Isaac Newton the first scientist to be knighted.

[Gareth]

This is a wonderful group and I have found it extremely valuable in
some research. However, I believe the assertion that Sir Isaac Newton
was the first scientist to be knighted is incorrect. Surely Sir
Christopher Wren's knighthood (1673) predates Newton's significantly.
Although Newton was undoubtedly the more accomplished scientist, Wren
was a founding the Royal Society in the 1660s (with such scientific
luminaries as Hooke, Boyle, Wilkins and Moray). He was a notable
contributor in a huge range of scientific disciplines and only turned
to architecture later in life.

His knighthood did follow his remarkable architectural contributions
to the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of 1666, but that
does not diminish the fact that he built his architectural
achievements on a profound scientific understanding of geometry,
physics, mathematics and even optics. And if we're being really
pedantic, Francis Bacon was an early exponent of the scientific method
and he got his knighthood in 1603.

[Turenne]

Post by Gareth
This is a wonderful group and I have found it extremely valuable in
some research. However, I believe the assertion that Sir Isaac Newton
was the first scientist to be knighted is incorrect. Surely Sir
Christopher Wren's knighthood (1673) predates Newton's significantly.
Although Newton was undoubtedly the more accomplished scientist, Wren
was a founding the Royal Society in the 1660s (with such scientific
luminaries as Hooke, Boyle, Wilkins and Moray). He was a notable
contributor in a huge range of scientific disciplines and only turned
to architecture later in life.
His knighthood did follow his remarkable architectural contributions
to the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of 1666, but that
does not diminish the fact that he built his architectural
achievements on a profound scientific understanding of geometry,
physics, mathematics and even optics. And if we're being really
pedantic, Francis Bacon was an early exponent of the scientific method
and he got his knighthood in 1603.

Gareth. where in this group did someone say that Isaac Newton was the
first scientist to be knighted?

BTW Have yo seen this? It's a fairly nifty list of armigerous
scientists:

http://www.numericana.com/arms/

Richard L

[jetlounge smith]

Post by Gareth
This is a wonderful group and I have found it extremely valuable in
some research. However, I believe the assertion that Sir Isaac Newton
was the first scientist to be knighted is incorrect. Surely Sir
Christopher Wren's knighthood (1673) predates Newton's significantly.
Although Newton was undoubtedly the more accomplished scientist, Wren
was a founding the Royal Society in the 1660s (with such scientific
luminaries as Hooke, Boyle, Wilkins and Moray). He was a notable
contributor in a huge range of scientific disciplines and only turned
to architecture later in life.
His knighthood did follow his remarkable architectural contributions
to the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of 1666, but that
does not diminish the fact that he built his architectural
achievements on a profound scientific understanding of geometry,
physics, mathematics and even optics. And if we're being really
pedantic, Francis Bacon was an early exponent of the scientific method
and he got his knighthood in 1603.

Wren was not however known as a scentist, but rather an architect and
I wiould submit that that is why he was knighted:

I would say that Issac Newton was the first scientist to knighted and
that Wren was knighted for his service as an architect:

http://www.nndb.com/people/829/000084577/

Leaving then, Issac Newton as the first knighted scientist for his
work inteh field.

[Outis]

Post by Turenne
BTW Have yo seen this? It's a fairly nifty list of armigerous
http://www.numericana.com/arms/

Only by the most permissive standard would anyone consider Thomas
Aquinas as a scientist. There are many on this list whom I would not
consider "scientist" or "inventor", especially the earlier ones. An
interesting list nonetheless.

Post by Turenne
Leaving then, Issac Newton as the first knighted scientist for his
work inteh field.

I agree with the assertion on Wren, but it is doubtful whether Newton
is knighted for his scientific works. Most believe that he's knighted
for his service at the Royal Mint. But even more likely, the
knighthood may be a simple political patronage (for the coming
election) rather than an recognition of any of his works.

-- o

[Tim Powys-Lybbe]

Post by jetlounge smith

Post by Gareth
This is a wonderful group and I have found it extremely valuable in
some research. However, I believe the assertion that Sir Isaac
Newton was the first scientist to be knighted is incorrect. Surely
Sir Christopher Wren's knighthood (1673) predates Newton's
significantly. Although Newton was undoubtedly the more accomplished
scientist, Wren was a founding the Royal Society in the 1660s (with
such scientific luminaries as Hooke, Boyle, Wilkins and Moray). He
was a notable contributor in a huge range of scientific disciplines
and only turned to architecture later in life.
His knighthood did follow his remarkable architectural contributions
to the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of 1666, but that
does not diminish the fact that he built his architectural
achievements on a profound scientific understanding of geometry,
physics, mathematics and even optics. And if we're being really
pedantic, Francis Bacon was an early exponent of the scientific
method and he got his knighthood in 1603.

Wren was not however known as a scentist, but rather an architect and
I would say that Issac Newton was the first scientist to knighted and
http://www.nndb.com/people/829/000084577/
Leaving then, Issac Newton as the first knighted scientist for his
work inteh field.

The reputably reliable wiki article on him says:

"In April 1705, Queen Anne knighted Newton during a royal visit to
Trinity College, Cambridge. The knighthood is likely to have been
motivated by political considerations connected with the Parliamentary
election in May 1705, rather than any recognition of Newton's scientific
work or services as Master of the Mint.[52] Newton was the first
scientist ever to be knighted.[49]"

[jetlounge smith]

Post by Tim Powys-Lybbe

Post by jetlounge smith

Post by Gareth
This is a wonderful group and I have found it extremely valuable in
some research. However, I believe the assertion that Sir Isaac
Newton was the first scientist to be knighted is incorrect. Surely
Sir Christopher Wren's knighthood (1673) predates Newton's
significantly. Although Newton was undoubtedly the more accomplished
scientist, Wren was a founding the Royal Society in the 1660s (with
such scientific luminaries as Hooke, Boyle, Wilkins and Moray). He
was a notable contributor in a huge range of scientific disciplines
and only turned to architecture later in life.
His knighthood did follow his remarkable architectural contributions
to the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of 1666, but that
does not diminish the fact that he built his architectural
achievements on a profound scientific understanding of geometry,
physics, mathematics and even optics. And if we're being really
pedantic, Francis Bacon was an early exponent of the scientific
method and he got his knighthood in 1603.

Wren was not however known as a scentist, but rather an architect and
I would say that Issac Newton was the first scientist to knighted and
http://www.nndb.com/people/829/000084577/
Leaving then, Issac Newton as the first knighted scientist for his
work inteh field.

"In April 1705, Queen Anne knighted Newton during a royal visit to
Trinity College, Cambridge. The knighthood is likely to have been
motivated by political considerations connected with the Parliamentary
election in May 1705, rather than any recognition of Newton's scientific
work or services as Master of the Mint.[52] Newton was the first
scientist ever to be knighted.[49]"
--
             for a miscellany of bygones:http://powys.org/- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

That may very well be. The source article didn't mention that, so
neither did I.