Continuity thesis
Pierre Duhem, a French physicist and philosopher of science, began to challenge the prevailing view that the Middle Ages were intellectually barren. His ten-volume work on the history of science, titled Le système du monde: histoire des doctrines cosmologiques de Platon à Copernic, laid out this new perspective. Unlike earlier historians such as Voltaire and Condorcet who dismissed medieval intellectual importance, Duhem sought to show how the Roman Catholic Church fostered Western scientific development. His research into statics led him to encounter works by medieval mathematicians like Nicole Oresme and Roger Bacon. He concluded that modern mechanics and physics proceeded from doctrines professed in medieval schools through an uninterrupted series of improvements.
George Sarton, active between 1884 and 1956, became another notable supporter of continuity arguments. In his book The History of Science and the New Humanism published in 1931, he stressed historical continuity across time periods. Sarton argued that Renaissance humanism actually caused stagnation by prioritizing form over fact and grammar over substance. He claimed science had to be introduced to Western culture twice: first during the Arabic, Latin translation movement of the twelfth century, then again during the seventeenth-century Scientific Revolution. This dual introduction occurred because the initial appearance of science was swept away before it could take root fully.
James Franklin, an Australian mathematician and historian of science, challenged the idea of a European Renaissance as a myth. He described the traditional view as believing there was a sudden new outlook after one thousand years of darkness following the year 1000. Franklin argued instead that the twelfth century represented the real renaissance while later thought declined significantly. Nicole Oresme invented graphs and performed calculations involving probability during this earlier period. The Merton School at Oxford developed steps in understanding motion and continuous variation during the 1330s and 1340s. Robert Pasnau linked scholastic debates directly to modern philosophical frameworks used by Descartes and Locke.
A. C. Graham criticized notions of modern science in 1973 by questioning whether Ptolemy or Copernicus were closer to modern science than Chinese or Maya astronomers. George Saliba expanded on these critiques in 1999 when reviewing Toby E. Huff's work on Islam, China and the West. Arun Bala proposed that changes involved in the Scientific Revolution had multicultural roots including Alhazen's optical theory and Hindu, Arabic numerals. These influences included mechanical technologies from China and heliocentrism rooted in ancient Egyptian religious ideas associated with Hermeticism. Critics noted that lacking documentary evidence of transmission, Bala's model remained a working hypothesis rather than a conclusion.
Gary Hatfield argued against labeling the seventeenth century as a singular scientific revolution despite its individual revolutions. He pointed out that science remained tied to metaphysics until experimental physics separated from natural philosophy at the end of the eighteenth century. Comparable individual revolutions continued occurring before and after this period such as the optical revolution of Faraday and Maxwell. Edward Grant identified four factors combining to create origins of modern science within medieval times. The plague of 1348, 1350 killed a third of people in Europe and contributed to decline in some branches of science between Oresme and Copernicus.
Paul Freedman and Gabrielle M. Spiegel characterized the continuity thesis as typical of Medieval Studies in North America during the twentieth century. Despite many points raised by proponents, most scholars still support the traditional view of the Scientific Revolution occurring in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Franklin noted that little importance occurs in other branches of science for two centuries between Oresme and Copernicus. Johan Huizinga examined tendencies toward elaborate theory of signs which Franklin compared with degeneracy of modern Marxism. Chaucer died in 1400 while widely read writers like Erasmus and More appeared just after 1500 creating an almost two hundred year gap in English literature.
Common questions
What is the continuity thesis regarding European intellectual history?
The continuity thesis posits that modern mechanics and physics proceeded from doctrines professed in medieval schools through an uninterrupted series of improvements. Pierre Duhem argued that the Roman Catholic Church fostered Western scientific development rather than hindering it.
Who supported the continuity thesis between 1884 and 1956?
George Sarton became a notable supporter of continuity arguments during his active years between 1884 and 1956. He stressed historical continuity across time periods and claimed science had to be introduced to Western culture twice.
When did Nicole Oresme invent graphs and perform calculations involving probability?
Nicole Oresme invented graphs and performed calculations involving probability during the twelfth century. This period represents the real renaissance according to James Franklin who challenged the idea of a European Renaissance as a myth.
Why did George Saliba expand on critiques of modern science in 1999?
George Saliba expanded on these critiques in 1999 when reviewing Toby E. Huff's work on Islam, China and the West. He questioned whether Ptolemy or Copernicus were closer to modern science than Chinese or Maya astronomers.
What factors created origins of modern science within medieval times according to Edward Grant?
Edward Grant identified four factors combining to create origins of modern science within medieval times. The plague of 1348, 1350 killed a third of people in Europe and contributed to decline in some branches of science between Oresme and Copernicus.
All sources
19 references cited across the entry
- 1bookRevolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge and Its Ambitions, 1500-1700Peter Dear — Princeton University Press — Apr 2001
- 2bookIt Started with Copernicus: How Turning the World inside out Led to the Scientific RevolutionHoward Margolis — McGraw-Hill — 25 Apr 2002
- 3bookThe Construction of Modern Science: Mechanisms and MechanicsRichard S. Westfall — Cambridge University Press — Oct 1971
- 4bookReappraisals of the Scientific RevolutionCambridge University Press — 27 Jul 1990
- 5journalScience and Humanism in the Italian RenaissanceEric Cochrane — Oxford University Press for the American Historical Association — Dec 1976
- 6bookIntroduction to the History of ScienceGeorge Sarton — Williams & Wilkins for Carnegie Institution of Washington — 1947
- 7journalThe Renaissance MythJames Franklin — Nov 1982
- 8bookA Sourcebook in Medieval ScienceEdward Grant — Harvard University Press — Jan 1974
- 9bookGod's PhilosophersJames Hannam — Icon Books — 6 Aug 2009
- 10journalScience by conceptual analysis: the genius of the late scholasticsJames Franklin — 2012
- 11bookHerfsttij der middeleeuwenJohan Huizinga — E. Arnold & Co. — 1924
- 12bookThe Development of MathematicsE.T Bell — Dover Publications — 2 September 1992
- 13journalA Theory of Secondary QualitiesRobert Pasnau — Nov 2006
- 15journalSeeking the Origins of Modern Science?George Saliba — Autumn 1999
- 16bookThe Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional, and Intellectual ContextsEdward Grant — Cambridge University Press — 13 Oct 1996
- 17bookTradition, Transmission, Transformation: Proceedings of Two Conferences on Pre-Modern Science Held at the University of OklahomaGary Hatfield — Brill Publishers — July 1996
- 18bookThe Dialogue of Civilizations in the Birth of Modern ScienceArun Bala — Palgrave Macmillan — 15 Sep 2008
- 19journalBook Review: The Dialogue of Civilizations in the Birth of Modern SciencePeter G Sobol — University of Chicago Press on behalf of History of Science Society — Dec 2007