What do you think?
Rate this book
Out of the Shadow of a Giant: Hooke, Halley, and the Birth of Science
What if Newton had never lived? A compelling dual biography argues that Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley easily could have filled the giant’s shoes—and deserve credit for the birth of modern science.
Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley, whose place in history has been overshadowed by the giant figure of Newton, were pioneering scientists within their own right, and instrumental in establishing the Royal Society.
Although Newton is widely regarded as one of the greatest scientists of all time and the father of the English scientific revolution, John and Mary Gribbin uncover the fascinating story of Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley, whose scientific achievements neatly embrace the hundred years or so during which science as we know it became established. They argue persuasively that, even without Newton, science would have made a great leap forward in the second half of the seventeenth century, headed by two extraordinary figures, Hooke and Halley.
Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley, whose place in history has been overshadowed by the giant figure of Newton, were pioneering scientists within their own right, and instrumental in establishing the Royal Society.
Although Newton is widely regarded as one of the greatest scientists of all time and the father of the English scientific revolution, John and Mary Gribbin uncover the fascinating story of Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley, whose scientific achievements neatly embrace the hundred years or so during which science as we know it became established. They argue persuasively that, even without Newton, science would have made a great leap forward in the second half of the seventeenth century, headed by two extraordinary figures, Hooke and Halley.
328 pages, Hardcover
Published October 24, 2017
35 people are currently reading
629 people want to read
About the author
John Gribbin
385 books853 followersJohn R. Gribbin is a British science writer, an astrophysicist, and a visiting fellow in astronomy at the University of Sussex. His writings include quantum physics, human evolution, climate change, global warming, the origins of the universe, and biographies of famous scientists. He also writes science fiction.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
May 20, 2017
We should be truly grateful to John and Mary Gribbin for this opportunity to find out more about two stalwarts of 17th/18th century British science, Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley (apparently pronounced 'Hawley', as presumably it was thought of as Hall-ley). This pair have been unfortunately and unfairly overshadowed by Isaac Newton, and this book does a lot to bring them into the open. (I wish the Gribbins had also included another in Newton's shadow, the mathematician John Wallis.)
The aim here is very much to get a feel for the scientific contribution of this pair, though we do get some biographical detail, particularly of Hooke (in whose household it seemed to be decidedly risky to be young and female, even if you were his niece), with rather less of Halley's life. Both men were polymaths to a far greater extent than I had realised - for example I had no idea how much architecture Hooke was responsible for, including designing some of Wren's churches and coming up with the basic concept behind the St Paul's dome. He also did a considerable amount of impressive work on astronomy and geology. Similarly, we all know of Halley's astronomical ventures, but it was delightful to discover more of his remarkable scientific exploration exploits as the only non-navy man ever to become master and commander of a Royal Navy ship. Wonderful stuff, which the Gribbins bring to life in a style that is sometimes wry and always engaging.
What was more familiar, having read a lot about Newton, was these two men's interactions with the giant of the book's title. Halley came off far better of the two - as a far more diplomatic character he seemed better able to deal with Newton's caprices and was famously responsible for Newton's great Principia being published.
Hooke, of course, had a very rocky relationship with Newton. For some time after Newton's death this was portrayed very much from the 'winner', Newton's side. The Gribbins redress the balance, showing just how much Hooke contributed. If anything they are so fair to Hooke that they go a bit too far the other way, taking every opportunity to stick the knife into Newton, but giving Hooke (who I suspect was an equally difficult character) the benefit of the doubt.
There's no doubt that Newton claimed for his own, or failed to acknowledge contributions from Hooke - but there seemed less effort to show where Hooke or Halley might have done the same - for example Halley's ideas on demographics were surely to some extent based on Graunt's, but he isn't mentioned. Two examples of showing perhaps unfair favour to Hooke: the Gribbins are very sarcastic about Newton's waffly fluid ideas as a possible explanation of how gravity works, but don't point out that all the attempts of the period were either based on fluid concepts or streams of particles - Hooke's 'attraction' isn't an explanation at all, but merely an observation of its effect, and was much criticised (via Newton's use of it) at the time. We are also told that Newton's first law of motion was 'Hooke's of course' - except it was hardly novel as it came from Hooke. Galileo came close to it, and even Aristotle implied it, if only to show why he thought a vacuum was untenable.
However, I don't want to make too much of the bias towards Hooke. The contribution Hooke made certainly needs rebalancing if you take the popular view that still persists of Newton being the stand-out super genius of his era. As the Gribbins point out, Newton was a superb mathematician (this is why I'd like Wallis introduced more for comparison), but a less imaginative physicist than Hooke.
Altogether, then, a great opportunity to find out more about the sheer breadth of achievement of these two remarkable figures and to bring them out from under Newton's shadow. Recommended.
The aim here is very much to get a feel for the scientific contribution of this pair, though we do get some biographical detail, particularly of Hooke (in whose household it seemed to be decidedly risky to be young and female, even if you were his niece), with rather less of Halley's life. Both men were polymaths to a far greater extent than I had realised - for example I had no idea how much architecture Hooke was responsible for, including designing some of Wren's churches and coming up with the basic concept behind the St Paul's dome. He also did a considerable amount of impressive work on astronomy and geology. Similarly, we all know of Halley's astronomical ventures, but it was delightful to discover more of his remarkable scientific exploration exploits as the only non-navy man ever to become master and commander of a Royal Navy ship. Wonderful stuff, which the Gribbins bring to life in a style that is sometimes wry and always engaging.
What was more familiar, having read a lot about Newton, was these two men's interactions with the giant of the book's title. Halley came off far better of the two - as a far more diplomatic character he seemed better able to deal with Newton's caprices and was famously responsible for Newton's great Principia being published.
Hooke, of course, had a very rocky relationship with Newton. For some time after Newton's death this was portrayed very much from the 'winner', Newton's side. The Gribbins redress the balance, showing just how much Hooke contributed. If anything they are so fair to Hooke that they go a bit too far the other way, taking every opportunity to stick the knife into Newton, but giving Hooke (who I suspect was an equally difficult character) the benefit of the doubt.
There's no doubt that Newton claimed for his own, or failed to acknowledge contributions from Hooke - but there seemed less effort to show where Hooke or Halley might have done the same - for example Halley's ideas on demographics were surely to some extent based on Graunt's, but he isn't mentioned. Two examples of showing perhaps unfair favour to Hooke: the Gribbins are very sarcastic about Newton's waffly fluid ideas as a possible explanation of how gravity works, but don't point out that all the attempts of the period were either based on fluid concepts or streams of particles - Hooke's 'attraction' isn't an explanation at all, but merely an observation of its effect, and was much criticised (via Newton's use of it) at the time. We are also told that Newton's first law of motion was 'Hooke's of course' - except it was hardly novel as it came from Hooke. Galileo came close to it, and even Aristotle implied it, if only to show why he thought a vacuum was untenable.
However, I don't want to make too much of the bias towards Hooke. The contribution Hooke made certainly needs rebalancing if you take the popular view that still persists of Newton being the stand-out super genius of his era. As the Gribbins point out, Newton was a superb mathematician (this is why I'd like Wallis introduced more for comparison), but a less imaginative physicist than Hooke.
Altogether, then, a great opportunity to find out more about the sheer breadth of achievement of these two remarkable figures and to bring them out from under Newton's shadow. Recommended.
November 4, 2023
Quite interesting dual biography of Robert Hooke and Edmund Halley, scientists in late 1600's England who lie in Newton's shadow. Halley was an astronomer, navigator, actuary, and all around scientist. But the bigger star of the book was Hooke, who the book credits with about half of universal gravitation, along with architectural achievements (St. Paul's dome), being ahead of his time in biology, optics and geology, and being an exceptional engineer of air pumps and spring mechanism clocks.
Meanwhile Newton is revealed through letters to be thin skinned and vengeful, and eager to steal credit by falsifying records. Hooke sometimes exaggerated his own accomplishments, but through his correspondence it seems was an honest and skilled natural philosopher.
I don't completely buy the conclusion that Hooke was the more important scientist, as Newton's mathematical achievements were key to so much that followed, but this book did significantly change my estimation of their relative merits.
Meanwhile Newton is revealed through letters to be thin skinned and vengeful, and eager to steal credit by falsifying records. Hooke sometimes exaggerated his own accomplishments, but through his correspondence it seems was an honest and skilled natural philosopher.
I don't completely buy the conclusion that Hooke was the more important scientist, as Newton's mathematical achievements were key to so much that followed, but this book did significantly change my estimation of their relative merits.
April 12, 2024
Hooke deserved better 🥲
November 27, 2017
After I accepted the premis that Isaac Newton was a nutbag and a paranoid and vengeful mathematician/alchemist and probably took Robert Hookes ideas as his own, lived long after his rival and dropped his portrait down the Royal Society's privy, then the exclamation marks and asides and partisan tone got up my nose. I get it! OK!
It is from about this point in the history of science that I start to struggle; the inverse square law leaves me cold. I must have a medieval mind, much like Newton before Hooke, and believe the universe if full of magical fluidy swirls. A good book, but a little childish and dotty with asterix.
It is from about this point in the history of science that I start to struggle; the inverse square law leaves me cold. I must have a medieval mind, much like Newton before Hooke, and believe the universe if full of magical fluidy swirls. A good book, but a little childish and dotty with asterix.
October 29, 2018
Most of the physics that Newton claimed and gets credit for was stolen from Hooke, as Newton was a terrible scientist and Hooke was a genius. Furthermore, Newton went to great lengths to minimize Hooke's contributions. On the other hand, Newton was a genius at mathematics (which is mentioned but not detailed in this book), and does deserve credit for that. Hooke was not good at math but never claimed credit for something he did not originate.
September 12, 2021
Well, if Isaac Newton is your hero, this book will definitely change your mind. This book was super interesting, but not necessarily exciting. Good book for people who enjoy reading about science, and yet another example of how we create hero stories in science, when really there are no heroes. If you want to learn more about Hooke, Newton, or Halley, or science in the 1600’s, this is a good book.
July 27, 2018
Every school child learn about Newton and his 3 laws of motion; about Hooke and his law about springs; about Halley and his prediction of the return of his comet but that is about the extent of it. All 3 carried out much further scientific research back in the 17th century which is rarely talked about.
This book by John & Mary Gribbin describes the social history around the era of these three greats telling of wars, political and royal upheavals, fire and pestilence. It is difficult to imagine how people survived in those days let alone how scientists managed to pioneer great discoveries. This book takes the story even further in 2 intriguing ways.
Firstly it describes in great details how Hooke and Halley discovered and researched many wonderful things for which they are never given true credit. Hooke worked on weather forecasting through his barometer and observation of cloud patterns; he studied human respiration, worked to build the first vacuum chambers; he helped Wren rebuild London after the great fire including St Paul's; he even proposed evolution of the species before Darwin. Halley travelled the seven seas to catalogue stars of the southern hemisphere but during his voyages as captain of the ship he discovered new lands as far as Antarctica and charted global movements of the winds and tides. Secondly and more significant for this book the authors claim through old documentary evidence how Newton stole plagiarised and angrily defended his discoverers as his own, many stolen from others.
I have read several accounts of such stories and the whole thing leaves me confused about the veracity of recorded history and about how much we are taught which has been written by the victors or the strongest sweeping truth into the gutter of the past.
The book is aptly entitled "Out of the shadow of a giant" but who is the giant. It is further subtitled Newton stood on the shoulders of Hooke and Halley but that is a quote from Newton who may have been referring to the diminutive size of Hooke and the ease with which he stood on him. It is apparent from the tale told by the authors that Newton was more of a mathematician whereas Hooke and Halley were the physicists and the story contrasts the differing approaches to scientific study using these 2 disciplines.
This book has inspired me to investigate further the work of these 3 great scientists who set the stage for the rest of scientific study ever since.
This book by John & Mary Gribbin describes the social history around the era of these three greats telling of wars, political and royal upheavals, fire and pestilence. It is difficult to imagine how people survived in those days let alone how scientists managed to pioneer great discoveries. This book takes the story even further in 2 intriguing ways.
Firstly it describes in great details how Hooke and Halley discovered and researched many wonderful things for which they are never given true credit. Hooke worked on weather forecasting through his barometer and observation of cloud patterns; he studied human respiration, worked to build the first vacuum chambers; he helped Wren rebuild London after the great fire including St Paul's; he even proposed evolution of the species before Darwin. Halley travelled the seven seas to catalogue stars of the southern hemisphere but during his voyages as captain of the ship he discovered new lands as far as Antarctica and charted global movements of the winds and tides. Secondly and more significant for this book the authors claim through old documentary evidence how Newton stole plagiarised and angrily defended his discoverers as his own, many stolen from others.
I have read several accounts of such stories and the whole thing leaves me confused about the veracity of recorded history and about how much we are taught which has been written by the victors or the strongest sweeping truth into the gutter of the past.
The book is aptly entitled "Out of the shadow of a giant" but who is the giant. It is further subtitled Newton stood on the shoulders of Hooke and Halley but that is a quote from Newton who may have been referring to the diminutive size of Hooke and the ease with which he stood on him. It is apparent from the tale told by the authors that Newton was more of a mathematician whereas Hooke and Halley were the physicists and the story contrasts the differing approaches to scientific study using these 2 disciplines.
This book has inspired me to investigate further the work of these 3 great scientists who set the stage for the rest of scientific study ever since.
July 28, 2025
This scientific double-biography of Robert Hooke (1635-1703) and Edmond Halley (1656-1742) aims to put the names of these two English scientists where they belong: as two of the remarkable natural philosophers of their time, and of any time, and take them out of the shadow of Isaac Newton (the giant in the title). The book has a tone that is distinctly anti-Newton (the “serial plagiarist” (page 51)): Newton seems indeed to have been a rather unpleasant character in many ways, a very pricky person with respect to the priority of his discoveries, not so much about the appropriation of other people's. About Hooke and Halley, their place in the history of science is, indeed, not well known today by the public at large, not even by that part of the public interested in and knowledgeable about science: Hooke is essentially remembered by “Hooke’s Law” in linear elasticity, and Halley by “his” comet. That both have been immeasurably more important than these two results lead us to think is what this book is all about. It is a very nice introduction to their life and work, to the scientific life in England from the mid seventeen to the mid eighteen centuries, the creation and early working to the Royal Society, and the lively politics of the times (the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution). But the focus is the scientific activities of Hooke and Halley. Hooke was, indeed, an extraordinary character, who among his very many activities, experiments (as a curator of experiments at the Royal Society, and independently) and discoveries produced many studies with the vacuum pump and the microscope, and works in areas such as meteorology, geology and paleontology, and, of course, physics, where he (and not Newton) was the discoverer of the universal nature of gravitation, and conjectured its inverse square dependence on distance, besides being a surveyor and architect strongly involved in the reconstruction of the City of London after the Great Fire. As for Edmond Halley, not only his prediction of the return of the comet was a tour de force, but his Catalogue of the Southern Skyes, his study of the magnetic declination in Southern Atlantic and his study of how to compute the distance to the Sun using the transit of Venus (something that was only achieved after his death), is more than enough to return him to a more preeminent place in the history of science; and this on top of his other duties in the Royal Society (and in financing the publication of Newton’s Principia) and in State business (diplomatic and maybe espionage) during the War of the Spanish Succession. All this I learned in this interesting book, written in a lively style that gets the reader’s attention from beginning to end. A first-rate history of science for the general public.
June 29, 2025
"Newton's world-view was very much what you would expect from a mystic alchemist and crackpot theologian. He thought that the planets were kept apart by 'unsociableness' and referred to vortices in the ether." (166)
"Hooke had the greatest physical insight, and even if we set to one side his other scientific achievements (microscopy, geophysics and the rest he was the first person to realize that the same laws of physics apply in the Universe at large as here on Earth, and to appreciate in particular that the inverse square law of gravity is a universal force and that it acts centripetally; Newton was a mathematical genius (his other activities, alchemy and theology, are best set to one time) who codified the new physics by providing a set of equations to describe the behavior of everything from balls rolling down slopes to planets orbiting the Sun; Halley (apart from his other achievements as an astronomical observer and geophysicist) was the first person to apply theose equations to new problems, rather than 'merely' explaining past observations, and use them to make successful predictions, the ultimate (indeed, only) test of any scientific theory. None of them deserves to be remembered in the shadow of any of the others, but if push came to shove, we should certainly place Hooke 'first among equals.'" (282)
"Hooke had the greatest physical insight, and even if we set to one side his other scientific achievements (microscopy, geophysics and the rest he was the first person to realize that the same laws of physics apply in the Universe at large as here on Earth, and to appreciate in particular that the inverse square law of gravity is a universal force and that it acts centripetally; Newton was a mathematical genius (his other activities, alchemy and theology, are best set to one time) who codified the new physics by providing a set of equations to describe the behavior of everything from balls rolling down slopes to planets orbiting the Sun; Halley (apart from his other achievements as an astronomical observer and geophysicist) was the first person to apply theose equations to new problems, rather than 'merely' explaining past observations, and use them to make successful predictions, the ultimate (indeed, only) test of any scientific theory. None of them deserves to be remembered in the shadow of any of the others, but if push came to shove, we should certainly place Hooke 'first among equals.'" (282)
November 5, 2017
Is Isaac Newton over-rated?
This is the question that the book ultimately asks, and I enjoyed how the authors answered it. From the book descriptions, I thought that this book would be similar to an alternative history, a sort-of what would have happened had Isaac Newton not been born - would science have grown the way it did. Authors John Gribbin and Mary Gribbin didn’t take this approach but instead wrote two interlacing biographies, of Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley, two great leaders of the scientific revolution. The biographies are very good and it was great to have these scientists brought out of the shadow of Isaac Newton. I recommend this book for anyone interested in the history of science.
Disclosure: I received a complimentary copy of this book via Netgalley for review purposes.
This is the question that the book ultimately asks, and I enjoyed how the authors answered it. From the book descriptions, I thought that this book would be similar to an alternative history, a sort-of what would have happened had Isaac Newton not been born - would science have grown the way it did. Authors John Gribbin and Mary Gribbin didn’t take this approach but instead wrote two interlacing biographies, of Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley, two great leaders of the scientific revolution. The biographies are very good and it was great to have these scientists brought out of the shadow of Isaac Newton. I recommend this book for anyone interested in the history of science.
Disclosure: I received a complimentary copy of this book via Netgalley for review purposes.
September 15, 2020
A really informative and interesting view into Hooke and Halley's lives, which have been passed over frequently in science history. Though a little dense, I really enjoyed the combination of scientific discovery and personal lives and squabbles. Gribbin does an excellent job of humanizing everyone involved. We tend to think of historical scientists as one-dimensional, only in the light of their noteworthy accomplishments, but Gribbin goes deep into both the personal lives, and the non-scientific achievements of Hooke, Halley, and many others.
My primary gripe with the book is some of the blanket assumptions made about certain individuals. Gribbin seems to have made up his mind about Newton in particular, and while there is definitely much to complain about, some of his claims are discarded exclusively because they came from Newton, a "known liar".
My primary gripe with the book is some of the blanket assumptions made about certain individuals. Gribbin seems to have made up his mind about Newton in particular, and while there is definitely much to complain about, some of his claims are discarded exclusively because they came from Newton, a "known liar".
March 26, 2024
Excellent view into under-credited scientists and gave me new appreciation of now-shadowy figures of science we may never know of.
It goes on a bit too long with the (justified) evidence of Newton's villainous nature. All well presented, but the more I read historical scientific biographies of scholars, the more I dread the (seemingly) inevitable slog of credit-stealing, squabbling and general childishness of all.
Also disappointed (but not surprised) of the common "use" of domestic-hires and underage incest that is inevitable when documenting any truthful history of the general male population. For some reason I maintain some underlying dream that higher evolved intelligences would also naturally have evolved higher emotional intelligence towards fellow humans, but the second statement already listed above about general childishness should prevent such delusions.
It goes on a bit too long with the (justified) evidence of Newton's villainous nature. All well presented, but the more I read historical scientific biographies of scholars, the more I dread the (seemingly) inevitable slog of credit-stealing, squabbling and general childishness of all.
Also disappointed (but not surprised) of the common "use" of domestic-hires and underage incest that is inevitable when documenting any truthful history of the general male population. For some reason I maintain some underlying dream that higher evolved intelligences would also naturally have evolved higher emotional intelligence towards fellow humans, but the second statement already listed above about general childishness should prevent such delusions.
October 27, 2018
I really enjoyed this book. I did not know all of Hooke's and Halley's contributions to science and culture in general. In particular, I was not aware that Hooke came up with the inverse square law of gravitation before Newton.
The descriptions at the very end of Halley's observations of the transits of Mercury and Venus, and the solar eclipse of 1715, were very cool. The determination of the decreasing radius of the sun is amazing.
The descriptions at the very end of Halley's observations of the transits of Mercury and Venus, and the solar eclipse of 1715, were very cool. The determination of the decreasing radius of the sun is amazing.
April 19, 2018
3.5, upping it to 4. I had no idea that Newton was such a jerk! I learned a lot about this period in the history of science, but I was occasionally annoyed by the multiple "We're only mentioning topic X right now but we'll get back to it later". There must have been a similar formulation used at least 10 times in this book. Still, overall entertaining!
November 4, 2021
What a great book. Did not know the history of Robert Hooke. 'Nullius in verba' the Royal Society's motto is taken to mean 'take nobody's word for it', it is "an expression of the determination of Fellows to withstand the domination of authority and to verify all statements by an appeal to facts determined by experiment". And is the heart of science itself! beautiful!
June 8, 2017
Nicely done work on Hooke, Halley and the one who must not be named. Even though the title really should be something more akin to 'The Sun Shone Out of Hooke's ass', it was a really interesting and educational read on what the authors call the birth of science.
December 1, 2017
In this book, the authors show that Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley do not get the credit they deserve and Isaac Newton stole some of Hooke's ideas. Full review: http://peterfsblogs.blogspot.com/2017...
March 14, 2021
Was Issac Newton an intellectual thief?
Did he steal all his ideas from Hooke and Halley?
Was he really a nut case immersed in alchemy and religious heresy?
Has the whole world been deluded for over 300 years??
Read and find out!!!
Did he steal all his ideas from Hooke and Halley?
Was he really a nut case immersed in alchemy and religious heresy?
Has the whole world been deluded for over 300 years??
Read and find out!!!
March 24, 2024
Holy crap. This is the only legit reaction to this book. Newton did the math but Newton is otherwise a massive, petty liar who stole Hook’s theories. And Hailey (he of the comet) has a wild story and was a total genius.
November 9, 2021
Solid. Lowered my opinion on Newton and gave me a deep appreciation for Hooke
Want to read
December 5, 2021Isaac Newton, more gnat than giant.
August 5, 2022
Exciting....these two are not a fan of Newton
September 17, 2022
I’ve read quite a few historical science books covering this time period, but I think this is the first focusing on Hooke
March 21, 2023
Isaac Newton didn't make all his discoveries alone and often "borrowed" them from unsung pioneers. An interesting insight into the early scientific discovery and the minds of geniuses.
September 20, 2023
Hooke - what a brilliant scientist! Newton's cradle? Hooke. Newton's first law...Hooke. Lovely book and interesting subject.
October 2, 2023
Interesting book mostly about the very overlooked, but brilliant Hooke. The book also makes Newton out to be very odd, I want to read more about him.
July 3, 2024
Not exactly an easy summer read, but I liked it a lot for all the pieces of trivia I found there.
November 3, 2024
Light and breezy. Refreshingly partisan. I would have liked a final chapter with more detail on how and why Hooke and Halley came to be overshadowed by Newton.
April 30, 2019
I certainly enjoyed reading Out of the Shadow of a Giant and I learned a lot about Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley that I hadn't known before. I agree with Gribbin & Gribbin that Hooke & Halley deserve more recognition than they get today, as each was an impressive scientist in their own right. Their jabs at Isaac Newton (some deserved, some not) are at times over the top, though they do point out that much of Newton's fame and achievements would not have been possible with out the work of Hooke and Halley.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews