave to academic

[13] Louis Pontchartrain a Mrs les Juges Consuls de Besançon, 6 October 1700, BN FF 21119 fol. 2010.

[14] Louis Pontchartrain to M. Dosseau, 13 February 1700, BN FF 2119 fol. 85. 139 institutions. Louis Pontchartrain did, however, make occasional references to the merit of a particular book for which an author was seeking a privilege for publication. In one such case he wrote

Quoique ie ne convienne pas bien avec le Sr Hébert de l'utilité de son ouvrage, ie ne crois néantmoins aucune inconvénient de luy permettre de l'imprimer . . . [15]

The book in question was probably Eclaircissemens pour 1'intelligence du sens littéral des épistres de saint Paul et autres livres du

Nouveau Testament (Paris: Léon de Laulne, Louis Rouiland, 1690) by

E. Himbert. It received an approuvai on 17 July 1690. Perhaps more active than Louis Pontchartrain in their intercourse with men of learning were his son, Jerome Pontchartrain, and his nephew, Jean-

Paul Bignon.

Jerome Pontchartrain was on terms of easy familiarity with a number of the literary figures of the day. These included La

Bruyère, Valincour, Fontenelle, the Abbé Renaudot, and the marquis de

Sévigné [son of the marquise de sévigné]. [16] One of Jerome's tutors had been Pare Thomas Gouye, a Jesuit mathematician who had been the link between the Académie des sciences and the Jesuits in China dur­ ing the 1680's. [17] Gouye became a full member of the Académie in

1699. Another tutor had been Jacques Tourreil. Louis Pontchartrain

[15] Louis Pontchartrain to La Reynie, 5 July 1690, BN FF NA 5247 fol. 13.

[16] G. Dapping, "Lettres de Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain," pp. 52-64, 80-92.

[17] Charles E. O'Neill, Church and State in French Colonial Louisi­ ana, Policy and Politics to 1732 (New Haven: Yale University press, 1966) p. 35. 140 appointed Tourreil a member of the Académie des inscriptions et médaillés in 1691. [18] At the request of his father, Jerome attended

the meetings of the Académie des inscriptions in 1692 and 1693 before his heavy responsibilities at the ministry of the marine forced him

to withdraw. [19]

Jerome's correspondence with the litterateurs of France is often

full of a banter which betrays close personal relations. In a letter

to Fontenelle Jerome chides the latter about his correspondence:

Je crois, Monsieur, que dans la bibliothèque du Roy, dans celle du Vatican, et dans toutes les bibliothèques du monde, on ne pourra jamais trouver de livres plus obscurs ny de romans plus inintelligibles que vostre lettre du 1er de ce mois. [20]

Jérôme's correspondence often touches on the affairs of the Académie

française; he was a partisan of the ancients in the quarrel over the

ancients and the moderns. [21]

Jérôme Pontchartrain's concern for letters was not simply based

on a passion for amusement and light verse but on an interest in

scholarly achievement. In discussing with Fontenelle the replacement

for La Fontaine in the Académie française he offers the opinion.

[18] Louis F. A. Maury, 1'Ancienne Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres (Paris: Didier, 1864) p. 20.

[19] Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres. Histoire de l'Académie royale des inscriptions et belles lettres (Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1717), I, 7.

[20] Jerome Pontchartrain to Bernard Fontenelle, 13 May 1695, in G. B. Depping, "Lettres de Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain," p. 60.

[21] Depping, "Lettres de Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain," p. 59. 141 Je crois qu'après avoir bien cherché, vous ne pourrez mieux trouver que II. Dacier, qui restablira dans vostre compagnie la solide érudition qui en est bannie depuis quelque temps. [22]

The Abbé Bignon played an even greater role in cultural affairs under Pontchartrain. Jean-Jacques Dortous de Mairan aptly character­ ized the Abbé Bignon's role in the scholarly world in his eulogy of the Abbé presented before the Académie des sciences ;

On le trouvera a la tête de mille excellens ouvrages pro­ curez par ses soins ou mis au jour sous ses auspices, et au défaut de son nom on le reconnoitra a celui de Mece'ne de son siècle et l'ange tutélaire des sciences et des Savants. [23]

For fifty years, 1691 to 1741, Bignon organized and promoted much of the scholarly activity of France. His organizing skills reflected not only hard work, a systematic mind, and an eye for academic merit, but also an ability to exploit the system of credit which articulated the Old Regime political structure. The crédit at Bignon's disposal derived not only from the many positions which he held in the royally sponsored scholarly institutions, but from a strong network of family and personal ties which extended through much of society and govern­ ment. A brief biographical sketch of the Abbé Bignon will illustrate both the sources of such credit and the use he made of it.

There is unfortunately no complete or adequate biographical

[22] Jérôme Pontchartrain to Bernard Fontenelle, 13 May 1695, in G. B. Depping, "Lettres de Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain," p. 60.

[23] Jean-Jacques Dortous de Mairan, "Éloge de l'Abbé Jean-Paul Big­ non," in Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences année 1743, p. 189. 142 account of the Abbé Bignon. An Oratorian, E. Bonnardet, compiled the pertinent facts of his life in a brief summary which appeared in

1937. [24] Not until the 1970's, however, did sustained scholarly inquiry into Bignon's life begin. In 1973 Jack A. Clarke summarized the extant state of knowledge about the Abbe in his article "Abbé

Jean-Paul Bignon 'Moderator of the Academies' and Royal Librarian."

[25] In the following year, 1974, Franqoise Blechet completed a mas­ ters thesis for the Ecole des chartes on the correspondence of the

Abbé. This correspondence, however, dates principally from the reign of Louis XIV; to date Bignon's earlier correspondence has not been located and it appears to be non-existent. [26]

Both the grandfather and the father of Jean-Paul Bignon, Jerome

Bignon I and II, had been scholar/magistrates. Jérôme I, 1590-1656, known as the Cato of his time, was a tutor to Louis XIII and became

Advocate General in the Paris parlement and also Royal Librarian.

[27] Jean-Paul's father, Jerome II, inherited both of these posi­ tions, [28] and gained the position of conseiller d'état. However in

1684 Jérôme II was forced by the marquis de Louvois to sell his post

[24] "Essai de bibliographie oratorienne: Jean-Paul Bignon," L'Oratoire de France VII (January 1937), pp. 46-50.

[25] French Historical Studies VIII (Fall 1973) 213-235.

[26] As of 1977 Mile Blechet planned to continue her studies of Big­ non for a doctoral thesis under the direction of Henri-Jean Mar­ tin at the Sorbonne. I hope that my own work will contribute to our knowledge of Bignon for the early years, 1591-1715.

[27] Clarke, "Abbé Jean-Paul Bignon," p. 214.

[28] Mairan, "Eloge," p. 185. 143 of maître de la librarie [royal librarian] to the marquis' son, the

Abbé Louvois. [29] This position, renamed bibliothécaire due roi, was returned to the Abbé Bignon in 1718 at the death of the Abbé Louvois;

Bignon in turn passed this position on to his own nephew.

The Abbé Bignon's mother was Suzanne Phélypeaux, sister of Louis

Phelypeaux. This relationship provided him with valuable ties to the

Phelypeaux family and especially with his uncle, Louis Phelypeaux, the comte de Pontchartrain. Jean-Paul Bignon's role in the Académie des sciences came about through this tie. His three brothers also held administrative posts. The oldest, Jerome III, was also a con­ seiller d'état; he also held the post of prévôt des marchands. Louis

Bignon served as capitaine aux gardes and inspecteur general de

1'infantrie, while Armand Rolland Bignon was a conseiller d'etat and also intendant de la généralité de Paris. [30] A son of Armand suc­ ceeded the Abbé Bignon as Royal Librarian in 1743.

In his early formative years the young Jean-Paul Bignon (1662-

1743) showed an enthusiasm for the study of the classics. He studied for four years at the séminaire Saint-Magloire in Paris and following that entered the Oratoire in 1684 at the age of 22. [31] Finding life in the city too disruptive for his studies he retired to Saint-Paul- aux-Bois with a tutor to continue his classical education. [32].

[29] See p. 29 above.

[30] Mairan, "Eloge," p. 194.

[31] Clarke, "Abbé Jean-Paul Bignon," p. 214.

[32] Ibid. 144 Shortly after Louis Pontchartrain became a secretary of state in

1690, he asked his nephew to return to Paris to undertake a more active role in the church and government. [33] The young cleric began

to preach in the various churches of Paris and established a reputa­ tion as an orator. On 17 February 1693 he was appointed a prédi­

cateur du roi. [34]

For the remaining fifty years of his life Bignon worked closely with the two successive leaders of the Phelypeaux family, the comte de Pontchartrain and his successor the comte de Maurepas, to coordi­ nate many of the scholarly activities of France. In the fall of 1691

Louis Pontchartrain appointed Bignon as President of the Académie des

sciences. He held this position until 1701 and again at various

times until his death. In 1693 he succeeded to the thirteenth chair

of the Académie française, an election he no doubt owed to his con­

nection with Louis Pontchartrain. He provided a facto link

between that academy and the ministry of his uncle and exercised more

power than did the director or the secretary of this body. [35] In

the same year he entered the Académie des inscriptions as its direc-

When Louis pontchartrain became Chancellor of France in 1699,

one of his newly acquired duties was the control of the book trade.

At this time a privilege authorizing publication of a book could be

[33] Ibid.

[34] Ibid., p. 215.

[35] See below p. 149. 145 obtained not only from the Chancellor but also from the parlements, the bishops, and the universities. Pontchartrain withdrew this right from these institutions and vested them solely in a newly created bureau de la librarie, headed by Bignon. [36]

Bignon established a board of eight censors to review all books for which a privilege was sought. A number of these censors were drawn from the various academies. From the Acadanie des sciences

Bignon took Fontenelle and Filleau des Billettes. [37] Their concern as censors centered on sound arguments and good style more than on political affiliation. [38]

In 1701 Pontchartrain asked the Abbe Bignon to take under his direction the editorship of the Journal des sçavans. The Journal had been declining in reputation over the past several years. It had failed to cover foreign publications adequately, it had borrowed its reviews from other journals, and it had become polemical in tone.

[39] To remedy this situation Bignon appointed a board of profes­ sional editors who were to receive a salary for their effort [400 JrT per year] and who were to review books in their specialized fields.

Half the editors were drawn from the membership of the Acade^mie des inscriptions, the more formal successor of the informal petite

[36] See John D. Woodbridge, "Censure royale et censure episcopale: le conflit de 1702." Dix-huitieme siècle, VIII (1976), 333-355.

[37] Clarke, "Abbe Jean-Paul Bignon," p. 223.

[38] Ibid.

[39] Ibid., p. 225. 146 académie. [40] At this time the Abbé Bignon also began an extensive international correspondence to acquire book news for the J ournal des

sçavans; this correspondence survives and is housed in the

Bibliothèque nationale. [41] The improved Journal was well received, even by such critical readers as Pierre Bayle. [42]

The Abbe Bignon also held important positions in the royal government serving as a liaison with the clergy. Like his father and

two of his brothers, he held the office of conseiller d''état, which he obtained on 20 February 1701. As a member of the conseil d'etat he was the chief representative of the church and became chairman of

the bureau des affaires écclesiastiques of that Council [43] later in

the same year, 1701. From 1693 to 1695 Bignon had attended the

Assemblées du cierge, sometimes as the deputy from Paris. [44] For

his faithful service he was named Abbé of St. Quentin in 1694, a

position with an income of 30,000 ■H’ per annum. In 1710 he became

doyen of the chapter of St.-Germain-1'Auxerrois. [43]

The Abbe Bignon personally had a penchant for erudition to a

greater degree than for either the natural sciences or belles-

[40] Ibid.

[41] BN FF 22225-22236.

[42] Clarke, "Abbé Jean-Paul Bignon," p. 225.

[43] I ^ . , p. 222.

[44] Mairan, "Eloge," p. 88.

[45] E. Bonnardet, "Jean-Paul Bignon de l'Oratoire," Archives de 1'Académie des sciences. Dossier Jean-Paul Bignon. 147 lettres, [46] but this personal preference did not cause him to slight other modes of scholarship. Indeed it was the Abbe's wide- ranging ability to understand and support all scholarly endeavor in all fields with sympathetic interest that made him the perfect maece­ nas of the learned professions of his day. The same wide-ranging interests served him well as editor of the Journal des sçavans and as chief of the bureau de la librarie. [47]

If one compares the procès-verbaux of the Académie des sciences and those of the Académie des inscriptions, however, one is struck by the fact that the Abbe Bignon seldom attended meetings of the former while he was rarely absent from meetings of the latter. Within the

Académie des sciences, his closest ties were with travelers and naturalists, such as Tournefort and René Reaumur. We may note also that Bignon was instrumental in obtaining royal funding for

Tournefort's botanical trip to the Middle East in 1702. [48]

His own scholarly activités were along erudite lines. Bignon may be said to be personally responsible for seeing into print the volume on Médailles sur les principaux événements du régne de Louis le Grand (Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1702), prepared by the Académie des inscriptions as a history of the reign in medals. [49] In later

[46] See Bruno Neveu, "La Vie erudite a Paris a la fin du XVIIe siè­ cle , " M M i o t h è g ^ ^ _l'écol^ des chartes^ CXXIV (1966) 432-511.

[47] For examples, see my discussion of his support for the mechani­ cal and mathematical sciences below, p. 171.

[48] Maury, L'Ancienne Académie des sciences, p. 48.

[49] Clarke, "Abbé Jean-Paul Bignon," p. 221. 148 years Bignon began work on a grammar and dictionary of Chinese, a project he never finished. [50] In 1712/1714 he published anonymously a romance entitled Les Aventures d'Adalla, fils d'Orif et ses voyages a 1'Isle de Borico, which went through six printings. [51]

Bignon had numerous other projected or partially completed endeavors. He had hoped to write Recherches sur 1'antiquité et

1'origine des plus anciens peuples tels que les Caldeens et les Egyp­ tiens . [52] He actually left an unpublished manuscript, Commentaire sur la Bibliothèque d'Apollodore. [53] Although there are no traces of the former project, the latter manuscript survives. [54]

Despite his personal penchant for erudition, when Bignon did attend biweekly meetings of the Académie des sciences he showed a lively interest in the proceedings. He listened attentively to the scientific papers read at the meetings and interrupted the reader if he did not understand some technicality. Bignon also selected papers to be presented at the two public meetings held by the Académie des sciences each year, choosing among those submitted to him by academi­ cians those which he deemed most worthy of a public presentation.

■ /55j [50] Samuel Masson, Histoire critique de la republique des lettres, tant ancienne que modem (Amsterdam: Jacques Desbordes, 1712- 1718), 111, 301.

[51] Bonnardet, "Jean-Paul Bignon de l'Oratoire," Archives de l'Académie des sciences. Dossier Jean-Paul Bignon.

[52] Ibid.

[53] Ibid.

[54] BN FF 22076. [55J Bignon to Reamur, 4 November 1717, Archives de 1 'Académie des Bignon's role in shaping the character of French scholarship henefitted from his many connections within the government of Louis

XIV and especially from the full support he enjoyed from his uncle,

Louis Pontchartrain. Martin Lister marvelled at the resources avail­ able to French academicians in 1698:

, The Abbe Bignon is President, Nephew to Monsieur Pontchar­ train. I was informed by some of them that they have this great advantage to encourage them in the pursuit of natural philosophy, that if any of the members shall give in a Bill of charges of any Experiments which he shall have made; or shall desire the Impression of any Book, and bring in the Charges of Graving required for such Book, the President allowing and signing it, the Money is forthwith reimbursed by the King. [56]

This was a fairly accurate estimate of the situation, at least in the eyes of the academicians, but the process was not always so automatic.

For example, the Académie française had begun a revised edition of its dictionary which had first appeared in 1694. This caused some

extraordinary expenses which Pontchartrain at first resisted paying

even though the Abbe Bignon had approved them:

. . . et 1'Academic ayant résolu de donner la second edi­ tion par ordre alphabétique, au lieu que la premiere estoit par racines, il est nécessaire de recopier tout le diction­ naire. Lorsque 1'Assembles s'assembla pour deliberer M l'Abbe Bignon dit qu'il en parleroit a Monseigneur de Pontchartrain et qu'il ne doutoit pas que le Roy ne voulast

sciences. Dossier Jean-Paul Bignon.

[56] Lister, A Journey pp. 81-82. bien pourvoir a cette dépense, et qu'on pouvoit mesme com­ mencer a faire faire les transcriptions. Sur ce discours M l'Abbe Regnier a fait copier les trois premieres lettres, mais quand il a este question de faire payer le copist M de Pontchartrain a respondu que le Roy n'avoit pas accoutume de faire cette depense et que Sa Majesté ne vouloit en faire de nouvelles . . . [57]

Pontchartrain relented, however, and agreed to pay these expenses.

[58] That the work could begin and financial obligation be made on the strength of Bignon's word illustrates the strength of his rela­ tionship with the secretary of state.

Although he already had many personal and family ties with both intellectuals and government officiels, the Abbe Bignon made every effort to strengthen support for the royal academies among men of influence. There can be no doubt that the Acadeinie française was the premier Académie in both position and prestige. The Académie fran­

çaise. like the University, the City of Paris, and the various courts paid its corporate respects to Louis XIV on the occasion of the death of Monsieur in 1701. The Acadeinie des sciences and the Académie des inscriptions were not included among the bodies with this privilege.

[59] This is but one example of the distance which separated these

two academies from more securely established Old Regime institutions, even after their respective reorganizations under Pontchartrain in

1699 and 1701 respectively. Bignon's behavior toward two successive

[57] Mémoire pour I'Acadmie française, BN Clairambaut 566, fol. 186- 187.

[58] Louis Pontchartrain to the Abbe Dangeaux, BN Clairambaut 566 fol. 183-185.

[59] AN 0 ^ 263, fol. 214-215. 151 Controller Generals on the occasion of their appointments exemplified

his approach to improving the situation of these academies.

Although only a secretary of state could sign a money ordon­

nance, the Controller General assigned the funds upon which payments were to be made. Should he designate a fund which was already

depleted, payments were delayed. Hence continuity of funding for

such institutions as the academies depended in part on the actions of

the Controller General. Pontchartrain held this post from 1689 until

1699 and he expected his own protégé", Caumartin, to succédé him. [60]

Instead the king appointed Chamillart, a man not allied to any of the

great families, to this post. The Abbe Bignon, who was of course

closely linked to the Pontchartrain camp, promptly organized a depu­

tation from the Académie des sciences to pay its respects to the new

appointee, Chamillart. [61] In 1708 Bignon repeated this performance

when Nicolas Desmaretz became Controller General. As he wrote to

Desmaretz, "L'Académie des inscriptions et celle des sciences brûlent

d'une juste impatience de vous rendre leurs homages." [62] Desmaretz,

a nephew of the great Colbert, was an important link with the Colbert

clan which began to reassert its strength at the end of Louis' reign.

Bignon also lent his support to the creation of an Académie in

Montpellier. He undertook a large correspondence with the notables

of Languedoc to enlist their support in the Parlement for the

[60] G. McCollim, personal communication, Paris 1977.

[61] P.V. T. 18, 25 November 1699.

[62] Abbé Jean-Paul Bignon to Desmaretz, 8 March 1708, AN G^ 562. 152 proposed academy. He assured them that their support would result in an increase in their credit in Paris. [63] His activities also extended to the schools of hydrography found in the various French port cities. These institutions were run by the Jesuits. A Jesuit,

Thoubeau, turned to Louis Pontchartrain for help in reforming the standards and curricula for these schools in 1692. In 1697 the Abbe

Bignon was able to place Thomas Lagny, an associe of the Académie des sciences, as a professor in the school of hydrography in Rochefort.

[64]

These are but a few of the ways in which the Abbe Jean-Paul Big­ non was able to promote the interests of science and of scholarship in general. He tapped the resources of the state through a network of relatives and associates to insure a stable climate for scholarly progress. Foremost among his resources were of course his close assoication with his uncle, Louis Pontchartrain, and his cousin,

Jérôme. Through these connections he could play the political role of a maecenas who offered credit to those who supported the cause of scholarship.

[63] See my discussion of this endeavor, p. 195 below.

[64] See below p. 203v Chapter V

Early Reforms in the Acadeinie, 1691 - 1698

When Louis Pontchartrain assumed responsibility as protector of the Académie des sciences on 25 July 1691, in what state did he find the Académie? Or more pertinent to the topic of refnrm, what did

Louis Pontchartrain know about conditions in the Acadeinie? Was it apparent to him at this time that rejuvenation of the Académie was needed? In Chapters Two and Three we have outlined some of the con­ ditions of the Académie during the eight-year protectorship of

Louvois. Pontchartrain may have been aware of some of these facts, but it is doubtful that he knew the full details. He was after all a very busy man occupied with affairs of state as Controller General since 1689 and Secretary of State for the maison du roi, and Secre­ tary of State for the marine since 1690. He lacked only the surin­ tendance des bâtiments to regroup in the hands of a single person all of the positions once held by J. B. Colbert.

But Pontchartrain was not named to the surintendance des bâti­ ments ; that position went instead to the marquis de Villacerf.

Pontchartrain was able, however, to detach a number of responsibili­ ties from the surintendance des bâtiments and attach them to the office of the maison du roi. These included the protectorships for the Académie des sciences and the Académie des inscriptions or petite

153 154 académie, as well as administrative charge of the Bibliothèque du roi, the Imprimerie royale, and the Argenterie. [ 1_]

Does this indicate a knowledge of and interest in the activities of these institutions? Or was Pontchartrain merely amassing offices for their patronage value? The latter does not seem to be the case.

For example, Pontchartrain did not turn out of office persons appointed by Louvois in the way that Louvois eight years earlier had routed Colbert's appointees. Louvois had turned Jerome Bignon,

Pontchartrain's brother-in-law, out of his office as maftre de la librarie some years earlier, and given the office to his young son, the Abbe de Louvois. One might have expected Pontchartrain in turn to dismiss the Abbé de Louvois, but instead he left unchanged such appointments made by his predecessor. Perhaps this reflects the fact that Pontchartrain had become Controller General on the recommenda­ tion of Le Peletier, a protege of the marquis de Louvois. [2]

If patronage was not his motive, did Pontchartrain have a genuine interest in the advancement of knowledge? Was he aware of the existing state of scholarly affairs? The Argenterie he wanted for his project to melt down the silver of the realm for coinage, but the other four institutions which he brought under the maison du roi, the Académie des sciences, the Académie des inscriptions, the

Bibliothèque du roi, and the Imprimerie royale formed the heart of

[1] Règlement touchant les fonctions de la charge du surintendant des Batimens," 25 July 1692, AN 0^35 fol. 216-217.

[2] Clément, Le Gouvernement de Louis XIV, p. 211. 155 royal patronage of scholarship. Two other bodies, the Acadeinie fran­

çaise and the College royale were already tied to the maison du roi.

The management of the Observatoire and of the Jardin royale had been left with the surintendance des bâtiments. However, for the Observa­ toire, only upkeep of the observatory building was left under the bâtiments; its research program was firmly in Pontchartrain's hands as part of the Acadeinie des sciences. The Jardin royale was classed with all of the other royal gardens and so remained in the bâtiments.

[3]

Administratively speaking, it made no sense to have these insti­ tutions under the control of the surintendant des bâtiments; they had nothing to do with royal residences. In contrast those academies which dealt with the fine arts, those of architecture and painting, had contributions to make to the elegance of royal building, and their continuation in the bâtiments was a logical step.

Bringing all of the "scholarly" royal institutions together in the office of the maison du roi and grouping those devoted to the arts in the surintendance des bâtiments was a logical administrative arrangement, but Pontchartrain's motives probably went beyond admin­

istrative simplicity. He enjoyed an intercourse with men of letters,

and one might suppose that he wished to improve their institutional

support.

[3] In 1699 there was apparently an attempt to bring the jardin roy­ ale under the control of the Académie des sciences; see below, p. 156 Thirteen days after Pontchartrain assumed responsibilities for

the Acadeinie des sciences, a report on the state of the Acadeinie

appeared under the title "Estât des Ouvrages de 1'Académie des Sci­

ences et de ceux qui la composent 7 aoust 1691 avec les gratifica­

tions qu'ils recevoient par an." [4] The author is probably Henri de

la Chapelle. The intended reader was clearly Pontchartrain. [5] This

report confirms a number of things we already knew about the state of

the Académie des sciences. It is important here that they were con­

sidered sufficiently consequential to bring them to the attention of

the new protector. Let me briefly summarize this report.

Three works of the collected treatises of members of the

Académie, which had been in the process of being edited and printed,

were cancelled abruptly at the mid-way point "par ordre exprès" in

■ 1689 or 1690. These were the new edition of the Mémoires pour servir

_a I'histoire des animaux, the Voyages de l'Académie, and a collection

of treatises on mathematics and mechanics being edited by Philippe de

la Hire. A fourth work comprising treatises of some of the ancient

Greek scientists was _lso in the process of being edited by Philippe

de la Hire and M. Thévènot. All of these works could easily be com­

pleted in a few months time once the authorization to print them was

received, declared the author of the August 1691 estât.

This report also dincussed the state of the membership in 1691.

The Académie had lost some of its leading scientists in the past

[4] BN Clairambault 566 fol. 251-252.

[5] See Appendix A for the full text of this Estât. 157 eight years. Huygens and Roemer were absent, while Perrault, Blondel,

Marriotte, Borelli, and DuClos had all died. Their replacements included a few able men but two facts characterize the recently appointed academicians as a group. First, they either entered without pensions or the received pensions far below those received by the other academicians; and second, those who had ability such as

Rolle and Varignon were to make their major contributions at a later time, during Pontchartrain's protectorship. These two, Rolle and

Varignon, could hardly fill the vacuum created by the loss of scien­ tists of such reknown as Huygens, Roemer, and the others named above.

As the report of August 1691 indicates, those appointed under

Louvois were Thevenot, Mery, Rolle, Varignon, and Cusset. Thévènot was not a scientist but a traveler and linguist, and he received no pension. Since he replaced Carcavi, one can assume that it was due to his position in the Bibliothèque du roi, one similar to that held by Carcavi, that he owed his appointment to the Académie. Mery was a tolerably good surgeon, but he was invariably mistaken in his state­ ments about the fetal heart. [6] He received a pension of 400 Pf per annum. Rolle and Varignon were both good mathematicians; both had done some good work prior to 1691, but they were to make their marks in the 1690's. Rolle received only 400 If per year, while Varignon had no pension when the report was prepared. About Cusset little is known; he received a pension of 400 If per annum.

[6] See K. J. Franklin, "Jean Mery and his Ideas on Foetal Blood Flow," Annals of Science V (July 1945) 203-228. 158 By a close study of the estât of August 1691 one detects in it the tenor of a dissiderata list presented by the membership of the

Acadeinie des sciences to the new protector. It reads like a list of unfinished business which had been accumulating under Louvois. First of all the author makes a point of noting that several works were within just a few months of completion when work on them was halted by a direct order, probably issued by Louvois, as discussed in

Chapter Three above. One finds such statements as "ce volume pour- roit paraistre dans six mois si on n'en eut point arreste l'impression par ordre expres." Is this not a hint that the Académie is willing and able to complete these publications once approval is received to resume work on them?

Secondly there is a marginal note in the manuscript stating that

Homberg and Tournefort are due 600 >1 each "d'appointment," a term which means stipend or salary in French. Now Homberg and Tournefort did not become official members until late 1691 when they were appointed by Pontchartrain. Does this mean that Louvois had promised them membership but had not honored the committment? They are not listed among members of the Académie in the estât; for what reason then did the government owe them each 600 If? One would expect the amounts owed to differ were they fees for services rendered.

Besides, 600 VC was the amount of the pension Louvois had granted

Mery, who was already included as a member. By including this in the mémoire prepared for Pontchartrain the author is bringing attention not only to the financial obligation but also to the need for the status of these two men to be rectified.

Thirdly, the author refers to the work of Cassini in extending the meridian northward and southward from the observatory in Paris as if it were a work in progress. As we saw in the last chapter, Cas­ sini in fact had done no work on the meridian since 1683, in so far as can be determined from available data, i.e., the procès-verbaux of the Acadeinie and other sources. Extending the meridian required a team of four or five surveyors who needed to be in constant communi­ cation with each other to notify one another of surveying data for geographic points. This produced a large correspondence. In the

Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris [7] this correspondence which was maintained by J. D. Cassini, is stored in a folder. The letters therein date from the fall of 1683 when the project was begun and start again in 1700 when the project was finally resumed. There are none for the intervening years. After 4 March 1684, no mention is made of the meridian project in the procès-verbaux until 1 September

1691 [8] when Cassini presented a recommendation to the Académie for resuming work on the meridian. Had he been working on th meridian all these years, such a presentation would not have been necessary.

Why did the author of the 1691 mémoire make it sound as though Cas­ sini were currently engaged in this project? Was it perhaps a ploy to gain support by making it sound as though this project were currently active?

[7] Bibliothèque de I'Observatorie de Paris, D2.38.

[8] P.V., T. 13, 1 September 1691. 160 Finally, the mémoire includes a list of unpaid pensions dating

from 1689. There is nothing particularly unusual about this. Many

times an Estât contained amounts of unpaid money, but this document

does not appear to be a straightforward Estât. Here again it may have been a reminder that pensions were in arrears.

It can thus be demonstrated that on assuming the protectorsip of

the Académie Louis Pontchartrain had both an interest in and a

knowledge of the conditions in the Académie. He had deliberately

grouped all of the royal "scholarly" institutions under his own

administration in the maison du roi by removing some of them from

other administrative jurisdictions. This is a foretaste of his later

actions in divesting other institutions of powers of book censorship

and bringing all of these powers within the Chancellery. [9] The

changes made in 1691 may have been designed to promote administrative

simplicity, but in the light of some of his later reforms, one may

suggest that Pontchartrain also had an interest in bringing added

support to these scholarly institutions. The "Estât des ouvrages" 7

August 1691, acquainted him, of course, with specific conditions in

the Académie des sciences and gave him a list of specific actions

which were needed.

The marquis de Louvois died on 16 July 1691; Pontchartrain

assumed administrative responsibilities for the Académie on 25 July

1691. No proceedings are recorded in the procès-verbaux [10] between

[9] See Woodbridge, "Censure royale et censure "episcopale: le con­ flit de 1702," p. 333-355.

[10] P.V., T. 13. 161 7 July and 1 September of that year. Although the Académie had always held meetings throughout the summer, it is possible that these meetings were never held due to uncertainties about the future of the

Académie. Meetings were recorded for 1 September and 5 September; then the Académie took its annual fall recess and did not meet again until 14 November 1691. Except for the two meetings in September, the Académie apparently did not meet between 25 July and 14 November; thus Pontchartrain did not have an opportunity to institute any changes until November.

Almost as soon as meetings resume in November 1691, one finds the Abbé Jean-Paul Bignon, nephew of the corate de Pontchartrain, attending meetings of the Académie des sciences as the spokesman for

Pontchartrain. The Abbé Bignon's first two acts were to announce that Pontchartrain had appointed two new members: Tournefort on 21

November, and Homberg on 24 November. [Ill There is an obvious rela­ tionship between the immediate appointment of these two scientists to the Académie and the appearance of their names on the Estât prepared for Pontchartrain three months earlier. Pontchartrain's first actions seem to be directed toward rectifying some of the abuses listed in this document. Both Tournefort and Homberg were awarded annual pensions of 1,500 a sum equivalent to pensions given under

Colbert's protectorship and well above the amounts given to new academicians by Louvois.

[11] P.V., T. 13, for these dates. 162

These sums paid to Homberg and Tournefort are based on an account for the Academia for 1703. [12] Prior to 1691 the amounts paid to the academicians may be obtained from the Comptes des bâti­ ments du roi sous le regne de Louix XIV edited by Jules Guiffrey, but after the transfer of the Académie to the maison du roi, these fig­ ures no longer appear in Guiffrey's compilation. Except for the

"Estât des ouvrages," 7 August 1691, the "estât" for 1703 is the next document to list pensions for the acadmictans. The pensions for Hom­ berg and Tournefort are not included in Guiffrey's work, as they became members only in 1691, but are included in the estât for 1703.

A comparison of the pensions listed in Guiffrey for 1690, or in the

"Estât des ouvrages," 7 August 1691, with the pensions reported in

1703 for those academicians who were members in both years shows that, except for.members in the category of "élèves, the pensions went unchanged throughout this time interval. It is therefore safe to assume that Homberg and Tournefort were appointed at 1,500 in

1691, since that was their pension in 1703.

When Louvois died both Rolle and Varignon were "élèves, Rolle receiving 400 per year and Varignon nothing. Following the reforms of 1699 they were both appointed as pensionnaires; in the estât of 1703 each was receiving 900 JUjTper year. It is likely that

Rolle and Varignon became regular members, with 900 Jrf per year pen­ sions, shortly after Pontchartrain assume the protectorship. As

[12] Estât des sommes que le Roy veut et ordonne estre payees par le garde de son trésor royale a ceux qui composent les Academies Royales des Inscriptions et Medailes et des Sciences par gratifi­ cation pour l'annee 1703. AN G^ 793. 163 noted in Chapter Three, both became very active at meetings after

1691, which is not typical of "élèves of the Acadeinie but of regular members.

Another change which occurred early in Pontchartrain's adminis­ tration was in publication. Between 1676 and 1679, under Colbert, the Académie had published four works which were collections of treatises by the members of the Académie. The history of these titles is explored in detail in Chapters Two and Three above, as is the failure of the Académie to produce any new collective works under

Louvois. Indeed several works which were in the process of being printed were brought to an abrupt halt late in Louvois' administra­ tion, probably at his direct orders. Collective publication reap­ peared under Pontchartrain, beginning with Two titles which appeared in 1693:

1. Recueil d'observations faites en plusieurs voyages par ordre de

Sa Majesté pour perfectionner l'astronomie et la géographie. Avec

divers traitez astronomiques. par messieurs de l'Académie royale des

sciences. Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1693.

2. Divers ouvrages de mathématiques et de phislque. par messieurs

de l'Académie royale des sciences. Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1693.

The first title, is, of course, the collection of treatises on

voyages and astronomy by members of the Académie which had been ini­

tiated by Cassini and the other astronomers while Colbert was still

protector of the Académie. This project had received only modest

support from Louvois and in the end was withdrawn from publication. 164 The second title is the collection of mathematical treatises which Le la Hire had begun with Louvois' permission but which had been suppressed.

These two works appeared in the "Estât des ouvrages," 7 August

1691, as part of the unfinished business of the Acadeinie. Since both were published by the Imprimerie royale, which was under the supervi­ sion of Pontchartrain, the decision to publish these works was either made or approved by Pontchartrain. Here, as in other cases,

Pontchartrain seems to be taking his cue from the "Estât des

Ouvrages," 7 August 1691.

The Manoires pour servir è l'histoire des animaux, on which the

Académie had exerted so much effort only to have the work stopped by a direct order when part of the text and plates were already printed, did not appear in the first round of new publications after Pontchar­ train became protector. The problem seems to have been one of tim­ ing. The Académie resumed editorial work on the Voyages in 1692,

[13] but the first mention of any attempt to resume work on the His­ toire des animaux does not appear until 1694. [14] Unfortunately for this effort, extreme stringency measures were in force throughout the royal government by 1694.

Louvois had stopped the work of extending the meridian of Paris to the two coasts of France in 1684. The change of protectors

[13] P.V., t. 13, 21 June 1692.

[14] P.V., T. 14, 17 April 1594; 19 May 1694; and passim. 165 prompted Cassini to try to revive the project. On September 1, 1691, at the very first meeting after Pontchartrain became protector, the proces-verbaux reports that

M. Cassini apporta un projet pour la continuation de la méridienne, et pour les observations des longitudes dans les different lieux de la terre pour la perfection de la géographie et de la navigation. [15]

Although the "Estât des Ouvrages," 7 August 1691 speaks of this as a current project, in fact it had been dormant for eight years.

Clearly it was not dormant in Cassini's mind, however, and the inclu­ sion of this project in the Estât suggests that Cassini had some influence in what was included in this report. Surely it is not coincidental that Cassini had a proposal ready to present on this topic only three weeks later.

Although work on the meridian was not resumed at this time,

Pontchartrain's exact response to the proposal is not known. The project should have an obvious appeal for anyone holding the position of minister for the marine, as Pontchartrain did. That work was finally resumed in 1700, during a time of peace and following the reform of the Académie in 1699, indicates support for the project.

Pontchartrain may have felt that the project was too costly to be resumed during a time of war.

So far we have looked at a number of changes or minor reforms brought about in the Académie des sciences as an apparent response to problems mentioned in the "Estât des Ouvrages," 7 August 1691. The

[15] P.V., T. 13, 1 September 1691. 166 tie between this report, which was destined for Pontchartrain, and

the reforms themselves, reinforces the evidence already adduced that

these reforms had their origin with the minister of state. Pontchar­

train, however, was not one simply to respond to a set of requests.

He perceived the need to rejuvenate the Académie and he took steps in

that direction on his own initiative.

Pontchartrain's first and most important step was to find a new vehicle for publishing the results of the research generated in the

Academic. Within a month after the fall recess ended in 1691, the

Abbe Bignon announced Pontchartrain's plan;

M. 1'Abbe Bignon a dit que l'intention de M. de Pontchar­ train est que la Compagnie donne tous les mois au public un mémoire de ce qu'elle aura fait. Sur quoy la Compagnie pour obéir a cette ordre a conclu que chaque personne de l'assemblee apportera samdy prochain un projet de ce qui pourra etre donne au public et que l'on commencera a donner au public le premier de ces mémoires le 31 jour de Janvier l'annee prochaine 1692 et que l'on continuera de les donner au public tous les mois. [16]

The Royal Society had published its own Philosophical Transactions

since 1665. The A"ademie, on the other hand, had relied on the occa­

sional publication of its collected works, on the Journal des sça-

vans, and on individual publishing.

None of these was really sufficient, as we have seen in earlier

chapters. The official publications of the Acadeinie printed by the

Imprimerie royale consisted of expensive, elegantly printed "limited

editions" which were unsuitable as a means of scientific communication.

[16] P.V. , T. 13, 19 December 1691. 167 Such works were also subject to the whims of the protector, as well as to the constraints of the royal budget. The Journal des sga- vans was a general review which covered history, theology, and travel as well as science. In addition, in Chapter Two we demonstrated that

the number of notices from academicians appearing in the Journal des

sçavans declined greatly in the late 1680's. At last the Académie was to have its own monthly publication which would put it on a par with the Royal Society.

Having to fill up a monthly Meinoire, however, put an awesome

responsibility on the academicians to produce work of publishable quality in rapid succession. Indeed this may have been

Pontchartrain's motive; he was not one to condone neglect of one's appointed duties. To recapitulate the formal response of the

Académie, recall that the proces-verbaux reads^

. . Sur quoy la Compagnie pour obeir a cette ordre a con­ clu que chaque personne de l'assemblee apportera samdy pro­ chain un project de ce qui pourra etre donne au public . . . [17]

At this time the Acadeinie had only a few members, twelve or fourteen

at the most, who were capable of reserch and writing of publishable

quality. The Royal Society in contrast had a large amateurish membership, in which responsibility was diffuse; it could also rely

on a wide correspondence to fill its Philosophical Transactions. For

the Acadeinie des sciences, responsibility for the success of the

Mémoires fell personally on each member.

[17] Ibid., emphasis added. 168

One is immediately struck by the increased activity at the biweekly meetings recorded in the proces-verbaux following the announcement of the intended mémoires, which was made on 19 December

1691. From the beginning of 1692, it is common to find three or even four scientific presentations being made at a single meeting, rather than one or two as previously. One also finds that the academicians began to prepare the agenda for the following meeting during each meeting. Table 14 below shows that the number of scientific presen­ tations reached its highest in 1692 of any year in the 24 years under study. The peak year of 1692 is particularly significant when con­ trasted to the three previous years, 1689 to 1691. These three years represent the lowest level of scientific activity of the entire 24- year period, the average number of scientific presentations per year being only 129 for those three years. [18]

The tables speak for themselves. Pontchartrain must have been

greatly pleased. Indeed he periodically read the pages of the

proces-verbaux of the Académie, a sign of how conscientiously he took his duties as protector. [19] It also indicates that he wished to know at first hand the abilities and application of the individual academicians.

The Mémoires were published monthly for two years, 1692 and

1693; then they ceased. In this two-year period eighty-five

treatises were published. Two features of this publication are

[18] See Table 2 above.

[19] P.V., T. 14, 12 March 1695. TABLE 14

Number of Scientific Presentations by Protector and by Year

Colbert Louvois Pontchartrain

Number of Year Number of Year Number of Presentations Presentations Presentations

1676 138 1684 202 1692 207

1677 189 1685 196 1693 166

1678 202 1686 157 1694 135

1679 174 1687 172 1695 166

1680 172 1688 160 1696 152

1681 123 1689 119 1697 142

1682 152 1690 145 1698 128

1683 176 1691 123 1699 184

Total 1,326 Total 1,276 Total 1,280 170 worthy of note. First, nearly all of the contributions came from

resident members of the Acadeinie. Secondly, the works presented were

all produced in the same two-year period. [20] That is, the academi­

cians did not fill the Mémoires by simply pulling older works from

their files.

The demise of the Mémoires is attributable to the fact that they

were too large a venture for so few scientists, although the

stringent war-time budget may also have encouraged such a move. How­

ever, Martin Lister, visiting the marquis de 1'Hôpital, a member of

the Académie, recorded in 1698 the following comment by l'Hô'pital:

He [I'Hopital] told me it was not possible for them to con­ tinue the monthly Memoirs, as they had done for two years only, because they were few in number of that society and had very little correspondence. [21]

There is no indication that such alternatives as less frequent publi­

cation were considered.

In our analysis of the scientific activity of the Académie under

Louvois we noted two aspects of decline in the productivity of the

Académie. One was an outright decline in scientific productivity.

The second was a distortion in the proportion of research which was

devoted to each of the major scientific disciplines. Pontchartrain

rectified the fist problem by stimulating publication, which in turn

stimulated research. The second problem was rectified through the

[20] Most can be dated by comparing titles published in the mémoires to titles of treatises read at biweekly meetings, recorded in the proces-verbaux.

[21] Martin Lister, The Journey, p. 97. 171 new attitude towards science and scholarship displayed by Louis

Pontchartrain and the Abbé Bignon.

Colbert initially appointed to the Acadeinie a membership which represented the entire spectrum of recognized scientific concerns.

He also supported work in all of these areas. The result was a roughly equal distribution of research in all areas under Colbert's protectorship. Louvois' one-sided support for the research necessary to publish another edition of the Mémoires pour servir a 1'histoire des animaux distorted this; anatomical topics came to dominate the bi-weekly meetings and research in mechanics and mathematics all but disappeared.

During the protectorship of Pontchartrain a more balanced pat­ tern of research reappeared in the Académie. [22] Some of the changes in the relative frequency of presentations dealing with each

field of science such as those in medicine, embryology, and physiol­

ogy may be accounted for by changing interests of the scientific com­ munity or of individual academicians, as the membership of the

Académie had of course changed over time. On the other hand there was a strong resurgence of research in mechanics and mathematics within the Acadeinie under Pontchartrain, a fact which was due no

doubt to the counscientious concerns of the Abbé Bignon.

In 1692 Bignon created a separate group of advisors to consider

the problems of technology. [23] The new group was not composed of

[22] See Table 15 below.

[23^ Claire Salomon-Bayet, "Un préambule théorique a une Acadénie des Humber and Percent of Scientific Presentations by Protector and by Scientific Area

Colbert Louvois Pontchartrain

Area Number ■p'ercent Number Percent Number Percent

Anatomy

Natural 133 10% 404 33% 163 13% History

Astronomy 207 15% 130 10% 170 13%

Mathematics 124 10% 37 3% 183 14% Mechanics

Chemistry 208 15% 254 20% 238 18%

Medicine 25 2% 25 # 1 M 5%

Embryology 39 3% 30 2% 1 59 5% Physiology

Other 590 45% 324 30% 1 405 32%

Total 1,326 100% 1,276 100% 1,280 100% 173 academicians but neither were they artisans. Their interests were in

the application of rational and mathematical methods to mechanical arts. The three principles of this group were Pere Sebastien, Jau- geon, and Des Billettes. They met every Monday in the Hotel of the

Abbé Bignon to discuss technical matters. [24] Although none were members of the Académie des sciences at this time, they maintained

close times with the Académie and all three became members in 1699, as will be seen in the next chapter.

Louis Pontchartrain's efforts to reorganize the administrative

structure of the royal academies, to rectify the financial and per­

sonal problems inherited from Louvois, to promote a major program of

publication and research, and to create an atmosphere in which all of

the sciences including technology were treated with equal concern,

constitute his first attempts at reform. They betray a basic change

in mentality toward the proper functions of academic institutions

from that exhibited by Louvois. A few organizational changes were

made at this time, but these early reforms were basically a return to

the methods of Colbert. That is, personal intervention and direction

on the parts of Pontchartrain and his representative the Abbé Bignon

were used in order to achieve a certain momentum in scientific pro­

ductivity. Their efforts had only a modest success, as they were

unable to maintain this momentum. What was needed was a fundamental

arts," Revue d'histoire des sciences, XXIII (July/September 1970), 229-250.

[24] Ibid. 174 organizational change which would mold the scientific pursuits of the academicians into a self-sustaining, self-regulating, and internally motivated institution. Chapter VI

The Règlement of 1699

On 4 February 1699 the Académie des sciences received from the king a règlement of fifty articles which defined the constitutional framework within which the Académie and its members were to function.

This règlement was an attempt to institutionalize the reforms needed for the smooth and productive operation of the Académie. Ever since its founding, all changes in the Académie and all efforts to promote its program had been executed on an ^ hoc basis by the protector or one of his representatives, but ad hoc procedures had never proved to be a satisfactory means of solving the recurring problems of the

Académie.

When Louis Pontchartrain assumed the role of protector to the

Académie in 1691 he was faced with the problems of one, low scien­ tific productivity, two, a fragmentation of internal cohesion and direction, and three, some minor problems of membership and pensions.

His immediate attention to these problems brought about a brief period [1692-1693] of flourishing activity, but these efforts failed to produce lasting effects. By the middle of the decade the Académie was once again in a state of quiescence and Pontchartrain and Bignon were facing the same set of problems. Clearly the only permanent solution was to institutionalize the needed reforms.

175 176

Bernard Fontenelle, who had been appointed perpetual secretary

of the Académie in 1697 by Pontchartrain and was thus a witness and

perhaps a collaborator in the règlement itself, corroborates this view. In the past the Académie had relied on the sharing of a common

ideal of experimental science to infuse cooperation into its member­

ship and promote scientific productivity, he suggests, but times had

changed and a more formal statement of procedures and duties was

required. In his own words, written in 1699, he states,

L'Amour des Sciences en faisoit presque seul toutes les lois, mais quoique le succès eut “été heureux, il est cer­ tain que pour rendre cette compagnie durable et aussi utile qu'elle le pouvoit être, il falloit des règles plus pré­ cises et plus sévères. [1]

Fontenelle might have added that the "succès heureux" of the earlier

years of the Académie derived not only from "1'Amour des Sciences"

but also from the attention and direction of a strong protector.

Fontenelle is equally clear on the expected results which the

règlement was intended to bring about. The règlement was to make the

academicians more productive in their work and to provide a constitu­

tional foundation through which differences might be settled and

cooperation among the members facilitated. Concerning the produc­

tivity of the academicians he says.

Les Académiciens sont plus fortement que jamais engagez au travail & même a l'assiduité. [2]

. . . ou tous les Académiciens pensionnaires déclerent par écrit quel êtoit l'Ouvrage auquel ils travailleroient, & en

[1] Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royal des sciences . . . MDCXClX, p. 1.

[2] Ibid. . p. 12. quel temps ils espèroient l'avoir fini. [3]

To call the règlement a type of constituion with all that term implies about its function as an instrument of government was not far from Fontenelle's own conception of its purpose, for he speaks of the

Académie as a type of République. In his own words:

De là I the règlement] se forma une compagnie presque toute nouvelle, pareille en quelque sorte à ces Républiques, dont le plan a été conçu par les sages, lorsqu'ils ont fait des Loix, en se donnant une liberté entière d'imaginer & de ne suivre que les souhaites de leur raison. [4]

With the Treaty of Ryswick signed in 1697, peace had returned to

Europe by 1698. In the eloquent language of Fontenelle, this development in the political sphere had implications for other spheres of activity as well:

C'est ainsi qu'en jugea le Roy, lorsqu'après la dernière Guerre si glorieuse à Sa Majesté, il tourna particulière­ ment les yeux sur le dedans de son Royaume, pour y repren­ dre de ses propres mains, & Selon les vues de sa sagesse, les fruits de la paix. [5]

A number of recent historians have noted that the return to peace signaled the commencement of a series of internal reforms of French government on the part of Louis XIV and his ministers. This was as true in commerce as it was in science and letters. [6] Fontenelle is of course referring to the new règlement for the Académie des sci-

[Tf^Ib'id.. p. 15.

[4] Ibid.. p. 2

[5] Ibid.

[6] See Thomas J. Schaeper, "The French Council of Commerce, 1700- 1715: An Administrative Study of Mercantilism after Colbert," unpublished PhD dissertation, Ohio State University, 1977, pp. 25-25. Although the Académie had shown signs of difficulties as early as 1694, Pontchartrain was not ready to meet its problems until the return of peace. The problems were the same as those found at the end of the Louvois era: one, a declining scientific productivity; two, a decline of group effort or internal cohesion; and three, the need for a stabilization of membership and financial support. By

1698 the problems of membership and financial support had assumed a greater significance than they had taken during the protectorship of

Louvois, while the problems of discord and internal cohesion had been kept in stricter bounds under the watchful eye of the Abbe Bignon.

Yet all three problems needed an institutional solution. In the remainder of this chapter I shall analyze the fifty articles of the

Règlement of 1699 to show how they deal with each of these problems.

Article 1, which establishes the relationship of the Académie to the crown, and articles 2 through 15, which define the membership and its recruitment, lay the foundation for the durability and strength of the Académie. Articles 16 through 35 specify the conduct and the work expected of the members. Articles 36 through 45 deal with the officers of the Académie, and articles 46 through 50 deal with finan­ cial and miscellaneous arrangements. For purposes of reference the

complete text of the règlement may be found in Appendix B. A. The Problems of Membership and Financial Support

The marquis de 1'Hospital had commented to Martin Lister on the

reasons for which the Académie found it necessary to give up publica­

tion of its Mémoires in 1693. [7] L'Hospital pointed to the small

size of the membership of the Académie at this time, and to the lack

of correspondence from abroad to supplement the research done within

the Académie. The obvious solution to this bottleneck would be to

add new members and create more pensions. Louis Pontchartrain did

appoint new members to the Académie des sciences. It was not possi­

ble, however, to simply multiply pensions; there seemed to be an

upper limit to the amount available for pensions which could not be

exceeded.

In 1691 there were 18 resident members of the Académie; by 1698

that number had grown to 30. Birembaut claims that the membership was 20 and 33 respectively in these years, but he included the

corresponding members. [8] On the whole the new members were a com­

petent group. Among the outstanding additions were Tournefort, Rom­

berg, I'Hospital, Fontenelle, Sauveur, and Cassini II. Competent but

perhaps not outstanding were Maraidi, Bolduc, Charas, Chazelles, De

la Hire II, Carre", and Tauvry. The nonentities were Couplet fils. De

la Coudraie, and Morin.

The financial support for all these new members is not known,

but financial support for the Académie and its members did decline

during the war years. Tournefort and Romberg entered the Académie

[7] See pp. 167-170 above.

[8] Birembaut, "Les Caractères originaux," p. 19. 180 with pensions of 1,500 each in 1691. [9] Tournefort published his

three-volume work, Elements de botanique, in 1694.

(Paris: Imprimerie royale). For this work the plates alone cost

12,000 yC\ the total expense was borne by the government. [10] It is

unlikely that the king would have funded this project in 1694; the

funds were probably made available in 1692 or 1693.

Bolduc entered the Académie with a pension of 500 VC in 1694.

[11] Many of the others who entered the Acadanie after 1693 were

designated as eleves or associes, who probably received either no

pension at all or only 400 y i per year. For instance Maraldi, who

entered the Académie in 1694, received 400 per year. [12] The oth­

ers who entered as “élèves were Cassini fils, Louis Carré, and Daniel

Tauvry.

Of course by 1694 France was in desperate financial straits.

Harvests had been bad for three successive years, government income

was down, and Pontchartrain as Controller General was using every

possible expedient to raise revenue to continue the War of the League

of Augsburg. The pensions of artists at the academy in Rome were

stopped in 1694. [13] Many of those who were employed in the surin­

tendance des bâtiments received augmentations des gages; that is.

[9] See p. 161 above.

[10] Lister Journey, p. 81.

[11] Estât des Sommes . . . 1703, AN 793.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Guillemet, Essai, p. 185. 181 they received either no salary or partial salary for 1694 but an

increase in salary for future years. [14] There is no record that the members of the Académie des sciences went unpaid in these difficult years, and enough records survive that one would expect such an event

to leave its traces had it occurred. Fontenelle in fact claims that payment went on uninterrupted:

Le Roi pour assurer aux Académiciens le repos & le loisir dont ils avoient besoin, leur établit des pensions, que les guerres même n'ont jamais fait cesser, . . . [15]

It is not known, however, whether payment was ever made in some type of promissory note which had to be discounted for liquid cash.

This assessment of the situation is supported by the journal of

Claude Bourdelin. Bourdelin, a member of the chemical section of the

Académie, had been conducting experiments for the Académie since

1672. He maintained a journal of his expenses which has survived,

[16] and every year or every few years he presented a mémoire for the reimbursement of his expenses. Over the years his activity declined and in 1687 Bourdelin received permission to conduct his experiments at home rather than in the Bibliothèque royale where the laboratory

of the Académie was located. The Académie continued to reimburse his expenses, however.

Concerning the expenses for 1694, which was certainly the most

[14] Ibid., p. 181.

[15] Académie des Sciences. Histoire et Mémoires de l'Académie des sciences depuis son établissement, p. 9.

[16] BN FF NA 5147. stringent year of the decade, Bourdelin makes this entry:

Le 26 Décembre 1695 donne le mémoire a Monsieur l'Abbe Big­ non qui l'avoit demande et a dit qu'il le feroit payer, plus je luy ay aussy donne les deux de 92 et 93 seulement les sommes, il m'a dit qu'ils estaient arreste mais qu'il n'y avait point d'argent. Le 6 mars 1695 Monsieur Gruynt qui demeur devant les Capucins du Marais a pays pour l'annee 1694. [17]

The sums for 1692 and 1693 were paid in December 1696. [18] As this record indicates, despite the tight budget of the mid-1690's, pay­ ments for the expenses of the Académie were made, even for the incon­ sequential expenses of Bourdelin's laboratory. That Bignon asked for a memoirs of expenses suggests that the government could have let the debt slide for several more years if it had so wished. This passage also suggests that Bourdelin had not submitted his expenses from 1692 and 1693 until 1695 when Bignon asked for those of 1694.

Besides the problem of expanding the membership of the Académie des sciences on insufficient funds, a solution was needed for a

related problem. In addition to the thirty scientists whose member­

ship in the Académie had been formally acknowledged by the end of

1698, the eve of the reform règlement, the activities of the Académie included a fringe membership of informal associates. The status of these men needed to be rectified.

On 4 February 1699, the day on which the reform articles were announced to the Académie, the Abbé Bignon also read to the Académie a letter from Louis Pontchartrain in which the initial membership of

[17] Ibid.. p. 132

[18] Ibid. 183 the renewed Académie was set forth. [19] Significantly, Pontchartrain states in this letter that "J'ay fait lecture s' Sa Majesté les académiciens qui la composent présentement, sçavoir, . . followed by a list of names. In fact, a number of persons included in this list, whose names I have underlined [20] had not been recognized as formal members of the Académie as of the date of this letter.

Indeed the very definition of membership had become hazy and uncertain as a consequence of the lack of formal criteria for member­ ship. Even the receipt of a pension was no certain mark of member­ ship. In Chapter Five we saw that at Louvois' death in 1691 there were a number of scientists whose relationship with the Académie had not been clarified in formal terms. Pontchartrain had settled that problem by appointing Homberg and Tournefort as regular members. Now the same problem was repeating itself, with the difference that this time the ranks of the fringe membership seemed to be swelling more rapidly.

Articles I through 15 of the Règlement of 1699 addressed the dual problems of stabilizing an enlarged membership committed to a higher level of scientific productivity and of obtaining for the

Académie a secure financial basis. The Académie des sciences needed legal recognition as a formal entity within the Old Regime government in order to be a permanently budgeted item in the national budget and thus insure its continuity. It likewise needed, as the experience of

[19] See Appendix A for the text of this letter.

[20] See text. Appendix A. 184

trying to publish monthly meinolres in 1692 and 1693 indicates, sup­

port for as large a membership as possible within the royal budget.

But increasing the membership by adding to the ranks of unpaid members or by allowing the growth of an informal fringe membership

could only lead to problems, since Pontchartrain clearly expected well-paid regular members to be productive in their research and pub­

lication to a degree which could hardly be demanded of unpaid or

poorly paid fringe members or informal associates. The règlement of

1699 solves this set of interrelated problems admirably.

1. Financial Support

With the receipt of a règlement signed by Louis XIV himself, the

Académie des sciences attained a legal recognition never before

accorded to it. Furthermore the first article of the règlement

placed the Académie under the direct protection of the king. The

effect of the règlement was to establish the Académie as a permanent

institution of the French government. In so far as I can determine,

only after the reforms of 1699 does the Académie des sciences become

a separately budgeted item to be paid by the royal treasury. Of the

three budgets for the Académie which I have found, none carries a

date prior to 1703: one for 1703, [21] one for 1708, [22] and

another for 1715. [23]

[21] AN g 7 793.

[22] AN 918

[23] AN 0- 611. 185

The financial bases of the Academie for the years prior to the

1699 reforms is an area for further research. So long as they were

part of the surintendance des bâtiments, the Academie des sciences

and the other royal academies were paid on a general account for pen­

sions. The Academie des sciences itself did not appear as an

independent entity in the accounts of the bâtiments; pensions for the

individual members could be continued or revoked at will. The

mechanics of payment for the years between 1691 and 1698, after the

Academie was transferred to the maison du roi, are still unknown.

In sum, prior to 1699 the members of the Academie des sciences were treated as individual pensioners and as such, their livelihood

was much less secure. It was not certain that their pensions would

be renewed at all when Colbert died. Justell made the following

remark in a letter to Ashton:

On espere que Monsieur De Louvoy accordera a 1'Academie sa protection. [24]

Again at the death of Louvois in July 1691, there was a period of

about a month when the Academie did not meet. Presumably the academ­

icians were awaiting the fate of their company — and their pensions.

[25] After 1699 the Acadenie had official recognition with a speci­

fied slot in the royal budget, so that changes of protector were of

less concern at the fiscal level.

Articles 2 through 15 of the règlement divided the membership of

[24] Justell to Ashton, no date, RS, LEG IX 37-38.

[25] See p. 161 above. 186 the Academie into four classes: honoraires. pensionnaires. associes,

and "elèves. The honoraires were to number ten, while there were to

be twenty members in each of the other classes. This allowed for a

total membership of seventy, but only the twenty pensionnaires were

to receive pensions. The honoraires were expected to be amateurs of

sciences. The associés and the eleves were ranked in hierarchical fashion under the pensionnaires in such a way as to form a ladder for advancement to higher rank, thus providing a stimulus for produc­

tivity. [26]

New members were to be nominated by Che academicians and appointed by the king. This formal procedure of recruitment provided

a clear and effective definition of membership. The creation of

these classes of non-pensioned members provided a formal status for

the rather large fringe membership of the Acadanie, who could thus be

incorporated and recognized as part of the Academie at little cost.

At the same time this expansion formed a larger base for research and

publication on limited funds. A detailed analysis of each class of

membership will support and clarify these arguments.

2. Honoraires

The four classes of membership established formally in 1699 had

all existed informally prior to that date, which supports Hahn's

thesis that the règlement was a codification of pre-existing prac­

tices, at least on this pointe The class of honoraire accommodated a

[26] On the role of these two classes, see the letter which Pontchar­ train wrote to the Academie in 1714. Appendix A. 187 number of amateurs of science who had over the years gained entrance

to the meetings of the Academie "par honneur." For example, in 1684

Pera Gouye and Fere Fontenay, members of the Jesuit order, began to attend meetings on a regular basis to communicate thé scientific pro­ gress of the Jesuits working in China and Siam. Their access to the meetings was based on the express orders of Louvois, [27] but Louvois never accorded them the rank of académicien. Other honorary members are mentioned in the report submitted to Pontchartrain when he assumed the protectorship in 1691. The report notes that "Renaud y entrer par honneur," and that "a M. Dalesme pour inventions de machines, 600 il lui permettre d'y entrer par honneur." [28]

Renaud, a naval engineer, received no pension; Dalesme was at least

to be paid for his efforts although present "par honneur."

The Carmelite, Pere Truchet, usually acknowledged as Pere Sebas­ tien, was likewise occasionally present at meetings of the Academie des sciences. His access to meetings derived from his membership in

the group of technologists who met weekly at the hotel of the Abbé

Bignon. [29] His claim to formal membership will be discussed below along with those of Des Billettes and Jaugeon.

When we look at the list of honorary members appointed by the king during the reorganization of the A c a d ^ i e in 1699, we see that

[27] P.V., T. 11, 16 December 1684.

[28] Estât des Ouvrages de 1'Academie, August 1691, BN Clairambault, 566, fol. 251-252.

[29] See p. 171 above. 188 three of them, Pere Gouye, M. Renaud, and Pere Truchet already had entrance to meetings. Two others, the Abbé Bignon and the marquis de

I'Hospital, had been active members of the Académie prior to the reforms; both were probably placed in the class of honoraires in deference to their rank. That leaves five more positions. Three of these positions were not filled by the king but were left open, to be filled by nominees selected by the academicians themselves. The other two royal appointees, Pere Malebranche and Nicolas de Mallez- ieu, are somewhat more difficult to explain, however.

André Robinet has advanced the argument that Malebranche was the leader of a group of mathematicians who supported the controversial

Leibnitzian calculus and who entered the Academie des sciences "en masse" in the 1690's and the early 1700's. [30] This group of "Male- branchistes" included the marquis de I'Hospital, Varignon, Reyneau,

Bernard Lamy, Carré, Sauveur, Saurin, Guisnee, Reneau d'Elisagaray, and Fontenelle. [31] Malebranche was the leader of the group, not because of his skill as a mathematician, but because his towering

reputation as a philosopher was an invaluable aid in gaining support for the cause. During the 1690's he criticized, edited, and pushed

to publication the writings of I'Hospital, Varignon, and others of

the group. [32]

[30] André Robinet, "Le Groupe malebranchiste introducteur de calcul infinitésimal en France," Revue d'Histoire des sciences XIII (October/December 1960), 287-308.

[31] Ibid.. p. 287.

[32] Ibid. . pp. 287-291. 189 Robinet has established the membership of this group through the study and editing of a collection of manuscripts written by these mathematicians and emandated in the hand of Malebranche. This col­ lection of manuscripts, originally in the archives of the Oratoire and now in the Bibliothèque nationale have been published as volume

XVI1-2 of the Oeuvres completes of Malebranche. Through his correspondence within the Oratoire Malebranche also succeeded in introducing the ideas of Leibnitzian calculus into the curriculum of the colleges maintained by the Oratoire. [33]

The existence of this group of "Malebranchistes" and the leading role played in it by Malebranche himself establishes Malebranche as part of the "fringe membership" of the Académie des sciences in the

1690's. Reneau d'Elisagaray (Renaud) had, as noted above, had entré to the biweekly meetings "par honneur" since sometime in the 1680's.

Varignon became a member in 1688, I'Hospital in 1694, Sauveur in

1696, and Louis Carré in 1697. It is not surprising, therefore, that

Malebranche was appointed during the reforms of 1699 and that others of the group entered the Académie in the next three or four years.

The only opponent to this school of mathematics to enter the Acadanie during this period was Père Gouye, who was appointed an honoraire in

1699 after having attended meetings since 1684, as noted above.

There is no substantial evidence to indicate that either the

Abbé Bignon or Louis Pontchartrain showed any favoritism in recruit­

ing this group to the Académie. The Abbé Bignon showed no apparent

[33] Ibid., p. 290. 190 bias when, as President of the Académie, he moderated the debates on the subject. [34] He was favorably disposed to receive Johanna Ber­ noulli, a supporter of the cause, as an associé externe when Male­ branche asked Bignon to support his admission. [35]

It is more likely that the Abbé Bignon was intrigued by the intellectual Importance of the problem of the calculus and pushed for a solution. The discussion of the relative decline of mathematics under Louvois and its revival after 1691 found in Chapter Five above supports this proposition. As noted above [36] both Varignon and

Rolle greatly increased their presentations to the biweekly meetings after this date, although the debate had been going on in the Acta erudltorum throughout the 1880's. [37] Rolle and Varignon were the two principal antagonists in the arguments concerning the calculus in

the Académie des sciences during the 1690's, with Rolle opposing and

Varignon supporting the "Malebranchists."

Initially at least, the class of honorary members was clearly not a sop given to the noble class by the king to satisfy their van­

ity, as Le Cler claims. [38] Six of the seven members originally

[34] André Robinet, "Les Académiciens des Sciences Malebranchists" in Oeuvres complètes Nicolas de Malebranche (Paris: Jurin, 1967), T. XX, 176.

[35] Varignon to Johann I Bernoulli, 19 February 1699, Malebranche, Oeuvres complètes T. XIX, P. 664.

[36] See p. 94 above.

[37] Robinet, "Le Groupe malebranchiste," pp. 288 ff.

[38] Adhemard Le Cler, "Académie des Sciences," in La Grande Encyclo­ pédie (Paris, Lamirault, 1886-1902), T. 1, 199. 191 appointed by Louis in 1699 had a tie with the Académie prior to the règlement of 1699. Only the marquis de I'Hospital carried a noble rank, and only he and the Abbe Bignon would be considered men of influence in the larger world of the court.

Louis Pontchartrain held certain reservations about the utility of honorary membership, although he considered the existence of a senior class of members useful in regulating and stimulating the rest of the members. His comments on the law faculty at the University of

Besançon could apply equally well to the Académie des sciences;

Je suis de votre avis pour l'ètablissment de quelque doc­ teurs agrèges dans la faculté de droit de votre université non seulement parceque cela rendra le corps plus considér­ able, mais encore parcequ'il est bon de donner des surveil­ lants aux professeurs affin qu'ils ne soient pas trop les maîtres. Cela facilitera encore les exercises et animera les disputes et les "etudes. Ainsi rien ne me paroist plus utile que cet établissmens. Mais a l'égard des docteurs honnoraires je les trouve asses inutiles et puis qu'il n'y en point eu jusqu'ici je crois qu'on peut fort bein s'en passer. [39]

The Académie had different views on the subject of honorary mem- berhsip. The king's original appointments to this class gave recog­ nition to amateurs of science who were already involved with the activities of the Académie. Future appointments were to be made by

the king based on the nomination of the Académie (Article 8 of the

1699 règlement) and the Académie began to use this privilege to sol-

licit the favor and support of the well-placed. The king had

appointed seven honoraires, leaving three positions to be filled by

the Académie. The academicians nominated Guy Fagon, premier medecin

[39] Pontchartrain to M. Boisot, Pro. general du Parlement de Besan­ con, 13 March 1700. BN FF 21119 fols. 180-181. 192 du roi and surintendant de Jardin du roi; the Abbé Camille Louvols, youngest son of the late marquis de Louvols and bibliothécaire du roi; and Vauban.

Ail three had an interest In scientific matters. [40] But com­ pared to the men of modest power and Influence appointed by Louis, these three nominees had much to offer the Académie besides the pleasure of their company.

On 7 January 1699, a month before the reforms of the Acadonle des sciences, Louis XIV ordained a changed In the status of the Jar­ din du roi. This was the one scientific or "scholarly" institution which Pontchartrain had failed to attach to his administration of the maison du roi in 1691. [41] Now, In early 1699, Louis XIV removed the

Jardin du roi from the administrative responsibilities of the surin­ tendance des bâtiments. Rather than transferring It to the maison du roi, however, the king granted the Jardin an Independent status as a surintendance. The position of surintendant was awarded to the prem­ ier medecin du roi, who was at that time Guy Fagon. [42] This had been a long-time ambition of Fagon. The Académie des sciences also hoped to extend Its own authority after this change, and the class of honorary membership was one tool in its efforts.

[40] Philippe de la Hire reports having performed some experiments at Meudon for the Abbé Louvols; see "Examen de la pesanteur de l'Air par Ph de la Hire," P.V., T. 14, 28 janvier 1696; the scientific interests of Fagon and Vauban are of course well known.

[41] See discussion, pp. 153-155 above.

[42] Règlement pour le Jardin Royal de Plantes, AN 0^ 43 fol. 43. On 14 February 1699, the Académie nominated Fagon

pour une place d'Académicien honoraire, quoyqu'a cause de son employ l'on n'espère pas qu'il puise venir aux assem­ blées mais on a voulu donner cette distinction a son mérite et a' sa personne. [43]

In the meantime certain other tentatives toward the Jardin were attempted. The outcome may be judged from the following letter from

Fagon, which Fontenelle read to the Académie one week later, on 21

February 1699:

Monsieur Je suis extrêmement surpris d'apprendre de mon fils que Ms s vous avoit proposer d'oster le recueil des Squelettes de l'Académie, du lieu ou il est au Jardin Royal. Et je ne sçauvois comprendre, quel motif la porte a vous demander une chose dont je ne lui ay jamais parlé. S'il m'avoit été permis de vous dire encore un mot hier dans le Salon de Versailles, vous aviez connu Monsieur combien J'estois éloigné de cette pensée. L'heure de prie Dieu du Roy vous fit retirer, dans le moment que je voulois avoir l'honneur de vous offrir non seulement le logement que l'Académie remplit dans le Jardin Royal, mais tout ce qui peut y dépendre de moy pour son usage. La grace que le Roy m'a faite de m'en adonner l'entière surintendance, m'est beau­ coup plus sensible, par le droit qu'elle me rend, de ne plus partage avec personne la liberté que Sa Majesté m'accorde de faire les honneurs de son Jardin; que part tous les autres avantages qui m'en reviennent. Je n'en connois point Monsieur qui me puisse faire un plus grand plaisir, que celuy de vous en rendre le maîstre: et de pouvois, en conservant a l'Académie ce qu'elle y occupe, contribuer a*luy établir par une joissance continuée dans les différentes administrations du Jardin Royal, une espèce de titre, pour se maintenir contre les prétentions de mes successeurs. Jugez je vous supplie Monsieur si je voudrois présentement me retrancher l'unique resource que J'ay, de pouvoir par ce petit service prolonge après ma mort, sup­ plier en quelque fapon aux devoirs que je ne sauvoir rendre pendant ma vie a l'Académie. [44]

Fagon had just gained the independence of the Jardin from the Surin-

[43] P.V., T. 18, 14 February 1699.

[44] P.V., T. 18, 21 February 1699. 194 tendance des bâtiments. Clearly he was not ready to share those powers even with the Académie des sciences, his new honorary member­ ship in the Académie not withstanding. Exactly what had transpired between Fagon and the Académie is not clear, but in this letter Fagon is reasserting both his authority over the entire Jardin and his good will toward the Académie.

Despite the relative security of the Académie following the règlement of 1699, the Abbé Bignon did not pass up the opportunity to secure the good will of influential men. When Pontchartrain resigned as Controller General in 1699, the Abbe organized a deputation of members to pay their respects to the new Controller General, Chamil- lart, and ask his protection for the Académie. [45] This was repeated when DesMaretz became Controller General in 1708. [46]

Bignon was instrumental in the creation of a new Académie at

Montpellier in 1706, even giving it a set of regulations identical to those established for the Paris Académie des sciences in 1699. As

Françoise Blichet has noted, honorary members were important to the

Montpellier academy. Honorary members who had influence with the

Parlement were especially useful when the funds for the new body were at issue. Bignon's correspondence with members of the parlement, who were also honorary members of the Académie of Montpellier, reveals how he manipulated them into supporting the Académie, first by flattering their vanity and secondly by assuring them that their

[45] P.V. T. 18, 25 November 1699.

[46] Abbe Bignon to Nicolas Desraartez, 8 March 1708, AN G^ 562. 195 crédit Increased in Paris when they won support in the parlement at

Aix for the Montpellier academy. [47] His role was no doubt the same in Paris, and it is perhaps for this reason that the class of honorary members of theAcadémie des sciences gradually became a

"who's who" of political France.

3. Pensionnaires

The class of pensionnaire established in the new règlement had its origins in the membership of the Académie des sciences prior to the 1699 reforms. All of those who were full-fledged académiciens prior to 1699, with the possible exception of Morin de Toulon, were awarded the rank of pensionnaire in the reformed Académie. Pontchar­ train is somewhat disingenuous, however, when he says that all those appointed as pensionnaires were previous members. [48] He names three mechaniciens, Des Billettes, Jaugeon, and Dalesme, to this category.

None had ever been a regular académicien, but like the honorary appointees all three had been on the fringes of the Académie.

Dalesme had been admitted to meetings of the Académie "par honr neur" and he received at least some support from the Académie. [49]

The other two. Des Billettes and Jaugeon, along with Père Truchet

[47] Françoise Blechet, "Le Role de l'Abbé Bignon dans l'activité des sociétés savantes au XVIIle siècle," in Les Sociétés savantes, leur Histoire, Actes du 100e Congrès national des sociétés savantes (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, 1976), p. 34.

[48] See Pontchartrain's letter to Bignon, Appendix A.

[49] See the reference to a payment of 600 H' "for inventions," p. 187 above. 196 (known as Pere Sebastien) had been the chief members of the group of technologists who met at the hotel of the Abbé Bignon. [50] Their ties with the Académie prior to 1699 are extremely interesting.

As noted, the Abbé Bignon had resumed the effort begun by Col­ bert in 1675 to formulate a science of machines, [51] but Bignon gave this charge to a group outside the Académie des sciences. Neverthe­ less evidence indicates that the group was closely allied with the

Académie. Between 1693 and 1696 this group maintained a procés- verbaux, which is found appended to the end of volume 13 of the procès-verbaux of the Académie des sciences. Why was it appended

In the dossier of Des Billettes found in the archives of the

Académie des sciences is a document dated 28 October 3694. [52] In this document Des Billettes poses the question of whether the group of technologists should join the Académie des sciences or form their own Académie des arts.

To join the Académie des sciences, he says, would be no problem because it would simply be a matter of adding another group to the membership. The chemists, geometers, astronomers, and other special­ ists each speak their own language and go their separate directions, so why not a group of technologists who could do likewise? But it is

[50] See p. 173 above.

[51] See p. 97 above.

[52] Reproduced in Salomon-Bayet, "Un Préambule théorique," p. 244. 197 apparent that Des Billettes would prefer the creation of a separate

Académie des arts. Technology has its own goals and the members need

Lo work closely together and criticise each other's work. If neither

of these alternatives is feasible. Des Billettes expresses the opin­

ion that the Abbe Bignon would probably attach the group to the

intendance des arts et manufactures.

Almost from the time of its creation the Académie des sciences

had served as a panel of experts on the utility and originality of

inventions submitted to the king for a privilege. Placets requesting

privilèges were forwarded to the Académie by the protecteur. A com­

mittee system developed within the Académie for making these judge­ ments, with the committee members always coming from the mathemati­

cians or the astronomers. Discussion in the meetings of the Acadanie

relating to the decisions of such committees is reported in the

procès-verbaux. All discussions of inventions which were noted in

the procès-verbaux were included in the data which I coded for com­

puter analysis. Analysis of these data show interesting variations in

the number of inventions submitted to the Académie for a privilege

decision each year.

Table 16 presents these data. It is striking that between 1692

and 1698 practically no inventions were presented to the Académie,

while nine inventions were presented in 1699. It is highly improb­

ably that such a striking change occurred just by chance. One must

suspect that the placets requesting privileges were being channelled

elsewhere for consideration during the 1690's. Number of Inventions submitted to the Académie des Sciences for Approval by Year

Colbert Louvois Pontchartrain

Year Number Year Number Year Number

1676 12 1684 4 1692 1

1677 8 1685 9 1693 1

1678 4 1686 7 1694 1

1679 3 1687 5 1695 1

1680 4 1688 4 1696 1

1681 3 1689 0 1697 0

1682 4 1690 3 1698 1

1683 6 1691 1 1699 9

lotal 44 Total 33 Total 15 199 Even Colbert did not always assign placets to the Acadanie des

sciences for consideration, because Huygens informs us that Colbert at times asked him directly for a judgement on a given invention.

Since Huygens rarely appears as a named participant in the biweekly meetings of the Académie, it is doubtful that he shared these

requests with other academicians; his known hostility to some of his

colleagues reinforces this view. [53] It is possible that Pontchar­

train was referring placets directly to some of the individual members of the Académie for advice in the decade of the 1690's, but

it is more probable that these placets were being referred to the group of technologists assembled around Bignon, as other data sug-

In 1699 all three members of the group of technologists were appointed to the Académie des sciences in the course of the reform,

Pere Truchet as an honorary member and Jaugeon and Des Billettes as pensionnaires. In fact Pontchartrain did just what Des Billettes had

suggested as one alternative in his memorandum of 1694 discussed

above: Pontchartrain created a new category within the Académie,

that of mécanicien, and assigned Jaugeon, Des Billettes, and Dasleme

as the three pensionnaires who filled this section.

These three mechanicians along with Pere Truchet and De la Hire

were the academicians most frequently appointed to the committees

created to study placets and recommend for or against privileges in

[53] See Christiaan Huygens to Ph. Doublet, 20 January 1168, in Huygens Oeuvres, VI, pp. 173-175, #1619; and Christiaan Huygens to J. B. Colbert, 13 March 1669, jpE* 378-379. #1711. 200 the reformed Académie. De la Hire had completed his hook on the mechanical arts in 1695. [54] That these technologists functioned as the principle advisors on inventions within the reformed Académie adds support to the argument that Pontchartrain had relied on this group during the I690's when they were outside the Académie, rather than on the Academic itself, for advise on mechanical arts or inven-

If this is the case, as the evidence suggests, then it is neces­ sary to reconsider the significance of Article 31 of the règlement of

1699. This article states that the Acadeimie will examine all machines submitted to the king for privileges, if the king so desires. [55] This gives the Académie the right to examine all inven­ tions but leaves with the king the option of asking another group, such as a future Acad^ie des arts, to undertake this function. This was the alternative which Des Billettes had preferred in 1694 and the wording of Article 31 suggests that the government was retaining this as a possible future development.

Roger Hahn has interpreted this article in a broad context. He suggests that Article 31 was first a codification of existing prac­ tice, and secondly that it formed one of the two pillars for the future power of the Académie. We have shown in earlier sections that the decision to censure all publications of academicians made by the

Académie in 1686 [56] was a reaction to specific problems or

[54] See p. 97 above.

[55] Emphasis added.

[56] See p. 124 above. 201 incidents within the Académie rather than a broad statement of gen­ eral policy. We have seen that the same is true of De la Chapelle's speech to the Académie outlining Louvois' request for practical research in 1686. It is highly probable that the same is true in this instance: Article 31 was intended to resolve the specific prob­ lem of who is to examine inventions. Hahn is justified in saying that this article was a formal statement of past practice, but in the

1690's the practice iself was slipping from the hands of the

Académie. The solution chosen by Pontchartrain in 1699 was to incor­ porate the group of technologists into the Acadeinle des sciences and then give the right of examining inventions to the Académie.

Returning to our discussion of the membership of the Académie subsequent to the 1699 reform, it is quite clear that the few pen­ sionnaires appointed by Pontchartrain who were not already members of the Académie prior to the reform were men who nevertheless had some prior claim to entrance into the Académie. Dasleme had been admitted since the Louvois era "par honneur" and may have received a pension.

[57] Jaugeon and Des Billettes belonged to the group of technologists assembled by the Abbé Bignon. This group was separate from the

Académie des sciences, yet sufficiently associates with it to have its procès-verbaux attached to that of the Académie. Des Billettes had proposed inclusion in the Académie des sciences as one alterna­

tive to the creation of a separate Académie des arts. And finally,

[57] See p. 187 above. 202 these semi-outsiders already seem to have shared in the exercise of a function which was reserved to the Académie des sciences at the time of the reform, that of judging the merits of new inventions and mak­ ing recommendations on the issuance of privileges for these inven­ tions. Hence their inclusion in the reformed Académie des sciences served to strengthen the Académie and centralize these functions.

4. Associés

Pontchartrain began to use the terra associé or associé externe around 1695 in making appointments to the Académie. Chazelles was named associé astronome in 1695; Gughielmini was named associé physi­ cien in 1696; Lagny became an associé externe in 1686; and Langlade was given the same title in 1698. [58] This was a convenient new category. As Frenchmen these men did not qualify for the title

Académicien "étranger [59] which was held by persons such as

Tshirnhausen, but all were often away from Paris or engaged in other occupations which conflicted with obligations to the Académie des sciences. Hence they could not participate fully in the activities of the Académie. No doubt this was convenient for Pontchartrain, as he had little or no funds for new pensions during the war years and pensions would have been expected had he appointed such persons as regular academicians.

Thomas Lagny is a good case in point. Lagny served as tutor to

[58] See Académie des sciences. Index biographique.

[59] Except for Gughielmini who was Italian. 203 the future maréchal duc de Noailles, who later rewarded him with the deputy directorship of the Banque générale in 1716. He had colla­ borated on several mathematical publications with the marquis de

I'Hospital in the 1690's, and he was appointed to the Académie des sciences as an associé externe in 1696, shortly after I'Hospital's appointment as an academician. The next year the Abbé Bignon obtained for Lagny the position of professor of hydrography in

Rochfort, which of course removed him from Paris. [60]

Chazelles does not quite fit into this category. He worked at the observatory doing computation for Cassini and was probably paid by Cassini out of his own pocket. He also worked with Cassini to extend the meridian southward in 1700/1701. Since he had no pension, not even the 400 JrlT usually allotted to 'élèves, the rank of associe was perhaps the best way to formalize his position.

We may ask what distinguished the class of associés from the class of honoraires as first established by Pontchartrain. Both groups incorporated men who had interests in science and who wished to participate in the activities of the Académie, but who received no pensions. Despite the modest positions of the first appointees to the position of honoraire, the honoraires still outranked those appointed as associés, whether by their clerical rank, their family ties, or their academic reputations. Secondly, some of those appointed as honoraires had previously been admitted to meetings of

[60] Pierre Costabel, "Thomas Lagny," Dictionary of Scientific Biog­ raphy VII, 558-559. 204 the Académie "par honneur" while those of the associes who had been

in the Académie prior to the reform had carried tht title of associe

then as well.

That precedent had a role in assigning the pre-reform members to

the new classes of membership created by the règlements is well

illustrated by the case of Andre Dalesme. Dalesme had been admitted

to earlier meetings "par honneur," but he may also have received a pension of 600 Jrl' per year. [61] This precedent seems best to explain his appointment as a pensionnaire rather than an honoraire in 1699.

The membership of the class of associes created by the new règlement was divided between twelve positions for French citizens and' eight for foreigners. Unlike the pensionnaires and the élèves, the associes were not required to reside in Paris (Article 5), although in fact many did so. This served the purpose of having corresponding members who could contribute to the research and publi­ cation program of the Académie, without requiring a financial obliga­ tion from the government. L'Hospital had complained about the lack

of such correspondents in the publication of the Mémoires of the

Académie in 1692 and 1693. The class of associé also provided a forum to prove their worth to those who aspired to the rank of pen­ sionnaire.

The category of associé also provided an overflow category for

those who had positions in the pre-reform Académie, who could not be

[61] See p. 187 above. 205 appointed as pensionnaires because the twenty positions had already been filled by the senior academicians. In addition to those who had been associes prior to 1699, three men who had been 'élèves before the reforms were appointed to this class in 1699. They are Cassini II,

De la Hire II, and Tauvry. One member whose prior position is unk­ nown, Morin de Toulon, was also appointed as an associe. Five of the twenty associes appointed in 1699 had no previous position in the

Académie.

5. Elèves

Only two members of the pre-reform Académie, Maraldi and Louis

Carré, were appointed to the lowly rank of élève in 1699. The class of élève had existed in the Académie ever since its foundation in

1666, and hence the preservation of this class in the regulations of

1699 presents no special explanatory problem. The twenty positions for pensionnaires and the twelve associé positions reserved for native Frenchmen had all been filled from the original membership of

the Académie and from its fringe membership of persons with informal claims to consideration. Only three of the twenty positions for

élèves were filled in this way, leaving most of these positions at the disposal of the Académie for its nominees.

According to the règlement of 1699, élèves were attached to

individual pensionnaires of the Académie as a sort of understudy.

Consequently the positions available for élèves were filled by the nominations of the academicians in question. This is a change from 206 the early position of élèves, who had previously not been attached to any one académicien. This practice appeared only in the

1690's; Louis Carré was appointed as "élève to Varignon [62] and

Couplet fils was appointed élève to his father. [63] This may explain why Carré continued as an élève in the reformed Académie while the other élèves became associés. Carré could have become an associé at this time; after all five of the positions for associes went to men who had not been members prior to 1699.

6. Method of Appointment

New members were recruited to the Académie based on nominations made by the honoraires and the pensionnaires, with final selection made by the king. Clearly this gave the Académie des sciences more autonomy than it held before the reform, when appointment to mem- berhsip rested with the protector of the Académie. To fill a posi­ tion as honoraire, the Académie proposed by majority vote a single individual whom the king could accept or reject (Article 7). To fill the places of pensionnaire or associé several prospective members were nominated by the Académie, of whom a certain number must be drawn from the next lower rank of members already in the Académie.

Hence entrance into the lower ranks of the Académie held some promise

of later promotion to the more prestigious position of paid pension­ naire. (Articles 8 and 9). An élève was nominated by the pension­ naire for whom he was to work, approved by the Académie, and

[62] P.V. , T. 16, 16 March 1697.

[63] P.V. T. 15, 4 April 1696. 207 appointed by the king (Article 10). Royal appointment was usually no more than a formality, but when Tournefort nominated someone of the

Lutheran religion as his [eleve, Louis XIV rejected the nomination.

The king did, however, allow this person to accompnay Tournefort on his trip to the Middle East in 1700 on business of the Académie.

[64]

Through the procedure of peer selection, Pontchartrain hoped to assure an Académie membership not just of larger size but of a qual­

ity capable of first-rate research and publication. In fact it was

Pontchartrain who overcame the king's objections and obtained the

right of self-recruitment for the Académie. [65]

The Académie has as a rule been given high marks for its selec­

tion of qualified members, [66] but this did not prevent intrigue in

the process, a fact that greatly displeased Louis Pontchartrain.

Claude Bourdelin II states in his journal:

On procéda a la nomination d'un associe chemiste pour rem­ plir la place de mr LeMery. Mrs. Geoffroy & Benis ont eu la pluralité des vois, ce dernier parce qu'il s'etoit vante apresque tous les messieurs les académiciens qu'il etoit le medecin de la famille de Mr l'Abbe Bignon & qu'on ne pouroit pas faire un plus grand plaisir a Mons l'Abbe que de luy donner les vois. [67]

To the credit of the academicians, they chose Geoffroy. Several

[64] BN FF N.A. 5148 fol 16V.

[65] Louis Pontchartrain to l'Abbé Bignon, 10 May 1702, in G. Dap­ ping, ed., Correspondance administrative sous le régne de Louis XIV (Paris, Imprimerie royale, 1850-1855), IV, 617.

[66] Bertrand, L'Académie des sciences, p. 63 ff.

[67] BN FF NA 5148, fol. 15, entry for 9 December 1699. 208

years later Pontchartrain showed his displeasure over this type of

activity:

Je ne scaurois ra'empescher en cette occasion de vous parler des brigues qui ont agité l'Académie. . . . [68]

B. The Problem of Internal Cohesion

Two scientific debates produced much heat in the 1690's. One

was on the legitimacy of infinitessimal calculus and the other on the

circulation of blood in the mammalian fetal heart. Both debates con­

tinued into the early 18th century. From the perspective of this

thesis, it is significant that these debates were conducted as scien­

tific debates within the Académie. In contrast to the 1680's, no

conflict resulted over the reporting of the activities of the

Académie to the protector, over who spoke for the Académie, or over

who presided over the Académie in the protector's name. Problems

such as these in the management of the Académie had been among the

causes of conflict and of the erosion of corporate unity during

Louvois' protectorship. Now the Abbé Bignon was President of the

Académie des sciences and he was also the nephew and trusted assis­

tant of Louis Pontchartrain. Bignon spoke both for the protector and

for the Académie des sciences. Fontenelle, and occasionally the Abbé

Gallois, communicated directly with Pontchartrain, but there was

never a confusion of authority. Nor was there a covert carrying of

tales. Indeed the Abbé Bignon may have exercised a rather absolute

authority over the Académie. As one consequence of the reforms

[68] Louis Pontchartrain to l'Abbé Bignon, 10 May 1702, in Dapping, ed. Correspondance, IV, 617-618. 209 instituted by the règlement of 1699, one finds a resumption of cor­ porate decision-making by the Académie as a body following the

reforms. [69]

Internal conflict, then, was not the problem in 1699 that it had been in the 1680's; the same is true of the question of authority within the Académie and of the rapport between protector and

Académie. But the ideal of cooperative research had long since disappeared. Cooperation among the anatomists who had been working on a new edition of the Histoire des animaux ceased around 1688 with the death of Claude Perrault, [70] and no other cooperative projects took

its place.

These problems which had so disrupted the Académie during

Louvois' protectorship had ceased to be major issues due to the care­

ful direction of the Abbé Bignon, yet their regulation by the règle­ ment was essential. The old ideal of settling scientific disputes

through group experimentation had not recognized the legitimacy of conflicting ideas or conflicting personalities. Now the Académie was ready to accept such differences as legitimate. If the legitimacy of

conflict was to be recognized then rules which set bounds to con­

flicts and set rules for conducting its course were a prerequisite

for a company which is "pareille en quelque sorte a ces Républiques,"

as Fontenelle was to say of the Académie.

[69] See Table 12 in Chaper Three.

[70] Lister, Journey, pp. 65-69. 210 Good order is the obvious intent of many of the articles. Arti­ cle 26 is quite explicit in stating that disagreements among academi­ cians must be held within the bounds of good manners. The article does admit the existence of disagreement, in a sense putting to rest

the hope of an earlier generation of scientists that all disputes would be settled by experiment. In 1702 Jean Le Febvre contravened

the new etiquette when he accused Philippe de la Hire II, and by

implication his father, of plagiarizing from his publication, the

Connaissance des temps. De la Hire raised the issue at a meeting of

the Académie and the Académie voted to censure Le Febvre's conduct for having violated Article 26. [71] The Acadanie asked Le Febvre to make a formal apology to De la Hire II, but Le Febvre declined to attend any more meetings and so was excluded from membership for nonattendance.

Article 37 is also explicit in placing the responsibility for good order in the hands of the president of the Académie. The need for presidential role is alluded to by the Abbe Gallois during some

of the heated disputes over the infitessimal calculus:

M. l'Abbe Galloys s'excusa de lire sur ce que M l'Abbe Big­ non n'y etoit point & qu'on 1'avoit accuse d'emportement la derniere fois qu'il lut contre les infiniments petits. [72]

The Abbé Gallois waited until Bignon was present on 9 July 1701 to

read his arguments against the calculus. [73] He apparently felt the

[71] Bertrand, L'Académie des sciences, pp. 57-58.

[72] Bourdelin, Journal, entry for 4 June 1701. BN FF NA 5145 fol. 37.

[73] Ibid. . fol. 38. 211 need for a moderating influence or a voice of authority to maintain good order.

Other articles regulating the conduct of members are not so

explicit in their purpose, but there is a clear intention to elminate

certain types of conduct as possible points of contention. Even the

seating arrangement at meetings, stated in article 36 and amplified

by the Abbe Bignon, had a reason for being. Fontenelle described the

confusion at the first meetings of the reformed Académie and the Abbe

Bignon's solution to it;

Ce desordre cessa bien-tot, M. l'Abbé Bignon marqua a^ cha­ cun une place fixe, & il se trouva, car peut-etre n'est-il pas hors de propos de rapporter les plus petites choses, sur tout parce qu'en fait de Compagnies elles peuvent devenir importantes; il se trouva que les Spavans de dif­ férente espèce, un Géomètre, par exemple, & un anatomiste furent voisins, & comme ils ne parlent pas la même langue, les conversations particuliers en furent moins s' craindre. [74]

Not only did this seating bring order to the meetings but it pre­

cluded possible private conversations and/or disputes by separating

those in the same field.

The reform of 1699 recognized scientific disagreement in a way

that the unwritten assumptions of the old Académie failed to do. Not

only does Article 26 acknowledge its existence but Article 20 ack­

nowledges the failure of the older practice of group research, that

is, the failure of the Baconian ideal of resolving all questions

through experiment. Article 25 still upholds the older ideal of

[74] Académie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences , années MDCXCIX, p. 14. 212 verification by experiment but immediately following it, article 26 acknowledges room for disagreement. If experimental research done in the presence of all members is no longer the final arbiter of scien­ tific questions then the opinions of the academicians must take its place. Article 32 states that honoraires, pensionnaires, and asso­ ciés will have a deliberative voice on scientific affairs, and Arti­ cle 38 states that the president will pronounce resolutions accepted by a plurality of votes.

Given this deliberative role of the membership in deciding scientific questions, the need for a formal code of conduct and pro­ cedures becomes all the more apparent in that this new role holds great potential for intensifying the divisions in the Académie which had been in existence for some time. The quarrel over the blind spot of the eye, an affair of the 1670's, had involved just a few members of the Académie, Marriotte, Perrault, and Pecquet. [75] The quarrel was conducted by means of publications and never directly concerned the membership as a whole except insofar as the conflict disrupted an occasional meeting. The new procedure required that the Académie appoint commissions to settle such issues. Fontenelle's metaphor of the Académie as a type of République and the reform articles as a type of constitution thus become all the more meaningful.

C. The Problem of Scientific Productivity

An enlarged membership, peer recruitment, and the orderly set-

[75] Hirshfield, "The Académie Royale des Sciences," p. 141. 213 tlement of differences are but secondary goals of the new reforms; in the end they must contribute to the increased scientific productivity of the Académie or they have no significance. The ad hoc reforms introduced by Pontchartrain in 1692 resulted in an increase of pro­ ductivity both in research and in publication, but two years later, after the Mémoires ceased publication, the Académie returned to a lower level of output. The increased size of the Académie effected by the règlement should of course Increase the total scientific out­ put of the Académie, but two further reforms were needed. These were first, a clear guide to the level of productivity expected of the academicians, and second, a means of publication completely within the control of the Académie.

An analysis of the works published by the academicians reveals a diference in the type of publications issued in 1692 and 1693 and those completed between 1694 and 1698. In 1692 and 1693 the members were totally engrossed in research for and preparation of several

"official" publications. These were the Mémoires de mathématiques et de physique tirez des registres de l'Académie, published monthly by the Imprimerie royale for those two years; and several collective publications which had been in preparation in the I680's, cancelled late in the Louvois' administration, and finally resumed under

Pontchartrain. No private monographs were published by any of the academicians in these two years. Cassini published Le Neptune fran­

çais ou Atlas nouveau des cartes marines . . . (Paris, H. Jaillot,

1693) in 1693, but this was an atlas with only six pages of text. 214 Furthermore it represented the collective work of the astronomers of the Acadeinie»

In contrast, no official or collective works were published between 1694 and 1698, while eight individual monographs appeared during those years. [76] Monographic works did not generally emerge from the biweekly scientific activities of the Académie. It would therefore not be surprising to see a decline in the level of scienr tific research after the cessation of the Mémoires in 1693. There is some evidence to indicate that such a decline occurred, as Table 17 indicates. It may be coincidental, but in 1694 the names of members attending each meeting began to be recorded in the procès-verbaux of the meetings. [77]

The last years of the 1690's thus exhibit a decline in scien­ tific activity and in publication similar to, but less pronounced than, that found in the last years of Louvois' protectorship of the

Académie. It is interesting to note that Roger Hahn concluded that there was some evidence for decline in the late 1690's but not in, the

1680's. [78] Of equal interest, however, is that both protectorships began with a flurry of scientific activity, both stimulated by pub­ lishing projects. These were the Mémoires pour servir & l'Histoire des animaux, under Louvois, and the monthly Mémoires de Mathématiques et de la Physique . ., under Pontchartrain, respectively.

[76] See Appendix C for complete citations.

[77] P.V., T. 14, 29 December 1694.

[78] Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, p. 20. TABLE 17

Total Number of Scientific Presentations during the Protectorship of Pontchartrain by Year

Year Number of Presentations

1692 207 Average - 186 1693 166

1694 135

1695 166

1696 152 Average - 144

1697 142

1698 128 216 Ernest Maindron began his account of the reforms of 1699 with

the following remark:

C'est en 1698 que Lister écrivait le Voyage ^ Paris. et c'est avec raison qu'il signale l'interruption que subis­ sait alors la publication des Mémoires ^ e 1'Académie. A ce moment la Compagnie attendait une organisation definitive qui lui fut seulement octroyee par le règlement du 26 Jan­ vier 1699. [79]

When Lister visited Paris in 1698, Maindron felt that he sensed that

reform was in the air. This reform was designed above all else to

revive the research and publication of that society.

For a non-teaching institution such as the Académie des sci­

ences , publications are central to its raison d'etre. Whether those

publications advance the cause of learning or bring glory to king and

country, publications justify its existence in the eyes of the

learned world and of the government alike. The history of the

Académie as it has been traced to this point illustrates well the

difficulties faced by the Académie in bringing its work into print.

The experience of publishing a monthly Mémoire during 1692 and 1693

likewise illustrates the strength of resources which an institution

must have in order to maintain such a publication. Maindron is

alluding to this need for institutional resources.

Foremost among the articles of the règlement which were intended

to insure productivity in the reformed Académie was article 23, the

tour de rolle. According to this article, the pensionnaires were to

take turns presenting their research at the meetings of the Académie.

[79] Ernest Maindron, L'Academie des Sciences (Paris: F. Alcan, 1888), p. 18. 217 The article also specified that their turns were to come due accord­

ing to their place on the membership role of the Académie.

Because the règlement so clearly specified both the proper pro­

cedures for the Académie and the duties of the individual academi­

cians, Louis Pontchartrain seldom thereafter had a need to intervene

directly in the affairs of the Academia. When he did intervene it

was due to a deep sense of indignation over those members who were

not being productive. This more than anything else aroused his ire,

and his prescription was a stricter adherence to the tour de rolle

instituted by article 23. In a letter to the Abbé Bignon he states

that a number of eleves and associés had been lax in their duties.

Henseforth these two classes were to make presentations at the meet­

ings of the Académie according to a tour de rolle. In addition, any­

one nominated for the position of élève must in the future submit to

a committee of the Académie two scientific treatises for evaluation.

[80]

A number of other articles reinforce the vigilance of the

Académie des sciences over the diligence of its members. Each member must attend meetings faithfully (Article 19) and each must prepare an

outline of his future research plans for the inspection of the

Académie (Article 21). The Académie is to maintain a correspondence

with other scientists (Article 27), examine and comment on the scien­

tific works of others (Article 28), and repeat experiments done else­ where. (Article 29)

[80] P.V., T. 33, 20 February 1714; see Appendix A for complete text of this letter. Another crucial article for the future productivity of the

Academia is number 46, which placed the control over its own publica­ tions directly in the hands of the Académie. This article states

that in order to facilitate the printing of the works of the

Académie, the Acadenie des sciences will be allowed to choose its own printer and that the king will give a privilege to said printer to publish whatever is approved by the Académie.

In April of 1699 the powers outlined in article 46 were ampli­ fied and formalized by a privilege du roi [81] which was registered on the books of the Community of printers and booksellers. The docu­ ment itself best illustrates the sweeping powers entrusted to the

Académie ;

Nous lui avons permis & accorde permettons & accordons par nos présentes Lettres de faire imprimer, vendre & débiter en tous les lieux de notre Royaume les Remarques ou Obser­ vations journalières & les Relations annuelles de ce qui aura ete fait dans les assemblées de ladite Académie & gén­ éralement tout ce qu'Elle voudra faire paroitre en son nom, comme aussi les autres Ouvrages, Mémoires, Traites ou livres des Particuliers qui la composent, lorsqu'après les avoir examiner & approuves au terme de article trente dudit Règlement, elle les jugera dignes d'etre Imprimer.

This privilege du roi appeared at the beginning of each volume

of the Histoire & Mémoires of the Académie beginning in 1699. In

1704 it was changed to a limited privilege with a duration of ten years. The 1701 volume, published in 1704, likewise carries an approbation by a royal censor, but the 1701 volume is the only volume

[81] AN q I 43 fol. 460. 219 for which this is true. Before 1701 and after 1701 the volumes of this publiation carry no approbation.

Why was the Académie allowed to choose its own printer and book­ seller, or to rephrase the question, why were the publications of the

Acadeinie des sciences no longer to be printed by the Imprimerie roy­ ale? The answer is far from clear. Ever since the creation of the

Académie in 1666 all "official" publications of the Acadeinie had been printed at the Imprimerie royale while most of the works by indivi­ dual academicians had been published by priate printers and booksell­ ers. The difficulties faced by the Acadànie over the past twenty- five years in maintaining a regular or orderly sequence of publica­ tions have already been spelled out. Most of the difficulties, how­ ever, were shown to stem from either the lack of official support for the Academie and its work, or from the limied capacity of an Acadeinie of so few members as it had prior to 1699 for producing publishable research. The ability of the Imprimerie royale to produce the works of the Acadeinie had never been in question.

Perhaps the authors of the reforms believed that placing the responsibility for publication squarely on the shoulders of the academicians themselves would force them to attain publication goals more readily than would continued dependence on the Imprimerie roy­ ale. The evidence needed for a more certain interpretation of this sequence of events is not available at present. However here is one indisputable fact : prior to 1699 much of the research of the

Academie was never published; after 1699 the Histoire et Mémoires of 220 the Acadanie were published annually until the Acadànie was closed by the Convention in 1793 nearly a century later. The Histoire et

Mémoires stand as the single most important contribution to science in the eighteenth century.

This achievement did not turn on the powers granted by a single article of the reforms, such as article 46 or article 23, but was the result of the total effects of the reform in so far as it created a large pool of scientific talent, gave a permanent status to the

Academie des sciences, and created regulations which prodded the membership into greater scientific productivity, while at the same time offering a reward for accomplishments. Chapter VII

Reform of the Academie des sciences In the

Context of General Cultural Reform

The reforms of the Académie des sciences, which culminated In the règlement of 1699, were but part of a broader attempt to reform the royally sponsored cultural Institutions of France. The thesis of the second period of reform In the reign of Louis XIV alluded to above [1] states that In the I690's and early 1700's, a concern for the proper functioning of governmental and cultural Institutions arose among the principle ministers of Louis XIV. These ministers began to Initiate changes In these Institutions with a view to

Improving their accountability and performance. This reform Initia­ tive was extended to a number of the cultural and scholarly Institu­ tions of France by Louis Pontchartrain and the Abbé Bignon. Although an exhauslve account of this initiative Is beyond the scope of this dissertation, the author will examine a number of examples for the purpose of Illustrating the congrulty of problems and of the aproach to reform between the Académie des sciences and certain other Insti­ tutions.

Two congrultles prevailed among all of the royally sponsored cultural and scholarly Institutions during the reign of Louis

[1] See p. 133 above. 222

XIV: one, the members were too often negligient in performing their duties, whether they be teaching or research and publication, and

two, the government reacted to this neglect by attempting to secure

for the institution a corporate status which assigned certain powers and responsibilities to the institution but reserved some degree of control to the government itself for enforcing the règlements govern­

ing these institutions. The specific actions taken in each case depended, however, on the situation in the institution concerned and on the governmental minister who faced the problem.

In dealing with the negligence of certain members and inactivity in the Academie française and the Academie de peinture et de sculp­ ture, J. B. Colbert had to gain some sort of leverage over the activities of these two institutions whose corporate status already allowed them almost complete autonomy. Louis Pontchartrain, on the other hand, faced the opposite problem in revitalizing the activities of the Academie des sciences and the Académie des inscriptions et médaillés. Neither body had any autonomy whatever. Creating a cor­ porate status for each of these academies was a means of defining their functions and placing responsibility for their execution squarely on the membership itself. The different approaches used by these ministers reflects a difference in circumstances. The condi­ tions of absolute autonomy and absolute dependence both created prob­ lems for the creative productivity of these institutions. A middle ground which placed some of the responsibility and a corresponding degree of autonomy on the Institution and some authority in govern- ment hands appeared to each minister as the wiser solution.

Since the period during which the Academie des sciences was administered by Colbert has become a standard by which to compare the later performance of that Académie, It would be well to examine

Colbert's attempt to reform two cultural Institutions during the so- called "first" period of reform before examining the second period of reform.

The corporate monarchy of the Old Regime was an amalgam of semi-private corporations, each of which exercised a particular lim­ ited portion of the king's authority. These corporations were seral- prlvate in that either, one, access to membership and to offices was controlled by the members, or two, the offices of government exer­ cised by the corporation were "owned" by members of the corporation.

The monarchy benefitted from this arrangement In that the exercise of royal preogatlves could be "farmed" for Immediate revenues. A second benefit accrued In that these corporations purported to maintain a certain minimum standard In the performance of the functions allotted

to them, and in training new members of the corporation. However If

the performance of Individuals In the corporations fell short of

royal expectations, the crown was unable to take direct action.

Given the benefits that the corporation system provided, the crown

adopted a strategy of Increasing royal control over corporations

rather than abolishing corporations. Hence to the modern eye, many

of the "reforms" of the Old Regime appear but half-measures. 224

A number of royal academies originated as groups of private individuals which solicited the protection of the king. Such protec­ tion usually included an exclusive right to exercise a particular power. In this sense the academies resembled the guilds, universi­ ties, courts, and towns of the era, all of which controlled their own affairs and also exercised some portion of the king's authority.

The Academie de peinture et sculpture arose when several artists, LeBrun, Lesueur, Dejardin. Bourdon, and others, separated themselves from the existing community of artists and gained the pro­ tection of Louis XIV, including work space in the Louvre. [2] This

Academie obtained the privilege of executing paintings and sculptures for the king [3] and eventually it gained exclusive rights to conduct classes for aspiring artists. [4] In return the king received the prospect of a higher level of achievement or competence in artistic affairs. [5] According to the statuts et règlements of 1648, by which the academy was established, both the reception of new members and the election of officers (Articles 5 and 13) were completely in the hands of the membership; not even a veto power over proposed members was reserved to the king. [6]

[2] Louis P. Deseine, Notices historiques sur les anciennes académies royales de peinture, sculpture de Paris et celle d'architecture (Paris: Le Normant, 1814), pp. 7-9.

[3] Ibid., p. 15

[4] Guillemet, Essai, p. 198.

[5] Deseine, Notices historiques, p. 7.

[6] Académie royale de peinture & de sculpture, Paris. Frocés-verbaux de l'Académie royale de peinture et de sculpture, 1648-1793 10 225 The Académie française emerged from one of the numerous literary circles which met on a regular schedule in the homes of various Pari­ sian patrons. The subject of its authority was the French language.

It was given an official seal, and the office of chancellor was created to give authority to its pronouncements on language. The privileges of the Academie française included that of committatus [7] and the right to audience with the king. The government was to receive in return a standardization of French usage through the crea­ tion of an official dictionary and grammar. According to the règle­ ment of 1637 and the earlier letters patent of 1635, which stipulate these matters, the Academie française could elect its own members and officers subject to the approval of the protector of the Acadanie

(Article 1). Since the first two protectors were Cardinal Richelieu and the Chancellor Seguier, the king had littledirect influence in the early years of the Académie française.

The privileges held by these two academies together with their independence and neglect of duties produced a crop of discontents over the next few years. The surintendant des bâtiments, Ratabon, carried on a feud with the Academie de peinture et ^ sculpture through the 1650's because the Academie refused to admit A. Bosse to membership. [8] In 1662 a group of discontent students staged a revolt and established their own school to teach painting and

volumes (Paris: J. Baur, 1875-1892), I, 7-10.

[7] Committatus is the right to have all court cases processed in

[8] Guillemet, Essai, pp. 41-43. 226 sculpture. They appealed to the Chancellor for his protection, spel­

ling out their grievances with the Acadanie. The professor desig­

nated by the Academie de peinture et de sculpture, they reported, was

oten absent from his post of instruction; he did not pose the models; he would not make constructive criticism of their work; he usually

sent a substitute or his son to give the lessons; and advancement was more by favor than by industry or ability. [9]

Problems also occurred in the Acadmie française. From its

inception, this body earned the reputation of being composed of men

of light repartee and wit rather than of substantial scholarship on matters of language. Ismael Boulliau observed, referring to members

of this body.

The learning and capacity of a wit will consist in rounding out a period and making a rondeau, the transformation of an eye or some other trifle that may be produced in three weeks or a month and paraded through the salons of the coquettes of Paris, who give credit according to their fancy. [10]

Besides the scorn and personal vendettas which crop up in a

privileged organization like the Academie française, there was a gen­

eral neglect of substantial accomplishment. According to Article 26

of the règlement established for this academy in 1637, the Academie

française was charged with preparation of a French dictionary, a

grammar, and treatises on rhetoric and poetry. Yet at the death of

[9] Academie de peintre et de sculpture. Procès-verbaux, I, 197-203, 29 November 1662.

[10] Ismael Boulliau to DuPuy, 14 October 1645, quoted and translated by Harcourt Brown, Scientific Organizations, p. 64. I l l its second protector, Chancellor Seguier, in 1672, few if any steps had been taken to meet these obligations. There were no regular meetings of the Academie and no minutes of meetings. [11]

Such voices of discontent over the abuse of privileges and pub­ lic responsibilities eventually brought about royal intervention.

Jean Baptiste Colbert instituted reforms of the Academie de peinture et de sculpture in 1664, and of the Academie française in 1672.

During the 1650's the Academie de peinture et de sculpture was

"persuaded" to amend its rules in such a way as to bring it under the royal directive. In 1663 Louis XIV issued letters patent which gave a new règlement to this academy. The new règlement summed up the amended rules adopted during the 1650's and added new articles giving the king effective control over the officers of the academy. The academy was required to select a protector and a vice-protector

(Article 8), and four rectors were appointed by the king to monitor the activities of the academy (Article 10). Other articles spell out the duties of the professors of the academy in a very precise and detailed fashion (Articles 11 and 13) suggestive of the later rules of the Academie des sciences. These articles of the new règlement obviously reflect the complaints registered during the student revolt of the previous year mentioned above.

Although issued in December 1663, the new règlement was not entered in the register of the academy until 7 June 1664. [12] To

[11] Academie française. Les Registres de 1'Academie française 1672-1793 4 vols (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1895-1906), I, 49.

[12] Academie de peinture et de sulpture, Proces-verbaux. I, 249-258. 228 make the reforms more palatable the king offered 4,000 > T per year to provide pensions for all the officers of the Academie» The new regu­

lations gave the king sufficient influence in the affairs of the

Academie de peinture et de sculpture that he was able to impose con­ formity to these regulations when members tended to be lax in their duties. [13]

Following the death of Chancellor Seguier in 1672 there was con­ cern over whether the Academie française would survive without a powerful protector. [14] At the risk of royal regulation of the affairs of the academy, the Académie française obtained the direct protection of Louis XIV. As protector, Louis acquired the right of veto over new members and officers as specified in the rules of 1635 and 1637. To stimulate work on the dictionary, Colbert established a regular schedule of meetings for the Academie française and required that records of the meetings be kept. Colbert also ordered that forty gold jetons (tokens) were to be distributed at each meeting to those in attendance. [15] The Academie française did not, however, receive a new règlement and its autonomy was only slightly reduced by these changes.

[13] Ibid., pp. 261-263, 16 August 1664.

[14] Charpentier to Colbert, 13 June 1672, in Colbert, Lettres, V, 540.

[15] Academic française. Les Registres. I, 49. 229 The decade of the 1680's was generally a period of decline for the Academie des sciences, but this was not true of all scholarly institutions. The College royale, which was administered through the maison du roi and was therefore a responsibility of Colbert's eldest son, the marquis de Seignelay, underwent a series of reforms in this decade in order to curtail the delinquent behavior of a number of its professors.

Although the king had the right to appoint new professors and he also paid their salaries, a professor of the College royal could obtain a survivance for his position. [16] In another document the professors are referred to as "officiers de Sa Majesté." [17]

The possibility of ownership implied by survivances reduced the power of the king to remove delinquent professors, but it did not reduce his interest in their performance. When Seignelay became secretary of state for the maison du roi in 1683, he asked the Abbe

Gallois for a mémoire on the professors of the College royal in which

Gallois was to detail their individual merits and their application in fulfilling their duties. [18] The Collge royal had been under the administrative jurisdiction of the maison du roi since 1671 and Seig­ nelay needed this information to prepare a budget request, that is an

[16] See, for example, "Survivance de Professeur en Eloquence latine au College Royal en faveur de Marc Antoine îiersant du 24 Mars 1686." AN q I 30 fol. 110-111.

[17] Mémoire a Monseigneur Colbert pour les Professeurs du Roy au College Royal, AN 0^ 1600.

[18] Seignelay to l'Abbe Gallois, 22 November 1684. AN 0^ 28, fol. 417^. The appointment of Gallois to inspect the Collie royal in 1684 may have been a first step in one of several attempts to bring reform to this institution, J. B. Colbert apparently had not been favorably impressed by the royal professors. In 1664 they addressed a mémoire to Colbert asking why their names had been lined out of the 1664 budget, especially at a time when the king was increasing his gen­ erosity to other men of letters. [19] The professors at the Collège

royal were paid a modest salary, around 600 per year at this time, but they received a yearly supplement or "augmentation des gages,"

the amount of the supplement following a system of seniority. [20]

When Seignelay asked the Abbe Gallois for a mémoire on the mer­

its and application of the different professors he was planning a

reform. He intended to pay the "augmentation des gages" for merit

and performance, rather than according to seniority. [21] One is led

to assume that some of the royal professors continued to neglect

their duties after this change. In 1687 the professors received no

"augmentation" at all. [22]

[19] Mémoire a Monseignieur Colbert pour Is Professeurs du Roy au College Royal, AN 0^ 1600.

[20] Mémoire des augmentations de gages a distribuer entre les pro­ fesseurs du Roy pour l'annee 1674, Collège de France. Archives. K-IV-A-49.

[21] Seignelay to l'Abbe Gallois, 22 November 1684. AN 0^ 28, fol. 417V.

[22] Placet présenté a Mgr de Seignelay pour 1'expedition des gages et augmentations de 1687. College de France. Archives. K-IV-A- 58a. A note in the margin of this document states that there are 231

The following year, 1688, the king issued a règlement for the

College royal. [23] According to this règlement, each professor was

to sign a register every time he delivered a lecture. The register was to be maintained by the Abbe Gallois, and he was to give periodic

reports to Seignelay on its contents. When Louis Pontchartrain

assumed the position of minister of state for the maison du roi in

1690, after Seignelay's death, he institutionalized Gallois' role as

inspector. [24]

During the five years of peace between the treaty of Ryswick in

1697 and the beginning of the War of the Spanish Succession in 1702,

Louis XIV turned his attention to domestic problems. Louis' actions have been interpreted in two quite different ways: one, as the

implementation of badly needed reforms, or two, as the centralization

and hence the greater control of domestic affairs (including cultural

affairs) by the royal government.

Fontanelle exemplified the former view in his history of the

Academie des sciences ;

C'est ainsi qu'en jugea le Roy, lorsqu'après la Guerre tei> minee par le Traité" de Riswic, il tourna particulièrement les yeux sur le dedans de son Royaume, pour y répandre de ses propres mains, & selon les veues de sa sagesse, les

to be no augmentations for that year.

[23] Règlement sur ce qui doit etre observe par les professeurs du College Royal. Du 23e Janvier 1688 a Versailles. AN 0^ 32, fol. 26.

[24] Ordonnance qui établi le Abbe Gallois pour observer aux pro­ fesseurs du College Royal, les règlements et la discipline dud. College. AN 0^ 35 fol. 46^ - 47^. 232 fruits de la Paix. [25]

Those who emphasize the control aspect of Louis' actions have charac­ terized it as simply a negative reaction to" public criticism of royal policy and not as an attempt to reform social and political institu­ tions. [26]

From my own point of view, Louis' ministers were attempting to rationalize the bureaucratic structure of the government to make it more responsive to public needs. This process might require greater control and centralization in certain cases and less in other cases.

The central argument of Roger Hahn's study of the Acadanie des sciences is that in the eighteenth century the Académie came to con­ trol much of the scientific and technological work of France and formed a support to the absolutism of the state. [27] From a dif­ ferent perspective, however, the Academie acquired through the règle­ ment of 1699 a degree of independence from the government which it had not exercised previously.

The Académie française and the Academie de peinture et de sculp­ ture began as semi-private and independent organizations which were reformed by being brought under royal control. In contrast the

Académie des sciences began as a semi-private oganization, but one

[25] Academie des sciences. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences . . . MDCXCIX, p. 2.

[26] See Lionel Rothkrug, Opposition to Louis XIV; the Political and Social Origins of the French Enlightenment (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965).

[27] Hahn, The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution, pp. 45-49. 233 entirely dependent on the good graces of the king and his ministers.

The reform of 1699 in fact gave this body greater independence as well as the form of a corporation.

At the time of its creation in 1666 the Academie des sciences received no règlement that entitled it to special privileges, nor was any area of royal authority granted to the Academie as its exclusive jurisdiction. As noted above, [28] the Academie did not hold exclusive rights to review new inventions for the granting of a privilege. The various ministers of state chose whomever they wished to exercise this authority, drawing both upon the Academie and upon individuals. Nor did the Academie control its own membership in the years prior to 1699: both appointment to membership and dismissal therefrom were in the hands of the protector of the Academie. The protector could direct much of the operation of the Academie. either directly or through his premier commis or other representative. For a number of years the Academie had no officers, of its own except a secretary.

One can readily find examples of the difference in the degree of external control exercised over the Academie des sciences versus other bodies which already had formal regulations establishing their rights and powers. Louvois would have faced no difficulty in appointing the Abbe L'Annion as president of the Academie des sci­ ences , [29] nor in dismissing him when he chose. In contrast Louvois

[28] See p. 197 above.

[29] Although whether he in fact did so is uncertain, as noted in 234 was unable to dismiss LeBrun as director of the Academie de peinture et de sculpture although he circumvented LeBrun on many major deci­ sions relating to the royal buildings. [30] Not until LeBrun's death in 1690 was Louvois able to replace him with his own choice. Mignard.

[31]

It is clear from this description that the Academie des sciences should not be considered a corps d'etat prior to the règlement of

1699. The new règlement changed this, giving the Academie new rights which it had previously lacked. Most importantly the Académie des

sciences gained formal jurisdiction over the examination of all

inventions (article 31 of the règlement) and it acquired the right to nominate new members subject to the approval of the king (articles 7

to 10).

At first glance the reform of the Acadeinie des inscriptions et médaillés which occurred in 1701 also suggests cultural centraliza­

tion. This academy was given a new règlement in 1701 which had many

similarities with the règlement issued for the Academie des sciences

two years earlier. The regulations were so similar that these two

academies were considered "sister" academies; once a year, the secre­

tary of each body reported on activities of each academy at a special

session of the other body.

Chapter Three.

[30] Rousset, Histoire de Louvois. Ill, 371.

[31] Guillemet, Essai, p. 171. 235 Despite these similarities, the historical antecedents and even

the raison d'etre of the two règlements are quite different. In 1663

J. B. Colbert created an informal advisory group of four scholars or

Erudites drawn from the membership of the academie française. The

four were to advise the king on inscriptions and themes to be used in

relating the history of the Sun King's reign. These themes were

incorporated in the tapestries woven at the Gobelins for Versailles,

in the operas written by Lully, in the books written to celebrate the

fêtes of the king, and in the numerous medals struck to commemorate

the notable triumphs of the reign. In sum their function was, more

clearly than any other single group, to promote the gloire of Louis

XIV. [32]

The activity of this group apparently paralleled that of the

Academie des sciences in certain ways. Charles Perrault had been

secretary for this group, called the petite académie, and gave it

much of its stimulus. After he fell from favor with Colbert in 1682,

he ceased to attend meetings and the group became inactive. [33]

Louvois revived the group during his first years as surintendant d&s

bâtiments but its activities declined once again during the latter

years of Louvois' administration. [34] Maury has suggested that Louis

XIV's turn to piety in the late 1680's removed the rationale for such

a group. [35] More than likely, however, it was Louvois'

[32] Académie des inscriptions. Histoire. I, pp. 1-3.

[33] Ibid., p. 4.

[34] Ibid., p. 6.

TssJ Louis F. A. Maury, L'Ancienne Academie des inscriptions ^ 236 preoccupation with other affairs and his neglect of the royal academ­ ies in general which resulted in this decline, just as with the activities of the Academie des sciences.

No quantitative measure of the activities of the petite académie in its early years is possible because none of the records prior to

1694 have survived. Charles Perrault kept minutes until his fall from favor in 1682; then the Abbe Gallois served as secretary until

Louvois appointed his premier commis, de la Chapelle, to this func­ tion in 1684. De la Chapelle kept records until his death in 1694, when the Abbé Tallement assumed this role. Detailed knowledge of this group begins with the register kept by the Abbe Tallement. [36]

Although one has but impressionistic evidence for activity or inactivity in the petite acadgnie prior to 1694, other bits of evi­ dence support my interpretation. That Louvois did not bother to replace either Quinault or Rainssat, who died in 1688 and 1689 respectively, is one such piece of evidence. [37] On assuming respon­ sibility for this body, by then known as the Academie des inscrip­ tions et médaillés. in 1691 Pontchartrain immediately filled the vacancies in the Academie and then proceeded over the next few years to increase its membership just as he had done in the Académie des sciences.

belles-lettres (Paris: Didier, 1864), p. 19.

[36] Academie des inscriptions et belles-lettres. Exposition, p. 10.

[37] Academie des inscriptions. Histoire, I, 6. 237 Despite the similarities which we have cited between the for­ tunes, and the reform regulations, of the Academie des sciences and the Académie des inscriptions, some essential points distinguish the reforms of the two bodies. First, prior to 1701 the Academie des inscriptions, unlike the Académie des sciences, was not a scholarly body. Members did not investigate topics of historical interest in order to report the results at the meetings. Instead, meetings were concerned with the design and execution of various medals in prepara­ tion of a history of the reign of Louis XIV, according to the regis­ ter of this academie from 1694 to 1701. With the new regulations of

1701, the Academie became a scholarly institution in which the prin­ ciple activity was the investigation of historical topics for their own sake. Bruno Neveu has stated that the love of erudition reached its height at the end of the seventeenth century and found its natural home in the Académie des inscriptions. [38] Maury has made the same observation concerning the changed nature of the Academie after 1701. [39]

By June of 1701 the Academie des inscriptions was nearing the completion of its major project, the preparation of a history of the reign in medals. With no other formal task, the academicians faced the choice of disbanding or finding another role. This is the con­ text from which the 1701 regulation for the Academie des inscriptions emerged. The règlement represented not a reform brought about by the

[38] Neveu, "La Vie erudite," p. 433.

[39] Maury, L'Ancienne Academiedes inscriptions, pp. 20-23. 238 administration, but a special request originated by the Academie, at the urging of the Abbe Bignon, to assure its own survival.

The Abbé Bignon stated the case very neatly at a meeting of the

Académie des inscriptions in June 1701:

Monsieur l'Abbe Bignon a dit a la Compagnie que l'ouvrage principale ou elle s'estoit occupée surtout depuis dix ans estant achevé et ne pouvant manquer d'estre agreable au Roy, il croyoit que c'estoit un temps propre a donner lieu a Monsieur de Pontchartrain de entretenir Sa Majesté pour obtenir quelque règlement qui pust fixer pour toujours la Compagnie et assurer a ceux qui la composent la continua­ tion de leur pensions. Il adjouta que le Roy n'ayant pas voulu donner des lettres patentes telles qu'elles avoient este dresses, il falloir demander seulement un règlement ainsi qu'on en avoit donne un a l'Academie des Sciences, et que cela seroit aussi stable que les lettres patentes. [40]

Bignon advised the Académie des inscriptions to ask only for some type of règlement, as the king was not willing to issue lettres patentes; the one would serve as well as the other to guarentee the survival of the group. Pontchartrain himself may have suggested this approach. Louis Pontchartrain, like the Abbé Bignon, was personally enamoured of erudition. For example, after becoming protector of the

Académie des inscriptions in 1691, he sent his son, Jérôme Pontchar­ train, to attend meetings of this group. Jerome in fact attended most of the meetings until about 1694 when responsibilities for the marine intervened. [41]

The members of the Academie des inscriptions gladly accepted the

[40] Académie^ des inscriptions. "Registre." 18 Juin 1701. Archive de l'Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres.

[41] Académie des inscriptions. Histoire. I. 7. 239 idea of a règlement like that of the Académie des sciences, but they were unprepared for the arduous duties of preparing scholarly treatises for each meeting. Indeed many members chose to revert to a veteran status after 1701 rather than meet these demands. [42]

Pontchartrain was not faced with the need of reforming an unproduc­ tive body in this instance, but, when the opportunity to reshape the

Académie arose, he chose to create another institution patterned after the Académie des sciences.

As in his interventions with other scholarly institutions,

Pontchartrain's chief concern with this academy was also for scho­

larly productivity rather than government control and regulation.

When in 1710 certain members of the Académie des inscriptions failed

to meet their obligations to present treatises at the meetings of the

academy according to the tour de rolle, he became indignant and lec­

tured the academy in rather stern works. [43] Aside from the issue of

scholary productivity, however, the Académie des inscriptions was

relatively free of government controls.

Colbert's attempt to prod the Académie française into producing

a dictionary of the French language or to gain any substantial con­

trol over its activities was but a qualified success. It thus fell

to Louis Pontchartrain to deal with the delinquency of this Académie

and to attempt reform where Colbert had failed. In 1672 Colbert had

fixed the hours for meetings of this body and an agenda of work to be

[42] Ibid., p. 24.

[43] See Appendix A for his letter to the Académie des inscriptions. 240 conducted. To stimulate effort he offered to distribute forty gold tokens or jetons at each meeting, to be shared by those in atten­ dance. Ultimately a dictionary was completed in 1692, but this was a dubious victory, for it was immediately apparent that the dictionary was unsatisfactory. The academicians were once again neglecting their official duties.

The Académie française had received from the king the sole right to publish a French dictionary almost twenty years earlier, in 1674.

[44] Yet a member of the Académie, the Abbé Furetiere, proceeded to compile his own French dictionary. In 1685 he was expelled from the

Académie française and forbidden to publish his work, [45] but a posthumous edition of this dictionary was published in The Hague in

1690, four years before the appearance of the edition of the

Académie.

A comparison of the two dictionaries is enlightening.

Furetiere's dictionary [46] begins with an introduction by Bayle.

His dictionary is obviously of greater length than that of the

Académie, and it is not hard to discern why. First of all, Furetiére had included the vocabulary of the arts and sciences, that is, a technical vocabulary which is missing from the dictionary of the

Académie. Secondly, Furetiere had included obsolete works, and

[44] D. Maclaren Robertson, A History of the French Academy, 1635- 1910 (New York: Dillingham, 1910), p. 71.

[45] Ibid., p. 74.

[46] Antoine Furetiere, Le Dictionarie universel. The Hague and Rot­ terdam, Leers, 1690. 241 thirdly, he had used extensive quotations from the best authors of

French literature. The Académie française had compiled a list of authors to illustrate its work, but had declined to use it. [47] It is interesting to note that the introduction to the 1694 edition of the Académie is devoted to an explanation of these three omissions from the dictionary. A fourth distinction is that the Académie chose to arrange all definitions of words under the root from which the word derived, while that of Furetiere was arranged alphabetically.

In a letter to Boileau, dated 28 September, 1694, Racine observed:

Pendant qu'on présentait ainsi Dictionnaire de l'Académie, j^'ai appris que Leers Libraire d'Amsterdam avoit présenté au Roi et au ministres une nouvelle édition du Dictionnaire de Furetiere qui a été très bien reçu . . . Cela a paru un assez bizarre contretemps pour ^ Dictionr naire de l'Académie qui me paroit n'avoir pas tant de par­ tisans que l'autre [48]

Charles Beaulieux has written a revealing monograph on the history of the first edition of the dictionary of the Académie. His problem is to explain how the Académie française, containing as it did such literary giants as Racine, Boileau, Corneille, La Fontaine, and so on, could have published such a miserable dictionary. That it was a poor job is beyond doubt. In 1692, 500 copies of a projected 1,000

[47] Robertson, A History of the French Academy, pp. 211-212.

[48] Quoted from Chaires Beaulieux, ed., Observations sur l'orthographie de la langue française, transcriptions, commen­ taire, et facsimile du manuscrit de Mezeray, 1673, et des cri­ tiques des commissaires de 1'Académie précédés d'une histoire de la gestion de la édition du dictionnaire de l'Académie fran­ çaise, 1639-1694 (Paris: Librarie ancienne Honore Champion, 1951), p. 83. 242 were printed but it contained such serious errors that production was halted and the printer was forbidden to sell any of these copies.

[49] This edition was quickly revised and corrected, and issued in

1694 as the first edition of the dictionary.

Beaulieux, with Furetiere as his source — a very biased source, of course — describes the compilation of the Acadànie's dictionary as a process of simple plagiarism from existing dictionaries. [50]

The orthography used by the Academic, he says, was already passing out of style and was chosen to show the relation of words to their

Latin roots rather than to reflect current usage. Racine and

D'Olivet are among those who had some choice words for the work of the Académie. On seeing some drafts of the first edition, Racine allegedly commented.

Bon Dieu, ou nous fourrons-nous quand ce livre viendra à* paroitre? le Public nous jettera des pierres! [51]

Beaulieux reports that D'Olivet, commenting on the same edition.

Il faudroit commencer par brûler le Dictionnaire dont les "definitions" . . . sont . . . si ridicules que nous en avons honte [52]

It is Beaulieux's thesis, following the work of Furetiere, that the responsibility for the fiasco of the first edition does not rest

[49] Ibid.. p. 81.

[50] Ibid.. pp. 60-67.

[51] ibid., pp. 78-79.

[52] Ibid.. p. 8. 243 on the outstanding literary men of the Académie, but rather on a

group of lesser lights called by Furetiere "les Jetonnlers." To

understand this epithet, one needs to recall that in 1672 Colbert

ordered that jetons, tokens redeemable in money, be given to each

member when he attended a session. This was done to encourage

members to attend meetings.

Since there were forty members, there were forty jetons to be

distributed at each meeting; any jetons left over were to be distri­

buted to those present. There being seldom more than ten members at

a meeting, this amounted to four jetons per member. Furetiere claims

that this small group of "jetonniers" attended solely for the purpose

of collecting their jetons. They attended sessions during vacations

when other academicians left Paris, and often argued over whether a

member late to a session was entitled to receive a jeton. They pur­

posely kept small the number of members who attended sessions by nom­

inating for membership the great and the noble, that is men who had

not time to attend the meetings. [53]

Beaulieux has checked Furetiere's account of the "jetonniers"

against the Registres de l'Académie française and he concludes that

Furetiere is right. [54] It was these "jetonniers" who did the day-

to-day work on the dictionary which ended in the abortive 1692 edi­

tion on which prodcution was stopped and completed copies forbidden

to be sold. At this point an attempt to rescue the Dictionnaire was

~[53] Ibid.. pp. 24-27.

[54] Ibid., p. 26. 244 made by three members who were not "jetonniers," 1'Abbe de Dangeau,

Barbier d'Aucour, and Thomas Corneille. Their somewhat hasty revi­ sion was finally published in 1694 as the first edition of the Dic­ tionnaire. [54]

It is thus understandable that the Académie française consiered revision of the dictionary to be a desirable goal. In an undated manuscript probably written in 1702 addressed to Pontchartrain, an unnamed apologist for the Académie française pleads for special funds to recopy the dictionary into an alphabetical arrangement. [55] He explains that the first edition, arranged by roots, was intended only as galley proofs on which to make corrections. He adds that the Abbé

Regnier had proceeded to have the first three letters transcribed, but that the king and M. Pontchartrain refused to pay for such an

"unnecessary" novelty. The apologist then asks M. Pontchartrain to convince the king that this is no minor novelty.

The king was apparently not hard to convince, for we find a letter, also undated, from Pontchartrain to the Abbé Dangeau, direc­ tor of the Académie française. [56] In this letter Pontchartrain tells Dangeau that the king has read the memoir of the Académie on the subject of expenses and has agreed to pay for a transcription.

Pontchartrain then took the opportunity to nudge Dangeau to pursue more ardently certain works which the Académie has promised but which

[54] Ibid., p. 82.

[55] BN Clairambault 566 fol. 186-187.

[56] Ibid.. fol. 184-185. are not as yet forthcoming:

Reveillez-vous done, s'il vous plait, execucer votre promesse, et en meme temp rechaufes le zele de les autres messieurs.

Although both of these documents are undated, they clearly follow the appearance of the first edition of the dictionary and they indicate a degree of discontent with the performance of the Acadanie française.

Two documents with more precise dates then enter our account of the Académie française. The first is entitled "Mémoire sur les assemblées de 1'Académie francoise et sur les recompenses de ceux qui y travaillent davantage," [57] and it is a recommendation for major reforms within the Académie. The author is unknown, but the date is probably 1702 because a list of members is attached, the newest member having been received into the Académie française in 1702. The gist of this memoir is that by reducing the number of meetings of the

Académie, one could save money which could be used to reward those members who work diligently.

The author points out that in the beginning the Académie fran­

çaise met only twice a week but that in order to hasten the comple­ tion of the dictionary, sessions had been increased to three per week. Since the king paid for attendance at meetings, this created a greater expense for the king. Since the completion of the diction­ ary, however, most meetings were spent in idle chatter, and individu­ als did not devote themselves eagerly to common tasks since there was

[57] BN Clairambault 566, fol. 190-193. 246 neither recognition nor special compensation for diligence. The author of the mémoire therefore made two recommendations for reforms : that members of the Académie undertake individual projects, and that the number of meetings be reduced to two per week and the money saved be used to reward the more diligent members.

Pontchartrain apparently liked the ideas contained in this mémoire. In a letter from Pontchartrain to the Abbé Dangeau dated

December 1702, [58] Pontchartrain recapitulates the arguments from the above mémoire. He then tells Dangeau that the king has author­ ized him to cut back the jetons to two meetings per week. He then makes two statements which are scratched through with a pen: first, that the king will pay for a transcription of the dictionary; second, that one-half of the fund saved by reducing the number of meetings will be given to members for hard work. In place of these two deleted items, another recommendation in a diferent handwriting is attached. It states that the 4,000 livres saved from jetons will be divided into four bourses and distributed annually to the four oldest members of the Académie who have attended meetings at least twenty times that year.

Although these seem to be reasonable changes, Pontchartrain does not seem to have enforced them, or else the Académie had enough power to reverse his attempts. In any event the Registres de l'Académie française does not mention that any reforms were effected, and meet­ ings continued to be held three times per week. There is no

[58] Ibid.. fol. 197-200. 247 indication that any change was made in paying members for all three meetings.

What is one to make of this profusion of règlements and organi­ zational changes in the cultural or scholarly institutions of France?

Is there some consistency of policy throughout? The one overwhelming theme running through all of the reforms-we have discussed, both the earlier reforms instituted by Colbert and his son, Seignelay, and the later ones of Pontchartrain, is the insistance of both ministers that academic institutions and their members fulfill their formal obliga­ tions and do so with satisfactory quality of results. Even the

Académie des inscriptions, which had not previously been found want­ ing in application, was obligated to a new level of scholarly produc­ tivity by its new règlement.

A second facet of these reforms is the qualified nature of cen­ tralization. Clearly many aspects of French cultural activity were centralized in the hands of a single minister toward the end of the seventeenth century, but this centralized control seems to have been used to stimulate the effective discharge of institutional obliga­ tions, rather than for censorship. Certain bodies, such as the

Académie de peinture et de sculpture, the Académie française, and the

Collège royal, had their independence curtailed to compel a greater responsiveness to their public responsibilities. On the other hand, the Académie des sciences and the Académie des inscriptions actually had their corporate status enhanced during the reform process, leav­ ing more decision-making powers to each of these bodies. There is no 248 indication of a master plan to establish uniformity within the academies. Pontchartrain's attempt to reform the Académie française in 1702 was a direct response to a memoir addressed to him on the subject, while the reniement given the Académie des inscriptions was almost an accident of history.

From this large-scale perspective, the reform of the Acadànie des sciences is less an internal affair than Roger Hahn suggests.

The pattern of reforms throughout the cultural institutions of late seventeenth century France which we have traced here indicates that the government was primarily concerned with scholarly and artistic accountability or performance. From the perspective of a minister of state the Académie des sciences was one of several cultural institu­ tions in need of revitalization. The overall pattern of cultural reforms correlates well with the internal evidence of decline and reform within the Académie des sciences. The Académie des sciences _a Paris underwent between the years

1676 and 1699 fundamental changes in its activities and in its form of organization. The study of this institution week by week for twenty-four years and the analysis of certain key documents relevant to its administration have brought to light a number of significant features of these changes and their casual relationships.

The quantity of research and publication produced by the

Académie des sciences and its members changed between 1676 and 1699.

Research as measured by the number of scientific presentations made at the biweekly meetings of the Académie showed a decline between

1688 and 1691, an increase in 1692 and 1693, and finally a moderate decline after 1693. The quantity of publications showed a more marked change in these years. No collective or "official" publica­ tions of the Académie appeared between 1679 and 1692, while a fair number were published in 1676 and again in 1692 and 1693. The number of works published by the individual members of the Académie, both monographs and notices in the Journal des scavans, declined greatly after 1683. The Académie published its own journal or Mémoires in

1692 and 1693 to compensate for this decline but was unable to con­ tinue publication after 1693.

249 250 Some variation over the course of time in the quantity of research and publications produced within an institution is to be expected due to the changing problems of science and the changing membership of the institution. In the case of the Académie, however, the decline in scientific productivity in the 1680's was doubtlessly due to the preference demonstrated by the Academy's second protec­ tor, the marquis de Louvois, for research and publication on anatomy and natural history and his lack of support for the fields of mechan­ ics, mathematics, and astronomy, that is, for the very fields on which the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century rested.

Debate and personal conflict were a fact of institutional life in the Academia from its inception. In the absence of any commonly accepted procedures for adjudicating conflict, the program of the

Academia depended to a great extent on the direction given to the

Academia by its protector. Colbert supplied this direction to the

Académie and resolved its internal conflicts, but the marquis de

Louvois lost touch with the members of Acadanie after 1686. Neglect spawned conflict and sparked a crisis of authority.

The first attempts to revive the Académie in 1691 derived directly from an awareness on the part of Louis Pontchartrain of the state of decline in the Académie during the preceeding years. A mémoire addressed to Pontchartrain at the time he assumed the protec­ torship in 1691 spelled out a list of problems facing the Académie and formed the bases for Pontchartrain's first reforms. These reforms were: first, to institute a program of publication in order 251 to revive the scientific productivity of the Académie; secondly, to appoint the Abbe Bignon as president of the Académie in order to give it direction and cohesion; and thirdly, to rectify irregularities concerning the pensions and membership status of a number of new members.

It gradually became apparent, however, that a reorganization and a formal instrument of government would be the most suitable means to effect a lasting improvement in the operations of the Acadenie. The reforms instituted by Pontchartrain in 1691/1693 produced but a brief period of scientific productivity. The problems contronting the

Academic in 1699 were the same ones which had arisen during Louvois' protectorship and which had been only partially resolved ,by

Pontchartrain's early attempts at reform.

The règlement of 1699 offered a systematic solution to these problems. First, the Académie became a permanent corporation within the government and acquired a regular budget line. Secondly, a pro­ cedure for attaining membership was clearly defined and the member­ ship was oganized into a hierarchial classification which stimulated productivity by offering advancement to those who excelled. Thirdly, the règlement recognized the legitimacy of disagreement as part of

the normal course of scientific discovery and set forth procedures

for keeping it within bounds. Fourtly, the règlement stated a stan­ dard for scientific productivity and gave both the powers and respon­ sibility for publication to the membership. 252

This reform of the Académie in 1699 was possible because Louis

Pontchartrain and the Abbe Bignon had a personal concern for the scholarly enterprise and were willing to utilize their positions within the government to negotiate support for scholarly activities.

The reform of the Académie was part of a broader attempt exhi­ bited throughout the reign of Louis XIV to reform royally-sponsored cultural institutions. These reforms do not reveal an attempt to control these institutions for purposes of censorship, but they are rather means of insuring the enforcement of their public and scho­ larly responsibilities. To attain this end certain rights and deci­ sions were given to the membership of these institutions and other prerogatives were reserved for the crown. In the case of the

Académie des sciences the right to nominate new members and the dis­ cretion over what to publish was given to the membership while the appointment of officers and the approval of nominations was left with the king. This division of powers placed on the membership of the

Académie the responsibility for the quality and quantity of its research and publication. It reserved to the government the means to intercede in case the officers of the Académie failed to enforce the regulations set forth in the règlement.

I hope that this study in the governance of the Académie des sciences and the problems it faced will help the reader achieve a better understanding of the ancien regime. Our knowledge of the ancien regime and how it functioned has been undergoing a revision for some years now. We no longer suscribe to the view that the state 253 was engrossing the rights of individuals and institutions in an attempt to impose its absolute authority. The royal government was creating institutions which reflected a compromise of interests and which set forth clear procedures to individuals for treading these institutional paths in order to attain their personal goals within the bounds demanded by the public and the government. APPENDIX A

DOCUMENT 1

Speech made by Henri Bessie, sieur de la Cha.pelle on 30 January 1686 to the Académie des Sciences

M de Louvois demande ce que l'on pourra faire au laboratoire. Ne peut- on considérer ce travail ou comme une recherche curieuse ou comme une recherche utile?

J'appelle recherche curieuse ce qui n'est qu'une pure curiosité, un jeu et pour ainsi dire un amusement des chymistes. Cette compagnie est trop illustre et a des applications trop serieuses pour ne s'attacher ici qu'a une simple curiosité.

J'entends une recherche utile ce qui peut avoir rapport au service du roi et de l'etat: pour le grand oeuvre, qui comprend aussi l'extrait des mercures de tous les métaux, leur transmutation ou leur multiplication, dont M de Louvois ne veut point entendre parler ou bien la recherche et l'examen des mines et minières de France, et de toutes les compositions sulfurées qui servent a la guerre, ou de celles qui peuvent adoucir l'eau de la mer et la rendre bonne a

L'autre recherche plus convenable a cette compagnie qui seroit plus du gout de Mgr de Louvois regarde tout ce qui peut illustrer la physique et servir a la medecine, ces deux choses estant presque inseparables, parce que la medecine tire des consequenpes et profite des nouvelles découvertes de la physique.

Néanmoins, si la compagnie juge a propos de travailler a ce qui regarde princepalement la physique, ne pourroit-elle pas, en achevant l'analyse des plantes, observer aussi leur saveur et examiner si leurs sels sont semblables a ceux des terres et joindre ces remarques dans ce grand ouvrage qu'elle a entrepris pour servir a l'histoire des plantes.

Si l'on veut travailler a d'autres analyses, ne pourrait-on pas faire celle des pierres depuis le caillou jusqu'aux pierres precieuses et y joindre celles du corail, des perles et de l'ambre gris, si l'on rime mieux s'appliquer a la chymie minérale et si la compagnie ne craint point les tempestes que ses observations

254 pourroient exciter dans les facultez de medecine et parmy les empyriques, qui 1 'empescheroit de choisir dans le theatre chymique les auteurs les plus célébrés et de desabuser les hommes ou sur les remedes particuliers qu’ils ont inventes, ou sur cette recherche inutile du remede universel qui est comme la pierre philosophais?

Ne pourroit-on pas reimprimer et augmenter le petit livre des eaux minérales qui porte le nom de M Duclos, en expliquant plus au long ce qu'elles ont d'utile ou de nuisible, ou par elles-mesmes, ou par l'usage que les médecins en ordonnent dans les maladies faute d'en bien connoistre les propriétés?

Ne seroit-il pas a propos de faire en mesme temps l'analyse des vins naturels des différants terroirs du royaume et des autres pays, et mesme des vins de liqueur qui sont le plus en usage parmi nous pour en tirer des inductions utiles a la santé?

Ne seroit-ce point une occupation digne de la compagnie de faire chercher des dissolvants par la boisson contre les pierres de reins, comme le chevalier Borry pretendoit en avoir trouve: d 'examiner si les remedes pratiques contre la goutte ont quelque fondement, comme celui du chirurgier de Lillers en Flandre, qui est compose de crane d'homme mort du dernier supplice, et quelle vertu l'urine d'un goutteux peut avoir pour le soulager en le buvant, comme plusieurs personnes le pratiquent aujourd'hui.

Enfin ne seroit-il pas permis d 'examiner les effets du mercure et de l'antimoine, du quinquina, du laudanum et du pavot selon les différentes preparations et de faire des analyses exactes du the, du cafe, du cacao, dont l'usage se rend si commun soit comme des remedes, soit comme des alimens.

(P.V .j T. 13, 30 January 1686). DOCUMENT 2

Estât des Ouvrages de 1 'Académie des Sciences et de ceux qui la composent, 7 Aoust 1691, avec les Gratifications qu'ils recevoient par an il est deu de la pension de 1689

1000 .... M Duhamel secretaire de 1 'Académie 1500 VC

6000 H ___ M Cassini pour l'astronomie et geometric 9000 H

1000 Ü___ M de la Hire pour 1 'astronomie et geometrie 1500 .H

1000 yC — M l'abbe Gallois pour toutes les sciences 1500 y C

1000 yL — M Dodart médecin pour l'histoire des plantes et pour la physique 1500 y L

1400 y — M Du Vernay pour la dissection des animaux servant a l'histoire commancee par 1'académie, lui et un garçon cirurgien 2100 ,lï

400 n — M Mery pour la mesme chose 600 y C

1000 yi — M Bourdelin pour la chymie et l'analyse des plantes servant a l'histoire des plantes commences par 1'académie 1500 ü"

800 H ___ M Marchand pour lad. histoire des plantes 1200 y C

333-6-8 ___ M Sedileau pour l'astronomie et geometrie 500 HT mort en 1689 M Borelly pour la chymie avoit 2000 11 et estoit loge

M Thevenot y remplit la place de feu M Carcavy depuis X ^ 1684 sans pension pour ce sujet il en avoit comme garde des livres de la Bibliothèque

M Huygens absent retire en hollande avoit 6000 i f

M DuClos pour la chymie avoit 2000 y i et loge

M Blondel pour les mathématiques avoit 1500 .M" M Perrault pour la physique, l’histoire des des animaux et la mechanique avoit 2000 lî

M Mariotte pour la physique et les mathématiques avoit 1500

M Romer pour l ’astronomie de les mathématiques 1500 y L estoit trouve en danmarc

Eleves de 1’Académie

266-13-4 .... M Potenot pour l’astronomie et la geometrie 400 VL

266-13-4 ___ M Cusset pour l’astronomie geometrie et mechaniques 400 H

M Lefebvre pour l ’astronomie geometrie et les nombres 300

M de Varignon pour les mathématiques n'a pas encore de pension et en mérité une servant dequis 4 ans

M Couplet garde des machines et instruments de 1 ’academe pour leur entretien et autres services q u ’il rend a la compagnie et comme concierge de 1’observatoire a 500 VL

M de Chastillon graveur de dessinateur pour dessiner les parties des animaux disséqués et les plantes rares servant aux exercises de l’académie 400 jLÎ

Mg de Louvois lui M de la Chapelle y ’a assiste assiduesement depuis avoit fait esperer septembre 1683 et n ’a rien touche. Pour cela une gratification il distribuoit les ordonnonces de gratification pareille aux et arrestoit les mémoires des dépenses de 1 ’académie.

Bien que les Sieurs la Croix et Dippi interprettes de langues arabe et turque ne fussent pas de 1 ’académie des sciences, en cette qualité d ’interprettes leurs ordonnonces m ’estoient adressées scavoir

800 a M de la Croix 1200 if 800 a M Dippi 1200 2Ï Tournefort botaniste a Les frais du laboratoire montant inegale- 600 d'apointement ment par années de payment par ordonnonces Homberg chimiste a sur les mémoires certifies de Mrs Borelly 600 d'apointement et Bourdelin, les plus fortes annes non Renaud y entrer par point passe 2000 XL honneur Il se fait encore des dépenses pour les dissectiones des animaux sur les mémoires certifies de M Duvernay, par ordonnances, les plus fortes années non point passe 1000 yC

a M Dalesme pour inventions de machines, il lui permettre d'y entrer par honneur 600 H

Les petites depences impreveus pour le service de 1'académie ordonnes de temps en temps pour porter et reporter des machines et des animaux et autres sujets des exercises de lad. académie ont este a communes années a 200 un peu moins, j'ai arreste les mémoires de tout ce que dessus sur les certificats de ces Mrs et ils ont este payes par ordonnances.

Le bois bougie papier et plumes estaient fournies du fonds et sur les comptes de la Bibliothèque ou les assemblées de lad. académie se tenoient a cause que sur les difficultés et les disputes qui surviennent dans_les conferences, on a recours sur le champ a des livres de tant de matières diferentes qu'il faut une grande bibliothèque pour les fournir dans tous les cas.

Estât des Ouvrages qui sont sous la presse

Les ouvrages de 1'académie sont présentement

Mémoires pour servir a l'histoire des animaux, il y en a un volume d'imprime avec les figures et les descriptions des animaux qui ont este disséqués par Mrs de l'academie, elle travaille depuis 8 ans a corriger et augmenter cet ouvrage par de nouvelles experiences et observations, les epreuves d'une partie des planches sont tires, et les descriptions en sont imprimée de la nouvelle edition, ce volume pouroit paraistre dans six mois se on n'en eut point arreste 1'impression par ordre exprès. Il y a des matériaux amasses pour un second volume avec les desseins et les descriptions, il faut graver le reste des desseins et revoir les descriptions. 259

Mémoires pour servir a l'histoire des plantes la plus grande depense en est faite, il y a 40 plantes gravées et non descrites et il y en a 239 descrites et gravées. M Dodart en fait les descriptions, en a beaucoup de fautes, on y adjouste l’analyse des plantes que M Bour­ delin fait dans le laboratoire de l'academie qu'il escrit sur les re­ gistres et reporte a la compagnie.

Il y a un volume de voyages de Mrs de l'academie qui ont este en di­ vers. pais éloignés faire des observations qu'ils ont raportees a la compagnie, on a adjouste a cet ouvrage une preface qui rend compte au public de tous les travaux de l'academie plusieurs traites d'as'r tronomie de M Cassini très curieux, ce volume eut pu paraistre dans trois mois si l'ordre survenu n'en eut arreste l'impression qui est presque achevee.

M de la hyre prend soin de L'impression de plusieurs ouvrages post- urnes de Mrs de l'academie, il y en a un volume prest a donner et dans trois mois il eut paru sans cet ordre d 'arrester tout. Led. S de la hyre a des matériaux tout prest pour un second volume de di­ vers traites des mathématiques partis de ces Mrs et partie de luy.

On travaillait aussy a la traduction du Frontinus de aquiductibus qui est faite et que la compagnie aussi charge M L'Abbe Gallois de revoir. Chacun travaillast avec application selon ses talents pour avancer les ouvrages, sans compter les livres q u ’en leur particulier ils ont donnes au public.

Les dépenses de 1'impression de ces ouvrages, et de ceux de heron dont M de la hire prend soin, et des tactiques dont M thevenot s'est char­ ge, se sont faites a 1'imprimerie royale, et ont este comprises dans les comptes qu j'ai arreste du S Mabre Cramoisy, dans ceux de la veuve depuis la déroute de ses affaires, et on pourroit faire des a- comodements avec le Sr Assisson pour diminuer cette depense en l'en­ gageant d 'imprimer sur son compte quelques uns de ces ouvrages, le Roy promettant d'en prendre un certain nombre d'exemplaires pour faire des presents.

M Cassini a commence la mesure actuelle de la terre en tirant la ligne meridiene depuis l'observatoire qusqu'a St. Sauveur par de la Bourges, et Le St Loir sur les instructions de l'academie a este reconnoistre les stations pour le prolongement de cette ligne jusqu'a Portorendre en Roussillon, et en a fait la carte. M de la hire de son coste a prolonge cette ligne depuis l'observatoire jusqu fort près de Don- kerque, ce travail qui est grand, estoit d'une merveilleuse utilité pour rectifier la géographie et les erreurs infines que se sont per- petuees dans les cartes qui ne font que s 'imiter les uns les autres.

Les assemblées de l'academie se tiennent les mercredis et les samedis depuis deux heures jusqu'a dans une salle basse de la biblioteque du Roy ou sont les livres qui conservent les matières qui se traittent ’dans la Compagnie. Clairembaut 566 f 251-252). DOCUMENT 3

Letter from Louis Pontchartrain to Abbe Bignon, 28 January 1699

Monsieur En consequence du Règlement pour I'Acadanie Royale des Sciences ordonné par le Roy le 26 de ce mois, j ’ay fait lecture a' sa Majesté des académiciens qui la composent presentment, Sçavoir vous monsieur, M. le marquis de l'hospital, le Pere Truchet, M. Renau Cap^^ de Vaisseau, M. ^ Mallezieu, le Père Malebranche, le Père Gouye, Académiciens honnoraires. Les Abbé Gallois géométre, les Rolle géométre,. les Varignon géométre, les Cassini astronome, les • . de la Hire astronome, les Le Febvre astronome, les Filleau des Billettes méchanicien, les Jaugeon méchanicien, les Delasme méchanicien, les Du Hamel anatomiste, les Du Verney anatomiste, les Mery anatomiste, les Bourdelin chimiste, les Homberg chimiste, les Boulduc chimiste, les Dodart botaniste, les Marchand botaniste, l e ^ Tournefort botaniste, les de Fontennelle secrétaire, les Couplet trésorier. Académiciens pensionnaires. Les Leibnitz étranger, les de Tschirnhausen étranger, les Guillelmini étranger, les de Lagny géométre, les Regis géométre, les Cassini fils astronome, les de la Hire fils astronome, les Chazelles méchanicien, les Sauveur méchanicien, les Tauvry anatomiste, les Bourdelin fils anatomiste, les de Langlade chimiste, les Lemery chimiste, les Morin de Ste Victor botaniste, les Morin de Toulon botaniste. Académiciens associéz; sous les Varignon les Carré élève, sous les Cassini astronome les Maraldi, sous les Homberg les Geoffroy élève, sous les Couplet les Couplet fils élève. Sa Majesté a marqué une satisfaction particulière du mérite et de l'application de chacun d'eux et les a de nouveau en tant que besoin servit, agrées et choisis pour les places qu'il occupent; il est cependant a' observer que les Dodart n'est agrée que par une consideration toute singulière, car son employ de médecin de Madame la Princesse du Conti douairière l'obligeant à résider hors Paris auprès de cette Princesse il ne pourroit estre au rang des Académiciens pensionnaires suivant l'art, du règlement et le Roy ne le conserve en ce rang qu'a raison de son extrême ancienneté dans l'Académie et sans qu'un pareil exemple puisse dans la suite estre jamais tire s'consequence. Sa Majesté au surplus m'a commandé de vous faire savoir que son intention en que vous fassiez incessamment procéder a 1'election des sujets dignes des autres places qui restent é remplir pour parfaire le nombre porté par ladite Règlement.

(P.V., T. 18, 4 February 1699.) Letter from Louis Pontchartrain to the Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 3 December 1710

Messieurs, II y a quelque temps que je me suis fait ^ porter vos registres de cette année dans l ’esperience d'y trouver de nouveaux sujets de faire, autant que je le désire, votre cour au Roy, dans les différents oc­ casions qui s'en présenter. Mon premier soin a este d'y examiner le progrès du tour de Rolle si précisément ordonné par les articles 21 et 22 du règlement, et recommende depuis avec tant d'instance dans une infinité de lettres écrites à M^s vos officiers. On ne peut pas je l'avoue être plus surpris que je l'ay été, en voyant combien cette premier des devoirs acadéniques a este negligee. La pluspart des vos séances sont dénuées de pieces et ne sont presque remplies que de conversations légers ou de petits difficultés que l'on ne savoit regarder que comme des amusements, et la suitte nécessaire d'un travail sérieux. J'ay cherche ce qui pouvait vous avoir amène a un point si capable de servir la reputation naissante et si peu établie de l'Académie; Et je n'ay pas este longtemps è me persuader que le mauvais exemple en devait 'être la veritable cause. Pour y remédier je m'étois fait un plan sur lequel j'estois prest de prendre l'ordre du Roy, quand j'ay jugé qu'une mortification de cette nature rejail- liroit sur tout le corps, et pourroit donner également au Roy et au public, une impression epu favorable de vos exercises; Ainsy J'ay mieux ayme que ce fust l'Académie elle-méme qui cherchast les moyens de reprimer un abus, qui 1'interesse au delà peut être de ce qu'elle pense. Elle prendra selons toutes les aparances de justes mésures pour n'y estre plus expose, et les lois académiques qu'elle jugera a propos d'établir a^ cet égard, luy feront en general autant d'hon­ neur que de tort aux particulier qui voudront les enfreindre et qui s'en trouveront punis par ces mesmes règlements. J'ay donc écrit a^ M^ votre President de faire incessement délibérer sur cette ma­ tière, et je charge le secrétaire de dresser un precès verbal de la délibération qui Z:' instruise non seulement de ce qui aura este ré­ solu a" la pluralité des voix mais encore de tout ce qui aura -été pro­ posé de la diversité particulière des avis afinque ce qui sera trouvé par sa Ma^e de plus convénable, suit revêtu de toute la forme nécessaire pour son execution. Dans la triste nécessité ou je me trouve pour 1'honore de l'Académie et pour le bien public, de remé­ dier a un tel relâchement je ne crois pas pouvoir mieux marquer la consideration et l'amitié que j'ay toujours pour la Compagnie qu'en la chargeant elle meme de proposer des remedes convenables persuadé qu'elle ne me laissera d'autre soin que celuy d'en diminuer la ri­ gueur, et que tels qu'ils soient ils deviendront par le zele et par le travail des particuliers qui la composent, je le desire ardemment par le véritable interest que je prendray toujours à'1 'honneur de la. Je suis (BN FF 9413 fol 190^ a 192^). Letter from Louis Pontchartrain to the Académie des sciences, 20 February 1714

Le Roy ayans été enforme. Monsieur, que quelques uns d'entre les as­ sociez, et les élèves de l'Acadéaie, ne faisoiens aucunes fonctione d'Académiciens, que mâne ils n'assistoiens presque poins aux assem­ blées, et que maigre les divers avis qui leur avoiens été donnes, ne se corrigeants poins de leur négligence, Elle pouvroit devenir d'un dangereux exemple. Sa Majesté a cru ne devoir pas différer davantage à prononcer leur exclusion, vous aurez donc soin au plutôt de déclarer vacante la place d'associé anatomiste du S du Verney le jeune, celle d'élève anatomiste du S Aubert, et celle d'élève géomètre du S du Torar^ et vous déclarer en même tems, qu'au lieu du S du Torar, Sa Majesté a nommé M Bomie, qui a marqué plus de gout pour la géométrie que pour les observations astronomiques, ayez attention, s'il vous plait, que toutes ces places ou bien que les autres qui vacquent dans i'Académie soient remplies de sujets veritablemens dignes, et pour celle des élèves surtout, avertissez les pensionnaires qui doit les nommer, qu'ils apportent auparavant aumoins deux pièces, qu'ils cer- tiffierons être de ceux qu'ils ont droite de proposer, pour l’examen desquelles pieces, 1'Académie choisira deux commissaires, et sur leur rapport elle jugera s'ils méritent d'etre receus. D'ailleurs pour obliger à l'avenir les associez, et les élèves à mieux travailler, le Roy ordonne qu'ils lisent à tour de rolle comme les pensionnaires, quay que moins fréquemment; c'est que dans un tour de rolle des pen­ sionnaires, les associez liront après les trois pensionnaires de leur classe et que dans un autre tour de rolle des pensionnaires chaque élève lira après le pensionnaire dont il est élève. Cette nouvelle règle doit être observée si exactement, que dans les cas même d'ab­ sence de Paris, il faudra avoir soin d 'envoyer sa pièce pour être lue, et que faute de remplir ainsi le tour de rolle, ceux qui y manquer­ ont une première fois, seront déchus de tout droit de voix passive durant un an, et exclus absolument en cas de récidive, 1'intention de Sa Majesté étant que le present Règlement ait la même force, que les anciens, vous le ferez lire a la première assemblée et mettre sur les registres.

(P.V. T. 33, 20 February 1714). APPENDIX B

REGLEMENT ORDONNE PAR LE ROI

POUR L'ACADÉMIE ROYALE DES SCIENCES

26 JANVIER 1699

Le Roi voulant continuer a donner des marques de son affection â l'Académie royale des sciences, Sa Majesté a résolu le present règlement, lequel Elle veut et entend être exactement observé.

L'Académie royale des sciences demeurera toujours sous la protection du Roi et recevra ses ordres par celui des Secrétaires d'État à qui il plaira a Sa Majesté d'en donner le soin.

II

Ladite Académie sera toujours composée de quatre sortes d'acadé­ miciens : les honoraires, les pensionnaires, les associés et les elèves; la premiere classe composée de dix personnes, et les trois autres chacune de vingt; et nul ne sera admis dans aucune de ces quatre classes, que par le choix ou l'agréent de Sa Majesté.

Les honoraires seront tous regnicoles et recommandables par leur intelligence dans les mathématiques ou dans la physique, desquels l'un sera président, et aucun d'eux ne pourra devenir pensionnaire.

Les pensionnaires seront tous établis a Paris: trois géomètres, trois astronomes, trois mécaniciens, trois anatomistes, trois chimistes, trois botanistes, un secrétaire et un trésorier. Et lorsqu'il arrivera que quelqu'un d'entre eux sera appelé a quelque charge ou commission demandant résidence hors de Paris, il sera pourvu a sa place, de même que si elle avoit vaqué par décès.

263 Les associes seront en pareil nombre; douze desquels ne pourront etre que regnicoles, deux appliques a la ge^omètrie, deux a l'astro­ nomie, deux aux mécaniques, deux a 1'anatomie, deux a la chimie, deux a la botanique; les huit autres pourront être étrangers et s'appliquer aT celles d'entre ces diverses sciences pour lesquelles ils auront plus d'inclination et de talent.

Les élèves seront tous établis a Paris, chacun d'eux appliqué au genre de science dont fera profession 1'académicien pensionnaire auquel il sera attaché; et s'ils passent a" des emplois demandant résidence hors de Paris, leurs places seront remplies, comme si elles étoient vacantes par mort.

VII

Pour remplir les places d'honoraires, l'assemblée élira, a la pluralité des voix^ un sujet digne qu'elle proposera a Sa Majesté pour avoir son agrément.

Pour remplir les places de pensionnaires, l'Académie élira trois sujets, desquels ^deux au moins seront associés ou élèves, et ils seront proposés a Sa Majesté, afin qu'il lui plaise en choisir un.

Pour remplir les places d'associés, l'Académie élira deux sujets, desquels un au moins pourra être pris du nombre des élèves, et ils seront proposés a Sa Majesté, afin qu'il lui plaise en choisir un.

Pour remplir les places d'élèves, chacun des pensionnaires s'en pourra choisir un qu'il présentera a la Compagnie, qui en délibérera; et s'il est agrée a la pluralité des voix, il sera propose à" Sa Maj esté. Nul ne pourra être propose Sa Majesté" pour remplir aucune desdites places d 'académicien, s ’il n'est de bonnes moeurs et de probité reconnue.

Nul ne pourra être proposé de même, s'il est régulier, attaché a' quelque ordre de religion, si ce n'est pour remplir quelque place d'académicien honoraire.

Nul ne pourra être proposé a Sa Majesté pour les places de pen­ sionnaire ou d'associé, s'il n'est connu par quelque ouvrage conside­ rable imprimé, par quelque cours fait avec éclat, par quelque machine de son invention, ou par quelque découverte particulière.

Nul ne pourra etre propose pour les places de pensionnaire ou d'associé, qu'il n'ait au moins vingt-cinq ans.

Nul ne pourra être proposé pour les places d'élèves, qu'il n'ait vingt ans au moins.

XVI

Les assemblées ordinaires de l'Académie se tiendront a la biblio­ thèque du Roi, les mercredi et samedi de chaque semaine; et lorsque lesdits jours se rencontrera quelque fête, l'assemblée se tiendra la jour précédent.

Les seances desdites assemblées seront au moins de deux heures, savoir: depuis trois jusqu'a cinq. Les vacances de l ’Acadanie commenceront au huitième de septembre et finiront le onzième de novembre; elle vaquera en outre pendant la quinzaine de Parques, la semaine de la Pentecôte, et depuis Noel jusqu'aux Rois.

XIX

Les académiciens seront assidus à' tous les jours d'assemblée, et nul des pensionnaires ne pourra s'absenter plus de deux mois pour ses affaires particulières, hors le temps des vacances, sans un congé exprès de Sa Majesté.

L 'expérience ayant fait connaître trop d 'inconvénients dans les ouvrages auxquels toute l'Académie pourroit travailler en commun, chacun des académiciens choisira plutôt quelque objet particulier de ses études, et par le compte qu'il en rendra dans les assemblées, il tachera d'enrichir de ses lumières tous ceux qui composent l'Académie, et de profiter de leurs remarques.

XXI

Au commencement de chaque année, chaque académicien pensionnaire sera obligé de déclarer par écrit è la Compagnie le principal ouvrage auquel il se proposera de travailler; et les autres académi­ ciens seront invités a donner une semblable déclaration de leurs desseins.

Quoique chaque académicien soit obligé de s'appliquer principale­ ment a ce qui concerne la science particulière a laquelle il s'est adonné, tous néanmoins seront exhortés è étendre leurs recherches sur tout ce qui peut être d'utile ou de curieux dans les diverses parties des mathématiques, dans la différente conduite des arts et dans tout ce qui peut regarder quelque point de l'histoire naturelle, ou appartenir en quelque manière è la physique. XXIII

Dans chaque assemblée, il y aura du moins deux académiciens pensionnaires obligés, a* tour de role, d'apporter quelques observa­ tions sur leur science. Pour les associés, ils auront toujours la liberté de proposer de meme leurs observations; et chacun de ceux qui seront présents, tant honoraires que pensionnaires ou associés, pourront, selon l'ordre de leur science, faire leurs remarques sur ce qui aura été proposé; mais les élèves ne parleront que lorsqu'ils y seront invites par le président.

Toutes les observations que les académiciens apporteront aux assemblées seront par eux laissées le jour même par écrit entre les mains du secrétaire, pour y avoir recours dans l'occasion.

XXV

Toutes les experiences qui seront rapportées par quelque académi­ cien seront vérifiées par lui dans les assemblées, s'il est possible, ou du moins elles le seront en particulier, en presence de quelques académiciens.

L'Académie veillera exactement a'ce que, dans les occasions ou quelques académiciens seront d'opinions différentes, ils n'emploient aucun teirme de mépris ni d'aigreur l'un contre l'autre, soit dans leurs discours, soit dans leurs écrits; et lors même qu'ils combatt­ ront les sentiments de quelques savants que ce puisse être, l'Académie les exhortera a n'en parler qu'avec ménagement.

XXVII

L'Académie aura soin d'entretenir commerce avec les divers savants, soit de Paris et des provinces du royaume, soit même des pays étrangers afin d'être promptement informée de ce qui s'y passera de curieux pour les mathématiques ou pour la physique; et dans les élections pour remplir des places d 'académiciens, elle donnera beaucoup de préférence aux savants qui auront été les plus exacts a cette espèce de commerce. L ’Académie chargera quelqu’un des académiciens de lire les ouvrages importants de physique ou de mathématiques qui paraîtront soit en France, soit ailleurs; et celui qu'elle aura chargé de cette lecture en fera son rapport a la Compagnie, sans en faire la critique, en marquant seulement s ’il y a des vues dont on puisse profiter.

XXIX

L ’Académie fera de nouveau les expériences considerables qui se seront faites partout ailleurs, et marquera dans ses registres la conformité ou la difference des siennes a celles dont il etoit question.

XXX

L ’Académie examinera les ouvrages que les acadèniciens se ■ proposeront de faire imprimer; elle n'y donnera son approbation qu’après une lecture entiere faite dans les assemblées, ou du moins qu'après un examen et rapport fait par ceux que la Compagnie aura commis a' cet examen; et nul des académiciens ne pourra mettre aux ouvrages qu'il feraJLmprimer le titre d ’académicien, s’ils n'ont été ainsi approuvés par l'Académie.

XXXI

L ’Acadànie examinera, si le Roi l ’ordonne, toutes les machines pour lesquelles on sollicitera des privileges auprès de Sa Majesté. Elle certifiera si elles son^ nouvelles et utiles, et les inventeurs de celles qui seront approuvées seront tenus de lui en laisser un modèle.

Les académiciens honoraires, pensionnaires et associes auront voix délibérative, lorsqu’il ne s'agira que de sciences.

Les seuls académiciens honoraires et pensionnaires auront voix délibérative, lorsqu'il s ’agira d ’élection ou d ’affaires concernant l ’Académie; et lesdites délibérations se feront par scrutin. XXXIV

Ceux qui ne seront point de l’Académie ne pourront assister ni être admis aux assemblées ordinaires, si ce n ’est quand ils y^seront conduits par le secretaire pour y proposer quelque découverte ou quelque machine nouvelle.

Toutes personnes auront entree aux assemblées publiques, qui se tiendront deux fois chaque année, l ’une le premier jour d ’après la Saint-Martin, et l’autre le premier jour après Pâques.

Le president sera au haut bout de la table avec les honoraires; les académiciens pensionnaires seront aux deux côtés de la table; les associés au bas bout, et les elèves chacun derrière l ’académicien duquel ils seront élèves.

XXXVII

Le président sera très attentif a ce que le bon ordre soit fidèle­ ment observe dans chaque assemblée et dans ce qui concerne l ’Académie; il en rendra un compte exact a Sa Majesté ou au Secrétaire d ’État auquel le Roi aura donne le soin de ladite Académie.

XXXVIII

Dans toutes les assemblées, le président fera délibérer sur les différentes matières, prendra les avis de ceux qui ont voix dans la Compagnie, selon l ’ordre de leur séance, et prononcera les resolutions à la pluralité des voix.

XXXIX

Le président sera nommé par Sa Majesté au premier janvier de chaque annee; mais quoique, chaque année, il ait ainsi besoin d ’une nouvelle nomination, il pourra être continué tant qu’il plaira a^Sa Majesté; et comme, par 1 ’indisposition ou par la nécessité de ses affaires, il pourroit arriver q u ’il manqueroit a^quelques séances. Sa Majesté, nommera en meme temps un autre académicien pour présider en l'absence dudit président. XL

Le secretaire sera exact a recueillir en substance tout ce qui aura éfé proposé, agit€, examiné et résolu dans la Compagnie, a'' l ’écrire sur son registre, par rapport a chaque jour d ’assemblé^e, et a y insérer les traités dont il aura été fait lecture. Il signera tous les actes qui en seront délivrés soit a ceux de la Compagnie, soit a*' autres qui auront intérêt d'en avoir; et à" la fin de décembre de chaque année, il donnera au public un extrait de ses registres, ou une histoire raisonnée de ce qui se sera fait de plus remarquable dans l'Académie.

XLI

Les registres, titres et papiers concernant l'Académie demeureront toujours entre les mains du secrétaire, a"qui ils seront incessam­ ment remis par un nouvel inventaire que le président en dressera; et au^mois de décembre de chaque année, ledit inventaire sera,^par le président, recolé et augmenté de ce qui s'y trouvera avoir été ajouté durant toute l'année.

XLII

Le secrétaire sera perpétuel; et lorsque, par maladie ou par autre raison considérable, il ne pourra venir a l'assemblée, il y commettra tzl d'entre les académiciens qu'il jugera a propos, pour tenir en sa place le registre.

XLIII

Le trésorier aura en sa garde tous les livres, meubles, instruments, machines ou autres curiosités appartenant a^l'Académie; lorsqu'il entrera en charge, le président les lui remettra par inventaire; et au mois de décembre de chaque année, ledit président récolera ledit inventaire pour l'augmenter de ce qui aura été ajouté durant toute 1'année.

Lorsque des savants demanderont a"voir quelqu'une des choses commises é la garde du trésorier, il aura soin de les leur montrer; mais il ne pourra les laisser transporter hors des salles où elles seront gardées, sans un ordre par "écrit de l'Académie. Le trésorier sera perpétuel; et truand, par quelque empêchement légitime, il ne pourra satisfaire a tous les devoirs de sa fonction, il nommera quelque académicien pour y satisfaire a'sa place.

XLVI

Pour faciliter l'impression des divers ouvrages que pourront composer les académiciens, Sa Majesté permet a l'Académie de se choisir un libraire, auquel, en conséquence de ce choix, le Roi fera expédier les privileges nécessaires pour imprimer et distribuer , les ouvrages des académiciens que l'Académie aura approuvés.

XLVII

Pour encourager les académiciens a la continuation de leurs travaux. Sa Majesté continuera à leur faire payer les pensions ordinaires et même des gratifications extraordinaires, suivant le mérite de leurs ouvrages.

Pour aider les académiciens dans leurs études et leur faciliter les moyens de perfectionner leur science, le Roi continuera de fournir aux frais nécessaires pour les diverses expériences et recherches que chaque académicien pourra faire.

Pour recompenser 1 'assiduité aux assemblées de 1 'Académie, Sa Majesté fera distribuer, â chaque assemblée, quarante jetons a^ tous ceux d'entre les académiciens pensionnaires qui seront presents.

Veut Sa Majesté que le présent règlement soit lu dans la prochaine assemblée et inséré dans les registres, pour être exactement observé suivant sa forme et teneur; et s'il arrivoit qu'aucune académicien contrevint en quelque partie. Sa Majesté en ordonnera la punition suivant l'exigence du cas. PUBLICATIONS OF THE ACADEMIE DES SCIENCES

AND ITS MEMBERS, 1676-1699

I. Publications which appeared during the Protectorship of Jean- Baptiste Colbert, 1676-1683

a. The Collective Publications of the Académie

Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire naturelle des animaux, dressez par M. Perrault. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1676.

Receuil de plusieurs traitez de mathématique de l'Académie royale des sciences. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1676.

Mémoires pour servir _à l'histoire des plantes, dressez par M. Dodart. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1676.

Mémoires pour servir é l'histoire des plantes, dressez par M. Dodart. Paris : Imprimerie royale, 1679.

b. Books published by the Members of the Académie

Mariette, Edme. Essay de logique contenant les principes des sciences et la manière de s'en servir pour faire de bons raisonnemans. Paris : E. Michallet, 1678. (1) JS 9 mai 1678.

______. Essays de physique ou mémoires pour servir à la sciences des choses naturelles. Premier essay de la végétation des plantes. Paris : E. Michallet, 1679 (5) JS 21 aoust 1679.

Second essay de la nature de 1'a ir. Paris: E. Michallet, 1679. (1) JS 20 novembre 1679.

Troisième essay de physique, du chaud et du froid. Paris : E. Michallet, 1679. (5) JS 7 septembre 1679. La Hire, Philippe de. La construction des equations analytiques. Paris: André Pralard, 1679. (1) JS 21 aoust 1679.

Nouveaux elemens des sections coniques. les lieux géométriques, la construction ou effection des 'equations. Paris: André Pralard, 1679. (1) JS aoust 1679.

Cottereau du Clos, Samuel. Dissertation sur les principes des mixtes naturels, faite en l'an 1677. Amsterdam: Daniel Elsevier, 1680. (1) JS 26 aoust 1680.

Cassini, Jean D. Observations sur la comète qui ^ paru au mois de décembre 1680 et en .janvier 1681. Paris : E. Michallet, 1681. (1)

Abrégé des observations et des reflexions sur la comète qui _a paru au mois de décembre 1680 et aux mois de janvier, février et mars de cette année 1681. Paris : E. Michallet, 1681. (I) JS 5 mai 1681.

Mariette, Edme. Quatrième essay. De la nature des couleurs. Paris: E. Michallet, 1681. (1) JS 8 décembre 1681.

Perrault^ Claude. Description anatomique de divers animaux dissèques dans 1 'Académie royale des sciences. 2 édition augmentée d 'une~découverte particulière touchant la vue. Paris: L. D'Houry, 1682. (4)

Blondel, François. Histoire du calendrier romain qui contient son origine et les divers changemens qui luy sont arrivez. Paris : L'autheur et Nicolas Langlois, 1682. (1) JS 22 février 1683.

La Hire, Phillipe de. La Gnomonique, ou l'art de tracer des cadrans ou horloges solaires sur toutes sortes de surface par différentes pratiques. Avec les démonstrations géométriques de toutes les operations. Paris: E. Michallet, 1682. (1) JS 7 septembre 1682.

Perrault, Claude. Lettres écrites (par Claude Perrault et E. Mariette) sur le sujet d'une nouvelle découverte touchant la veue, faite par M. Mariette. Paris : J. Cusson, 1682. (4) JS 14 septembre 1682. Cassini, Jean D. Premiers observations de la cornete de ce mois d*aoust 1682, presentees au roy. Paris : S . Mabre- Cramoisy, 1682. (1)

Blondel, Francois. Cours de mathématiques, contenant divers traitez composez et enseignez £ monseigneur le dauphin. Paris: L'autheur et Nicolas Langlois, 1683. (1) JS 9 aoust 1683.

Suitte du cours de mathématique, contenant divers traitez composez et enseignez a monseigneur le dauphin. Paris: L'autheur et Nicolas Langlois, 1683. (1) JS 13 septembre 1683.

. L'Art de .letter les bombes. Paris: L'autheur et Nicolas Langlois, 1683. (1) JS 1 mai 1684.

Nouvelle manière de fortifier les places. Paris : L'autheur et Nicolas Langlois, 1683. (4) JS 23 aoust 1683.

Duverney, Joseph G. Traite de l'organe de l'ouie, contenant la structure, les usages et les maladies de toutes les parties de l'oreille. Paris: E. Michallet, 1683. (1) JS 5 avril 1683.

Publications which appeared during the Protectorship of the marquis de Louvois, 1684-1691

The Collective Publications of the Académie

None were published within this time-span.

b. Books published by the Members of the Académie

Mariette, Edme. Traité' de la percussion ou chocq des corps dans lequel les principales regies du mouvement sont expliqués et demonstrée par leurs véritables cause. _3 édition reveue et augmentée de plusieurs propositions touchant 1'acceleration du mouvement des corps qui tombent. Paris: E. Michallet, 1684. (1) 275

Picard, Jean. Traite du nivellement. Avec une relation de quelques nivellemens faits par ordre du roy. et un abbrégé de la mesure de la terre du mâne auteur. Mis en lumière par les soins de M. de la Hire. Paris; E. Michallet, 1684. (4) JS 12 février 1684.

La Hire, Philippe de. Sectiones conicae in novem libros.... Paris: E. Michallet, 1685. (2)

Mariette, Edme. Traite du mouvement des eaux et des autres corps fluides. Divese en V parties. Mis en lumière par les soins de M. de la Hire. Paris: E. Michallet, 1686. (1) JS 4 mars 1686.

La Hire, Philippe de. Lettre^ la Hire de l 'Académie royale des sciences a M. *** sur une nouvelle forme de boussole. Paris: S. Mabre-Cramoisy, 1687. (2)

______. Réponse ^ M. ^ la. Hire a l'article de "la R ^ ubli­ gue des lettres" ou il est parlT de sa nouvelle boussole a M *** (8 aoust 1687). Paris: S. Mabre-Cramoisy, n.d. (2)

Tabulorum astronomicarum. Pars pior, de motibus solis et lunae nec-non de positione fixarum ex ipsis observationibus deductis,.... Paris: E. Michallet, 1687. (2) JS 25 octobre 1688.

Perrault, Claude. Essais de physique, ou recueil de plusieurs traitez touchant les choses naturelles. Tome IV. Paris: Jean-Baptiste Coignard, 1688. (2) JS 14 février 1689.

La Hire, Philippe de. Trouver la correction des observations correspondantes devant et après midi pour déterminer le vray midi. Paris: A. Lambin, 1689.

L'Ecole des arpenteurs, ou l'on enseigne toutes les pratiques de géométrie qui sont nécessaires ^ un arpenteur. On % a a.joute un abrégé du nivellement et les propriétés des eaux, ^ les maniérés de lès jauger ou mesurer. On y trouvera aussi une méthode fort courte pour faire des toisez. Enfin, on rapporte les ordonnances des rois sur 1'arpentage. Paris: Thomas Moette, 1689. (2) JS 18 avril 1689. Rolls, Michel. Traite d*algèbre, ou principes généraux pour résoudre les questions de mathématique. Paris: E. Michallet, 1690. (2)

Varignon, Pierre. Nouvelles con.jectures sur la pesanteur. Paris : Jean Boudot, 1690. (2) JS 20 novembre 1690; 19 mars 1691.

Cassini, Jean D. Nouvelles découvertes dans le globe de Jupiter faites a'l'Observatoire royal par monsieur Cassini de l'Académie des sciences et communiquées ^ 3^ mesme Académie. Paris: Jean Cusson, 1690. (2) JS 12 février 1691.

Rolle, Michel. Demonstration d'une méthode pour résoudre les "égalités de tous les degrés. Paris: Jean Cusson, 1691. (2) JS 3 mars 1692.

III. Publications which appeared during the Protectorship of Louis Pontchartrain, 1692-1699

The Collective Publications of the Académie

Mémoires de mathématique et de physique tirez des registres de l 'Académie royale des sciences. Paris : Imprimerie royale, 1692.

Mémoires de mathématique et de physique, tirez des registres de l'Acad^ie royale des sciences. Paris : Imprimerie royale, 1693.

Recueil d'observations faites en plusieurs voyages par ordre de Sa Majesté pour perfectionner l'astronomie et la géographie. Avec divers traitez astronomiques. Par messieurs de 1'Académie royale des sciences. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1693.

Divers ouvrages de mathématique et de phisique. Par messieurs de 1'Académie royale des sciences. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1693. b. Books published by Members of the Académie

Cassini, Jean D. Le Neptune frangoise, ou atlas nouveau des cartes marines levees et gravees par ordre exprès du Roy pour l'usage de ses armées de mer... reveu et mis en ordre par les sieurs Pene, Cassini, et autres. Paris: H. Jaillot, 1693. (4)

La Hire, Philippe de. Mémoires de mathématiques et de physique contenant un traite des 'epicycloides et de leurs usages dans les mlchaniques. l'explication des principaux effets de la glace et du froid, une dissertation des diffë^rences des sons de la corde de la trompette marine, un trait€ des differens accidens de la vue. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1694. (3)

Tournefort, Joseph P. Élëmens de botanique, ou méthode pour connoxtre les plantes. 3 vols. Paris : Imprimerie royale, 1694. (6) JS 13 septembre 1694.

La Hire, Philippe de. Traité'de mécanique, ou l'on explique tout ce qui est nécessaire dans la pratique des arts et les propriétés des corps pesants, lesquelles ont un plus grand usage dans la physique.' Paris: Jean Anisson, 1695. (4) JS 9 janvier 1696.

L 'Hospital, Guillaume F. A. de. Analyse des infiniment petits pour l'intelligence des lignes courbes. Paris : Imprimerie royale, 1696. (6) JS 10 septembre. 1696.

Tournefort, Joseph P. Réponse de M. Chôme 1, conseiller medécin du roy et docteur de la Faculté de Paris, é deux lettres "écrites par Mr P. Ç. sur la botanique, s.l. 1696. (4)

Lagny, Thomas F. de. Nouveaux élémens d'arithmétique et d'algèbre ou introduction aux mathématiques. Paris: Jean Jombert, 1697. (6)

Du Hamel, Jean-Baptiste. Regiae scientiarum Accdemiae historia.... Paris: E, Michallet, 1698. (4) JS 26 janvier 1699. 278

Tournefort, Joseph P. Histoire des plantes qui naissent aux environs de Paris, avec leur usage dans la medecine. Paris: Imprimerie royale 1698. (3) JS 11 aoust 1698.

Rolle, Michel. Méthodes pour résoudre les questions indeterminees de l'algèbre. Paris: Jean Cusson, 1699. (3) JS 11 mai 1699; 13 juillet 1699.

IV. Publications involving the Participation of the Members of the Académie

Observations physiques et mathématiques pour servir a l'histoire naturelle et _a perfection de l'astronomie et de la géographie envoyées de.-Siam é l 'Académie royale des sciences é Paris parles pères jésuites francois qui vont a'la Chine en qualité~dë mathematicians du roy. Avec les reflexions de messieurs de l'Académie et quelques notes du 2" Gouye, de la Compagnie de Jésus. Paris: La veuve Edme Martin, Jean Boudot et Estienne Martin, 1688. JS 13 septembre 1688.

Observations physiques et mathématiques pour servir é l'histoire naturelle et è la perfection de l'astronomie et de la géographie envoyées des Indes et de la Chine ^ l'Aca- ^ m i e royale des sciences Paris par les peres jésuites. Avec les reflexions de Mrs de l'Académie et les notes du 2- Gouye de la Compagnie de Jésus. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1692.

Veterum mathematicorum Athenaei Bitonis, Apollodori Heronis, Philonis et aliorum opera graece et latine plerque nunc primum édita. Ex manuscriptis codicibus Bibliothecae regiae. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1693.

(1) The research for these works was accomplished between 1676 and 1683. (2) Research accomplished between 1684 and 1691. (3) Research accomplished between 1692 and 1699. (4) Research cannot be clearly attributed to a definite time period. (5) Research accomplished before 1676. (6) Research accomplished before author was academician.

JS Indicates a review in the Journal des scavans. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archives de 1'Académie des Sciences.

Proces-verbaux, t. 1-33.

Dossier Jean-Paul Bignon.

Bibliothèque de l'Observatoire de Paris.

Series A, number 4.2.

Series C, number 1.13.

Series D, numbers 1.11, 1.13, 2.38.

Archives of the Royal Society, London.

Series LEG, numbers IX, XII.

Bibliothèque nationale.

Manuscrits français, numbers 21119, 21675, 22076, 22225-22236.

Manuscrits français, nouvelles acquisitions, numbers 4653, 5133- 5147, 5247, 5843, 5156.

Clairembault, number 566.

Archives nationales.

Series 0^, numbers 27- , 263- , 611.

Series G^, numbers 562, 793, 918.

Archives de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres.

Registre, 1701.

279 Archives du College de France.

Series K-IV.

Archives de la guerre, Vincennes.

PRINTED SOURCES

Académie française. Les Registres de l'Académie française, 16~72- 1793. 4 vols. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1895-1906.

Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres. Histoire de 1 'Académie royale des inscriptions et belles-lettres, vol. I. Paris: Im­ primerie royale, 1717.

Académie des sciences, Paris. Histoire de l'Académie royale des sci­ ences avec les mémoires de mathématique et de physique, tirees des registres de cette académie. MDCXCIX. Paris: Jean Boudot, 1702.

Histoire de l'Académie royale des sciences depuis son établissement en 1666 .jusqu'à 1686. Paris: Gabriel Martin,

Mémoires for ^ natural history of animals. (translated by Alexander Pitfield). n.p., 1687.

Académie royale de peinture et de sculpture, Paris. Procès-verbaux de l'Académie royale de peinture et de sculpture, 1648-1793. 10 vols. Paris: J. Baur, 1875-1892.

Cassini, Jean Dominique (III). Mémoires pour servir a l'histoire des sciences et celle de l'Observatoire. Paris: Bluet, 1810.

Colbert, Jean-Baptiste. Lettres, instructions et mémoires. Edited by Pierre Clement. 7 vols. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1861- 1873.

Depping, G., ed. Correspondance administrative sous le regne de Louis XIV. 4 vols. Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1850-1855.

"Lettres de Phélypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain, taire Hd'état * f" O/Miosous 1le a y'règne r»0"T>/-> de Louis VTT7XIV, à« desJ 1littérateurs < a»*, r, 4 et à des amis de la littérature de son temps." France. Comité historique des arts et monuments. Bulletin de histoire, sciences et lettres. II (1850), 52-64, 80-92.

Furetière, Antoine. lÆ Dictionnaire universel. The Hague and Rott­ erdam, Leers, 1690.

Guiffrey, Jules, ed. Comptes des bâtiments du roi sous le règne de Louis XIV. 5 vols. Paris: Imprimerie national, 1881-1901.

Huygens, Christiaan. Oeuvres complètes. 22 vols. The Hague: Nij- hoff, 1888-1950.

Institut de France, Paris. L'Institut de France. Lois, statuts et règlements concernant les anciennes académies et Institut, de 1635 a 1889. Edited by Leon Aucoc. Paris: Imprimerie na­ tionale, 1889.

Journal des scavans. Amsterdam. 1676-1699.

Malebranche, Nicolas. Oeuvres complètes. Edited by Andre Robinet. 20 vols. Paris: Vrin, 1958-1970.

Masson, Samuel. Histoire critique de la république des lettres, tant ancienne que moderne. 15 vols. Amsterdam: Jacques Desbordes, 1712-1718.

Mercure galant. Paris. 1677, 1684.

Oldenburg, Henry. Correspondence. Edited and translated by A. Ru­ pert Hall and Marie Boas Hall. Vols. 1- . Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1965-

Perrault, Charles. Mémoires de ma vie. Edited by Paul Bonnefon. Paris: Renouard, 1909.

Perrault, Pierre. De l'origine des fontaines. Paris: Pierre le Petit, 1674.

SECONDARY WORKS

Acadénie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, Paris. Exposition organizes a 1'occasion de son tricentenaire. Archives de France. Hotel ^ Rohan, avril-juin 1693. Paris, 1963. Académie des sciences, Paris. Index biographique des membres et correspondants de l'Académie des sciences de 22 décembre 1666 au 15 novembre 1954. 2nd ed. Paris; Gauthier-Villars, 1954.

Beaulieux, Charles, ed. Observations sur l'orthograptilc de la langue française, transcriptions, commentaire,, et facsimile du manuscrit de Mezeray, 1673, et des critiques des commissaires de l'Académie précédés d'une histoire de la gestion de la 1^^ ^ition du dictionnaire de l'Académie française 1639-1694. Paris: Librairie ancienne Honore Champion, 1951.

Berger, Patrice M. "The Famine of 1692-1694 in France, a Study in Administrative Response." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Uni­ versity of Chicago, 1972.

"Rural Charity : the Pontchartrain Case." French Histor­ ical Studies, X (Spring 1978), 393-415.

Bertrand, Joseph. L'Académie des sciences et les academicians de 1666 à 1793. Paris: J. Hetzel, 1869.

Birembaut, Arthur. "Les Caractères originaux de l'Académie royale des sciences de 1666 à 1698." Les Sociétés savantes, leur his­ toire. Actes du 100e Congrès national des Sociétés savantes. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1976, pp. 1-22.

"L'Exposition des modèles de machines a Paris en 1683." Revue d'histoire des sciences et de leur applications, (April/June 1967), 141-158.

Bléchet, Françoise. "Le Role de l'Abbé Bignon dans l'activité des sociétés savantes au XVIII® siècle." Les Sociétés savantes, leur histoire. Actes du 100® Congrès national des Sociétés savantes. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1976, pp. 31-41.

Bonnardet, E. "Essai de bibliographie oratorienne: Jean-Paul Bignon." L'Oratoire de France, VII (January 1937), 31-41.

Bourgeon, J. L. "Balthazar Phélypeaux." Le Conseil du Roi de Louis XII a la Revolution. Edited by Roland Mousnier. Paris: Presses Universitaire de France, 1970, pp. 131-152.

Brown, Harcourt. Scientific Organizations in Seventeenth Century France (1620-1680). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1934. Bi-ugman, Henri. Le Séjour de Christiaan Huygens a Paris. Paris: E. Droz, 1935.

Bussard, H. L. "Pierre de Carcavi." Dictionary of Scientific Bi­ ography. Ill, pp. 63-64.

Chabbert, Pierre. "Jacques Borelly.” Revue d ’histoire des sciences et de leurs applications, XXIII (July/September 1970), 203-227.

Clarke, Jack A. "Abb^ Jean-Paul Bignon 'Moderator of the Academies' and Royal Librarian." French Historical Studies, VIII (Fall 1973), 213-235.

Clement, Pierre. L'Italie en 1671. Paris: Didier, 1867.

______. Le Gouvernement de Louis XIV ou la cour, l'administra­ tion, les finances, et le commerce de 1683 a 1689. Paris : Guillaumin, 1848.

"Les Successeurs de Colbert: Pontchartrain." Revue des deux mondes. 2nd series, XLVI (1863), 916-945.

Cole, Charles W. French Mercantilism 1683-1700. New York: Columbia University Press, 1943.

Colbert and a Century of French Mercantilism. 2 vols. New York: Columbia University Press, 1939.

Cole, Francis Joseph. A History of Comparative Anatomy from Aristotle to the Eightec, th Century. London: Macmillan, 1944.

Conlon, Pierre. Prelude au siecle des lumières: repertoire chronolo- giaue de 1 ^ a 1715. 6 vols. Geneva: Droz, 1970-1975.

Costabel, Pierre. "Thomas Lagny." Dictionary of Scientific Biogra- phy, VII, pp. 558-559.

Delorme, Suzanne. "Un Cartésien ami de Gassendi: Henri-Louis Habert de Montmor." Revue d 'histoire des sciences et de leurs appli­ cations, XXVII (1974), 68-72.

Deseine, Louis P. Notices historiques sur les anciennes acadanies royales de peinture, sculpture de Paris et celle d'architecture. Paris: Le Normant, 1814.

Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Edited by Charles C. Gillespie. New York: Charles Scribner's, 1970-1980. 16 vols. 284 Franklin, K. J. "Jean Mery and his Idea of Foetal Blood Flow." Annals of Science, V (July 1945), 203-228.

Graesse, Johann. Trésor de livres rares et precieux. 8 vols. Milan: Gorlich, 1950.

Guillemet, Roger. Essai sur la surintendance des bâtiments du roi sous le règne personnel de Louis XIV (1662-1715). Paris: Arthur Rousseau, 1912.

Hahn, Roger. The Anatomy of a Scientific Institution: The Paris Academy of Sciences, 1666-1803. Berkeley: University of Califor­ nia Press, 1971.

Hall, A. Rupert. From Galileo to Newton, 1630-1720. New York: Har­ per, 1963.

Hatton, Ragnhild M. "Louis XIV: Recent Gains in Historical Knowledge." Journal of Modern History, XLV (June 1973), 277-289.

Hirshfield, John M. "The Académie Royale des Sciences (1666-1683): Inauguration and Initial Problems of Method." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago, 1957.

Hunter, Michael. "The social basis and changing fortunes of an early scientific institution: an analysis of the membership of the Royal Society, 1660-1685." Notes and Records of the Royal Soci­ ety, XXI (July 1976), 9-76.

Itard, Jean. "Michel Rolle." Dictionary of Scientific Biography, XI, p. 512.

Le Cler, Adhémard. "L’Académie des Sciences." La Grande Encyclopé­ die, I, p. 199.

Ma indron, Ernest. L'Académie des Sciences. Paris: F. Alcan, 1888.

Mairan, Jean-Jacques Dortus de. "Eloge de M. l'Abbé Bignon." His­ toire de l'Académie royale des sciences, avec les mémoires de mathématique et de physique, tirées des registres de cette académie, année MDCCXLIII, 1743, pp. 185-194.

Martin, Henri-Jean. Livre, pouvoirs et société à_ Paris au 17^ siecle (1598-1701). 2 vols. Geneva: Droz, 1969.

Maury, Louis F. A. L'Ancienne Académie des inscriptions et belles- lettres. Paris: Didier, 1864.

______. L'Ancienne Académie des sciences. 2nd ed. Paris : Didier, 1864. McClaughlin, Trevor. "Sur les rapports entre la compagnie Thévenot et l'Académie des sciences." Revue d'histoire des sciences et de leurs applications, XXVIII (July 1975), 235-242.

McKeon, Robert. "Une lettre de Nelchisèdech Thévenot sur les débuts de l'Académie royale des sciences." Revue d'histoire des sci­ ences et de leurs applications. XVIII (January/March 1965), 1-6.

Merton, Robert K. Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth Century England. New York; Howard Pertig, 1970.

Neveu, Bruno. "La Vie erudite à Paris a la fin du XVII® siecle." Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Chartes, CXXIV (1966), 432-511.

Olmsted, John W. "The Scientific Expedition of Jean Richer to Cayenne (1672-1673)." Isis, XXXIV (Autumn 1942), 117-128.

"The Voyage of Jean Richer to Acadia in 1670 : a Study in the Relations of Science and Navigation under Colbert." American Philosophical Society. Proceedings, CIV (December 1960), 612- 634.

O'Malley, C. D. "The Medical History of Louis XIV: Intimations of Mortality." Louis XIV and the Craft of Kingship. Edited by John C. Rule. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1969, pp. 123-154.

O'Neill, Charles E. Church and State in Colonial Louisiana, Policy and Politics to 1732. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966.

Ornstein, Martha. The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seven­ teenth Century. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1928.

Robertson, D. Maclaren. A History of the French Academy, 1635-1910. New York: Dillingham, 1910.

Robinet, Andre. "Les Académiciens des sciences malebranchistes." Oeuvres completes §f Nicolas Malebranche] . Edited by André Robinet. Vol. XX, pp. 162-174. Paris : Vrin, 1970.

"Le Groupe malebranchiste introducteur du calcul infin­ itesimal en France." Revue d'histoire des sciences et de leurs applications, XIII (October/December 1960), 287-308.

Rothkrug, Lionel. Opposition to Louis XIV: the Political and Social Origins of the French Enlightenment. Princeton: Princeton Uni­ versity Press, 1965. Rousset, Camille. Histoire de Louvois et de son administration poli­ tique et militaire. 4 vols. Paris: Didier, 1862-1863.

Rule, John C. "Royal Ministers and Government Reform during the Last Decades of Louis XIV's Reign." The Consortium of Revolutionary Europe 1750-1850. Edited by Claude C. Sturgill. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1975, pp. 1-13.

Salomon-Bayet, Claire. "Un Préambule théorique a une académie des arts." Revue d'histoire des sciences et d_e leurs applications, XXIII (July/September 1970), 229-250.

Schaeper, Thomas J. "The French Council of Commerce, 1700-1715: an Administrative Study of Mercantilism after Colbert." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The Ohio State University, 1977.

Shiller, Joseph. "Les Laboratoires d'anatomie et de botanique a l'A­ cadémie des sciences au XVII® siecle." Revue d'histoire des sci­ ences et de leurs applications, XVII (April 1964), 97-113.

Taton, René. Les Origines de 1'Académie royale des sciences, n.p.: Imprimerie alenconnaise, 1966.

Wolf, Charles. Histoire de l'Observatoire de Paris de sa fondation k 1793. Paris : Gauthier-Villars, 1902.

Woodbridge, John D. "Censure royale et censure episcopale: le con­ flit de 1702." Dix-huitieme siècle, VIII (1976), 333-355.