218 MICHAEL A. IIOSKIN 



but although still unrivalled, it was by Clarke's day becoming 

 seriously out of date. Leaving aside Newton's optical papers 

 (1672-6) and his epoch-making Principia (1687) , several im- 

 portant works on Cartesian physics had appeared since 1671/ 

 and the many observations and experiments carried out, 

 especially by Fellows of the Royal Society, had led to numerous 

 detailed improvement in knowledge. Another reason for dis- 

 satisfaction in Cambridge was the poor quality of Bonet's 

 translation. 



In Clarke, Ellis had a pupil of unusual gifts. Before coming 

 to Cambridge he had shown promise of the linguistic ability 

 that later in life led him to prepare editions of such different 

 authors as Caesar and Homer; and at Cambridge he made 

 his mark in natural philosophy by defending a Newtonian 

 thesis in the Schools.^ His insight into the forbidding Principia 

 was shortly to impress no less a figure than William Whiston, 

 who later succeeded Newton in his professorship. On meeting 

 Clarke, Whiston " was greatly surprised that so young a man 

 as Mr. Clarke then was, not much I think above twenty-two 

 years of age, should know so much of those sublime discoveries 

 which were then almost a secret to all, but a few particular 



London; 1702 (2nd version) , London; 1708 (2nd version, with notes of Le 

 Grand), Amsterdam; 1710 (3rd version), London; 1713 (? 2nd version, with 

 notes of Le Grand), Cologne; 1718 (3rd version), London; 1739, " 6th edition," 

 Leiden. 



EngHsh translation of John Clarke with 4th version of Samuel Clarke's notes: 

 1723, London; 1728/9, London; 1735, London. 



The various versions of Clarke's notes are discussed below. The term ' edition ' 

 is perhaps misleading in this coimexion, for the successive versions are radically 

 changed; and it is therefore not appropriate to speak of " the " notes by Clarke. 

 Sarton's inability to obtain a copy of the 1697 edition prevented him from realizing 

 this. One of the few writers to draw attention to the changes in Clarke's notes is 

 F. Cajori, Newton's Principia (Berkeley: Univ. of California, 1934), p. 631. 



^Including Malebranche, La Recherche de la Verite (1st ed., 1674/5), Regis, 

 Systeme de Philosophic (1st ed., 1690) , Perrault, Essais de Physique (1st ed., 1680) , 

 Le Clerc, Physica (1st ed., 1695). 



* Hoadley in Clarke, Works, I, p. i. 



