George Sarton is known as the "father of the modern history of science". He earned this title through his many works on medieval history, originating the History of Science program at Harvard, and acting as the first editor of Isis, an important journal of the history of science. He has been accused of having a negative bias towards Christianity. If this is true, it is very important. Sarton had a tremendous influence on what was taught and published in the history of science in the first half of the twentieth century. George Sarton's editorial record at Isis is probably worth a closer look.
If George Sarton had a negative bias towards the church or Christianity it would not have been unusual. It was fairly common amongst the English-speaking historians of Science in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. As an editor, he would be expected to keep his biases in check. One test of his impartiality was the treatment of the rogue historian, Pierre Duhem. Pierre Duhem was an important physicist and philosopher of science from the turn of the twentieth century who decided to study the history of science later in life. His work was of very high quality, shown by the fact that his works in all three fields are still taught today. In fact, Pierre Duhem is of more interest to modern historians of science than his contemporaries; including George Sarton [_1_] .
Duhem started with the same "dark age" bias as his colleagues. In studying the work of Leonardo da Vinci, he discovered that medieval professors (who were priests) had made some very important discoveries in physics. These were the Parisian Doctors. Duhem, like his contemporary, Alfred Wegener (see Wegener and Continental Drift) decided to challenge the status quo even though it meant few friends and lots of enemies. In Duhem's case it was disastrous. Duhem's considerable body of work was referenced in barely one article per year during Sarton's editorship [_2_] . Serious discussion of Duhem's discoveries, especially the Parisian doctors and Oxford Calculators, would have to wait until after Sarton stepped down as editor of Isisin 1952. In recent decades it has even been accepted that Galileo knew of the Parisian doctors work. This belated discovery could have been speeded up. It only required reading Duhem's work from the early twentieth century.
Sarton authored several large volumes of work on medieval science. In some of Sarton's works on science in the middle ages, Duhem and his work aren't mentioned at all and in others he is only very rarely referenced. This for a man who is now considered the premiere student of European medieval science in the early twentieth century.
One article that deals specifically with Duhem's work deserves special mention; a 1936 article by a graduate student on Pierre Duhem's work on a medieval scientist, Jordanus Nemorarius. The article attacked both Duhem's work and Duhem personally. He even implied that Pierre Duhem was not fit to understand the physics involved in his historical work [_3_] . George Sarton allowed the article to be published even though he had long known of Duhem's stature as a physicist. At the time he was considered a peer to such great physicists as Poincare. The publication of the article says as much about the editor of the journal as it does the author of the article.
George Sarton did sign an appeal for the publication of Duhem's manuscripts in 1937, but it is thought that this was more out of respect for the widow of Paul Tannery (a noted French historian of science) than for Duhem himself. Helene Duhem had been able to enlist Paul Tannery's widow in her 30 year battle to get her father's final manuscripts published (see The Real daVinci Code).
The focus of the discussion of seventeenth century science (sometimes known as the scientific revolution) had always been physics and astronomy. Galileo and Newton are written about more than Robert Boyle. Given this, it is difficult to understand why Isis would largely ignore classical mechanics in the middle ages when it was an important topic in the coverage of seventeenth century science.
The limited discussion of medieval physics wasn't because of a lack of source material. Two of the medieval thinkers who proposed important scientific concepts, Archbishop Thomas Bradwardine and Father Jean Buridan, were amongst the most famous and respected thinkers during the middle ages. Both had a following that spanned centuries and national borders. Thomas Bradwardine was so famous that he had even been mentioned in Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales. In that work he had been placed in league with the greatest philosophers, St. Augustine and Boethius. Bradwardine had received the honorary title doctor profundus and one of his followers, Paul of Venice, had received the name doctor profundissimus. Overlooking these three figures in a treatment of medieval science would be like overlooking Einstein in a treatment of 20th century science.
Medieval physics was downplayed in spite of its direct relevance to later advances. The Calculatores had proposed the mean-speed theorem. This was supposed to be one of Galileo's important contributions to science. Jean Buridan had proposed a theory of impetus very similar to Galileo's own impetus theory. This would eventually be refined by Newton into the theory of inertia.
There was one article (written in German) in Isis devoted to Thomas Bradwardine, an important Calculatore and none to Jean Buridan. Buridan was mentioned in a 16-page survey of physics that covered all physics over the entire middle ages [_4_] .
The journal's treatment of early modern science poses some problems as well. One scientist from this period was Father Domingo De Soto. He had published the correct law of free fall in the mid-sixteenth century; 75 years before Galileo's important works on mechanics. It is amazing how little interest there was in the first author to publish such an important theorem. This, in spite of the fact that Duhem had discussed his work in the early twentieth century [_5_] .
It is now known that the De Soto's Physics, which outlines the correct law of free fall, was already in its eight edition during Galileo's university days at Pisa. De Soto's Physics was being read and taught! Galileo may even have been told the correct law of free fall. De Soto's work was commonly taught in Jesuit schools in Italy and other parts of Europe before Galileo finally decided on the correct law of free fall in Padua. Galileo is known to have corresponded with Jesuit scientists while at Padua [_6_] .